부산대학교 도서관

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2006.03.003 Byline: Yuli Kim (a), Yunguang Sun (a), Carson Chow (b), Yves G. Pommier (c), S. Stoney Simons (a) Keywords: Glucocorticoid receptors; Modulation of dose-response curve; Partial agonist activity; Protein acetylation; RNA polymerase II phosphorylation; DNA unwinding Abstract: Varying the concentration of selected factors alters the induction properties of steroid receptors by changing the position of the dose-response curve (or the value for half-maximal induction=EC.sub.50) and the amount of partial agonist activity of antisteroids. We now describe a rudimentary mathematical model that predicts a simple Michaelis-Menten curve for the multi-step process of steroid-regulated gene induction. This model suggests that steps far downstream from receptor binding to steroid can influence the EC.sub.50 of agonist-complexes and partial agonist activity of antagonist-complexes. We therefore asked whether inhibitors of three possible downstream steps can reverse the effects of increased concentrations of two factors: glucocorticoid receptors (GRs) and Ubc9. The downstream steps (with inhibitors in parentheses) are protein deacetylation (TSA and VPA), DNA unwinding (CPT), and CTD phosphorylation of RNA polymerase II (DRB and H8). None of the inhibitors mimic or prevent the effects of added GRs. However, inhibitors of DNA unwinding and CTD phosphorylation do reverse the effects of Ubc9 with high GR concentrations. These results support our earlier conclusion that different rate-limiting steps operate at low and high GR concentrations versus high GR with Ubc9. The present data also suggest that downstream steps can modulate the EC.sub.50 of GR-mediated induction, thus both supporting the utility of our mathematical model and widening the field of biochemical processes that can modify the EC.sub.50. Author Affiliation: (a) Steroid Hormones Section, NIDDK/CEB, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States (b) Laboratory of Biological Modelling, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States (c) Laboratory of Molecular Pharmacology, NCI, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States Article History: Received 21 September 2005; Accepted 2 March 2006