Molecular and Cellular Biology, July 2006, p. 5205-5213, Vol. 26, No. 14
0270-7306/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.00009-06
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Departments of Microbiology,1 Urology,2 Radiation Oncology,3 NYU Cancer Institute, NYU School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, New York 100164
Received 3 January 2006/ Returned for modification 9 February 2006/ Accepted 24 April 2006
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
ER plays a central role in the development and progression of breast cancer by regulating genes and signaling pathways involved in cell proliferation, cell migration, and tumor invasiveness (6, 19, 30). ER is therefore an important target for anticancer therapy, and antiestrogens have routinely been used to treat breast cancer patients. However, there are limitations to this kind of treatment. First, only patients with ER-expressing tumors can be treated with antiestrogens. Second, although responsive at an early stage, many tumors eventually become resistant to antiestrogen therapy (13). A major challenge is to identify the mechanisms of resistance and to find alternative treatments. In light of these studies, Hsp90 and regulators of Hsp90 activity have emerged as possible targets.
Many Hsp90 client proteins, including ER, can be linked to tumor development and progression. Hsp90 inhibitors induce the degradation of the client proteins and have been shown to mediate antitumor effects (1). The Hsp90 inhibitor 17-allylaminogeldanamycin is currently being tested in clinical trials (17, 36). A recent study has demonstrated that hormone-refractory breast cancer remains sensitive to the antitumor activity of Hsp90 inhibitors (2). Although promising, there are still disadvantages associated with these compounds. It has proven difficult, for example, to reduce their hepatic toxicity without affecting their activity (5).
In addition to its client proteins, Hsp90 itself has been reported to exist in a highly active and p23-bound state in tumor cells, to be overexpressed in advanced-stage tumors, and to have a role in tumor invasion (9, 18, 20, 26). As a cochaperone and regulator of Hsp90 function, p23 could therefore be specifically targeted to modify Hsp90 activity. A recent biochemical study suggests that human p23 secures Hsp90 into an ATP-bound form, thus facilitating Hsp90 interaction with client proteins (25). In this context, it was recently reported that p23 was found to be upregulated in cancer tissues, especially in metastases, indicating that p23 is involved in tumor growth, in part, by enhancing Hsp90 affinity for client proteins (23, 27).
In view of these findings, we examined how p23 affects ER transcriptional regulatory functions and studied the effect of p23 overexpression on events related to tumor growth and progression. To this end, we stably overexpressed p23 in the MCF-7 breast cancer cell line, which expresses endogenous ER. We observed that p23 induces increased expression of the ER target genes pS2 and cathepsin D, but not c-Myc, cyclin D1, or E2F1. This induction was proportional to the recruitment of ER to the target gene promoter. Importantly, p23 overexpression enhances MCF-7 cell adhesion and invasion in the presence of fibronectin. Our findings show that p23 regulates ER target genes in a differential manner and controls distinct cellular processes connected to breast tumor development.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-p23 (JJ3; Affinity Bioreagents),
-Hsp90
(anti-Hsp90 MAb; Transduction Laboratories),
-ER
(HC-20; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and
-HA (12CA5; Roche). Cell lines, protein extracts, and Western blot analysis. The cell lines used were purchased from ATCC: MCF-7, HCC1395, UACC-893, HCC70, and BT-474. MCF-7 cells were maintained in Dulbeccos modification of Eagles medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS). Prior to the experiments, MCF-7 cells were refed with phenol red-free DMEM supplemented with 10% charcoal-stripped FBS. Special media for other cell lines were as described by the supplier (ATCC). Whole-cell extracts were prepared and fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-10 to 12% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, transferred to Immobilon membranes (Millipore Corp.), and probed with the indicated antibodies.
Stable and transient transfections. MCF-7 cells were transfected with pIRESneo (vector only) or pIRESneo-HA-p23 by using Lipofectamine-PLUS (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Stable transfectants were selected by culturing the cells in medium containing 800 µg of Geneticin (G418; Invitrogen)/ml for 4 to 6 weeks. Individual clones were assayed for p23 expression by indirect immunofluorescence and immunoblotting with HA- and p23-specific antibodies. Clones were maintained in medium containing 300 µg of G418/ml. To measure ER-dependent transcriptional activation, luciferase assays were performed as previously described (33). Briefly, the MCF-7 cell lines were transfected with an ERE-reporter plasmid (XETL) by using Lipofectamine-PLUS and incubated overnight in the presence or absence of 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol.
