Phosphorylated and SUMO-deficient progesterone receptors drive a gene expression profile important for breast cancer progression
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: This SuperSeries is composed of the following subset Series: GSE34147: Phosphorylated and SUMO-deficient progesterone receptors drive a gene expression profile important for breast cancer progression (Affymetrix gene expression analysis) GSE34148: Phosphorylated and SUMO-deficient progesterone receptors drive a gene expression profile important for breast cancer progression (Illumina gene expression analysis) Refer to individual Series
Project description:Anlaysis of the differential gene expression between T47D cells expressing wild type (WT) progesterone receptor isoform B (PR) or SUMOylation-deficient PR molecules. Total RNA obtained from T47D breast cancer cells induced (with AP21967) to express either iWT PR-B or mutant PR-B (iK388R, SUMO-deficient), treated with or without synthetic PR ligand R5020 for 6 h. Each sample had 1 replicate.
Project description:Progesterone receptors (PRs) are critical context-dependent transcription factors required for normal uterine (PR-A) and mammary gland (PR-B) development. Progesterone is proliferative in the breast, where PR-target genes include paracrine factors that mediate mammary stem cell self-renewal. In the context of altered signal transduction that typifies breast tumorigenesis, dysregulated (i.e. hyper-phosphorylated) PRs likely contribute to tumor progression by promoting cancer cell pro-survival and proliferation. Notably, in breast cancer cells, progestin-bound PRs induce rapid MAPK activation leading to selective regulation of growth-promoting genes by phosphorylated PR species. Functional domains within PR that interact with c-Src and estrogen receptors (ER) have been identified as indirect routes to MAPK activation. Herein, we describe a common docking (CD) domain located within the PR-B N-terminus, a motif first described in MAPKs that facilitates direct interactions between MAPKs and MEK1 or MAPK-phosphatases (MKPs). Mutation of negatively-charged amino acids, previously determined to be critical for CD domain function in MAPKs, within PR-B (mCD PR) did not alter MEK-binding or progestin-induced rapid signaling (i.e. MAPK activation) and PR transcriptional activity as measured by PRE-luciferase (reporter) assays. Microarray gene-expression analysis revealed that endogenous genes regulated by wt PR, but not mCD PR, are involved in critical cellular pathways regulating growth, proliferation, survival, and cancer. mCD PR failed to undergo ligand-induced phosphorylation on Ser81, a ck2-dependent site required for progestin-regulation of select growth-promoting genes (BIRC3, HSD11β2, HbEGF). Progestin-induced PR Ser81 phosphorylation mapped to CD domain-dependent binding of PR-B to MKP3, but did not require phosphatase activity. Receptors containing either mutant CD domains (mCD PR) or point mutations of Ser81 (S79/81A PR) failed to upregulate STAT5 and Wnt1, key PR-target gene products that act as critical mediators of mammary stem cell expansion. Inhibition of JAK/STAT signaling blocked progestin-induced STAT5 and Wnt1 expression. ChIP assays demonstrated that wt, but not phospho-mutant (S79/81A), PR-B was co-recruited to a PRE-containing enhancer region of the Wnt1 gene along with MKP3, ck2 and STAT5. Our studies reveal a novel scaffolding action of MKP3 mediated by interaction with the PR CD domain and required for ck2-dependent PR Ser81 phosphorylation. Co-regulation of select target genes by phospho-Ser81 PR and phospho-STAT5 is likely a global mechanism required for the activation of growth promoting programs active during normal mammary gland development and relevant to mechanisms of breast cancer progression. The study contains 6 different sample groups measured in triplicate, for a total of 18 individual samples (18 arrays). From parental T47D-Y human breast cancer cell lines, we created three stable clones expressing (1) an empty vector (pSG5), (2) the wild type progesterone receptor isoform B (pSG5-PR-B), or (3) a mutant mutant CD domain PR-B. These cell lines were treated with either (1) vehicle control (ethanol) or (2) R5020 10e-8 M for 6 hours before total RNA harvest. Thus, the experiment contains three cell lines, and two treatments (6 sample groups) treated and analyzed in triplicate (18 microarrays). Standard Illumina HT-12v4 chip controls were used during hybridization.
