| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Departments of Microbiology (M.J.G.), Urology (M.J.G.), and Pharmacology (W.C.) and New York University Cancer Institute, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York 10016; and Hospital for Special Surgery, Cornell University School of Medicine (I.R.), New York, New York 10021
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Michael J. Garabedian, Department of Microbiology, New York University Cancer Institute, New York University School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, New York 10016. E-mail: garabm01{at}med.nyu.edu.
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The glucocorticoid receptor (GR) is a ligand-activated and ubiquitously expressed transcription factor that controls numerous gene networks (9). Upon hormone binding, GR associates with specific genomic sites and assembles regulatory complexes to either activate or repress target genes in a cell- and promoter-specific manner. GR harbors two activation domains: an N-terminal activation function 1 (AF1) and a C-terminal AF2 (10, 11). Our laboratory has previously shown that vitamin D receptor-interacting protein 150/thyroid hormone receptor associated protein 170 (hereafter termed MED14) and vitamin D receptor-interacting protein 205/thyroid hormone receptor associated protein 220 (hereafter termed MED1) interact with GR through its AF1 and AF2 domains, respectively, and increase GR transcriptional activation in cell-based reporter assays (12). Recently, Rogatsky et al. (13) identified 10 GR-inducible target genes in U2OS osterosarcoma cells that differ in their requirements for AF1 and AF2. For example, GR induction of glucocorticoid-inducible leucine zipper (GILZ) and interferon regulatory factor 8 (IRF8) are largely AF1 independent, because a GR mutant with a disrupted AF1 core (14) is competent for activating these genes similarly to the wild type. Interestingly, this mutation also decreases the interaction of the receptor with MED14 (12). In contrast, ladinin 1 (LAD1) and IGF-binding protein 1 (IGFBP1) were sensitive to this AF1 mutation. The expressions of GILZ, LAD1, and IRF8 were compromised by the AF2 mutation E773R, which substitutes a key residue required for coactivator binding, whereas IGFBP1 was less sensitive to this alteration (13, 15). These findings suggest that GR AF1 and AF2 function in a gene-specific fashion, perhaps through differential recruitment of the Mediator complex.
In this study we test the hypothesis that distinct Mediator subunits direct gene-specific regulation by GR. We examined the dependence of GR primary target genes on MED1 and MED14 subunits by analyzing their recruitment to target promoters and their contribution to gene regulation.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Next, we measured the mRNA accumulation of GILZ, LAD1, IGFBP1, and IRF8 as a function of the Dex concentration. The concentration of Dex required for the induction of GILZ, LAD1, and IGFBP1 ranged between 0.1 and 1 nM, whereas the dose needed for activation of the IRF8 gene was higher (110 nM; Fig. 1B
). This suggests that at low ligand concentrations, GR is more efficient at engaging in the functional interactions that are necessary for transcriptional activation at the GILZ, LAD1, and IGFBP1 promoters compared with IRF8. The gene-specific kinetics and dose response to Dex suggest that different mechanisms may underlie the induction of GILZ, IGFBP1, LAD1, and IRF8 by GR in U2OS cells.
MED14 and MED1 Are Differentially Required for Dex-Dependent Activation of GR Target Genes
The Mediator complex has been shown to link transcription factors to the RNA polymerase transcription initiation complex (5). Our laboratory has previously shown that MED14 and MED1 interact with GR through AF1 and AF2, respectively, and increase GR-dependent transcriptional activation in transient transfection assays (12). To assess whether MED14 and MED1 are used differentially at GR target genes, we silenced the expression of MED14 and MED1 using small interfering RNA (siRNA) and measured LAD1, IGFBP1, GILZ and IRF8 mRNAs in the absence and presence of Dex by real-time PCR. The siRNAs specifically reduced MED14 and MED1 in cells at both the mRNA and protein levels, whereas the expression of GR and the control steroid receptor coactivator 1 (SRC-1) cofactor were unaffected (Fig. 2
, A and B).
|
Interestingly, silencing of MED1 dramatically reduced the Dex-dependent activation of LAD1 (55% reduction relative to control), but only modestly affected IRF8 (30% reduction) and had little effect on the expression of IGFBP1 and GILZ (<10% reduction). Similar trends were observed when basal expression was assessed, with the exception of GILZ, where the basal RNA level was reduced by siMED1 by 40% (Fig. 2D
). Simultaneous silencing of MED1 and MED14 did not result in any further reduction in the Dex-dependent expression of the four genes tested (supplemental Fig. 3).
