help button home button Endocrine Society JCEM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Agoulnik, I. U.
Right arrow Articles by Kieback, D. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Agoulnik, I. U.
Right arrow Articles by Kieback, D. G.
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 89, No. 12 6340-6347
Copyright © 2004 by The Endocrine Society

A Germline Variation in the Progesterone Receptor Gene Increases Transcriptional Activity and May Modify Ovarian Cancer Risk

Irina U. Agoulnik, Xiao-Wen Tong, Dagmar-C. Fischer, Klaus Körner, Neely E. Atkinson, Dean P. Edwards, Denis R. Headon, Nancy L. Weigel and Dirk G. Kieback

Departments of Molecular and Cellular Biology (I.U.A., N.L.W., D.G.K.) and Obstetrics and Gynecology (D.G.K.), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030; Red Cross Blood Bank (K.K.), 89081 Ulm, Germany; Department of Biomathematics, University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (N.E.A.), Houston, Texas 77030; Department of Pathology and Program in Molecular Biology, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center (D.P.E.), Denver, Colorado 80262; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Maastricht (D.-C.F., D.G.K.), 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands; Texas/United Kingdom Collaborative Research Initiative, Rice University (D.R.H.), Houston, Texas 77251; and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tongji University (X.-W.T.), 200065 Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Dirk G. Kieback, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P. Debyelaan 25, NL 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands. E-mail: dki{at}sgyn.azm.nl.


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Recently, we and others have detected a haplotype of the human progesterone receptor gene (PR). This haplotype consists of a 320-bp insertion in intron G together with point mutations in exons 4 and 5 and was named PROGINS. Whereas the exon 5 mutation is silent, the mutation in exon 4 results in a V660L substitution. Interestingly, this genetic polymorphism was seen to cosegregate with an increased risk of sporadic ovarian cancer in different ethnic groups. Our data provide evidence for the existence of an epidemiological link between a mutated progesterone receptor allele and ovarian cancer (odds ratio, 3.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.86–4.91). Functional characterization of the mutated receptor protein revealed a greater transcriptional activity compared with the wild-type receptor. By contrast, hormone binding and hormone dissociation rates were similar in both receptor proteins. We found that the increased transcriptional activity was due to increased stability resulting in higher expression of the mutant protein. Thus, the long-lasting hyperactivation of progesterone receptor-driven genes secondary to the increased transcriptional activity of the mutated progesterone receptor may participate in ovarian carcinogenesis. This is of special interest, because only a few genetic markers are available for the majority of women diagnosed with sporadic ovarian cancer.


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
BREAST CANCER IS the most frequent malignancy in women, and ovarian cancer is the gynecological malignancy with the highest mortality secondary to its insidious onset. During 2002 in the United States, ovarian cancer was diagnosed in 23,000 patients, and 14,000 women died due to their disease (1). Familial breast and ovarian cancers, which account for about 5% of all breast and ovarian cancers, are frequently related to mutation-induced loss of function of either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene (2, 3, 4). In contrast, only a few genetic markers are available for the 90–95% of patients with these malignancies without a positive family history.

Growth and differentiation of breast and ovary are highly dependent on steroid hormones and their cognate receptors. Two isoforms of the progesterone receptor (PR) are known (PRA and PRB), and they are generated by utilization of different start codons present in the PR gene. Human PRB is 164 amino acids longer than the PRA isoform, and the isoforms exhibit unique biological action (5). During pregnancy, PR is required in breast for increased branching, formation of the lobular-alveolar structures, and milk protein synthesis (6). Using a mouse PR knockout model in which the A isoform was deleted, it has been shown that the B isoform is sufficient to induce proliferative and differentiation responses in the mammary gland (7). Elimination of the B isoform causes defects in mammary gland development (8). In the ovary, PR is absolutely necessary for ovulation, because the antiprogestin RU486 inhibits ovulation (9), and PR knockout animals fail to ovulate despite exposure to superovulatory levels of gonadotropins (6).

PR has also been implicated in development of breast and ovarian cancers. It is expressed in mammary epithelium and in the human ovarian surface epithelium, the site where more than 90% of ovarian cancers originate (10). Chemical and steroidal induction of tumorigenesis using wild-type (WT) and PR knockout animals demonstrated that PR facilitates initiation of tumorigenesis in rodent breast and ovary (11, 12). Moreover, progesterone signaling greatly increases chromosomal instability in mouse mammary gland (13).

Little is known about the role of PR and PR mutations in cancer. The first restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) in the PR gene, caused by a 320-bp Alu insertion in intron G, was reported in 1991 (14). The HindIII PR gene RFLP did not display typical Mendelian distribution in the breast tumors; the factors affecting the HindIII allele frequencies are presently unknown (14). As Alu insertions in the intron of a gene can be associated with mutations elsewhere in the same gene, the complete coding region of the gene was examined by single strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis and sequencing of the full-length PR in 30 individuals harboring this polymorphism. Two additional variations that are strongly linked to the Alu insertion were identified: a silent substitution in exon 5 (H770H) and an amino acid change in exon 4 (V660L) (15, 16, 17). The V660L mutation is located in the hinge region of the PR, a poorly conserved sequence between the ligand and DNA binding domains of steroid receptors. It plays a role in receptor dimerization, nuclear localization, ligand binding, and interaction with corepressors (18, 19). This receptor variant, consisting of the 320-bp Alu insertion in intron G and the point mutations in exon 4 (V660L) and exon 5 (H770H), was named PROGINS. Our analysis of the frequency of PROGINS in ovarian cancer patients and corresponding healthy populations from different origins indicated that the PROGINS haplotype is more frequently identified among patients, thereby suggesting that PROGINS might participate in ovarian carcinogenesis. Moreover, our functional comparison of mutated (M) and WT PR revealed that the M receptor is more stable than the WT one, resulting in higher expression and increased transcriptional activity.


