|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
© The Rockefeller University Press,
0021-9525/1997//735 $5.00
The Journal of Cell Biology, Volume 139, Number 3,
, 1997 735-747
Article |
Specific and Redundant Functions of Retinoid X Receptor/Retinoic Acid Receptor Heterodimers in Differentiation, Proliferation, and Apoptosis of F9 Embryonal Carcinoma Cells
We have generated F9 murine embryonal carcinoma cells in which either the retinoid X receptor (RXR)
and retinoic acid receptor (RAR) genes or the RXR and RAR
genes are knocked out, and compared their phenotypes with those of wild-type (WT), RXR–/–, RAR–/–, and RAR–/– cells. RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells were resistant to retinoic acid treatment for the induction of primitive and parietal endodermal differentiation, as well as for antiproliferative and apoptotic responses, whereas they could differentiate into visceral endodermlike cells, as previously observed for RXR–/– cells. In contrast, RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells were defective for all three types of differentiation, as well as antiproliferative and apoptotic responses, indicating that RXR and RAR represent an essential receptor pair for these responses. Taken together with results obtained by treatment of WT and mutant F9 cells with RAR isotype– and panRXR-selective retinoids, our observations support the conclusion that RXR/ RAR heterodimers are the functional units mediating the retinoid signal in vivo. Our results also indicate that the various heterodimers can exert both specific and redundant functions in differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis. We also show that the functional redundancy exhibited between RXR isotypes and between RAR isotypes in cellular processes can be artifactually generated by gene knockouts. The present approach for multiple gene targeting should allow inactivation of any set of genes in a given cell.
Abbreviations used in this paper: AFP, -fetoprotein; E2, estradiol; EC, embryonal carcinoma; EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assays; HR, homologous recombination; PGK, phosphoglycerate kinase; RAR, retinoic acid receptor; RXR, retinoid X receptor; RARE, retinoic acid response element; RT, reverse transcription; tRA, all-trans retinoic acid; VE, visceral endoderm; WT, wild-type.
RETINOIDS exert their pleiotropic effects on vertebrate development, cellular differentiation, proliferation, and homeostasis through two classes of ligand-dependent transactivators: the retinoic acid receptors (RARs)1, and the retinoid X receptors (RXRs) (for reviews see De Luca, 1991; Blomhoff, 1994; Chambon, 1994, 1996; Kastner et al., 1995; Mangelsdorf and Evans, 1995). RARs are activated by all-trans retinoic acid (tRA) and by 9-cis retinoic acid (9C-RA), whereas RXRs are activated by 9C-RA only. The various RAR (RAR, β, and ) and RXR (RXR, β, and ) isotypes are encoded by different genes, and their isoforms, which differ in their NH2-terminal regions, are generated by differential promoter usage and alternative splicing. The multiple RAR and RXR isotypes and isoforms are conserved in vertebrate evolution, and display distinct spatiotemporal expression patterns in developing embryos and adult tissues, suggesting that each receptor performs some unique functions (for reviews see Leid et al., 1992a; Chambon, 1994; Kastner et al., 1994). RXR/RAR heterodimers bind much more efficiently to retinoic acid response elements (RAREs) than their respective homodimers in vitro (for reviews see Leid et al., 1992a; Chambon, 1994, 1996; Giguère, 1994; Glass, 1994; Kastner et al., 1994; Mangelsdorf et al., 1994; Gronemeyer and Laudet, 1995; Keaveney and Stunnenberg, 1995; Mangelsdorf and Evans, 1995), and several lines of evidence support the idea that these heterodimers represent the functional units transducing the retinoid signal in vivo (Kastner et al., 1995; Chambon, 1996).
The F9 murine embryonal carcinoma (EC) cell line expresses all types of RARs and RXRs (Zelent et al., 1989; Martin et al., 1990; Wan et al., 1994), and upon retinoic acid treatment, it differentiates into cells resembling three distinct extraembryonic endoderm (primitive, parietal, and visceral), depending on the culture conditions (for reviews see Strickland, 1981; Hogan et al., 1983; Gudas et al., 1994). Retinoid-induced differentiation is accompanied by an apoptotic response and a dramatic decrease in the rate of proliferation (Sleigh, 1992; Atencia et al., 1994; Clifford et al., 1996). Thus, F9 cells provide an attractive system for the analysis of retinoid signaling in vivo.
