In recent work we showed that the EGF receptor (EGFr) was activated in tumor promoter treated mouse epidermis (Cell Growth & Dierentiation, 6: 1447 ± 1455. In the present study, we have investigated the possible role of other erbB family members in the process of tumor promotion. Both erbB2 and erbB3, but not erbB4, were expressed in cultured mouse keratinocytes and in mouse epidermis in vivo. In cultured mouse keratinocytes, EGF stimulated rapid tyrosine phosphorylation of erbB2 followed by a time-dependent degradation of erbB2 protein. Furthermore, an increase in erbB2 : EGFr heterodimer formation was also induced by EGF. In contrast to the results with erbB2, EGF did not induce tyrosine phosphorylation, the degradation of erbB3, or erbB3 : EGFr heterodimer formation in cultured keratinocytes. Further analyses revealed that c-src kinase activity was dramatically elevated in cultured mouse keratinocytes exposed to EGF. In mouse epidermis following multiple treatments with 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA), the phosphotyrosine content of erbB2 was signi®cantly elevated in a dose-dependent manner. Concomittantly, erbB2 : EGFr heterodimer formation and c-src kinase activity were also elevated in TPA-treated epidermis. Structure-activity relationships with several phorbol ester analogs showed that the elevated phosphorylation of erbB2 in mouse epidermis followed closely with tumor promoting ability. Activation of erbB2 and c-src kinase were also observed in the epidermis of TGFa transgenic mice where expression of human TGFa was targeted to basal keratinocytes with the human K14 promoter. Collectively, the current data suggest that the activation of erbB2 in phorbol ester treated skin can be explained solely by a mechanism involving elevation of EGFr ligands and activation of the EGFr. In addition, activation of c-src may be an important downstream eector in mouse keratinocytes both in vivo and in vitro, following activation of the EGFr, erbB2, or both.

Subcellular localization and transcriptional activity of green fluorescent protein-progesterone receptor A and B chimeras (GFP-PRA and GFP-PRB) were examined in living mammalian cells. Both GFP-PRA and B chimeras were found to be similar in transcriptional activity compared with their non-GFP counterparts. GFP-PRA and PRA were both weakly active, while GFP-PRB and PRB gave a 20- to 40-fold induction using a reporter gene containing the full-length mouse mammary tumor virus long-terminal repeat linked to the luciferase gene (pLTRluc). Using fluorescence microscopy, nuclear/cytoplasmic distributions for the unliganded and hormone activated forms of GFP-PRA and GFP-PRB were characterized. The two forms of the receptor were found to have distinct intracellular distributions; GFP-PRA was found to be more nuclear than GFP-PRB in four cell lines examined. The causes for and implications of this differential localization of the A and B forms of the human PR are discussed.

Our previous work has shown that the progesterone receptor (PR) can exist in two distinct functional states in mammary adenocarcinoma cells. The differences in function included the ability to activate a promoter in organized chromatin, sensitivity to ligand, and ligandindependent activation. To determine whether these functional differences were because of altered cellular processing, we carried out biochemical analyses of the functionally distinct PRs. Although the majority of PR is localized to the nucleus, biochemical partitioning resulted in a loosely bound (cytosolic) fraction, and a tightly bound (nuclear) fraction. In the absence of progestins, the functionally distinct PRs differed significantly in partitioning between the two fractions. To characterize these fractions further, we analyzed interactions of unliganded PR with chaperones by coimmunoprecipitation. We determined that PR in the cytosolic fraction associated with hsp90 and p23. In contrast, PR in the nuclear fraction consisted of complexes containing hsp90, p23, and FKBP51 as well as PR that was dimerized and highly phosphorylated. Hormone treatment significantly reduced the formation of all PR-chaperone complexes. The hsp90 inhibitor, geldanamycin, similarly blocked transcriptional activity of both functionally distinct receptors. However, the two forms of the PR differed in their ability to associate with the mouse mammary tumor virus promoter in organized chromatin. These findings provide new information about the composition and distribution of mature progesterone receptor complexes in mammary adenocarcinoma cells, and suggest that differences in receptor subcellular distribution have a significant impact on their function. These findings also reveal that transiently expressed steroid receptors may not always be processed like their endogenous counterparts.Progesterone receptor (PR) 1 functions in the development of lobular alveolar structures in the normal mammary gland (1, 2). Data from in vitro studies using cultured breast cancer cells suggest that PR exerts its effects on mammary epithelium by regulating cell cycle progression. PR positive breast cancer cells exhibit a biphasic response to progestins, initial cell division followed by long term G 1 phase growth arrest (3, 4). In mammary adenocarcinoma, PR-mediated growth regulation is frequently lost. However, loss of function through receptor deletion or receptor mutation occurs only in a subset of tumors (5). Therefore, in the majority of cases, other mechanisms must be involved in loss of PR function. A better understanding of the mechanisms by which PR function can be modulated would be beneficial to developing therapy for tumors in which PR function has been lost or altered.In vivo, steroid receptors must interact with transcriptionally inactive promoters having complex chromatin structure. Accordingly, their transcriptional activity is dependent upon a variety of proteins that modify chromatin structure, such as ATP-dependent chromatin remodelers, histone acetyltransferases, and...