3.9 Article

Dissecting physiological roles of estrogen receptor α and β with potent selective ligands from structure-based design

Journal

MOLECULAR ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 7, Pages 1599-1609

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1210/me.2004-0050

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The distinct roles of the two estrogen receptor ( ER) isotypes, ERalpha and ERbeta, in mediating the physiological responses to estrogens are not completely understood. Although knockout animal experiments have been aiding to gain insight into estrogen signaling, additional information on the function of ERalpha and ERbeta will be provided by the application of isotype-selective ER agonists. Based on the crystal structure of the ERalpha ligand binding domain and a homology model of the ERbeta-ligand binding domain, we have designed steroidal ligands that exploit the differences in size and flexibility of the two ligand binding cavities. Compounds predicted to bind preferentially to either ERalpha or ERbeta were synthesized and tested in vitro using radio-ligand competition and transactivation assays. This approach directly led to highly ER isotype-selective ( similar to 200-fold) and potent ligands. To unravel physiological roles of the two receptors, in vivo experiments with rats were conducted using the ERalpha- and ERbeta-selective agonists in comparison to 17beta-estradiol. The ERalpha agonist induced uterine growth, caused bone-protective effects, reduced LH and FSH plasma levels, and increased angiotensin I, whereas the ERbeta agonist did not at all or only at high doses lead to such effects, despite high plasma levels. It can thus be concluded that estrogen effects on the uterus, pituitary, bone, and liver are primarily mediated via ERalpha. Simultaneous administration of the ERalpha and ERbeta ligand did not lead to an attenuation of ERalpha-mediated effects on the uterus, pituitary, and liver parameters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available