Because MED1 and MED14 are components of the large Mediator complex, it is possible that the reduction in MED1 or MED14 may disrupt the integrity of the entire Mediator complex, thereby altering GR-dependent gene expression. It has previously been demonstrated that the loss of MED1 does not substantially alter the subunit composition of the residual Mediator complex (16). However, this has not been established for MED14. Therefore, we asked whether MED14 is required for the integrity of the Mediator complex. We used VP16 activity, which is known to be dependent upon MED25 (17, 18), as an indicator of the integrity of the Mediator complex. As shown in Fig. 3
, the transcriptional activity of VP16 was not compromised when MED14 was reduced, whereas GR-dependent transcription was decreased. Therefore, the loss of MED14 does not substantially alter the functional integrity of the Mediator complex and suggests that GR uses specific Mediator components to control gene-specific transcription. Based on these findings, the GR-regulated genes examined can be grouped into distinct classes: IGFBP1 depends on MED14 function, rather than MED1 (class I); LAD1 and IRF8 transcriptional activation requires both MED14 and MED1 (class II); finally, GILZ is largely independent of either MED14 or MED1 (class III).
|
For the ChIP assay, U2OS-hGR cells were treated with either ethanol vehicle or Dex for 2 h, then cross-linked with formaldehyde. The chromatin was sheared, and the cross-linked protein-DNA complexes were precipitated with antibodies against GR, MED14, MED1, or control IgG. PCR was then performed on the precipitated DNA fragments to amplify the GR-binding sites within the regulatory regions (Fig. 4A
). Regions 24 kb upstream of the same promoter were amplified as a control for ChIP specificity. We found that GR, MED1, and MED14 associate with the GRE in the regulatory regions of IGFBP1, GILZ, and IRF8 genes in a Dex-dependent manner (Fig. 4B
). We also have examined MED14 recruitment to the LAD1 gene. Recall that a reduction in MED14 had a substantial effect on the basal level of LAD1 expression (Fig. 2D
). Our results show that MED14 is recruited to the LAD1 gene in a constitutive manner to a region approximately 1000 bp upstream from the start site of transcription (supplemental Fig. 4). This region contains numerous potential binding sites for transcription factors, such as specificity protein 1 (Sp1), that use the Mediator as a coactivator and could account for the change in basal activity when MED14 levels are reduced by siRNA. No Dex-dependent recruitment of GR was observed within a region 4 kb upstream of the LAD1 gene; therefore, analysis of this gene was not pursued.
|
We also examined whether the relative ratio of GR to selective Mediator components is an important determinant in the gene-specific effects observed on silencing MED14. Using the recruitment of GR as a baseline, the amount of MED1 or MED14 in relation to GR was determined among the genes (Fig. 4D
). The occupancy of MED14 at IGFBP1 and IRF8 compared with GR was significantly higher than that observed at the GILZ regulatory region (rank order: IGFBP1>IRF8>>GILZ), and this pattern held true at earlier time points (supplemental Fig. 6). This parallels the sensitivity of these genes to MED14 silencing (rank order: IGFBP1
IRF8>GILZ). In contrast, the recruitment of MED1 compared with that of GR is similar among the genes (Fig. 4D
). Therefore, the greater the MED14 recruitment relative to GR, the larger the effect of silencing MED14 has on transcriptional activation of a given gene. Thus, MED14 is an important determinant for GR hormone-dependent transcription of IGFBP1 and IRF8, but not GILZ.