Project description:Phosphorylated and Sumoylation-Deficient Progesterone Receptors Drive Proliferative Gene Signatures During Breast Cancer Progression
Project description:Exploring effect of estrogen and progesterone/progestin treatment on ER and PR binding. Two cell lines, four conditions (Vehicle, E2, Progesterone, E2+Progesterone), three factors (ER, PR, p300), all with three replicates.
Project description:Exploring effect of progesterone/progestin treatment on gene expression Two cell lines, three conditions (Full Media with E2, E2+ Progesterone, Full Media + R5020 Progestin)
Project description:Exploring effect of progesterone/progestin treatment on ER and PR binding. Two cell lines, three conditions (Full Media with E2, E2+ Progesterone, Full Media + R5020 Progestin), three factors (ER, PR, p300), all with three replicates, each with a matched Input control.
Project description:Phosphorylated and Sumoylation-Deficient Progesterone Receptors Drive Proliferative Gene Signatures During Breast Cancer Progression (Illumina gene expression analysis)
Project description:Phosphorylated and Sumoylation-Deficient Progesterone Receptors Drive Proliferative Gene Signatures During Breast Cancer Progression (Affymetrix gene expression analysis)
Project description:Transcriptomic changes and estrogen and progesterone receptor binding in multiple ER+/PR+ models (eight ER+/PR+ patient tumors, various T47Ds, ZR75) and multiple ER+/PR-negative models (four ER+/PR- patient tuumors, PR-deficient T47D and MCF7 cells) treated with various hormone combinations. Results: In isolation, estrogen and progestin act as genomic agonists by regulating the expression of common target genes in similar directions, but at different levels. Similarly, in isolation, progestin is also a weak phenotypic agonist of estrogen action. However, in the presence of both hormones, progestin behaves as a phenotypic estrogen antagonist. PR remodels nucleosomes to noncompetitively redirect ER genomic binding to distal enhancers enriched for BRCA1 binding motifs and sites that link PR and ER/PR complexes. Importantly, when both hormones are present, progestin modulates estrogen action such that responsive transcriptomes, cellular processes and ER/PR recruitment to genomic sites correlate with those observed with PR alone, but not ER alone. Conclusions: Genomic Agonism and Phenotypic Antagonism between Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors in Breast Cancer. Individual and concerted actions of ER and PR highlight the prognostic and therapeutic value of PR in ER+/PR+ breast cancers. ER+/PR+ and ER+/PR-deficient model systems were deprived of steroids by culturing them in phenol red free RPMI 1640 media that is supplemented with 10% charcoal-stripped fetal bovine serum and 1% penicillin/streptomycin. Subsequently, these steroid-deprived models were treated with either vehicle, 10 nM estradiol, 10 nM progestin R5020 or 10 nM of both the hormones and genomics (ChIP-seq and RNA-seq) was performed. ChIP-seq was done after 45 minutes of hormone treatments. For cell models, RNA-seq was done after 12 hours of hormone treatments. Tumor explants were treated with either 24 or 48 hours.
Project description:The nuclear steroid hormone receptor Progesterone Receptor (PGR) is expressed in granulosa cells in the ovarian follicle in a tightly regulated pattern in response to the surge of Luteinizing Hormone (LH) that stimulates ovulation. PGR plays a critical role in mediating ovulation in response to LH, however the mechanism for this is still unknown. Using the KGN human granulosa cell line expressing the primary PGR isoforms PGR-A or PGR-B, we performed immunoprecipitation-mass spectrometry to identify novel interacting proteins that regulate PGR function in these ovary-specific target cells. Proteomic analysis revealed protein interactions with both PGR isoforms that were gained (e.g. transcriptional coactivators) or lost (e.g. chaperone proteins) in response to the PGR agonist R5020. Additionally, isoform-specific interactions, including different families of transcriptional regulators, were identified. Comparison with published datasets of PGR interacting proteins in human breast cancer cell lines and decidualised endometrial stromal cells demonstrated a remarkable number of tissue-specific interactions, shedding light on how PGR can maintain diverse functions in different tissues. In conclusion, our dataset provides new insights into ovary-specific PGR transcriptional mechanisms.