RNA isolation and real-time RT-PCR. Cells were incubated in the absence or presence of 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol for 0.5 to 16 h before harvesting. Total RNA was isolated by using the RNeasy Minikit from QIAGEN. Real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) was performed as described in the manual for the SYBR Green Quantitative RT-PCR kit (Sigma) by using a LightCycler from Roche. The following primers were used: pS2, 5'-GAACAAGGTGATCTGCG-3' and 5'-TGGTATTAGGATAGAAGCACCA-3'; cathepsin D, 5'-GTACATGATCCCCTGTGAGAAGGT-3' and 5'-GGGACAGCTTGTAGCCTTTGC-3'; c-Myc, 5'-TGCGTGACCAGATCCC-3' and 5'-CGCACAAGAGTTCCGTA-3'; E2F1, 5'-GGAAAAGGTGTGAAATCCC-3' and 5'-CTTCTTGGCAATGAGCT-3'; cyclin D1, 5'-AAGCTCAAGTGGAACCT-3' and 5'-AGGAAGTTGTTGGGGC-3'; and 28S, 5'-AAACTCTGGTGGAGGTCCGT-3' and 5'-CTTACCAAAAGTGGCCCACTA-3'.
RNA interference. The p23 siRNA duplex sense sequence was 5'-AGCUUAAUUGGCUUAGUGUdTdT-3' (Dharmacon). The GL3 siRNA duplex from Dharmacon was used as a control. Cells were transfected twice with the siRNA duplexes using Oligofectamine (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. At 20 h after the second transfection, cells were treated with 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol for 4 h. RNA and protein were isolated, mRNA expression levels were determined by real-time RT-PCR, and protein levels were analyzed by immunoblotting.
Chromatin immunoprecipitation assay. Cells were grown for 3 days in phenol red-free DMEM supplemented with charcoal-stripped FBS. Cells were treated with 10 nM 17-ß-estradiol for 0 to 45 min and then cross-linked with 1% formaldehyde for 10 min at room temperature. Cross-linking was subsequently quenched by the addition of glycine. The cells were rinsed twice and then collected in ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline. The pellet was resuspended in lysis buffer 1 (50 mM HEPES, 1 mM EDTA, 140 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 0.5% NP-40, 0.25% Triton X-100, and 1x protease inhibitor cocktail [PI; Sigma]), incubated for 10 min at 4°C and centrifuged for 5 min at 1,500 rpm. The cells were washed in buffer II (10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, 200 mM NaCl, and 1x PI) for 10 min at room temperature and then centrifuged for 5 min at 3,000 rpm. The pellet was resuspended in radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) buffer (10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, 140 mM NaCl, 5% glycerol, 0.1% sodium deoxycholate, 0.1% SDS, 1% Triton X-100, and 1x PI) and then sonicated for 18 10-s pulses at 50% output (Branson Digital Sonifier). The extract was centrifuged at 14,000 rpm for 10 min, and the supernatant was transferred to a fresh microcentrifuge tube. Immunoprecipitation was performed overnight at 4°C. Then, 35 µl of protein A-Sepharose 4B slurry (RIPA and salmon sperm DNA, 100 µg/ml) was added, and the incubation was continued for 90 min. The Sepharose beads were centrifuged at 3,000 rpm and washed three to five times in RIPA buffer. Next, 100 µl of proteinase K-0.1% SDS was added to the samples, followed by incubation at 55°C for 3 h and then overnight at 65°C to elute the DNA and reverse the cross-link. DNA was purified with the PCR purification kit from QIAGEN, and PCR was performed by using 30 to 35 cycles for amplification. The oligonucleotides used for amplification were as follows: pS2(ERE), 5'-CTTCATGAGCTCCTTCCCT-3' and 5'-TGGCTGAGGGATCTGAGAT-3'; pS2(upstream), 5'-CCATCATGCTGAAGTCAGTG-3' and 5'-GTGAGTATCTTTCAGAAGATG-3'; c-Myc(ER-bound), 5'-TTATAATGCGAGGGTCTGGA-3' and 5'-CGAAAACCGGCTTTTATACT-3'; and c-Myc(upstream), 5'-GATGATGAGTTTCTAAGACG-3' and 5'-CGCATAAGAGATGGTGAAA-3'.