To further investigate the roles of RXRs and RARs in differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis, we have now generated F9 cells lacking either RXR and RAR, or RXR and RAR, and then compared their phenotypes with those of wild-type (WT), RXR–/– (Clifford et al., 1996), RAR–/– (Boylan et al., 1995), and RAR–/– (Boylan et al., 1993; Taneja et al., 1995) F9 cells. Multiple gene targeting in a given cell has been achieved by using a Cre/loxP system (Sauer and Henderson, 1990; Metzger et al., 1995), which allows removal of the antibiotic resistance gene from a targeted locus, and therefore subsequent mutagenesis of the second allele of a given gene with the same targeting construct, as well as the targeting of additional genes. We demonstrate that tRA-treated RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells differentiate poorly into primitive and parietal endodermlike cells and are impaired in both antiproliferative and apoptotic responses, whereas they fully differentiate into visceral endoderm (VE)-like cells, as previously observed for RXR–/– cells (Clifford et al., 1996). In contrast, RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells are defective for all three types of endodermal differentiation, as well as for the antiproliferative and apoptotic responses, indicating that the absence of both RXR and RAR cannot be functionally compensated by the other retinoid receptors in these cells. Taken together with results obtained by treatment of WT and mutant F9 cells with panRXR- and RAR isotype– selective retinoids, our findings support the conclusion that RXR/RAR heterodimers are the functional units mediating the retinoid signal in vivo. Furthermore our results indicate that RXR/RAR heterodimers can exert both specific and redundant functions in differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis. We also show that functional redundancy between RXR isotypes and between RAR isotypes can be artifactually generated by gene knockouts.
 |
Materials and Methods |
|---|
 TopAbstract Materials and Methods ResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Targeting of the RAR or RAR Genes in RXR-null F9 Cells.
The RAR targeting vector, pRAR(LNL), was previously described (Metzger et al., 1995). The RAR targeting vector, pRAR(LPL), was derived from pD6.5A (a gift from D. Lohnes, IGBMC, CNRS/INSERM/ ULP, Illkirch, France), which contains a 6-kb genomic fragment including exons 5 and 8. A unique SmaI site, followed by stop codons in all three reading frames, was introduced into pD6.5A at the KpnI site located in exon 8 of RAR by inserting the oligonucleotides 5'-CCCCGGGTAGGTAGATAGCGTAC-3' and 5'-GCTATCTACCTACCCGGGGGTAC-3', yielding the pRART4 construct. An XhoI-BamHI fragment containing the phosphoglycerate kinase (PGK) promoter-driven, puromycin- resistance (puro) gene, flanked by loxP sites, was isolated from pHRLpuro1, and blunt ended with T4 DNA polymerase, followed by ligation into the SmaI site of pRART4. pHRLpuro1 was constructed from VS-1, a plasmid containing a loxP site-flanked PGKpuroA+ cassette, by mutating the SalI site. The PGKpuroA+ cassette was obtained by ligating the PGK promoter (a 500-bp EcoRI-PstI fragment isolated from pKJ-1 [Adra et al., 1987]) to the coding sequence of the puro gene (a 600-bp HindIII-ClaI fragment isolated from pLXPB [Imler et al., 1996]), and by inserting the SV-40 polyadenylation signal (a 160-bp BglII-XbaI fragment isolated from pSG5 [Green et al., 1988]) using synthetic oligonucleotides. This cloning resulted in the loss of the PstI, HindIII, and ClaI restriction sites, and the introduction of HindIII and EcoRI sites at 5' and 3' ends of the PGK promoter, respectively. KpnI, ApaI, XhoI, and BglII restriction sites, and BamHI and SacI sites are located at 5' and 3' ends of the loxP-flanked cassette, respectively.
Electroporation, selection of neomycin-resistant clones, Cre-mediated excision of the resistance genes, and Southern blot analysis were performed as previously described (Metzger et al., 1995; Clifford et al., 1996). Puromycin selection (500 ng/ml) was carried out for 10 d.
Western Blotting and Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assays (EMSA)
Isolation of whole cell extracts from F9 cells and transfected COS-1 cells, Western blot analysis, and electrophoretic mobility shift assays were performed as previously described (Rochette-Egly et al., 1991; Gaub et al., 1992; Boylan et al., 1993).
Reverse Transcription (RT)-PCR
RNA preparation, RT-PCR, and Southern blotting were performed as previously described (Bouillet et al., 1995; Roy et al., 1995). The PCR primers and end-labeled oligonucleotide probes for collagen IV1, laminin B1, -fetoprotein (AFP), and 36B4, were described previously (Clifford et al., 1996). Transcript levels were quantified using a BAS 2000 bio-imaging analyzer (Fuji Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), and were normalized to the corresponding 36B4 signals.
Analysis of Cellular Growth
Cells were plated in triplicate 3-cm culture wells (5 x 102 cells per well), and cell counting experiments were performed as previously described (Clifford et al., 1996). [3H]Thymidine incorporation assays were performed essentially as described (Clifford et al., 1996), with the following modifications. Cells were cultured for 4 d in six replicate 3-cm wells, in the presence or absence of 1 µM tRA, and three of the six wells were treated with 8 µCi/well [3H]methylthymidine (20.0 Ci/mmol; Dupont-NEN, Boston, MA) for 2 h before harvesting. The cell cycle profile of WT and mutant cells was determined as previously described (Clifford et al., 1996).