GR-Mediated Induction of GILZ Requires Transcriptional Intermediary Factor (TIF)
In addition to the Mediator complex, a well-established family of cofactors that confer transcriptional activation by GR and other steroid hormone receptors are the p160 proteins [SRC1, TIF2/GR-interacting protein (GRIP)1, and steroid/nuclear receptor-associated coactivator 3/activator of thyroid hormone], which are recruited to the GR AF2 domain in an agonist-dependent manner (23, 24, 25, 26, 27). The p160 proteins modify chromatin structure through histone acetylation and methylation via associations with cAMP response element binding protein-binding protein and coactivator-associated arginine methyltransferase 1 (28). Based on kinetic studies, a cyclic recruitment of the Mediator vs. the p160 complexes to target promoters was proposed (29, 30); however, the relative contributions of these complexes to transcriptional activation of specific GR target genes are unknown. Given that siMED14 and siMED1 had distinct effects on the induction of IGFBP1, IRF8, LAD1, and GILZ, we examined the consequences of knocking down the expression of TIF2 on these genes. TIF2 appears to be the most abundant p160 in U2OS cells (31). Introducing siTIF2 into U2OS-GR cells specifically reduced the expression of TIF2 mRNA by 75% compared with cells transfected with control siRNA (Fig. 5A
). Analysis of Dex-dependent induction of GR targets revealed that IRF8 and IGFBP1 were unaffected by TIF2 down-regulation, LAD1 was slightly reduced, whereas the induction of GILZ was dramatically impaired by siTIF2 (Fig. 5B
). Basal activity was largely unaffected by TIF2 knockdown (not shown). These results implicate p160 TIF2 in conferring GR-dependent transcriptional activation of the GILZ gene.
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The precise mechanism underlying GR-dependent gene-specific regulation by the Mediator is not fully understood. Context effects introduced by differences in GREs, core promoters, chromatin packaging, or other transcription factors could influence the activities of the Mediator and may contribute to promoter-specific expression of GR target genes. For example, the binding of GR to MED14 may induce a specific Mediator conformation, which facilitates transcriptional activation at certain promoters. An alternate conformation, induced upon binding of GR to MED1, may regulate transcription at a different promoter. Elegant structural analysis of the Mediator complex bound to distinct activators supports this idea (6, 8, 34).
Although GR induction of IRF8 and IGFBP1 are Mediator dependent, GR activation of GILZ does not rely upon either MED14 or MED1. One possibility we considered was that MED1 and MED14 are simultaneously required at GILZ. This appears unlikely, however, because the concomitant reduction of MED1 and MED14 had little effect on GR regulation of GILZ. Another possibility is that the gene-specific requirement for MED1 and MED14 depends on specific sequences or number of GREs. For example, GR bound at the GILZ GRE, through allosteric changes imparted by the DNA (35), might adopt a conformation with a low affinity for Mediator subunits, but a high affinity for other coactivators (e.g. p160) or general transcription factors (e.g. transcription factor II D) that recruit RNA polymerase II, thus bypassing the requirement for the Mediator. Consistent with this idea is a comparatively low occupancy of MED1 and MED14 to GR at GILZ compared with IGFBP1 and IRF8 and the finding that GILZ is sensitive to knockdown of the p160 TIF2/GRIP1, whereas the Med14-sensitive genes, IRF8 and IGFBP1, are largely unaffected by a reduction in TIF2 levels. Although there is a small effect of MED14 reduction on GILZ induction by GR, and this is probably due to the interaction of Mediator with the GILZ regulatory region through a cooperating factor.
The total number of GREs in a given regulatory region might also influence the requirement for the Mediator. Interestingly, GILZ harbors four consensus GREs within the GR-binding fragment, and three of the four sites contribute to GILZ GRE activity (20). In contrast, IGFBP1 (19) and IRF8 (Rogatsky, I., unpublished observation) have noncanonical GREs, and GR occupancy at IGFBP1 and IRF8, compared with GILZ, is low. Such weak GR binding to DNA may prejudice genes toward Mediator-dependent RNA polymerase II recruitment.