Proliferation assay. Cells were seeded into 96-well plates in the absence or presence of 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol. The total number of viable cells was determined on days 1, 2, 3, and 4 by using the CellQuanti-MTT cell viability assay kit from BioAssay Systems according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Tumor growth on the chorioallantoic membrane of chicken embryos. Fertilized chicken eggs were incubated at 37°C and ca. 80% relative humidity. Cells were incubated in the presence of 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol overnight before harvesting and counting them. The cells were applied onto to small patches of traumatized chorioallantoic membranes (CAMs) of the embryonic chickens, and the formation of tumor masses was investigated after 7 days of incubation. The tumors were then excised and weighed.
Adhesion assay. Cells were incubated with or without 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol overnight before harvesting and counting. Forty-eight-well non-tissue-culture-treated plates had been precoated with fibronectin at 4°C overnight. Adhesion assays were then performed as described previously (34). Briefly, the adhesive cells were stained with crystal violet solution and then destained with 10% acetic acid. The destaining solution was transferred to 96-well plates, and the optical density at 600 nm was measured.
Invasion assays. Cells were incubated with or without 1 nM 17-ß-estradiol overnight before harvesting and counting. Invasion assays were performed by using BD BioCoat growth factor reduced matrigel invasion chamber from BD Biosciences according to the manufacturer's instructions. Fibronectin was used as a chemoattractant at a final concentration of 20 µg/ml. After addition of the cell suspension to the matrigel inserts, the invasion chambers were incubated at 37°C for 48 h. The noninvading cells were then removed by using moistened cotton swabs. The invading cells on the lower surface of the membrane were fixed and stained by using the Richard-Allan Scientific three-step stain kit (Fisher Scientific). The membranes were then removed from the insert by using a scalpel and placed on a microscope slide with a drop of immersion oil. The cells were counted under a microscope.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Differential regulation of ER target genes by p23. We went on to test the effect of elevated p23 levels on the expression of endogenous ER target genes. To this end, cells were treated with 17-ß-estradiol or ethanol, and the mRNA expression of the ER target genes cathepsin D, pS2, and c-Myc was determined by real-time RT-PCR. As seen in Fig. 2A and B, MCF-7+p23 cells displayed increased expression of both cathepsin D and pS2 at all time points after hormone treatment. We also noticed that the basal mRNA expression levels of pS2 and cathepsin D were elevated in the p23-overexpressing cell lines. This observation is in agreement with our previous studies showing that p23 overexpression induces estradiol-independent transcriptional activation by ER (22) (Fig. 1B). Although the underlying mechanism is unclear, p23 may induce conformational changes that render ER partially active, allowing for hormone-independent transcriptional activation. Surprisingly, the expression of c-Myc, although responsive to estradiol treatment, remained unaffected by p23 (Fig. 2C). To test whether this was simply due to the dosage of hormone used, we performed a dose-response experiment with estradiol concentrations ranging from 10 pM to 1 µM. From this experiment, we conclude that p23 does not affect c-Myc expression at any of the hormone concentration tested (Fig. S2 in the supplemental material). To further substantiate our findings, we reduced the p23 protein levels by RNA interference (siRNA) and determined the effect on the different genes. MCF-7 cells were transfected with a double-stranded RNA oligonucleotide corresponding to the p23 gene or the luciferase gene as a control, and the expression of cathepsin D, pS2, and c-Myc was examined after hormone treatment. The downregulation of p23 led to a significant decrease in cathepsin D and pS2 expression but had no effect on c-Myc (Fig. 3A through C). p23-siRNA reduced the levels of p23 specifically and did not give rise to changes in either ER or Hsp90 levels (Fig. 3D). Thus, our data strongly suggest that p23 regulates ER target genes differentially.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
pS2 and cathepsin D have been shown to promote tumor cell invasion, whereas c-Myc, cyclin D1, and E2F1 stimulate tumor cell proliferation. The differential control of these genes points to p23 as a potential regulator of distinct processes in tumor development. Indeed, p23 overexpression does not affect estrogen-dependent tumor cell growth but enhances MCF-7 cell adhesion and invasion in the presence of fibronectin. For tumor invasion and metastasis to occur, various cellular factors are up- and downregulated to induce alterations in cell-cell and cell-matrix interactions, and our findings indicate that p23 is involved in these processes. The transcriptional upregulation of pS2 and cathepsin D due to p23 overexpression may be important not only for breast tumor cell invasion in vitro but also in vivo. In addition to a p23- and estrogen-regulated enhancement of adhesion and invasion, p23 modifies the interaction of cells with the ECM in an estrogen-independent manner. Therefore, we conclude that p23 regulates both estrogen-dependent and estrogen-independent events linked to tumor progression.
