Structural basis of glucocorticoid receptor signaling bias

Dissociation between the healthy and toxic effects of cortisol, a major stress-responding hormone has been a widely used strategy to develop anti-inflammatory glucocorticoids with fewer side effects. Such strategy falls short when treating brain disorders as timing and activity state within large-scale neuronal networks determine the physiological and behavioral specificity of cortisol response. Advances in structural molecular dynamics posit the bases for engineering glucocorticoids with precision bias for select downstream signaling pathways. Design of allosteric and/or cooperative control for the glucocorticoid receptor could help promote the beneficial and reduce the deleterious effects of cortisol on brain and behavior in disease conditions.

Experience and activity-dependent control of glucocorticoid receptors during the stress response in large-scale brain networks

The diversity of actions of the glucocorticoid stress hormones among individuals and within organs, tissues and cells is shaped by age, gender, genetics, metabolism, and the quantity of exposure. However, such factors cannot explain the heterogeneity of responses in the brain within cells of the same lineage, or similar tissue environment, or in the same individual. Here, we argue that the stress response is continuously updated by synchronized neural activity on large-scale brain networks. This occurs at the molecular, cellular and behavioral levels by crosstalk communication between activity-dependent and glucocorticoid signaling pathways, which updates the diversity of responses based on prior experience. Such a Bayesian process determines adaptation to the demands of the body and external world. We propose a framework for understanding how the diversity of glucocorticoid actions throughout brain networks is essential for supporting optimal health, while its disruption may contribute to the pathophysiology of stress-related disorders, such as major depression, and resistance to therapeutic treatments.

Cancer and Stress: Does It Make a Difference to the Patient When These Two Challenges Collide?

Simple Summary

Head and neck cancers are the sixth most common cancer in the world. The burden of the disease has remained challenging over recent years despite the advances in treatments of other malignancies. The very use of the word malignancy brings about a stress response in almost all adult patients. Being told you have a tumour is not a word anyone wants to hear. We have embarked on a study which will investigate the effect of stress pathways on head and neck cancer patients and which signalling pathways may be involved. In the future, this will allow clinicians to better manage patients with head and neck cancer and reduce the patients’ stress so that this does not add to their tumour burden.

Abstract

A single head and neck Cancer (HNC) is a globally growing challenge associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis itself can affect the patients profoundly let alone the complex and disfiguring treatment. The highly important functions of structures of the head and neck such as mastication, speech, aesthetics, identity and social interactions make a cancer diagnosis in this region even more psychologically traumatic. The emotional distress engendered as a result of functional and social disruption is certain to negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The key biological responses to stressful events are moderated through the combined action of two systems, the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis (HPA) which releases glucocorticoids and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) which releases catecholamines. In acute stress, these hormones help the body to regain homeostasis; however, in chronic stress their increased levels and activation of their receptors may aid in the progression of cancer. Despite ample evidence on the existence of stress in patients diagnosed with HNC, studies looking at the effect of stress on the progression of disease are scarce, compared to other cancers. This review summarises the challenges associated with HNC that make it stressful and describes how stress signalling aids in the progression of cancer. Growing evidence on the relationship between stress and HNC makes it paramount to focus future research towards a better understanding of stress and its effect on head and neck cancer.

Dual-specificity phosphatase 29 is induced during neurogenic skeletal muscle atrophy and attenuates glucocorticoid receptor activity in muscle cell culture