The GR target genes analyzed were previously shown to differ in their requirements for AF1 and AF2 (13). For example, GR induction of GILZ and IRF8 is largely AF1 independent, as defined by the GR mutant 30IIB that disrupts the AF1 core and reduces AF1 activity (14). We have also previously shown that this receptor mutation decreases interaction with MED14 (12). This apparent discrepancy between the resistance of IRF8 activation to an AF1 mutation and its sensitivity to siMED14 may reflect the ability of GR to engage MED14 through a non-AF1 domain. Alternatively, another transcription factor that cooperates with GR could recruit MED14 to the IRF8 regulatory region, thus contributing to Mediator-dependent regulation. Consistent with this latter idea is the finding that MED14 and MED1 occupy a site approximately 1200 bp upstream of the IRF8 GRE in a Dex-dependent manner. This DNA regulatory region is predicted to contain Sp1- and p65- (nuclear factor-
B) binding sites, which recruit transcription factors that have been shown to be Mediator dependent (36, 37) and, in the case of Sp1, have been shown to cooperate synergistically with GR to enhance transcription (38).
The lack of sensitivity of GILZ to siMED14 and to a mutation in AF1 is consistent with Mediator-independent phenotype of GILZ activation by GR. Consistent with the lack of a strict requirement for GR AF1 in the activation of GILZ is the finding that thymocytes from mice expressing a ligand-binding GR fragment devoid of the N-terminus still induced GILZ, albeit to a lesser degree than the wild-type GR (39). The expression of GILZ is, however, compromised by the AF2 mutation E773R, which substitutes a key residue required for coactivator binding, including MED1 (13, 15). Yet, siMED1 does not affect GILZ induction by GR, suggesting that an interaction between GR and a different AF2 cofactor, such as a p160 family member, is probably important for GILZ induction by GR.
Indeed, we show that TIF2/GRIP1 is indispensable in mediating GR transcriptional activation at GILZ. Such differential regulatory mechanisms may contribute to the distinct kinetic and hormonal induction profiles of the target genes examined. For example, the array of GREs at GILZ may facilitate GR recruitment at low hormone concentrations and result in rapid activation of the promoter over time.
The MED1 dependence of the GR target genes tested does not appear to be associated with the requirement for AF2, with the exception of the LAD1 gene. The LAD1 gene appears to be regulated by GR in a way that is distinct from the other genes tested. We were unable to identify a GR-binding site by ChIP within a region 4 kb upstream of the LAD1 transcription start site despite potential GREs detected by computer analysis. Fusion of the upstream regulatory region of LAD1 to a luciferase reporter did not support GR-mediated enhancement (Chen, W., and M. J. Garabedian, unpublished observation), unlike GILZ (20) and IRF8 (Rogatsky, I., unpublished observation). Both basal and Dex-induced LAD1 mRNA expressions were sensitive to a reduction in either MED1 or MED14. Although it is tempting to speculate that the induction of LAD1 by GR may reflect a distinct mode of regulation that relies on the nonnuclear action of GR (40), two pieces of evidence argue against this. First, previous results reported by Rogatsky et al. (13) demonstrate that LAD1 induction by GR is sensitive to a mutation that disrupts receptor dimerization, which suggests that cooperative DNA binding by GR is important for the induction of LAD1. Second, we examined the activation of LAD1 by GR with a single point mutation in the DNA-binding domain (K422E) that largely eliminates DNA binding to GRE (41). This derivative fails to activate the expression of the LAD1 gene (supplemental Fig. 9). In light of these findings, our data suggest that LAD1 is most likely being regulated by GR through direct DNA binding, and that GR is being recruited to a region(s) other than those we analyzed by ChIP. LAD1 may represent yet another type of GR regulatory mechanism that we have yet to fully elucidate.
