MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mechanisms of Glucocorticoid‐mediated Induction of Krüppel‐Like Factor 9 in the Human Airways

2019· article· en· W3174771939 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mahmoud Mostafa, A.N. Gerber, Robert Newton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicKruppel-like factors research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsA549 cellGlucocorticoid receptorTranscription factorBiologyTranscriptomeChromatin immunoprecipitationGlucocorticoidCell biologyCell cultureGene expressionMolecular biologyImmunologyGenePromoterGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE Glucocorticoids (GCs) are stress hormones that act on the GC receptor (GR; NR3C1) to elicit effects, including repression of inflammatory gene expression. However, the molecular mechanisms for this repressive effect remain unclear. Since GC, as inhaled corticosteroids, are the cornerstone of asthma treatment, a comparative transcriptome analysis of human airway epithelial cell variants was performed following GC treatment. This revealed 17 genes that were induced in common by GC. Of these, 7 genes were associated with gene ontology terms for transcriptional regulation. Many of these genes, including KLF9, were also induced by inhaled GC in vivo in the human airways. While, KLF9 is a probable repressor of transcription and has been implicated in cellular proliferation and differentiation, little is known about the GC‐mediated regulation of KLF9 in the airways. The current work addresses this knowledge gap. RESULTS GC‐mediated induction of KLF9 mRNA was confirmed in the airway epithelial cell lines, pulmonary type II A549 and bronchial epithelial BEAS‐2B cells, as well as in different primary cell types, including bronchial epithelial (HBE), vascular endothelial, fibroblast, and smooth muscle (ASM) cells, that are all present in the airways. Additionally, multiple GCs, including hydrocortisone, dexamethasone, and budesonide all induced KLF9 to a similar extent in A549 cells. This induction was abolished in A549 cells either by pretreating cells with the GR antagonist, Org34517, or by knocking down GR with siRNA. Chromatin immunoprecipitation of GR following glucocorticoid treatment in A549 and BEAS‐2B cells showed GR binding to sites 5.9, 6.7, 25, and 65 kb upstream of the KLF9 gene. Public domain data suggests that these sites may all possess enhancer activity and eRNA (enhancer RNA) expression was induced following GC treatment. Cellular fractionation showed that both basal and GC‐induced KLF9 protein was exclusively nuclear. CONCLUSIONS The current work confirms that KLF9 is GC‐induced in multiple structural cell types (epithelial, fibroblast, airway smooth muscle and endothelial) that are found in the airways. In A549 cells the GC‐mediated induction of KLF9 was GR‐dependent. Since GR bound to, and appeared to activate, multiple enhancers upstream of the KLF9 gene, direct transactivation by GR is likely. GC induction of KLF9 therefore represents a highly conserved transactivation event that can be used to model transcriptional control by GR. Further deciphering the molecular events that occur at the KLF9 upstream promotor following GC treatment will enhance our understanding of how GR drives gene expression. Support or Funding Information This work was supported by: RN grants: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) discovery grant; MMM studentships: NSERC Postgraduate Scholarship – Doctoral, Queen Elizabeth II Doctoral scholarship, and The Lung Association – Alberta & NWT studentship award. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicKruppel-like factors researchFrench-language works237,207