Platet et al. demonstrated that the unliganded as well as the estradiol-bound ER can suppress invasion through matrigel of MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells via nontranscriptional and transcriptional mechanisms, respectively (29). In our MCF-7 cell system, we observed both ligand-independent and -dependent changes in cell invasion when p23 is overexpressed, suggesting that changes in p23 levels can influence cell invasion in this cell context. This may reflect differences in the inherent invasion capacity between MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells or differences in the experimental design, such as the ECM environment, or both. The enhanced invasion through matrigel of MCF-7 cells overexpressing p23 results when fibronectin, rather than serum, is used as the ECM substrate. As in Platet et al., we also saw less MCF-7 cell invasion upon ER activation when serum, rather than fibronectin, is used as the substrate (data not shown). However, our experimental design using fibronectin is likely more relevant to metastasis in vivo, given the recent findings that tumor cells appear to stimulate normal fibroblasts in future sites of metastasis to produce fibronectin, thus attracting bone marrow-derived cells to form a premetastasis niche (21). The bone marrow cells, through the local action of proteases that liberate growth factors including VEGF, promote the motility and attachment of tumor cells and micrometastasis. Thus, the ability of ER to influence cell invasion is complex and appears to be cell context and ECM dependent. It would be interesting to examine the effect of modulating p23 levels on the invasive properties of MDA-MB-231cells in the presence of fibronectin.
p23 has recently been shown to be recruited to the glucocorticoid response elements in the promoters of endogenous glucocorticoid receptor (GR) target genes in a hormone-dependent manner (12). Freeman et al. suggest that p23 recruitment leads to a removal of GR and thus the disassembly of the transcription machinery and an inhibition of GR-dependent transcription (12). Stavreva et al., on the other hand, have shown that chaperones, including p23, stabilize the binding of GR to the promoter and give rise to a greater transcriptional output (32). Our results are also consistent with the idea that p23 modulates ER loading or unloading onto the DNA. This interpretation does not preclude p23 from having a "coactivator" function independent of its Hsp90 cochaperone activity, although attempts to identify a p23 mutant that separate its cochaperone activity (i.e., Hsp90 association) from its transcriptional effects on ER failed to uncover such a p23 derivative (28). Even though there are discrepancies as to the effect of chaperones at transcription regulatory regions, the studies suggest that chaperones are important also at a later stage in steroid receptor signaling than previously described. This role of p23 may potentially explain, at least in part, the phenotype observed in our experiments, i.e., the differential response of ER target genes to changes in p23 levels. Since there are no other studies suggesting occupancy of p23 of ER target gene promoters, we set out to investigate whether p23 binds to and whether there are any differences in binding to the pS2 versus the c-Myc promoters. However, we have been unable to clarify the recruitment pattern of p23 to these promoters. This may be due to the fact that p23 is binding to a region other than the EREs studied. It may also point to a complicated regulation pattern of chaperones, as the differential results obtained from the various groups would suggest. We therefore believe that further and careful mapping of the promoters under different conditions (e.g., hormone-time course experiments) has to be performed to identify putative regions to which p23 is recruited, which is beyond the scope of the present study.
Furthermore, p23 levels were found to be higher in breast cancer cell lines that derive from advanced-stage invasive tumors than in cell lines derived from low-grade tumors. Interestingly, in support of our findings, it was recently reported that p23 is upregulated in cancer tissues, especially in metastases, indicating that p23 is involved in tumor growth (23, 27). Taken together, our findings reveal novel functions of p23 and implicate p23 as a regulator of events associated with tumor cell invasion and metastasis.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This study was supported by grants from the American Cancer Society (M.J.G.), the Philip Morris USA, Inc., and Philip Morris International (M.J.G.), as well as from the DOD (R.J.S.) and NIH (R.J.S. and P.C.B.).