Based on these findings, we present models describing the role of Mediator in GR transcriptional activation of the IGFBP1, IRF8, and GILZ genes. For IGFBP1, the MED14-dependent induction by GR reflects a direct interaction of AF1 with MED14 (Fig. 7A
). This complex, in turn, recruits RNA polymerase II to the IGFBP1 promoter to initiate transcription. Interestingly, although the RNA polymerase II occupancy at the IGFBP1 promoter is Dex dependent, the enrichment is less dramatic than that of GILZ and IRF8 (not shown). Given the strong and rapid IGFBP1 mRNA induction after Dex treatment, the apparent low RNA polymerase II occupancy may indicate a role for the Mediator in enhancing the rate of reinitiation by RNA polymerase II and thus increasing the transcription efficiency of this gene.
|
The GILZ gene is regulated through multiple GREs at the enhancer region, which may supplant its requirement for the Mediator complex (Fig. 7C
). We propose that after binding to the GREs and chromatin remodeling by TIF2, GR can recruit RNA polymerase II independently of the Mediator. This rather simple mode of regulation is reminiscent of bacterial systems where activators bind DNA and exert effects on RNA polymerase. It is interesting to note that GILZ is induced by GR in a wide variety of cell types, including T cells (42), B cell-derived lymphoma Raji and IM-9 cells (Rogatsky, I., unpublished observations), erythroid progenitor cells (43), macrophages (44), A549 human lung adenocarcinoma (20), U2OS (13), and mouse embryonic fibroblasts (Wang, J. C., and M. J. Garabedian, unpublished observations), whereas IRF8 (45) and IGFBP1 (19) are more restricted in their expression to cells of hemopoietic and hepatic lineages, respectively.
The Mediator is important in GR promoter selectivity and activity. In addition, some genes, such as GILZ, appear to functionally bypass the requirement for specific Mediator components. Such a pathway may have evolved to enable the pan activation of genes by GR across multiple cell types, whereas the Mediator-dependent pathway could potentially confer cell type- and/or promoter-specific regulation depending on the concentration of, for example, MED14 within a given cell type. It is interesting to note that MED14 is X-linked and fails to undergo X-chromosome inactivation (46, 47). This suggests that MED14 levels are higher in females than in males, which, in light of our findings, may represent a mechanism underlying gender-specific differences in the expression of GR target genes, a hypothesis we are currently testing.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
RNA Interference
Two siRNA duplexes specific for human MED14 (siMED14) were designed using the siRNA designer software at siDESIGN Center at Dharmacon (Lafayette, CO) (http://design.dharmacon.com/rnadesign/default.aspx) and were synthesized with UU overhangs and a 5'-phosphate on the antisense strand (Dharmacon). The targeted 21-mer oligonucleotide sequences were AAGGAAATCTGATGTGGAAAG [266286 nucleotides (nt) on cDNA sequence; accession no. NM_006084, p1-siMED14] and AACAATGCCAACAACAGGCC (35003518 nt; p2-siMED14). A pool of four siRNA duplexes specific for human MED1 (siMED1) was designed and synthesized (Dharmacon) using the SMART selection and pooling technologies. An siRNA specific for luciferase (D-001400-01; siCTRL1) or a pool of nonspecific siRNA (D-001206-13; siCTRL2) was used as a control (Dharmacon). The TIF2 siRNA (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) oligonucleotide was generated against the sequence AAGTCAGATGTATCCTCTACA (457477 nt on cDNA sequence; accession no. NM_006540).
siRNA-Resistant MED14 Variant (MED14v)
The siRNA-resistant MED14v was generated from pRK5-HA-MED14 using the QuikChange mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) following the manufacturers instruction. The primer pair contained two point mutations (lower case) within the siMED14 targeting region and the sequences were 5'-CCTATGCCAAGGAAgTCcGATGTGGAAGG (forward primer) and 5'-CCTTTCCACATCgGAcTTCCTTGGCAGTAGG (reverse primer). The change was confirmed by DNA sequencing.
Transient Transfections
Cells were seeded into 6-cm plates at a density of 105 cells and transfected in serum-free medium using 10 µl Lipofectamine and 10 µl Plus reagent (Invitrogen Life Technologies, Inc.) following the manufacturers instructions. After 3 h, the medium was replaced with phenol red-free DMEM supplemented with 10% charcoal-dextran-stripped FBS. For luciferase assays, U2OS-hGR cells were seeded into six-well plates at a density of 105 cells/plate and transfected with pRK5-HA-MED14 or pRK5-HA-MED14v or with mouse mammary tumor virus promoter-luciferase, pGal4-luciferase, and Gal4-VP16 together with cytomegalovirus promoter-LacZ and siRNAs using Lipofectamine and Plus reagent. Three hours after the transfection, the cells were allowed to recover in phenol red-free DMEM-10% charcoal-dextran-stripped FBS medium for 40 h and then were treated with ethanol vehicle or Dex (100 nM) for an additional 8 h. Cells were harvested in lysis buffer, and luciferase activity was measured.