    Materials and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Materials

WT PRB was cloned in the BamHI site of the pLEN vector (20). WT PRB and PRA were recloned into the BamHI site of pcDNA3.1 (Invitrogen Life Technologies, Inc., Carlsbad, CA) vector. The V660L mutation was introduced into pLEN PRB using a QuikChange Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA), and this plasmid was used to clone M PRB and M PRA into the BamHI site of pcDNA3 vector. All plasmids were verified by DNA sequencing. The sequence of the primer used for mutagenesis was: TCTCCCACAGCCATTGGGCGTTCCAAAT [the site of the mutation (G to T) is underlined]. The reporter plasmid GRE2-E1b-chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (GRE2-E1b-CAT) was obtained from Dr. John Cidlowski (NIEHS) (21).

Promegestone (R5020) and [35S]methionine were purchased from PerkinElmer (Boston, MA), [3H]chloramphenicol was obtained from NEN (Boston, MA), and poly-L-lysine was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Corp. (St. Louis, MO). Tissue culture reagents and supplies were obtained from Fisher Scientific (Pittsburgh, PA) and Invitrogen Life Technologies, Inc. All other chemicals were reagent grade.

DNA isolation

DNA was extracted from paraffin-embedded tumor tissues essentially as previously described (22). Briefly, the sections (5 µm) were deparaffinized with octane, washed with ethanol, and digested with proteinase K. The protease was heat inactivated at 95 C, insoluble cell debris was removed by centrifugation, and the supernatants were subjected to PCR analysis.

SSCP assay

The complete coding region of the human PR gene was screened using SSCP analysis. Exons were amplified with the addition of [{alpha}-32P]deoxy-CTP. The exon-specific primers are summarized in Table 1Go. A standard PCR reaction mixture (10 µl) was prepared containing 1 µCi [{alpha}-32P]deoxy-CTP and 100 ng genomic DNA. PCR products were resolved on a nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel to identify conformational changes. Briefly, 1 µl of the reaction mixture was added to 4 µl stop solution (95% formamide, 20 mM EDTA, 20 mM NaOH, 0.05% bromophenol blue, and xylene cyanol), applied to a 7% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel, and run in 0.6x TBE buffer (89 mM Tris-borate and 2 mM EDTA, pH 8.0) at constant power (exon 4: 14 h, 8 watts; exon 5: 10 h, 6 watts). Finally, the gel was dried and exposed overnight. SSCP analysis revealed an aberrant migration of the amplified exons 4 and 5, which subsequently were submitted to sequence analysis.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 1. Sequences of primers used for exon and intron G-specific amplification of human PR

 
DNA sequencing of exons 4 and 5

The PCR products of exons 4 and 5 were purified through Centricon-100 columns (Amicon, Inc., Beverly, MA) as recommended by the manufacturer, and the same primers used for amplification were used for cycle sequencing in both directions (Thermo Sequenase Radio Labeled Terminator Cycle Sequencing kit, Amersham Biosciences, Piscataway, NJ). Samples were resolved on a 6% polyacrylamide gel, dried, and analyzed on a Fuji X BAS 1000 phosphorimager using MacBas program version 2.0 (Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd., Kohshin Graphic Systems, Inc., Tokyo, Japan).

RFLP analysis of exons 4 and 5

DNA fragments generated after amplification of genomic DNA with primer pairs specific for exons 4 and 5, respectively, were subsequently digested with BsrI (exon 4) and NlaIII (exon 5). Enzymatic digestions were performed as recommended by the manufacturer (New England Biolabs, Beverly, MA). BsrI cleaves WT exon 4 into four fragments (from 5' to 3': 47, 22, 157, and 80 bp), whereas the M exon is cut into three fragments (from 5' to 3': 47, 179, and 80 bp). NlaIII digestion of WT exon 5 results in two fragments of 99 and 46 bp, whereas the M exon 5 lacks the NlaIII cleavage site.

Study population

Samples taken from patients (n = 84) who underwent surgery for ovarian cancer between 1980 and 1995 at Ulm University Medical Center (Ulm, Germany) were included. Patients were selected without regard to family history. DNA isolated from 440 healthy female volunteers without a history of cancer served as a control group. This set of samples was collected and provided anonymously by the blood bank Ulm (K.K.). The ovarian cancer patients and the healthy volunteers both agreed to the use of these specimens for research purposes in advance.