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://mcb.asm.org/. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Beliakoff, J., R. Bagatell, G. Paine-Murrieta, C. W. Taylor, A. E. Lykkesfeldt, and L. Whitesell. 2003. Hormone-refractory breast cancer remains sensitive to the antitumor activity of heat shock protein 90 inhibitors. Clin. Cancer Res. 9:4961-4971.
3. Boxer, L. M., and C. V. Dang. 2001. Translocations involving c-myc and c-myc function. Oncogene 20:5595-5610.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Burrows, F., H. Zhang, and A. Kamal. 2004. Hsp90 activation and cell cycle regulation. Cell Cycle 3:1530-1536.[Medline]
5. Chiosis, G., M. Vilenchik, J. Kim, and D. Solit. 2004. Hsp90: the vulnerable chaperone. Drug Discov. Today 9:881-888.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Dabrosin, C., A. C. Johansson, and K. Ollinger. 2004. Decreased secretion of Cathepsin D in breast cancer in vivo by tamoxifen: mediated by the mannose-6-phosphate/IGF-II receptor? Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 85:229-238.[Medline]
7. DeFranco, D. B., and P. Csermely. 2000. Steroid receptor and molecular chaperone encounters in the nucleus. Sci. STKE 2000:PE1.
8. Dubik, D., and R. P. Shiu. 1992. Mechanism of estrogen activation of c-myc oncogene expression. Oncogene 7:1587-1594.[Medline]
9. Eustace, B. K., T. Sakurai, J. K. Stewart, D. Yimlamai, C. Unger, C. Zehetmeier, B. Lain, C. Torella, S. W. Henning, G. Beste, B. T. Scroggins, L. Neckers, L. L. Ilag, and D. G. Jay. 2004. Functional proteomic screens reveal an essential extracellular role for hsp90 alpha in cancer cell invasiveness. Nat. Cell Biol. 6:507-514.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Felts, S. J., and D. O. Toft. 2003. p23, a simple protein with complex activities. Cell Stress Chaperones 8:108-113.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Fliss, A. E., S. Benzeno, J. Rao, and A. J. Caplan. 2000. Control of estrogen receptor ligand binding by Hsp90. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 72:223-230.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Freeman, B. C., and K. R. Yamamoto. 2002. Disassembly of transcriptional regulatory complexes by molecular chaperones. Science 296:2232-2235.
13. Graham, J. D., D. L. Bain, J. K. Richer, T. A. Jackson, L. Tung, and K. B. Horwitz. 2000. Nuclear receptor conformation, coregulators, and tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer. Steroids 65:579-584.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Hall, J. M., D. P. McDonnell, and K. S. Korach. 2002. Allosteric regulation of estrogen receptor structure, function, and coactivator recruitment by different estrogen response elements. Mol. Endocrinol. 16:469-486.
15. Hanahan, D., and R. A. Weinberg. 2000. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 100:57-70.[CrossRef][Medline]
16. Ioachim, E., A. Charchanti, E. Briasoulis, V. Karavasilis, H. Tsanou, D. L. Arvanitis, N. J. Agnantis, and N. Pavlidis. 2002. Immunohistochemical expression of extracellular matrix components tenascin, fibronectin, collagen type IV and laminin in breast cancer: their prognostic value and role in tumour invasion and progression. Eur. J. Cancer 38:2362-2370.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Isaacs, J. S., W. Xu, and L. Neckers. 2003. Heat shock protein 90 as a molecular target for cancer therapeutics. Cancer Cell 3:213-217.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Jameel, A., R. A. Skilton, T. A. Campbell, S. K. Chander, R. C. Coombes, and Y. A. Luqmani. 1992. Clinical and biological significance of HSP89 alpha in human breast cancer. Int. J. Cancer 50:409-415.[Medline]
19. Jordan, V. C. 1999. Estrogen receptor as a target for the prevention of breast cancer. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 133:408-414.[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Kamal, A., L. Thao, J. Sensintaffar, L. Zhang, M. F. Boehm, L. C. Fritz, and F. J. Burrows. 2003. A high-affinity conformation of Hsp90 confers tumour selectivity on Hsp90 inhibitors. Nature 425:407-410.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Kaplan, R. N., R. D. Riba, S. Zacharoulis, A. H. Bramley, L. Vincent, C. Costa, D. D. MacDonald, D. K. Jin, K. Shido, S. A. Kerns, Z. Zhu, D. Hicklin, Y. Wu, J. L. Port, N. Altorki, E. R. Port, D. Ruggero, S. V. Shmelkov, K. K. Jensen, S. Rafii, and D. Lyden. 2005. VEGFR1-positive hematopoietic bone marrow progenitors initiate the pre-metastatic niche. Nature 438:820-827.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Knoblauch, R., and M. J. Garabedian. 1999. Role for Hsp90-associated cochaperone p23 in estrogen receptor signal transduction. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:3748-3759.
