The activities of progesterone receptor isoform A and B are differentially modulated by their ligands in a gene‐selective manner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that progesterone receptor (PR) isoform A (PR-A) and isoform B (PR-B) may mediate different effects of progesterone. The objective of this study was to determine if the functions of PR isoforms also vary in response to different PR modulators (PRM). The effects of 7 synthetic PRM were tested in MDA-MB-231 cells engineered to express PR-A, PR-B, or both PR isoforms. The effects of progesterone were similar in cells expressing PR-A or PR-B in which it inhibited growth and induced focal adhesion. On the other hand, synthetic PRM modulated the activity of the PR isoforms differently. RU486, CDB4124, 17alpha-hydroxy CDB4124 and VA2914 exerted agonist activities on cell growth and adhesion via PR-B. Via PR-A, however, these compounds displayed agonist effect on cell growth but induced stellate morphology which was distinct from the agonist's effect. Their dual properties via PR-A were also displayed at the gene expression level: the compounds acted as agonists on cell cycle genes but exhibited antagonistic effect on cell adhesion genes. Introduction of ERalpha by adenoviral vector to these cells did not change PR-A or PR-B mediated effect of PRM radically, but it causes significant cell rounding and modified the magnitudes of the responses to PRM. The findings suggest that the activities of PR isoforms may be modulated by different PRM through gene-specific regulatory mechanisms. This raises an interesting possibility that PRM may be designed to be PR isoform and cellular pathway selective to achieve targeted therapy in breast cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".