help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jordan, V. C.
Right arrow Articles by Welshons, W. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jordan, V. C.
Right arrow Articles by Welshons, W. V.

Endocrinology, Vol 116, 1845-1857, Copyright © 1985 by Endocrine Society

ARTICLES

Rat uterine growth and induction of progesterone receptor without estrogen receptor translocation

VC Jordan, AC Tate, SD Lyman, B Gosden, MF Wolf, RR Bain and WV Welshons

The rat uterus responds to estradiol (E2) and E2 benzoate stimulation with an increase in progesterone receptor production and with growth. These responses were also elicited to varying degrees by a series of estrogenic (ICI 77,949 and ICI 47,699) and antiestrogenic triphenylethylene derivatives [tamoxifen (TAM), 4-hydroxy-TAM (4-OH- TAM), and 4-CH3-TAM]. These compounds have a range of affinities for the estrogen receptor (ER) and are able to compete with [3H]E2 binding in the uterus in vivo. Within 1-2 h of a sc injection of high affinity ligands (E2, E2B, and 4-OH-TAM), there was decrease in cytosol ER. This decrease was also observed with TAM, which is metabolized to 4-OH-TAM in vivo. In contrast, there was no decrease in cytosolic ER in animals treated with low affinity compounds (ICI 77,949, ICI 47,699, and 4-CH3- TAM) at any time before the onset of an estrogenic response. Furthermore, the nuclear ER increased after administration of a high affinity ligand (E2), as measured by exchange assay, but no increase in nuclear ER was observed after administration of low affinity ligands (ICI 77,949 and 4-CH3-TAM), although estrogenic responses were produced. From these data we have suggested a functional model to explain ER-mediated events in the rat uterus that supports the recent proposal that unoccupied ER is located in the nuclear compartment. In this model, the majority of unoccupied ER may reside in the nucleus in vivo; however, when the cells are disrupted in vitro, the unoccupied receptor or dissociation of low affinity ligand-ER complex causes unoccupied receptor to fall out of the nucleus and be incorporated into the cytosolic fraction. The high affinity ligand-ER complexes are retained in the nucleus. This would suggest that the apparent translocation of the ER from the cytoplasm to the nucleus may be an artifact. The data may reflect differential extraction of unoccupied receptors from the nucleus rather than transfer of receptor complexes to the nucleus.




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
Copyright © 1985 by The Endocrine Society