Analysis of Apoptosis
Apoptosis was analyzed by both Hoechst staining of nuclei and FACS® analysis, as previously described (Clifford et al., 1996).
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
or RAR Genes in RXR Null F9 Cells-null F9 cell line, C2RXR–(L)/–(L), which constitutively expresses a ligand-dependent chimeric Cre- recombinase (Cre-ER; Metzger et al., 1995), was electroporated with the targeting constructs pRAR(LNL) (Fig. 1 A) or pRAR(LPL) (Fig. 2 A) to generate F9 cells disrupted in either the RXR and RAR genes or the RXR and RAR genes. These targeting constructs contain translation stop codons and loxP site–flanked neomycin- or puromycin-resistance genes in exon 9 of the RAR gene or exon 8 of the RAR gene, respectively (Materials and Methods; Figs. 1 A and 2 A). Since these exons encode the B region, which is common to all isoforms of a given RAR isotype (Kastner et al., 1990; Leroy et al., 1991; Chambon, 1994), the expression of RAR and RAR proteins is suppressed by these mutations. Homologous recombination (HR) and Cre-mediated excision of the resistance genes were verified by Southern blotting (Figs. 1 B and 2 B).
|
|
(LNL) targeting construct (Fig. 1 A), indicated that, after electroporation, 5 out of 96 C2RXR–(L)/–(L) neomycin-resistant clones had one targeted RAR allele (Fig. 1, A, HR[I]; and B, compare lanes 3 and 4 with lanes 1 and 2; data not shown). One RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR+/–(LNL) cell line (clone nine) was treated with estradiol (E2) to excise the loxP-flanked cassette (–[LNL] and –[L]) designate the targeted allele before and after Cre-mediated excision, respectively). Southern blot analysis using a1 and "neo" probes revealed that excision of the resistance gene occurred in two out of six subclones treated with E2 (Fig. 1, A, HR[E]; and B, compare lane 5 with lanes 3 and 4; see also Metzger et al., 1995). The second allele of the RAR gene was targeted in the RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR+/–(L) cell line (Fig. 1 B, clone 9a) using the same targeting construct and strategy. 2 of 96 neomycin-resistant clones were positive for the desired recombination event, resulting in RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR–(L)/–(LNL) cell lines (Fig. 1 B, clones 9a-10 and 9a-26; compare lanes 6 and 7 with lanes 1–5). No wild-type RAR transcripts were detected in RXR–(L)/–(L)/ RAR–(L)/–(LNL) cells by semi-quantitative RT-PCRs (data not shown). Similarly, no RAR protein could be detected in RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR–(L)/–(LNL) cells (called hereafter RXR–/–/RAR–/–) by Western blotting using the polyclonal antibody RP(F) (Gaub et al., 1992), directed against the F region of the RAR protein (Fig. 1 C, compare lanes 3 and 4 with lanes 2, 5, and 6).
To establish F9 cells in which both RXR and RAR genes are inactivated, C2RXR–(L)/–(L) cells were electroporated with the pRAR(LPL) targeting construct (Fig. 2 A). Southern blot analysis using the r1 probe, located 5' to the pRAR(LPL) sequence (Fig. 2 A), revealed that 3 out of 96 puromycin-resistant clones had one targeted RAR allele (Fig. 2, A, HR[I]; and B, compare lanes 3 and 4 with lanes 1 and 2; and data not shown). One RXR–(L)/–(L)/ RAR+/–(LPL) cell line (clone 25) was transiently transfected with a Cre recombinase expression construct (pPGK-Cre) (Clifford et al., 1996), since for unknown reasons the loxP-flanked, puromycin-resistance gene was not excised by treatment of the cells with E2 (data not shown; –[LPL] and –[L] designate the targeted allele before and after Cre-mediated excision, respectively). The pattern obtained by Southern blot analysis, using r1, r2, and puro probes, clearly indicated that 2 out of 96 subclones had lost the puromycin-resistance cassette (Fig. 2, A, HR[E]; and B, compare lane 5 with lane 4; and data not shown). The second allele of the RAR gene was inactivated in one RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR+/–(L) cell line (Fig. 2 B, clone 25a) using the same targeting construct and strategy, yielding a RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR–(L)/–(LPL) cell line (Fig. 2 B, clone 25a-3, compare lane 6 with lanes 1–5). No wild-type RAR RNA was detected in RXR–(L)/–(L)/RAR–(L)/–(LPL) cells (data not shown). The absence of RAR protein was verified by EMSA using the monoclonal antibodies Ab2(F) and Ab10(A2) (Rochette-Egly et al., 1991), directed against the F and A2 regions of the RAR protein, respectively. No antibody-shifted complex was observed in RXR–(L)/–(L)/ RAR–(L)/–(LPL) cells (called hereafter RXR–/–/RAR–/–) (Fig. 2 C, compare lane 5 with lanes 4, 6, and 10). Note that the RXR loci, which contain loxP sites, were not rearranged during excision of the resistance genes at the RAR or RAR loci (data not shown). Note also that the knockout of a given receptor(s) did not result in major variations of those remaining (Chiba et al., 1997).