Peripheral blood samples of 120 healthy female Caucasians, 100 Hispanics, and 101 African-Americans from the United States were collected at the blood bank of Baylor College of Medicine (Houston, TX). In addition, whole blood samples from Chinese ovarian cancer patients (n = 114) and healthy female volunteers (n = 512) were provided from Tongji Medical University (Wuhan, Peoples Republic of China). Informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Statistical methods

Statistical significance of the difference in frequencies between the control group and the group of ovarian cancer patients was confirmed by {chi}2 test of independence, and P values are based on {chi}2 values from contingency table analysis. For computation, the StataXact (Cytel, Cambridge, MA) software package was used; P values for the Chinese population are based on exact calculations. The P values for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium are two-sided and were obtained according to Yates by doubling the one-sided P value (23).

Transient transfection

Transient transfections were performed as described previously. The indicated plasmid DNAs were ionically bound to polylysine-coupled adenovirus using a cell to viral particle ratio of 1:500 (24).

Transactivation assay

COS-1, HeLa, and MDAH:2774 cells were purchased from American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA) and were maintained as recommended by American Type Culture Collection. The GRE2-E1b-CAT reporter, a gift from Dr. J. Cidlowski (21), was used to compare activities of WT and M receptor. Cells (COS-1, 9 x 104 cells/well; HeLa, 1.5 x 105 cells/well; MDAH:2774, 2 x 105 cells/well) were plated in six-well plates 1 d before transfection. Five hundred nanograms of GRE2-E1b-CAT reporter plasmid and the indicated amounts of either M or WT PR were transfected. The transfected cells were incubated 24 h in medium containing 5% charcoal-stripped fetal calf serum (FCS) with or without 10 nM R5020. Subsequently, cells were harvested and assayed for CAT activity as previously described (25). Each data point was tested in triplicate using multiple preparations of both M and WT receptor DNA.

Hormone binding assay

COS-1 cells were transfected with 250 ng of either M or WT PRB plasmid or were mock-transfected with the corresponding vector essentially as previously described (24). The transfected cells were incubated overnight in DMEM containing 5% (vol/vol) charcoal-stripped FCS. Two hours before harvesting, [3H]R5020 (final concentration, 50–6400 pM) was added to the medium. The harvested cells were washed with PBS and subjected to ethanol extraction, and bound hormone was measured by scintillation counting. Nonspecific binding of the hormone in mock-transfected cells was subtracted to obtain specific binding. Each data point was determined at least in duplicate.

Pulse-chase analysis

COS-1 cells were transfected with 250 ng of either M or WT PRB expression plasmid and allowed to express PR for 24 h. Cells were then placed in a medium containing 10% dialyzed FCS for 1 h. For biosynthetic labeling, cells were cultured in the presence of 100 µCi/ml [35S]methionine (specific activity, >1000 Ci/mmol) for 4 h. After three washes with PBS, DMEM containing 5% dialyzed FCS and a 100-fold excess of unlabeled methionine was added. At the times indicated, cells were harvested, and PR was immunoprecipitated using antibody AB 1294 (26). Immunoprecipitated protein was run on a 6% polyacrylamide-sodium dodecyl sulfate gel; the gel was dried and exposed to a phosphorimager plate for 3 h. The amount of radioactive protein was assessed using a Fuji X BAS 1000 phosphorimager (Fuji Photo Film Co., Tokyo, Japan) and MacBas version 2.0 software. Signal intensity in pixels was plotted against time, and the exponential trendline was added to the degradation curve. The equation for the trendline was used to calculate the half-life of the receptor.

Intracellular dissociation rate of R5020 from PR

COS-1 cells were transfected with 100 ng of either WT or M human PRB. Twenty-four hours later, the medium was replaced with serum-free DMEM containing 3 nM [3H]R5020 in the presence or absence of 300 nM unlabeled R5020. After 2 h of incubation, cells were washed, and dissociation of bound ligand was initiated by adding a 1000-fold excess of unlabeled R5020. At the time intervals indicated, a hormone binding assay was performed as described above. Radioactivity was determined by scintillation counting, and the amount of hormone specifically bound to the receptor was calculated.

GenBank accession numbers

The accession number for the Alu insertion into intron G of the PR gene called PROGINS is GDB Z49816. The accession number for the PR gene allele with the three described changes (PROGINS allele) is AF016381.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The PROGINS haplotype consists of an Alu insertion in intron G and substitutions in exon 4 and 5

We and others have previously described the PR RFLP caused by insertion of the Alu repeat in intron G (14, 15, 27). It is known that an Alu insertion in the intron of a gene can be associated with a mutation elsewhere in the same gene (28). Therefore, we examined the complete coding region of the PR gene by SSCP in 30 individuals carrying this Alu insertion. We identified two additional changes in exons 4 (V660L) and 5 (H770H). The exon 5 mutation created an additional NlaIII site, whereas the exon 4 mutation abolished a BsrI site. These findings were used to devise a diagnostic strategy consisting of PCR amplification of exons 4 and 5, followed by digestion with the restriction enzymes mentioned above and subsequent gel electrophoresis (PCR-RFLP). The presence of the Alu insertion in intron G was verified by PCR analysis and subsequent agarose gel electrophoresis.

