G Protein Pathway Suppressor 2 (GPS2) Is a Transcriptional Corepressor Important for Estrogen Receptor α-mediated Transcriptional Regulation*

We have identified G protein suppressor 2 (GPS2) as a stable component of the SMRT corepressor complexes. GPS2 potently represses basal transcription, with the repression domain mapped to the N-terminal silencing mediator of retinoic acid and thyroid hormone receptor (SMRT)-interacting domain. Knockdown of GPS2 abrogates, whereas overexpression potentiates, SMRT-mediated repression activity. The SMRT complexes are involved in 4-hydroxyl-tamoxifen (4OHT)-mediated gene repression by estrogen receptor α (ERα). We show that 4OHT recruits SMRT and GPS2 to the promoter of pS2, an ERα target gene, in a dynamic manner. Unexpectedly, we also found that estradiol (E2) promotes promoter recruitment of the SMRT complexes. While knockdown of GPS2 compromised 4OHT-mediated repression, it enhanced E2-induced expression of a reporter gene and several endogenous ERα target genes, including pS2, cyclin D1 (CCND1), progesterone receptor (PR), and c-MYC. Finally, we show that depletion of GPS2 or SMRT by siRNA promotes cell proliferation in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Thus, we concluded that GPS2 is an integral component of the SMRT complexes, important for ligand-dependent gene regulations by ERα and a suppressor for MCF-7 cell proliferation

ER and PR signaling nodes during mammary gland development

The ovarian hormones estrogen and progesterone orchestrate postnatal mammary gland development and are implicated in breast cancer. Most of our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) signaling stems from in vitro studies with hormone receptor-positive cell lines. They have shown that ER and PR regulate gene transcription either by binding to DNA response elements directly or via other transcription factors and recruiting co-regulators. In addition they cross-talk with other signaling pathways through nongenomic mechanisms. Mouse genetics combined with tissue recombination techniques have provided insights about the action of these two hormones in vivo. It has emerged that hormones act on a subset of mammary epithelial cells and relegate biological functions to paracrine factors. With regards to hormonal signaling in breast carcinomas, global gene expression analyses have led to the identification of gene expression signatures that are characteristic of ERα-positive tumors that have stipulated functional studies of hitherto poorly understood transcription factors. Here, we highlight what has been learned about ER and PR signaling nodes in these different systems and attempt to lay out in which way the insights may converge

Ofatumumab versus Teriflunomide in Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND: Ofatumumab, a subcutaneous anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, selectively depletes B cells. Teriflunomide, an oral inhibitor of pyrimidine synthesis, reduces T-cell and B-cell activation. The relative effects of these two drugs in patients with multiple sclerosis are not known. METHODS: In two double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis to receive subcutaneous ofatumumab (20 mg every 4 weeks after 20-mg loading doses at days 1, 7, and 14) or oral teriflunomide (14 mg daily) for up to 30 months. The primary end point was the annualized relapse rate. Secondary end points included disability worsening confirmed at 3 months or 6 months, disability improvement confirmed at 6 months, the number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions per T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, the annualized rate of new or enlarging lesions on T2-weighted MRI, serum neurofilament light chain levels at month 3, and change in brain volume. RESULTS: Overall, 946 patients were assigned to receive ofatumumab and 936 to receive teriflunomide; the median follow-up was 1.6 years. The annualized relapse rates in the ofatumumab and teriflunomide groups were 0.11 and 0.22, respectively, in trial 1 (difference, -0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.16 to -0.06; P<0.001) and 0.10 and 0.25 in trial 2 (difference, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.09; P<0.001). In the pooled trials, the percentage of patients with disability worsening confirmed at 3 months was 10.9% with ofatumumab and 15.0% with teriflunomide (hazard ratio, 0.66; P = 0.002); the percentage with disability worsening confirmed at 6 months was 8.1% and 12.0%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.68; P = 0.01); and the percentage with disability improvement confirmed at 6 months was 11.0% and 8.1% (hazard ratio, 1.35; P = 0.09). The number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions per T1-weighted MRI scan, the annualized rate of lesions on T2-weighted MRI, and serum neurofilament light chain levels, but not the change in brain volume, were in the same direction as the primary end point. Injection-related reactions occurred in 20.2% in the ofatumumab group and in 15.0% in the teriflunomide group (placebo injections). Serious infections occurred in 2.5% and 1.8% of the patients in the respective groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with multiple sclerosis, ofatumumab was associated with lower annualized relapse rates than teriflunomide. (Funded by Novartis; ASCLEPIOS I and II ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02792218 and NCT02792231.)