Function of RXRs and RARs in the Retinoid-induced Differentiation of F9 Cells into Primitive and Parietal Endodermlike Cells
WT F9 cells differentiate into primitive and parietal endodermlike cells, when grown in monolayer culture in the presence of tRA alone and tRA in combination with dibutyryl cAMP (bt2cAMP), respectively (Strickland, 1981; Hogan et al., 1983). Previous studies have shown that these two types of differentiation are severely impaired in RAR–/– and RXR–/– cells (Boylan et al., 1993; Clifford et al., 1996). The differentiation patterns of RXR–/–/ RAR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells were compared with those of WT and single knockout cell lines. After 4 d of treatment, <10% of RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells became flatter and irregular in shape, or rounded with long cell processes, which are the morphological characteristics of primitive or parietal endodermal differentiation of WT F9 cells, respectively. The same results were obtained with 9a-10 and 9a-26 RXR–/–/RAR–/– cell lines (Fig. 3 A, compare g–i with a–f, and data not shown). No morphological differentiation at all was observed in RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells after 4 d of treatment, and <0.1% of the cells exhibited a differentiated morphology after 6 d of treatment (Fig. 3 A, j–l, and data not shown). This undifferentiated phenotype persisted after 10 d of treatment.
|
1 and laminin B1, two markers of endodermal differentiation (Fig. 3, B and C). After 48 h of 1 µM tRA treatment, the induction of collagen type IV1 and laminin B1 was reduced in RAR–/– cells (10-fold and 6-fold lower levels, respectively) and in RXR–/– cells (3-fold and 6-fold lower levels, respectively) when compared to WT cells, whereas these inductions were not altered in RAR–/– cells (Boylan et al., 1993, 1995; Clifford et al., 1996; Taneja et al., 1996). The induction of both transcripts was also impaired in RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells (fivefold and sevenfold lower levels, respectively), whereas it was fully abrogated in RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells. Thus, RA-induced primitive and parietal endodermal differentiation of WT F9 cells appears to be mainly mediated by the RXR/RAR pair, whereas it cannot be mediated by combinations of RXR(β+) with either RAR or RARβ (see Table IV).
|
–/– F9 cells (Clifford et al., 1996). Similarly, after 10 d of treatment, >80% of the outer layer of RAR–/– and RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cell aggregates differentiated into VE-like cells, which were indistinguishable from those of WT and RXR–/– cells (Fig. 4 A, compare f with panels b and d; and Table I). In contrast, <10% of the outer layer of RAR–/– cells exhibited VE conversion after 10 d of treatment, whereas full VE differentiation was eventually achieved after 14 d of treatment (Fig. 4 A, compare h with g and b; and Table I). In RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, the surface of the aggregates was as smooth after 10 d of treatment as in untreated controls (Fig. 4 A, compare j with a and i), and <10% of the aggregates displayed only a spotty VE conversion after 12 or 18 d of treatment (Table I). To exclude the possibility that this very poor differentiation of the RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells could be due to some clonal variation, rather than the presence of the RXR-null mutation in the RAR-null background, we expressed the RXR cDNA in RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. As expected, cells expressing the RXR cDNA exhibited a phenotype identical to that of RAR–/– cells, i.e., the RA- induced VE differentiation was restored at late time (14 d) of RA treatment (data not shown).
|
|
1, laminin B1 and AFP in WT and mutant F9 cells (Fig. 4 B). After 10 d of aggregate culture in the presence of 50 nM tRA, the three markers were similarly induced in WT, RXR–/–, RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/–cells. In RAR–/– cells, the induction of laminin B1 was similar to that of WT cells, whereas the induction of collagen IV1 was slightly reduced (twofold lower than in WT cells). In contrast, the induction of AFP, a specific marker of VE differentiation, was hardly detectable in RAR–/– cells after 10 d of RA treatment (Fig. 4 B). There was no induction of either collagen IV1, laminin B1 or AFP in RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells, in agreement with their lack of morphological differentiation into VE. Thus, RXR and RAR play an essential role in VE differentiation of WT F9 cells.