PROGINS is a risk factor for sporadic ovarian cancer

To determine whether PROGINS might be a genetic risk factor for nonfamilial ovarian cancer and to investigate whether it cosegregates with an increased risk for ovarian cancer, we examined the frequency of PROGINS in the genomic DNA of healthy German Caucasians and central mainland Chinese women and ovarian cancer patients from the same ethnic groups. For this purpose, the PCR strategy described above was used, and all samples were tested for the presence of all three mutation to minimize the number of false negatives. Compared with the corresponding control population, we found approximately 2- and 4.5-fold increases in the frequency of PROGINS among German Caucasians and Chinese ovarian cancer patients, respectively (Table 2Go). However, no statistically significant differences with respect to the histology of cancer tissue and the age at diagnosis of ovarian cancer were seen between carriers and noncarriers of the PROGINS allele (data not shown). The frequency of PROGINS translated into odds ratios of 3.02 (German Caucasians) and 4.55 (Chinese women) and correlated well with the incidences of sporadic ovarian cancer in the five ethnic groups studied (Table 3Go) (29, 30, 31). Examination of the allele distribution in these populations revealed a deviation from Hardy-Weinberg distribution in Chinese and Hispanic groups. In 1603 specimens tested, all three alterations always occurred together. Thus, a PR with the three described changes represents a new allele that is frequent in many ethnic populations, indicating an early origin in human evolution. Although the frequency of PROGINS did not differ in a statistically significant manner between healthy women and ovarian cancer patients, our data suggest an association between PROGINS and the risk for ovarian cancer. In a first effort to verify the likelihood of this hypothesis, a functional comparison of WT and M PR was performed.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 2. Frequency of PROGINS in healthy women and ovarian cancer patients

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 3. Frequency of PROGINS in healthy women of different ethnic origins compared to the incidence (IC) of sporadic ovarian cancer

 
Hormone binding affinities of WT and M PR are indistinguishable

Because the mutation is located in the hinge region close to the hormone binding domain (Fig. 1AGo), we first compared the hormone binding affinities of WT and M PR. COS-1 cells transfected with saturating amounts of WT, M PRB, or vector (background) were treated with various concentrations of [3H]R5020, and hormone binding was measured (Fig. 1BGo). The slope of the curves generated by Scatchard analysis (Fig. 1CGo) after subtraction of background were identical, indicating that the affinities of the receptors are the same. The average dissociation constant determined from several experiments was 0.2 nM for both receptors. However, we repeatedly observed that the amount of M receptor protein was higher than that of the WT receptor.



View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
FIG. 1. Hormone binding affinity. A, A schematic representation of the PR structure. The location of the mutation in the hinge region is indicated with an arrow. B, COS-1 cells were transfected with 250 ng of either M or WT PRB in the pLEN expression vector or were mock-transfected. Nonspecific binding of the mock-transfected cells was subtracted to obtain specific binding. Each data point was tested in duplicate. Saturable and specific progesterone binding for both M and WT receptors was detected by the hormone binding assay. C, Scatchard analysis of PR ligand binding. The average calculated dissociation constant of 0.2 nM was identical for both M and WT PR.

 
M PR has higher transcriptional activity than the WT

To determine whether the mutation affected the transcriptional activity of PR, COS-1 cells were transfected with equal amounts of WT, M, or an equimolar mix of both plasmids and a GRE2-E1b-CAT reporter plasmid. As shown in Fig. 2AGo, the M PRB was more active than the WT. Interestingly, if the cells were transfected with equal amounts of WT and M PRB, the transcriptional activity was at least the same as that observed after transfection of cells with M PRB only. On the average, the activity of the M receptor is about 40% higher than the activity of the WT receptor. Although PRA is a much weaker transcriptional activator than PRB, the activity of M PRA was similarly, on the average, 30% higher (Fig. 2BGo). The same results were obtained with ovarian cancer-derived MDAH:2774 cells (Fig. 2CGo) and HeLa cells (data not shown) and regardless of whether pLEN or pcDNA3.1 expression vectors were used to express PR.



View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
FIG. 2. Transcriptional activity assay. A and B, Five hundred nanograms of GRE2-E1b-CAT reporter plasmid and a total of 0.01–0.1 ng DNA of M ({blacksquare}), WT ({square}), or mixed receptor ({cjs2113}) PRB (A) or PRA (B) were used to transfect COS-1 cells. Cells were treated with 10 nM R5020 or were left untreated and harvested, and equal amounts of protein were assayed for CAT activity. Each data point was tested at least in duplicate with different preparations of both M and WT receptor DNA. The hormone-induced transcriptional activity of the M progesterone receptor DNA was about 40% higher than that of the WT receptor DNA. C, Combinations of DNA identical with those in A were transfected into the epithelial ovarian cancer cell line MDAH:2774. Cells were left untreated for 24 h or were treated with 10 nM R5020 for 24 h and harvested, and equal amounts of protein were assayed for CAT activity. Analysis by one-way ANOVA (SigmaStat) of the obtained data showed that the difference between normal and M receptor activity was statistically significant. The mixture of the receptors showed significantly higher transcriptional activation than WT receptor (P < 0.05), but the apparent additional increase compared with the activity of the M receptor was not statistically significant. *, Statistically significant difference compared with the WT (P < 0.05).

