Differential modulation of glucocorticoid and progesterone receptor transactivation.

The determinants of the different biological activities of progesterone receptors (PRs) vs. glucocorticoid receptors (GRs), which bind to the same DNA sequences, remain poorly understood. The mechanisms by which differential expression of a common target gene can be achieved by PR and GR include unequal agonist steroid concentrations for half maximal induction (EC50) and dissimilar amounts of residual partial agonist activity for antisteroids in addition to the more common changes in total gene induction, or Vmax. Several factors are known to alter some or all of these three parameters for GR-regulated gene induction and some (i.e., the corepressors NCoR and SMRT) modulate the EC50 and partial agonist activity for GR and PR induction of the same gene in opposite directions. The current study demonstrates that other factors known to modulate GR properties (GME, GMEB-2, Ubc9, and STAMP) can also differentially interact with PRs or alter several of the above induction parameters under otherwise identical conditions. These results support the hypothesis that the modulation of EC50, partial agonist activity, and Vmax by a given factor is not limited to one receptor in a specific cell line. Furthermore, the number of factors that unequally modulate PR and GR induction parameters is now greatly expanded, thereby increasing the possible mechanisms for differential gene regulation by PRs vs. GRs.

Glucocorticoid receptor ligand binding domain is sufficient for the modulation of glucocorticoid induction properties by homologous receptors, coactivator transcription intermediary factor 2, and Ubc9.

Several factors modulate the position of the dose-response curve of steroid receptor-agonist complexes and the partial agonist activity of antagonist complexes, thereby causing differential gene activation by circulating hormones and unequal gene repression during endocrine therapies with antisteroids. We now ask whether the modulatory activity of three factors (homologous receptor, coactivator transcription intermediary factor 2, and Ubc9) requires the same or different domains of glucocorticoid receptors (GRs). In all cases, we find that neither the amino terminal half of the receptor, which contains the activation function-1 activation domain, nor the DNA binding domain is required. This contrasts with the major role of activation function-1 in determining the amount of gene expression and partial agonist activity of antisteroids with most steroid receptors. However, the situation is more complicated with Ubc9, where GR N-terminal sequences prevent the actions of Ubc9, but not added GR or transcription intermediary factor 2, at low GR concentrations. Inhibition is relieved by deletion of these sequences or by replacement with the comparable region of progesterone receptors but not by overexpression of the repressive sequences. These results plus the binding of C-terminal GR sequences to the suppressive N-terminal domain implicate an intramolecular mechanism for the inhibition of Ubc9 actions at low GR concentrations. A shift from noncooperative to cooperative steroid binding at high GR concentrations suggests that conformational changes reposition the inhibitory N-terminal sequence to allow Ubc9 interaction with elements of the ligand binding domain. Collectively, these results indicate a dominant role of GR C-terminal sequences in the modulation of the dose-response curve and partial agonist activity of GR complexes. They also reveal mechanistic differences both among individual modulators and between the ability of the same factors to regulate the total amount of gene expression.

Modulation of induction properties of glucocorticoid receptor-agonist and -antagonist complexes by coactivators involves binding to receptors but is independent of ability of coactivators to augment transactivation.

Coactivators such as TIF2 and SRC-1 modulate the positioning of the dose-response curve for agonist-bound glucocorticoid receptors (GRs) and the partial agonist activity of antiglucocorticoid complexes. These properties of coactivators differ from their initially defined activities of binding to, and increasing the total levels of transactivation by, agonist-bound steroid receptors. We now report that constructs of TIF2 and SRC-1 lacking the two activation domains (AD1 and AD2) have significantly less ability to increase transactivation but retain most of the activity for modulating the dose-response curve and partial agonist activity. Mammalian two-hybrid experiments show that the minimum TIF2 segment with modulatory activity (TIF2.4) does not interact with p300, CREB-binding protein, or PCAF, which also modulates GR activities. DRIP150 and DRIP205 have been implicated in coactivator actions but are unable to modulate GR activities. The absence of synergism by PCAF or DRIP150 with SRC-1 or TIF2, respectively, further suggests that these other factors are not involved. The ability of a TIF2.4 fragment (i.e. TIF2.37), which is not known to interact with proteins, to block the actions of TIF2.4 suggests that an unidentified binder mediates the modulatory activity of TIF2. Pull-down experiments with GST/TIF2.4 demonstrate a direct interaction of TIF2 with GR in a hormone-dependent fashion that requires the receptor interaction domains of TIF2 and is equally robust with agonists and most antiglucocorticoids. These observations, which are confirmed in mammalian two-hybrid assays, suggest that the capacity of coactivators such as TIF2 to modulate the partial agonist activity of antisteroids is mediated by the binding of coactivators to GR-antagonist complexes. In conclusion, the modulatory activity of coactivators with GR-agonist and -antagonist complexes is mechanistically distinct from the ability of coactivators to augment the total levels of transactivation and appears to involve the binding to both GR-steroid complexes and an unidentified TIF2-associated factor(s).