To further investigate the functions of RARs and RXRs in VE differentiation, WT and mutant F9 cells were treated for 10–18 d with tRA or synthetic retinoid agonist selective for RAR (BMS188,753 [BMS753]; Taneja et al., 1996), RARβ (BMS189,453 [BMS453]; Chen et al., 1995), RAR (BMS188,961 [BMS961]; Taneja et al., 1996) and all three RXRs (panRXR, BMS188,649 [BMS649]; also known as SR11237; Lehmann et al., 1992; see Roy et al., 1995) (Table I). In WT cells, VE differentiation was triggered by 100 nM of the RAR agonist as effectively as by 50 nM tRA, and it was synergistically induced by a combination of 10 nM RAR and 1 µM panRXR agonists (Table I). In contrast, VE differentiation of RAR–/– cells was triggered by 10 nM RAR agonist as efficiently as by 50 nM tRA, and it was even synergistically induced by 1 nM of the RAR agonist in combination with 1 µM panRXR agonist, indicating that RAR partially hinders the RAR function in WT cells. The RAR agonist alone, or together with the panRXR agonist, was more efficient in RXR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells than in WT cells, but weaker than in RAR–/– cells, demonstrating that RXR prevents an efficient synergism between RXR(β+) and RAR (Table I; see Table IV). As expected, no VE differentiation was observed in RAR–/– and RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells treated with the RAR/panRXR agonist combination.
The RAR agonist, BMS753, on its own did not trigger VE differentiation of WT and RXR–/– cells, whereas the combination of 100 nM RAR and 1 µM panRXR agonists was much less efficient than the RAR/panRXR agonist combination. As expected, no VE differentiation was seen in RAR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells upon treatment with the RAR/panRXR agonist combination. In contrast, RAR–/– cells weakly differentiated into VE-like cells upon treatment with 100 nM RAR agonist alone, and this differentiation was markedly enhanced by addition of 1 µM panRXR agonist. This synergistic stimulation was almost abrogated in RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells.
A combination of RARβ (BMS453) and panRXR agonists did not trigger VE differentiation in WT, RXR–/–, RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. Interestingly, this combination synergistically induced VE differentiation of RAR–/– cells, and this effect was almost absent in RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, as in the case of the RAR/panRXR agonist combination (Table I). Thus, RAR strongly prevents RAR and RARβ to synergize with RXR, and mutation of RAR artefactually generates functional redundancy between RARs for VE differentiation of F9 cells (see Table IV).
Function of RXRs and RARs in the Retinoid-induced Antiproliferative Response of F9 Cells and Retinoid-induced Proliferation of RXR/RAR Null F9 Cells
The effect of tRA on proliferation of WT, RXR–/–, RXR–/–/RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/– F9 cells was investigated (Fig. 5 A). After 6 d of 1 µM tRA treatment, the inhibition of growth as determined by cell counting, was lower for RXR–/– than for WT cells (58 and 79% inhibition relative to untreated control cells, respectively) (Clifford et al., 1996). The antiproliferative effect of tRA was decreased to the same extent for RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells (54% inhibition) and RXR–/– cells. On the other hand, tRA did not reduce, but slightly increased the number of RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. The rate of DNA synthesis was also compared for WT and mutant cell lines by measuring [3H]thymidine incorporation during the anti-proliferative response to tRA (Fig. 5 B). After 4 d of 1 µM tRA treatment, [3H]thymidine incorporation was reduced by 54% in WT cells relative to vehicle-treated control cells, and only by 20% in RXR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. In contrast, there was no inhibition of [3H]thymidine incorporation in RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells.
|
–/– cells (Clifford et al., 1996) (Fig. 5 C). The cell cycle profile of untreated RXR–/–/RAR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells was the same as that of WT and RXR–/– cells. After 5 d of 1 µM tRA treatment, the proportion of cells in the G0 and G1 phases, was 71% for WT cells, whereas it was lower for RXR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells (38 and 40%, respectively; Fig. 5 C, compare b, d, and f). Interestingly, the cell cycle profile of RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells was not significantly affected by tRA treatment, and was almost identical to that of untreated WT cells (Fig. 5 C, compare h with g and a).
To further dissect the roles of RARs and RXRs in the control of proliferation, WT and mutant F9 cells were treated for 6 d with tRA or receptor-selective retinoids, and cell numbers were counted (Table II). In WT cells, 100 nM RAR agonist efficiently reduced the proliferation, and 10 nM of the same agonist, which had no effect on its own, synergized with 1 µM panRXR agonist. The effect of these retinoids on proliferation was reduced, while not abolished, in RXR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, indicating that RXR can be partially replaced by RXR(β+) for synergizing with RAR (see Table IV). Interestingly, the RAR/panRXR agonist combination was more efficient in RAR–/– cells than in WT cells, revealing that RAR partially hinders the antiproliferative effect of RAR in WT cells (Table II; see Table IV). As expected, this combination did not inhibit the proliferation of RAR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. The combination of 100 nM RAR and 1 µM panRXR agonists, which reduced the proliferation of WT cells less efficiently than the RAR/panRXR agonist combination, was more efficient in RAR–/– cells than in WT cells (Table II), indicating that RAR partially hinders the antiproliferative effect of RAR in WT cells (see Table IV). The RAR/panRXR agonist combination had no effect on the proliferation of RXR–/– cells, showing that RAR can only synergize with RXR to inhibit proliferation (see Table IV).