Antibodies and Immunoblotting
Cells were washed with PBS, and whole cell extracts were prepared by lysing cells in 50 µl 10 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA, 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, 10 mM sodium fluoride, 25 mM ZnCl2, and 1x protease inhibitor cocktail (Calbiochem, La Jolla, CA) for 30 min on ice with vortexing at 10-min intervals. After centrifugation for 10 min at 4 C, the protein concentration was measured (protein assay; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) and boiled in sodium dodecyl sulfate sample buffer. Protein lysates (typically 35 µg) were separated by 7% SDS-PAGE, transferred to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Immobilon, Millipore Corp., Burlington, MA), probed with the indicated antibodies, and detected using enhanced chemiluminescence (GE Healthcare, Piscataway, NJ). The rabbit polyclonal antibody against MED14 was raised against a glutathione-S-transferase-MED1411461454 and affinity purified using a MED14 peptide column prepared with MED14 residues 11461454 (Covance, Berkeley, CA). A mouse monoclonal antibody against MED1 used in the immunoblot analysis was a gift from Dr. L. Freedman. An affinity-purified rabbit polyclonal antibody against MED1 used in the ChIP assay was provided by Dr. K. Oda. The antibody for GR (218) used in the ChIP assay was generated against the peptide 194LQDLEFSSGSPGKE207. The polyclonal antibody against the N-terminal 499 amino acids of human GR (N499) was a gift from Dr. K. Yamamoto. The following antibodies were also used: hemagglutinin mouse monoclonal antibody (12-CA5; Roche, Indianapolis, IN); tubulin mouse monoclonal (Covance), and rabbit polyclonal anti-SRC1 (SC-6096; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA).
Real-time PCR
Total RNA was isolated from cells using the RNeasy Mini Kit (Qiagen). cDNA was synthesized using enhanced avian reverse transcriptase (Sigma-Aldrich Corp.) and random hexamers (GE Healthcare) following the manufacturers instructions. Gene-specific cDNA was amplified in a 20-µl reaction containing SYBR Green Taq ReadyMix for Quantitative PCR (Sigma-Aldrich Corp.) and 300 nM of each primer. Real-time PCR was performed in a LightCycler (Roche). Rpl19 was used as an internal control for data normalization. The sequences of the primers used for real-time PCR are given in Table 2
.
|
|
Statistics
Results are expressed as the mean ± SD. Data were analyzed by Students t test. P < 0.1 was considered significant.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
First Published Online October 20, 2005
Abbreviations: AF1, Activation function 1; ChIP, chromatin immunoprecipitation; Dex, dexamethasone; FBS, fetal bovine serum; GILZ, glucocorticoid-inducible leucine zipper; GR, glucocorticoid receptor; GRE, glucocorticoid response element; GRIP, GR-interacting protein; IGFBP1, IGF-binding protein 1; IRF8, interferon regulatory factor 8; LAD1, ladinin 1; MED14v, MED14 variant; siRNA, small interfering RNA; Sp1, specificity protein 1; SRC-1, steroid receptor coactivator 1; TIF2, transcriptional intermediary factor 2.