 
M PR is expressed at higher concentrations in transiently transfected cells

The increase in total transcriptional activity of the M receptor correlated with the higher amount of the receptor detected in the hormone binding assay (Figs. 2AGo and 1BGo). While determining ligand binding affinity, we used saturating amounts of receptor DNA for transfection. Hence, to compare the levels of receptors per cell, we conducted a series of experiments measuring the amount of expressed PR at lower concentrations of [3H]R5020 and receptor plasmid in the same time frame as the CAT assay. We used equal amounts of WT and M human PR B DNAs to infect COS-1 cells. Whereas the WT receptor is expressed at a fairly constant level, with little increase over 16 h, the amount of M receptor increases in a hormone-dependent manner (Fig. 3AGo), pointing to an increased stability of the M receptor protein (see Fig. 4Go and below). The results indicated that the M PR is present in the COS-1 cells at levels about 40% higher for the B isoform (Fig. 3AGo) and 25–30% for the A isoform (Fig. 3BGo) compared with levels of the WT. These findings are consistent with the increased transcriptional activities of the M receptor proteins. However, the activity per receptor molecule is similar for WT and M PR.



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
FIG. 3. Comparison of PR protein levels. A, COS-1 cells were transfected with 100 ng GRE2-E1b-CAT reporter plasmid and 5 ng of either M or WT PRB cDNA or 5 ng empty vector for 4 h. The transfected cells were incubated for 24 h in DMEM containing 5% (vol/vol) charcoal-stripped FCS. [3H]R5020 was added to the medium to a final concentration of 1.0 nM, and a whole cell hormone binding assay was performed at the time points indicated. Each data point was tested in duplicate with different preparations of both M and WT receptor DNA. B, COS-1 cells were transfected with 5 ng of either WT or M PRA or empty expression vector. Cells were treated as described in A, and hormone binding was determined at the indicated time points.

 


View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
FIG. 4. The M receptor is more stable than the WT. A, WT or M PRB was transiently transfected into COS-1 cells and expressed for 24 h in the absence of hormone. Cells were labeled with 100 µCi/ml [35S]methionine and chased with the 100-fold excess of cold methionine for 12, 24, and 48 h in the presence of 10 nM R5020. PR was immunoprecipitated (PR antibody 1294) and separated on 6.5% SDS-PAGE. The gel was dried, exposed to a phosphoimager screen, and subsequently analyzed in a phosphoimager. The intensity of the radioactive band was measured in pixels and plotted against time. M receptor ({blacktriangleup}) degraded more slowly than the WT ({blacksquare}). B, Pulse-chase analysis of PRA was performed exactly as described for PRB. The results indicate that M PRA ({blacktriangleup}) is more stable than the WT ({blacksquare}).

 
The degradation rate of M PR is slower than that of WT

To confirm the difference in stability of the WT and M receptors we conducted pulse-chase experiments for both M and WT receptors (Fig. 4Go). PR was expressed in COS-1 cells in the absence of the ligand for 48 h, labeled with [35S]methionine, and chased with an excess of unlabeled methionine. Subsequently, the receptor was immunoprecipitated, and the amount of receptor protein was determined from band intensity after electrophoretic separation. The results indicated that the WT PRB degrades faster than the M PRB (Fig. 4AGo), and the calculated half-lives were 12.5 and 23.7 h, respectively. This result was confirmed by measuring degradation rates of M and WT PRB in the presence of cycloheximide (data not shown). Pulse-chase experiments with WT and M PRA also revealed an approximately 2 times increased half-life of the M receptor (21.2 vs. 38.9 h for WT PRA and M PRA, respectively).

Hormone dissociation rate is the same for WT and M receptors

Because there is a naturally occurring mutation in the androgen receptor that increases the rate of androgen dissociation and receptor degradation without altering ligand binding affinity (32), we investigated whether the difference in stability of the WT and M PRB was caused by changes in ligand dissociation kinetics. We expressed saturating amounts of the WT or M receptor in the COS-1 cells and treated them with the [3H]R5020 alone or with [3H]R5020 and the unlabeled hormone at the indicated time points. We found that the dissociation rates of ligand were indistinguishable (Fig. 5Go).



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
FIG. 5. Hormone dissociation assay. COS-1 cells were transfected with either WT or M PRB or with expression vector as described in Fig. 2Go. Twenty-four hours later cells were treated for 2 h with 3 nM [3H]R5020. Subsequently, medium was changed and replaced with one containing a 100-fold excess of unlabeled R5020, and the dissociation rate was measured at the indicated time points. Bound ligand was extracted and measured, and values were plotted as a function of time. The trendlines added to each curve appear to have the same slope, indicating similar dissociation kinetics.

 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
PR plays a central role in the development, maintenance, and renewal of breast and ovarian epithelia, which are the primary sites for development of sporadic breast and ovarian cancer. PR has been implicated in the development of breast cancer in a hormone replacement therapy trial. Women taking estrogen in combination with progestin had a higher incidence of breast cancer than those taking estrogen alone (33).

Almost 10 yr ago, a RFLP affecting intron G of the PR was described (14, 15, 16). Now we have extended these studies and identified two additional mutations (V660L and H770H) accompanying the Alu insertion in intron G. These three mutations always occur together and are in complete linkage disequilibrium (17).