|
agonist increased the number of RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, indicating that RAR can mediate a proliferative effect in the absence of both RXR and RAR. As expected, the RAR/panRXR agonist combination did not affect proliferation of RAR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. Neither the RARβ agonist alone nor in combination with the panRXR agonist affected the proliferation of WT, RXR–/–, RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, whereas this combination synergistically reduced the proliferation of RAR–/– cells. Note that 500 nM RARβ agonist alone increased the cell number of RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, and that this effect was enhanced by addition of 1 µM panRXR agonist. Thus, the presence of RAR not only hinders the antiproliferative effect of the RXR/RARβ pair, but also the proliferation-promoting effects of the combinations of RXR(β+) with RARβ, showing again that knockouts generate artifactual effects not observed under WT conditions, as already seen above in the case of F9 cell differentiation (see Table IV).
Function of RXRs and RARs for the Retinoid-induced Apoptotic Response of F9 Cells
Since retinoids can induce apoptosis, which also contributes to the decrease in cell number in retinoid-treated F9 cells (Atencia et al., 1994), we determined the extent of the tRA-induced apoptotic response of WT and mutant F9 cells by FACS® analysis. Sub-2N–size, DNA-containing particles corresponding to "apoptotic bodies" appeared in WT cells after 5 d of tRA treatment, whereas they were not detected in tRA-treated RXR–/– (see also Clifford et al., 1996), RXR–/–/RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells (Fig. 5 C, compare d, f, and h with b [arrow]). Apoptosis was confirmed by staining with the DNA-binding fluorochrome Hoechst 33258. Apoptotic particles and condensed chromatin were similarly observed in tRA-treated WT and RAR–/– cells (Fig. 6, a, b, e, and f; Table III). In contrast, tRA-induced apoptosis was reduced in RAR–/– cells, rarely seen in RXR–/– (Clifford et al., 1996) and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, and abolished in RXR–/–/ RAR–/– cells (Fig. 6, c, d, and g–l; Table III). Note that a background level of apoptosis occurred at high cell density even in the absence of tRA, as previously mentioned (Clifford et al., 1996).
|
|
agonist triggered apoptosis, and the addition of 1 µM panRXR agonist resulted in a synergistic effect. The effect of these retinoids was markedly reduced in RXR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, indicating that RXR can only poorly be replaced by RXR(β+) for this response (Table IV). In contrast, the RAR/panRXR agonist combination was more efficient in RAR–/– cells than in WT cells, indicating that RAR partially prevents the apoptotic response mediated by RAR in WT cells (Table IV). As expected, this combination had no effect on the apoptosis of RAR–/– and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. Neither the RAR/panRXR nor the RARβ/panRXR agonist combination induced the apoptosis of WT, RXR–/–, RAR–/–, RXR–/–/RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells, whereas they weakly triggered apoptosis of RAR–/– cells (Table III). 100 nM Am80, which acts as panRAR agonist at this concentration (Hashimoto et al., 1990), was as efficient as 100 nM RAR agonist for WT, RXR–/–, RAR–/–, and RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells. The panRAR/ panRXR combination was more effective than either the RAR/panRXR or the RARβ/panRXR combination in RAR–/– cells, whereas these retinoids had no effects on the apoptosis of RXR–/–/RAR–/– cells (Table III). Thus, RAR fully prevents the weak apoptotic response that can be mediated by the RXR/RAR and RXR/ RARβ pairs, and mutation of RAR artifactually generates some functional redundancy (Table IV). |
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
, β, or ) with either one of the three RARs (, β, or ), could be differentially involved in the numerous physiological events that are controlled by retinoids in vivo (Chambon, 1994, 1996). The results of RAR and RXR gene knockout studies in the mouse have supported these suggestions, but their interpretation remains equivocal, in particular because cell- autonomous and non–cell-autonomous effects cannot be distinguished in the intact animal (Kastner et al., 1995, 1997). The aim of the present study was to determine the actual role of the various RXR/RAR combinations as retinoid transducers in a well-established, cell-autonomous system, namely that provided by the retinoid-responsive F9 EC cells. To this end, differentiation into primitive, parietal, and visceral endoderms, as well as antiproliferative and apoptotic responses have been studied in RXR and RAR single or compound mutant F9 EC cells cultured in the presence of either tRA or panRXR- and/or RAR isotype-selective synthetic retinoids. Our present results are summarized in Table IV with relevant data from previous reports (Roy et al., 1995; Clifford et al., 1996; Taneja et al., 1996), and lead to several important conclusions, which are in keeping with those recently drawn from a study of the expression of RA-responsive genes in the same mutant F9 EC cells (Chiba et al., 1997).