Skeletal muscle atrophy is caused by a decrease in muscle size and strength and results from a range of physiological conditions, including denervation, immobilization, corticosteroid exposure and aging. Newly named dual-specificity phosphatase 29 (Dusp29) has been identified as a novel neurogenic atrophy-induced gene in skeletal muscle. Quantitative PCR analysis revealed that Dusp29 expression is significantly higher in differentiated myotubes compared with proliferating myoblasts. To determine how Dusp29 is transcriptionally regulated in skeletal muscle, fragments of the promoter region of Dusp29 were cloned, fused to a reporter gene, and found to be highly inducible in response to ectopic expression of the myogenic regulatory factors (MRF), MyoD and myogenin. Furthermore, site-directed mutagenesis of conserved E-box elements within the proximal promoter of Dusp29 rendered a Dusp29 reporter gene unresponsive to MRF overexpression. Dusp29, an atypical Dusp also known as Dupd1/Dusp27, was found to attenuate the ERK1/2 branch of the MAP kinase signaling pathway in muscle cells and inhibit muscle cell differentiation when ectopically expressed in proliferating myoblasts. Interestingly, Dusp29 was also found to destabilize AMPK protein while simultaneously enriching the phosphorylated pool of AMPK in muscle cells. Additionally, Dusp29 overexpression resulted in a significant increase in the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) protein and elevation in GR phosphorylation. Finally, Dusp29 was found to significantly impair the ability of the glucocorticoid receptor to function as a transcriptional activator in muscle cells treated with dexamethasone. Identifying and characterizing the function of Dusp29 in muscle provides novel insights into the molecular and cellular mechanisms for skeletal muscle atrophy.

Nuclear Receptors as Regulators of Pituitary Corticotroph Pro-Opiomelanocortin Transcription

The hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis plays a critical role in adaptive stress responses and maintaining organism homeostasis. The pituitary corticotroph is the central player in the HPA axis and is regulated by a plethora of hormonal and stress related factors that synergistically interact to activate and temper pro-opiomelanocortin (POMC) transcription, to either increase or decrease adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) production and secretion as needed. Nuclear receptors are a family of highly conserved transcription factors that can also be induced by various physiologic signals, and they mediate their responses via multiple targets to regulate metabolism and homeostasis. In this review, we summarize the modulatory roles of nuclear receptors on pituitary corticotroph cell POMC transcription, describe the unique and complex role these factors play in hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis (HPA) regulation and discuss potential therapeutic targets in disease states.

Regulatory and Mechanistic Actions of Glucocorticoids on T and Inflammatory Cells

Glucocorticoids (GCs) play an important role in regulating the inflammatory and immune response and have been used since decades to treat various inflammatory and autoimmune disorders. Fine-tuning the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) activity is instrumental in the search for novel therapeutic strategies aimed to reduce pathological signaling and restoring homeostasis. Despite the primary anti-inflammatory actions of GCs, there are studies suggesting that under certain conditions GCs may also exert pro-inflammatory responses. For these reasons the understanding of the GR basic mechanisms of action on different immune cells in the periphery (e.g., macrophages, dendritic cells, neutrophils, and T cells) and in the brain (microglia) contexts, that we review in this chapter, is a continuous matter of interest and may reveal novel therapeutic targets for the treatment of immune and inflammatory response.

Combinatorial function of transcription factors and cofactors

Differential gene expression gives rise to the many cell types of complex organisms. Enhancers regulate transcription by binding transcription factors (TFs), which in turn recruit cofactors to activate RNA Polymerase II at core promoters. Transcriptional regulation is typically mediated by distinct combinations of TFs, enabling a relatively small number of TFs to generate a large diversity of cell types. However, how TFs achieve combinatorial enhancer control and how enhancers, enhancer-bound TFs, and the cofactors they recruit regulate RNA Polymerase II activity is not entirely clear. Here, we review how TF synergy is mediated at the level of DNA binding and after binding, the role of cofactors and the post-translational modifications they catalyze, and discuss different models of enhancer-core-promoter communication.

Models and Methods to Investigate Acute Stress Responses in Cattle

There is a growing appreciation within the livestock industry and throughout society that animal stress is an important issue that must be addressed. With implications for animal health, well-being, and productivity, minimizing animal stress through improved animal management procedures and/or selective breeding is becoming a priority. Effective management of stress, however, depends on the ability to identify and quantify the effects of various stressors and determine if individual or combined stressors have distinct biological effects. Furthermore, it is critical to determine the duration of stress-induced biological effects if we are to understand how stress alters animal production and disease susceptibility. Common stress models used to evaluate both psychological and physical stressors in cattle are reviewed. We identify some of the major gaps in our knowledge regarding responses to specific stressors and propose more integrated methodologies and approaches to measuring these responses. These approaches are based on an increased knowledge of both the metabolic and immune effects of stress. Finally, we speculate on how these findings may impact animal agriculture, as well as the potential application of large animal models to understanding human stress.