We have shown that the frequency of this polymorphism is increased in women with ovarian cancer compared with healthy controls of the same ethnic origin (Tables 2Go and 3Go). This finding suggests that the presence of the PROGINS allele might be an additional risk factor for this malignancy. Although data obtained from the Chinese population are consistent with this hypothesis, the number of samples studied was too low to obtain a statistically significant result. To reach this goal, i.e. to detect the difference between 0.4% and 1.8% at a significance level of P = 0.05 and a power of 0.8, a study of at least 1546 subjects would be required. However, populations with the highest incidence of ovarian cancer have the highest frequency of the PROGINS allele as well (Table 3Go). Taken together, our data suggest a link between the risk for ovarian cancer and the presence of PROGINS and encouraged us to proceed with the functional characterization of the M receptor variant. To date, no functional consequences of coding sequence mutations have been described, although several PR mutations have been reported (17).

The V600L substitution is located in the hinge region of the receptor, a link between the DNA binding domain and the ligand binding domain. The hinge region has been implicated in receptor dimerization, stability, and cofactor interaction (18, 19). We found no differences in ligand binding affinity or ligand dissociation rate between the WT and M receptors, which suggests that V600L does not affect hormone-receptor interactions. Although Scatchard plots revealed identical ligand binding affinities, the amount of protein per cell differed. Because mutation did not alter the interaction between receptor and ligand, we were able to use this most sensitive assay (hormone binding) to compare the amounts of WT and M receptors synthesized after transfection of cells with equal amounts of either plasmid. As shown in Fig. 3Go, the amounts of M PRB and PRA were higher than in cells expressing the corresponding WT receptor. Interestingly, DeVivo et al. (17, 34) described a mutation in the PR promoter that selectively increases expression and presumably levels of PRB. This mutation has been linked to an increased risk of endometrial and breast cancers (17, 34).

To determine whether elevated levels of M receptors lead to increased transcriptional activity, we carried out transient transactivation experiments with a consensus PRE reporter. Both M PRA and M PRB are more active than the corresponding WT isoforms of the receptor. Surprisingly, an equimolar mix of WT and M PR was at least as active as the M PR alone. This is consistent with the observation that the presence of PROGINS increased the risk for ovarian cancer virtually independent of the zygosity. To determine whether the mutation causes a change in the degradation rate, thereby resulting in increased accumulation of the receptor, we compared the degradation rates of WT and M receptors in a pulse-chase assay. The results demonstrate that the mutation stabilizes both A and B isoforms. The calculated half-life of the WT PR is very similar to that in a previous report (35). It is likely that the heterodimer also has increased stability, accounting for the elevated transcriptional activity in cells expressing both forms. As we were preparing this manuscript, De Vivo et al. (17) reported that the PROGINS haplotype frequently includes an S344T substitution located in a domain shared by both isoforms. However, a functional characterization of this mutation has not been reported (17). In unrelated studies, Takimoto et al. (36) found that substituting an alanine 344 for serine had no effect on transcriptional activity. Thus, the S344T mutation, a more conservative substitution, is also unlikely to affect the function of the receptor.

In conclusion, we have shown that the PROGINS allele occurs more frequently in ovarian cancer patients, indicating that PROGINS may be a risk modifier. The V660L mutation in the PR is associated with increased transcriptional activity due to accumulation of the receptor protein secondary to an increased half-life. Importantly, the increase in transcriptional activity appears to be independent of the homo- and heterozygous state. This might also explain why heterozygous carriers of the PROGINS allele are virtually at the same increased risk for ovarian cancer as homozygous carriers.


    Footnotes
 
Abbreviations: CAT, Chloramphenicol acetyltransferase; FCS, fetal calf serum; M, mutated; PR, progesterone receptor; RFLP, restriction fragment length polymorphism; SSCP, single strand conformation polymorphism; WT, wild type.

Received January 22, 2004.