Taken together, our genetic data and those obtained with selective retinoids in WT or mutated cells establish that RXR/RAR pairs are always involved in the transduction of the retinoid signal, irrespective of the nature of the retinoid-induced event examined (differentiation, antiproliferative, or apoptotic effects). This is obvious from both the comparison of single and double mutants, and the combined use of the panRXR ligand with suboptimal concentrations of either one of the RAR isotype–specific, synthetic retinoids. Thus, since the panRXR-specific agonist is never active on its own, all cellular events induced by retinoids in F9 EC cells appear to be mediated by RXR/ RAR heterodimers. Note that the "subordination" of RXRs to RARs (i.e., that a RXR cannot be transcriptionally activated unless its heterodimer RAR partner is liganded), which has been repeatedly observed in different cell systems (Roy et al., 1995; Chen et al., 1996; Horn et al., 1996; Taneja et al., 1996), as well as in some in vitro studies (Durand et al., 1994; Apfel et al., 1995; Forman et al., 1995), may be important to prevent the promiscuous activation of the retinoid and other signaling pathways (e.g., those of thyroid hormones and vitamin D3) by RXR ligands (Mangelsdorf and Evans, 1995; Chambon, 1996). The dispensability of the RXR ligand that can be observed in some instances when a saturating amount of a RAR- selective ligand (notably in the case of RAR) is used, has been previously noted (Roy et al., 1995). This dispensability most probably reflects the fact that the RAR activation functions of RXR/RAR heterodimers alone are sufficient to trigger the expression of the genes involved in the cellular event considered, whereas the synergistic effect of the activation functions of the RXR heterodimeric partner becomes indispensable at lower concentrations of the RAR ligand (Clifford, J., unpublished results), which are probably closer to physiological retinoic acid concentrations.
The second important conclusion of the present study is that the various RXR/RAR heterodimers that can be formed in F9 EC cells exhibit some functional specificity. Indeed, each of the cellular events that are RA-induced in F9 cells appears to preferentially involve a specific RXR/ RAR isotype combination (or set of combinations) (Table IV). It appears that in all cases the RA signal is transduced by RXR/RAR heterodimers in WT F9 cells. However, both the RXR/RAR and RXR/RAR heterodimers can mediate the RA-induced inhibition of WT F9 cell proliferation. Thus, in WT F9 cells, depending on the cellular event considered, different RXR/RAR isotype heterodimers possess both specific functions and redundant functions shared with other heterodimers. Interestingly, additional redundant functions, not seen in WT cells, are revealed when either RXR or RAR are not expressed. The presence of RAR often hinders or blocks the activity of RAR and RARβ, where the presence of RXR can hinder the activity of RXR(β+) (Table IV). In several instances, the retinoid-induced cellular events mediated by RXR/RAR in WT cells can be mediated by RXR(β+)/RAR heterodimers in the absence of RXR, and by RXR/RAR( and/or β) heterodimers in the absence of RAR (Table IV). Again, these redundancies vary according to the cellular event examined, further supporting the conclusion that the different RXR/RAR isotype heterodimers possess some functional specificity.
The third conclusion is that gene knockouts generate artifactual conditions unmasking potential functional redundancies, which actually do not occur in the WT situation (Table IV). For instance, in the case of visceral endoderm differentiation, RXR(β+)/RAR heterodimers can efficiently substitute for RXR/RAR heterodimers in the absence of RXR; in addition, either RXR/RAR or RXR/RARβ heterodimers can efficiently substitute for RXR/RAR heterodimers in the absence of RAR, even though RXR/RAR heterodimers essentially mediate this differentiation in WT F9 EC cells. How the presence of RXR/RAR heterodimers prevents potentially functionally redundant heterodimers from transducing the RA signal is unknown, but it could be related to their differential affinities for the RAREs of the target genes involved in the cellular processes induced by RA in F9 cells. In any event, it is clear that the functional redundancies that are revealed by gene knockout cannot be taken as evidence for a lack of functional specificity of the knockout gene product under WT physiological conditions. It is not unlikely that many of the functional redundancies that have been so far revealed by mouse gene knockouts are similarly artifactually generated.
Interestingly, our present study also reveals that different RXR/RAR heterodimers can have opposite effects on cell proliferation of F9 cells. RXR/RAR or RAR heterodimers are involved in the transduction of the antiproliferative effect of RA, but in the absence of RXR and RAR, both RXR(β+)/RAR and RARβ heterodimers can mediate a proliferative effect of RA (Tables II and IV). Note that induction of proliferation of certain cell types by retinoids has been previously reported (Amos and Lotan, 1990; Koshimizu et al., 1995). Our present observations on retinoid-induced cell antiproliferative and proliferative effects, strengthen the conclusion that different RXR/RAR heterodimers can exert specific functions. These observations also suggest that the actual set of retinoid receptors present in a given cell may have a profound influence on the effects generated by a retinoid treatment.
