Kirsten K. Jacob

CCAAT/Enhancer-Binding Protein α Is a Physiological Regulator of Prolactin Gene Expression1

The sequence −101/−92 of the PRL promoter has been shown to be essential for both basal and hormone-increased PRL gene transcription. It is important to identify transcription factors that bind to this sequence if we are to understand the regulation of the PRL gene. Nuclear proteins, metabolically labeled with 35S were used in gel mobility shift experiments to examine which protein(s) binds to this region of the PRL promoter. An abundant 43-kDa protein binds to the PRL promoter at −106/−87. Two 43-kDa transcription factors were identified in cytosolic extracts of GH4 cells, CCAAT enhancer-binding protein α (C/EBPα) and cAMP response element-binding protein. Both of these bind to the PRL promoter, and both were present in GH4 cell nuclear extract, but only C/EBPα was definitively identified in complexes with PRL promoter DNA. Expression of C/EBPα increased basal PRL gene expression almost 6-fold, whereas expression of Chop10 that can act as an inhibitor of C/EBPα reduced the basal activity of the PRL promo...

Elk-1, C/EBPα, and Pit-1 Confer an Insulin-responsive Phenotype on Prolactin Promoter Expression in Chinese Hamster Ovary Cells and Define the Factors Required for Insulin-increased Transcription

The transcription factor(s) that mediate insulin-increased gene transcription are not well defined. These studies use phenotypic conversion of Rat2 and Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells with transcription factors to identify components required for regulation of prolactin promoter activity and its control by insulin. The pituitary-derived GH4 cells contain all of the transcription factors required for insulin-increased prolactin-chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) expression while HeLa cells require only Pit-1, a pituitary-specific factor. However, Rat2 and CHO cells require additional factors. We had determined previously that the transcription factor that mediates insulin-increased prolactin gene expression was likely an Ets-related protein. Elk-1 and Sap-1 were the only Ets-related transcription factors tested as chimeras with LexA DNA-binding domain that were able to mediate insulin-increased expression of a LexA-CAT reporter plasmid. Elk-1 and Sap-1 are expressed in GH4 and HeLa cells but Rat2 and CHO cells express Sap-1, but not Elk-1. Expression of Elk-1 made Rat2 cells (but not CHO cells) insulin responsive. C/EBPα also binds to the prolactin promoter at a sequence overlapping the binding site for Elk-1. Expression of both C/EBPα and Pit-1 in CHO cells is required for high basal transcription of prolactin-CAT. Expression of Elk-1 converts CHO cells into a phenotype in which prolactin gene expression is increased by insulin treatment. Finally, antisense mediated reduction of Elk-1 in GH4 cells decreased insulin-increased prolactin gene expression and confirmed the requirement for Elk-1 for insulin-increased prolactin gene expression. Thus, both C/EBPα and Pit-1 were required for high basal transcription while insulin sensitivity required Elk-1.

Insulin receptor tyrosine kinase activity and phosphorylation of tyrosines 1162 and 1163 are required for insulin-increased prolactin gene expression

Insulin treatment increased prolactin gene expression in GH4 cells, a rat pituitary tumor cell line, through the endogenous insulin receptor. However, insulin regulation of transfected plasmids required the expression of cotransfected insulin receptor. Prolactin-CAT expression was increased 12-fold in cells transfected with wild type insulin receptor, but insulin did not increase prolactin gene expression when a kinase negative mutant of the ATP binding site (K1030R) was expressed. Thus, receptor kinase activity was required for signaling to gene transcription. Mutation of tyrosine 1158 did not reduce insulin-increased prolactin-CAT expression while individual mutations of tyrosine 1162 and tyrosine 1163 each reduced insulin-increased prolactin-CAT expression by 50% and a triple mutant of tyrosines 1158/1162/1163 was inactive. Thus, mutation of tyrosine 1162 and 1163 was also sufficient to inactivate signaling by the insulin receptor. Insulin-stimulated auto phosphorylation occurred in all mutants in vitro except the ATP binding site mutant. However, the ability of mutant insulin receptors to mediate insulin-increased prolactin-CAT expression correlated with the substrate-specific catalytic activity of the receptors. This suggested that phosphorylation of these tyrosines was important for substrate access to the catalytic domain of the receptor.

Insulin and cyclic adenosine monophosphate increase prolactin gene expression through different response pathways

Insulin and cAMP stimulate prolactin gene transcription and prolactin-CAT expression in rat pituitary tumor GH cells. Expression of prolactin-CAT construct, pPrl(-173/+75)CAT, is stimulated 10- to 30-fold by either insulin or cAMP. Addition of both insulin and cAMP resulted in an additive 20- to 60-fold stimulation. Although the regulatory sequences have not been defined precisely, both insulin and cAMP appear to stimulate transcription of prolactin-CAT expression through possibly identical sequences in the -106/-87 region of the promoter. Insulin mediated increases in prolactin-CAT expression are not ras-dependent in GH4 cells. Thus, a number of experiments were performed to determine that the effects of insulin and cAMP are independent. First, insulin does not stimulate cAMP levels in GH4 cells. Second, cAMP action was inhibited by expression of a mutant regulatory subunit of cAMP-dependent protein kinase A that does not bind cAMP and by expression of an inhibitor of cAMP-dependent protein kinase A, while insulin action was not affected by expression of these proteins. Thus, although the regulatory sequences for insulin and cAMP may be identical, the effects of insulin and cAMP on the prolactin gene are clearly mediated through distinct response pathway.

The EGF response element in the prolactin promoter.

Epidermal growth factor (EGF) increases prolactin gene expression in GH4 cells, but the promoter element(s) required for this response has not been clearly defined. We identified a bipartite element - 96/ - 87, - 76/ - 67 in the rat proximal promoter that is essential for EGF signaling using deletion and linker-scanning mutants of the prolactin promoter. This element was active in either normal or inverted orientation when transferred to a heterologous promoter (mammary-tumor virus). We had previously identified this element as the cAMP/insulin response element of the prolactin promoter. However, the effects of EGF are additive with the responses to insulin or cAMP implying that EGF activated prolactin gene transcription by a mechanism different from insulin or cAMP. The EGF response element of the prolactin promoter is a recognition sequence for the Ets-related family of transcription factors and Ets-related factors have been shown to bind this element. Expression of the DNA-binding domain of c-Ets-1, which acts as a dominant negative inhibitor of Ets-related transcription factors, reduces EGF-increased prolactin-CAT expression 65% in GH4 cells. Thus, both EGF and insulin may signal through Ets-related transcription factors to activate prolactin gene transcription at the same response element in the prolactin proximal promoter.

Nocturnal Monitoring of Growth Hormone, Insulin, C-Peptide, and Glucose in Patients With Acromegaly

Circulating growth hormone, insulin, C-peptide, and glucose levels were compared during the sleep state in adults with acromegaly and healthy control subjects. Growth hormone secretion was episodic in both groups, with the sleep-related growth hormone peak noticeably absent in the acromegalic subjects. The mean nocturnal plasma insulin concentration was greater in the acromegalics. There was no significant difference in the C-peptide between the two groups. Insulin and glucose levels did not show an early morning rise in either acromegalics or healthy subjects. The authors conclude that there is a marked difference in the circulating levels of growth hormone and insulin between the acromegalic and the healthy groups during the sleep state, and there is no sleep-related nocturnal growth hormone peak in the acromegalic subjects. The hyperinsulinism of patients with acromegaly cannot be attributed to excess secretion of insulin.