Accepted September 8, 2004.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. American Cancer Society 2003 Cancer facts and figures. Atlanta: American Cancer Society
  2. Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens D, Futreal PA, Harshman K, Tavtigian S, Liu Q, Cochran C, Bennett LM, Ding W, Bell R, Rosenthal J, Hussey C, Tran T, McClure M, Frye C, Hattier T, Phelps R, Haugen-Strano A, Katcher H, Yakumo K, Gholami Z, Shaffer D, Stone S, Bayer S, Wray C, Bogden R, Dayananth P, Ward J, Tonin P, Narod S, Bristow PK, Norris FH, Helvering L, Morrison P, Rosteck P, Lai M, Barrett JC, Lewis C, Neuhausen S, Cannon-Albright L, Goldgar D, Wiseman R, Kamb A, Skolnick MH 1994 A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science 266:66–71[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Monteiro AN 2000 BRCA1: exploring the links to transcription. Trends Biochem Sci 25:469–474[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Somasundaram K, Zhang H, Zeng YX, Houvras Y, Peng Y, Zhang H, Wu GS, Licht JD, Weber BL, El-Deiry WS 1997 Arrest of the cell cycle by the tumour-suppressor BRCA1 requires the CDK-inhibitor p21WAF1/CiP1. Nature 389:187–190[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. Conneely OM, Mulac-Jericevic B, DeMayo F, Lydon JP, O’Malley BW 2002 Reproductive functions of progesterone receptors. Recent Prog Horm Res 57:339–355[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Lydon JP, DeMayo FJ, Funk CR, Mani SK, Hughes AR, Montgomery CAJ, Shyamala G, Conneely OM, O’Malley BW 1995 Mice lacking progesterone receptor exhibit pleiotropic reproductive abnormalities. Genes Dev 9:2266–2278[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Mulac-Jericevic B, Mullinax RA, DeMayo FJ, Lydon JP, Conneely OM 2000 Subgroup of reproductive functions of progesterone mediated by progesterone receptor-B isoform. Science 289:1751–1754[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Mulac-Jericevic B, Lydon JP, DeMayo FJ, Conneely OM 2003 Defective mammary gland morphogenesis in mice lacking the progesterone receptor B isoform. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:9744–9749[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Loutradis D, Bletsa R, Aravantinos L, Kallianidis K, Michalas S, Psychoyos A 1991 Preovulatory effects of the progesterone antagonist mifepristone (RU486) in mice. Hum Reprod 6:1238–1240[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Lau KM, Mok SC, Ho SM 1999 Expression of human estrogen receptor-{alpha} and -ß, progesterone receptor, and androgen receptor mRNA in normal and malignant ovarian epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:5722–5727[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Lydon JP, Ge G, Kittrell FS, Medina D, O’Malley BW 1999 Murine mammary gland carcinogenesis is critically dependent on progesterone receptor function. Cancer Res 59:4276–4284[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Medina D, Kittrell FS, Shepard A, Contreras A, Rosen JM, Lydon J 2003 Hormone dependence in premalignant mammary progression. Cancer Res 63:1067–1072[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Goepfert TM, McCarthy M, Kittrell FS, Stephens C, Ullrich RL, Brinkley BR, Medina D 2000 Progesterone facilitates chromosome instability (aneuploidy) in p53 null normal mammary epithelial cells. FASEB J 14:2221–2229[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Fuqua SA, Hill SM, Chamness GC, Benedix MG, Greene GL, O’Malley BW, McGuire WL 1991 Progesterone receptor gene restriction fragment length polymorphisms in human breast tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 83:1157–1160[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. McKenna NJ, Kieback DG, Carney DN, Fanning M, McLinden J, Headon DR 1995 A germline TaqI restriction fragment length polymorphism in the progesterone receptor gene in ovarian carcinoma. Br J Cancer 71:451–455[Medline]
  16. Rowe SM, Coughlan SJ, McKenna NJ, Garrett E, Kieback DG, Carney DN, Headon DR 1995 Ovarian carcinoma-associated TaqI restriction fragment length polymorphism in intron G of the progesterone receptor gene is due to an Alu sequence insertion. Cancer Res 55:2743–2745[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. De Vivo I, Huggins GS, Hankinson SE, Lescault PJ, Boezenk M, Colditz GA, Hunter DJ 2002 A functional polymorphism in the promoter of the progesterone receptor gene associated with endometrial cancer risk. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:12263–12268[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Tetel MJ, Jung S, Carbajo P, Ladtkow T, Skafar DF, Edwards DP 1997 Hinge and amino-terminal sequences contribute to solution dimerization of human progesterone receptor. Mol Endocrinol 11:1114–1128[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Jackson TA, Richer JK, Bain DL, Takimoto GS, Tung L, Horwitz KB 1997 The partial agonist activity of antagonist-occupied steroid receptors is controlled by a novel hinge domain-binding coactivator L7/SPA and the corepressors N-CoR or SMRT. Mol Endocrinol 11:693–705[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Vegeto E, Shahbaz MM, Wen DX, Goldman ME, O’Malley BW, McDonnell DP 1993 Human progesterone receptor A form is a cell- and promoter-specific repressor of human progesterone receptor B function. Mol Endocrinol 7:1244–1255[Abstract]
  21. Allgood VE, Oakley RH, Cidlowski JA 1993 Modulation by vitamin B6 of glucocorticoid receptor-mediated gene expression requires transcription factors in addition to the glucocorticoid receptor. J Biol Chem 268:20870–20876[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Wright D, Manos M 1990 Sample preparation from paraffin-embedded tissues. San Diego: Academic Press
  23. Weir BS 1990 Genetic data analysis, 71–80 ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinaur Associates