23. Krebs, J., P. Saremaslani, and R. Caduff. 2002. ALG-2: a Ca2+-binding modulator protein involved in cell proliferation and in cell death. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1600:68-73.[Medline]
24. Kushner, P. J., D. A. Agard, G. L. Greene, T. S. Scanlan, A. K. Shiau, R. M. Uht, and P. Webb. 2000. Estrogen receptor pathways to AP-1. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 74:311-317.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. McLaughlin, S. H., F. Sobott, Z. P. Yao, W. Zhang, P. R. Nielsen, J. G. Grossmann, E. D. Laue, C. V. Robinson, and S. E. Jackson. 2006. The co-chaperone p23 arrests the Hsp90 ATPase cycle to trap client proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 356:746-758.[CrossRef][Medline]
26. Mileo, A. M., M. Fanuele, F. Battaglia, G. Scambia, P. Benedetti-Panici, S. Mancuso, and U. Ferrini. 1990. Selective overexpression of mRNA coding for 90 kDa stress-protein in human ovarian cancer. Anticancer Res. 10:903-906.[Medline]
27. Mollerup, J., T. N. Krogh, P. F. Nielsen, and M. W. Berchtold. 2003. Properties of the co-chaperone protein p23 erroneously attributed to ALG-2 (apoptosis-linked gene 2). FEBS Lett. 555:478-482.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Oxelmark, E., R. Knoblauch, S. Arnal, L. F. Su, M. Schapira, and M. J. Garabedian. 2003. Genetic dissection of p23, an Hsp90 cochaperone, reveals a distinct surface involved in estrogen receptor signaling. J. Biol. Chem. 278:36547-36555.
29. Platet, N., S. Cunat, D. Chalbos, H. Rochefort, and M. Garcia. 2000. Unliganded and liganded estrogen receptors protect against cancer invasion via different mechanisms. Mol. Endocrinol. 14:999-1009.
30. Prest, S. J., F. E. May, and B. R. Westley. 2002. The estrogen-regulated protein, TFF1, stimulates migration of human breast cancer cells. FASEB J. 16:592-594.
31. Shang, Y., X. Hu, J. DiRenzo, M. A. Lazar, and M. Brown. 2000. Cofactor dynamics and sufficiency in estrogen receptor-regulated transcription. Cell 103:843-852.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Stavreva, D. A., W. G. Muller, G. L. Hager, C. L. Smith, and J. G. McNally. 2004. Rapid glucocorticoid receptor exchange at a promoter is coupled to transcription and regulated by chaperones and proteasomes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24:2682-2697.
33. Su, L. F., R. Knoblauch, and M. J. Garabedian. 2001. Rho GTPases as modulators of the estrogen receptor transcriptional response. J. Biol. Chem. 276:3231-3237.
34. Trikha, M., Y. A. De Clerck, and F. S. Markland. 1994. Contortrostatin, a snake venom disintegrin, inhibits beta 1 integrin-mediated human metastatic melanoma cell adhesion and blocks experimental metastasis. Cancer Res. 54:4993-4998.
35. Watson, P. H., R. T. Pon, and R. P. Shiu. 1991. Inhibition of c-myc expression by phosphorothioate antisense oligonucleotide identifies a critical role for c-myc in the growth of human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 51:3996-4000.
36. Workman, P. 2003. Auditing the pharmacological accounts for Hsp90 molecular chaperone inhibitors: unfolding the relationship between pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2:131-138.
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| J. Bacteriol. | J. Virol. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|
| Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. | Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | All ASM Journals |
|---|