Received for publication August 3, 2005. Accepted for publication October 12, 2005.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
NURSA Molecule Pages Link:
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
I. M. E. Beck, W. Vanden Berghe, L. Vermeulen, K. R. Yamamoto, G. Haegeman, and K. De Bosscher Crosstalk in Inflammation: The Interplay of Glucocorticoid Receptor-Based Mechanisms and Kinases and Phosphatases Endocr. Rev., December 1, 2009; 30(7): 830 - 882. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Ayroldi and C. Riccardi Glucocorticoid-induced leucine zipper (GILZ): a new important mediator of glucocorticoid action FASEB J, November 1, 2009; 23(11): 3649 - 3658. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Balamotis, M. A. Pennella, J. L. Stevens, B. Wasylyk, A. S. Belmont, and A. J. Berk Complexity in Transcription Control at the Activation Domain-Mediator Interface Sci. Signal., May 5, 2009; 2(69): ra20 - ra20. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. E Ellestad, S. A Malkiewicz, H D. Guthrie, G. R Welch, and T. E Porter Expression and regulation of glucocorticoid-induced leucine zipper in the developing anterior pituitary gland J. Mol. Endocrinol., February 1, 2009; 42(2): 171 - 183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Ding, C. Tomomori-Sato, S. Sato, R. C. Conaway, J. W. Conaway, and T. G. Boyer MED19 and MED26 Are Synergistic Functional Targets of the RE1 Silencing Transcription Factor in Epigenetic Silencing of Neuronal Gene Expression J. Biol. Chem., January 30, 2009; 284(5): 2648 - 2656. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Chen, T. Dang, R. D. Blind, Z. Wang, C. N. Cavasotto, A. B. Hittelman, I. Rogatsky, S. K. Logan, and M. J. Garabedian Glucocorticoid Receptor Phosphorylation Differentially Affects Target Gene Expression Mol. Endocrinol., August 1, 2008; 22(8): 1754 - 1766. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Jeanneteau, M. J. Garabedian, and M. V. Chao Activation of Trk neurotrophin receptors by glucocorticoids provides a neuroprotective effect PNAS, March 25, 2008; 105(12): 4862 - 4867. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Ge, Y.-W. Cho, H. Guo, T. B. Hong, M. Guermah, M. Ito, H. Yu, M. Kalkum, and R. G. Roeder Alternative Mechanisms by Which Mediator Subunit MED1/TRAP220 Regulates Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {gamma}-Stimulated Adipogenesis and Target Gene Expression Mol. Cell. Biol., February 1, 2008; 28(3): 1081 - 1091. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Aoyagi and T. K. Archer Nicotinamide Uncouples Hormone-Dependent Chromatin Remodeling from Transcription Complex Assembly Mol. Cell. Biol., January 1, 2008; 28(1): 30 - 39. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. K. Mathew, S. Sengupta, A. Kawakami, E. A. Andreasen, C. V. Lohr, C. A. Loynes, S. A. Renshaw, R. T. Peterson, and R. L. Tanguay Unraveling Tissue Regeneration Pathways Using Chemical Genetics J. Biol. Chem., November 30, 2007; 282(48): 35202 - 35210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Chen and R. G. Roeder The Mediator subunit MED1/TRAP220 is required for optimal glucocorticoid receptor-mediated transcription activation Nucleic Acids Res., September 25, 2007; 35(18): 6161 - 6169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. B. Hebbar and T. K. Archer Chromatin-dependent Cooperativity between Site-specific Transcription Factors in Vivo J. Biol. Chem., March 16, 2007; 282(11): 8284 - 8291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Wang, W. Chen, E. Kono, T. Dang, and M. J. Garabedian Modulation of Glucocorticoid Receptor Phosphorylation and Transcriptional Activity by a C-Terminal-Associated Protein Phosphatase Mol. Endocrinol., March 1, 2007; 21(3): 625 - 634. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. He and S. S. Simons Jr. STAMP, a Novel Predicted Factor Assisting TIF2 Actions in Glucocorticoid Receptor-Mediated Induction and Repression Mol. Cell. Biol., February 15, 2007; 27(4): 1467 - 1485. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. C. M. C. Koeijvoets, E. F. C. van Rossum, G. M. Dallinga-Thie, E. W. Steyerberg, J. C. Defesche, J. J. P. Kastelein, S. W. J. Lamberts, and E. J. G. Sijbrands A Functional Polymorphism in the Glucocorticoid Receptor Gene and Its Relation to Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Familial Hypercholesterolemia J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2006; 91(10): 4131 - 4136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Endocrinology | Endocrine Reviews | J. Clin. End. & Metab. |
| Molecular Endocrinology | Recent Prog. Horm. Res. | All Endocrine Journals |