  24. Nazareth LV, Stenoien DL, Bingman III WE, James AJ, Wu C, Zhang Y, Edwards DP, Mancini M, Marcelli M, Lamb DJ, Weigel NL 1999 A C619Y mutation in the human androgen receptor causes inactivation and mislocalization of the receptor with concomitant sequestration of SRC-1 (steroid receptor coactivator 1). Mol Endocrinol 13:2065–2075[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Zhang Y, Bai W, Allgood VE, Weigel NL 1994 Multiple signaling pathways activate the chicken progesterone receptor. Mol Endocrinol 8:577–584[Abstract]
  26. Press M, Spaulding B, Groshen S, Kaminsky D, Hagerty M, Sherman L, Christensen K, Edwards DP 2002 Comparison of different antibodies for detection of progesterone receptor in breast cancer. Steroids 67:799–813[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Kieback DG, Tong X-W, Weigel NL, Agoulnik IU 1998 A genetic mutation in the progesterone receptor (PROGINS) leads to an increased risk of non-familial breast and ovarian cancer causing inadequate control of estrogen receptor driven proliferation. J Soc Gynecol Invest 5:40a
  28. Grifa A, Piemontese MR, Melchionda S, Origone P, Zelante L, Coviello D, Fratta G, Dallapiccola B, Balestrazzi P, Ajmar F 1995 Screening of neurofibromatosis type 1 gene: identification of a large deletion and of an intronic variant. Clin Genet 47:281–284[Medline]
  29. NIH NCIM 1975 Third national cancer survey: incidence data. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
  30. Muir C, Waterhouse J, Mack T, Powell J, Whelan S 1987 Cancer incidence in five continents. Vol. 5. No. 88. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer
  31. Devesa SS, Silverman DT, Young Jr JL, Pollack ES, Brown CC, Horm JW, Percy CL, Myers MH, McKay FW, Fraumeni Jr JF 1987 Cancer incidence and mortality trends among whites in the United States, 1947–1984. J Natl Cancer Inst 79:701–770
  32. Zhou ZX, Lane MV, Kemppainen JA, French FS, Wilson EM 1995 Specificity of ligand-dependent androgen receptor stabilization: receptor domain interactions influence ligand dissociation and receptor stability. Mol Endocrinol 9:208–218[Abstract]
  33. Beral V, Banks E, Reeves G 2002 Evidence from randomised trials on the long-term effects of hormone replacement therapy. Lancet 360:942–944[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. De Vivo I, Hankinson SE, Colditz GA, Hunter DJ 2003 A functional polymorphism in the progesterone receptor gene is associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. Cancer Res 63:5236–5238[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Mullick A, Katzenellenbogen BS 1986 Progesterone receptor synthesis and degradation in MCF-7 human breast cancer cells as studied by dense amino acid incorporation. Evidence for a non-hormone binding receptor precursor. J Biol Chem 261:13236–13246[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Takimoto GS, Hovland AR, Tasset DM, Melville MY, Tung L, Horwitz KB 1996 Role of phosphorylation on DNA binding and transcriptional functions of human progesterone receptors. J Biol Chem 271:13308–13316[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
B. Diergaarde, J. D. Potter, E. R. Jupe, S. Manjeshwar, C. D. Shimasaki, T. W. Pugh, D. C. DeFreese, B. A. Gramling, I. Evans, and E. White
Polymorphisms in Genes Involved in Sex Hormone Metabolism, Estrogen Plus Progestin Hormone Therapy Use, and Risk of Postmenopausal Breast Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2008; 17(7): 1751 - 1759.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Mol EndocrinolHome page
A. Romano, B. Delvoux, D.-C. Fischer, and P. Groothuis
The PROGINS polymorphism of the human progesterone receptor diminishes the response to progesterone
J. Mol. Endocrinol., February 1, 2007; 38(2): 331 - 350.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
K.J.A.F. van Kaam, A. Romano, J.P. Schouten, G.A.J. Dunselman, and P.G. Groothuis
Progesterone receptor polymorphism +331G/A is associated with a decreased risk of deep infiltrating endometriosis
Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2007; 22(1): 129 - 135.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DevelopmentHome page
L. Palanker, A. S. Necakov, H. M. Sampson, R. Ni, C. Hu, C. S. Thummel, and H. M. Krause
Dynamic regulation of Drosophila nuclear receptor activity in vivo
Development, September 15, 2006; 133(18): 3549 - 3562.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
F. J.B. van Duijnhoven, P. H.M. Peeters, R. M.L. Warren, S. A. Bingham, A. G. Uitterlinden, P. A.H. van Noord, E. M. Monninkhof, D. E. Grobbee, and C. H. van Gils
Influence of Estrogen Receptor {alpha} and Progesterone Receptor Polymorphisms on the Effects of Hormone Therapy on Mammographic Density.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., March 1, 2006; 15(3): 462 - 467.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
P. Vigano, E. Somigliana, I. Chiodo, A. Abbiati, and P. Vercellini
Molecular mechanisms and biological plausibility underlying the malignant transformation of endometriosis: a critical analysis
Hum. Reprod. Update, January 1, 2006; 12(1): 77 - 89.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr Relat CancerHome page
S E Bojesen, S K Kjaer, E V S Hogdall, B L Thomsen, C K Hogdall, J Blaakaer, A Tybjaerg-Hansen, and B G Nordestgaard
Increased risk of ovarian cancer in integrin {beta}3 Leu33Pro homozygotes
Endocr. Relat. Cancer, December 1, 2005; 12(4): 945 - 952.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
F. Wieser, J.-L. Vigne, I. Ryan, D. Hornung, S. Djalali, and R. N. Taylor
Sulindac Suppresses Nuclear Factor-{kappa}B Activation and RANTES Gene and Protein Expression in Endometrial Stromal Cells from Women with Endometriosis
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., December 1, 2005; 90(12): 6441 - 6447.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol. Cell. Biol.Home page
F. F. Zheng, R.-C. Wu, C. L. Smith, and B. W. O'Malley
Rapid Estrogen-Induced Phosphorylation of the SRC-3 Coactivator Occurs in an Extranuclear Complex Containing Estrogen Receptor
Mol. Cell. Biol., September 15, 2005; 25(18): 8273 - 8284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Agoulnik, I. U.
Right arrow Articles by Kieback, D. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Agoulnik, I. U.
Right arrow Articles by Kieback, D. G.


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