Estrogen receptor beta activates the human retinoic acid receptor alpha-1 promoter in response to tamoxifen and other estrogen receptor antagonists, but not in response to estrogen.

Abstract

Human estrogen receptor-alpha (hERalpha) or -beta (hERbeta) transfected into Hep G2 or COS1 cells each responded to estrogen to increase transcription from an estrogen-responsive element (ERE)-driven reporter vector with similar fold induction through a classical mechanism involving direct receptor binding to DNA. ER antagonists inhibited this estrogen induction through both hERalpha and hERbeta, although raloxifene was more potent through ERalpha than ERbeta, and tamoxifen was more potent via ERbeta than ERalpha. We have shown previously that estrogen stimulated the human retinoic acid receptor-alpha-1 (hRARalpha-1) promoter through nonclassical EREs by a mechanism that was ERalpha dependent, but that did not involve direct receptor binding to DNA. We show here that in contrast to hERalpha, hERbeta did not induce reporter activity driven by the hRARalpha-1 promoter in the presence of estrogen. While hERbeta did not confer estrogen responsiveness on this promoter, it did elicit transcriptional activation in the presence of 4-hydroxytamoxifen (4-OH-Tam). Additionally, this 4-OH-Tam agonist activity via ERbeta was completely blocked by estrogen. Like ERalpha, transcriptional activation of this promoter by ERbeta was not mediated by direct receptor binding to DNA. While hERalpha was shown to act through two estrogen-responsive sequences within the promoter, hERbeta acted only at the 3'-region, through two Sp1 sites, in response to 4-OH-Tam. Other ER antagonists including raloxifene, ICI-164,384 and ICI-182,780 also acted as agonists through ERbeta via the hRARalpha-1 promoter. Through the use of mutant and chimeric receptors, it was shown that the 4-OH-Tam activity via ERbeta from the hRARalpha-1 promoter in Hep G2 cells required the amino-terminal region of ERbeta, a region that was not necessary for estrogen-induced ERbeta activity from an ERE in Hep G2 cells. Additionally, the progesterone receptor (PR) antagonist RU486 acted as a weak (IC50 >1 microM) antagonist via hERalpha and as a fairly potent (IC50 approximately 200 nM) antagonist via hERbeta from an ERE-driven reporter in cells that do not express PR. Although RU486 bound only weakly to ERalpha or ERbeta in vitro, it did bind to ERbeta in whole-cell binding assays, and therefore, it is likely metabolized to an ERbeta-interacting compound in the cell. Interestingly, RU486 acted as an agonist through ERbeta to stimulate the hRARalpha-1 promoter in Hep G2 cells. These findings may have ramifications in breast cancer treatment regimens utilizing tamoxifen or other ER antagonists and may explain some of the known estrogenic or antiestrogenic biological actions of RU486.