It is interesting to note that morphological differentiation of WT F9 EC cells can be efficiently triggered by a combination of panRXR/RAR-specific (BMS961) agonists, but not by a combination of panRXR/RAR-specific (BMS753) agonists, nor by a combination of a panRXR/RARβ-specific (BMS453) agonists. In contrast, P19 EC cell differentiation can be triggered by either a panRXR/RAR or a panRXR/RAR agonist combination, but not by a panRXR/RARβ agonist combination (Taneja et al., 1996), whereas the differentiation of the NB4 acute promyelocytic leukemia cells, and HL60 myeloblastic leukemia cells can be triggered by a combination of a panRXR/RAR or a panRXR/RARβ agonists, but not by a panRXR/RAR agonist combination (Chen et al., 1996). Similarly, the apoptosis of NB4 cells can be induced by a panRXR/RARβ agonist combination (Chen et al., 1996), which on the other hand is inefficient in the case of F9 cells (Table III). Thus, different RAR isotype-specific agonists acting synergistically with a panRXR agonist are not only more restricted than tRA in their effects on various cellular events in a given cell type (e.g., differentiation and apoptosis), but also affect differentially these events in a cell-specific manner. These cell type–specific effects of synthetic retinoids may extend their potential for therapeutical use.
Finally, to our best knowledge, this study is the first report of multiple gene targeting (two alleles of two genes) in a mammalian cell–autonomous system. Similar approaches will allow the inactivation of any set of genes in a given cell, which will undoubtedly and particularly useful to elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying complex biological events.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
This work was supported by funds from the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, the Collège de France, the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Régional, the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer, the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, the Human Frontier Science Program, and Bristol-Myers-Squibb. J. Clifford was supported by a fellowship from the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer and the US National Institutes of Health (grant No. IF32GM15857), and H. Chiba by a fellowship from the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
Submitted: 29 April 1997
Revised: 25 August 1997
Address all correspondence to P. Chambon, Institut de Génétique et de Biologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique/Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale/Université Louis Pasteur, Collège de France, BP 163, 67404 Illkirch-Cedex, France. Tel.: (33) 388-65-32-13. Fax: (33) 388-65-32-03. E-mail: IGBMC@ IGBMC.U-STRASBG.FR
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Adra CN, Boer PH & McBurney MW. Cloning and expression of the mouse pgk-1gene and the nucleotide sequence of its promoter, Gene (Amst), 1987, 60, 65–74.[Medline]
Amos B & Lotan R. Retinoid-sensitive cells and cell lines, Methods Enzymol, 1990, 190, 217–225.[Medline]
Apfel C, Kamber M, Klaus M, Mohr P, Keider S & LeMotte PK. Enhancement of HL-60 differentiation by a new class of retinoids with selective activity on retinoid X receptor, J Biol Chem, 1995, 270, 30765–30772.
Atencia R, Garcia-Sanz M, Unda F & Arechaga J. Apoptosis during retinoic acid-induced differentiation of F9 embryonal carcinoma cells, Exp Cell Res, 1994, 214, 663–667.[Medline]
Blomhoff, R. 1994. Overview of vitamin A metabolism and function. In Vitamin A Health and Disease. R. Blomhoff, editor. Marcel Dekker, New York/ Basel/Hong Kong. 1–35.
Bouillet P, Oulad-Abdelghani M, Vicaire S, Garnier J-M, Schuhbaur B, Dollé P & Chambon P. Efficient cloning of cDNAs of retinoic acid-responsive genes in P19 embryonal carcinoma cells and characterization of a novel mouse gene, Stra1 (Mouse LERK-2/Eplg2), Dev Biol, 1995, 170, 420–433.[Medline]
Boylan J, Lohnes D, Taneja R, Chambon P & Gudas LJ. Loss of retinoic acid receptor function in F9 cells by gene disruption results in aberrant Hoxa-1expression and differentiation upon retinoic acid treatment, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1993, 90, 9601–9605.
Boylan J, Lufkin T, Achkar CC, Taneja R, Chambon P & Gudas LJ. Targeted disruption of retinoic acid receptor (RAR) and RAR results in receptor-specific alterations in retinoic acid-mediated differentiation and retinoic acid metabolism, Mol Cell Biol, 1995, 15, 843–851.[Abstract]
Chambon P. The retinoid signaling pathway: molecular and genetic analyses, Semin Cell Biol, 1994, 5, 115–125.[Medline]
Chambon P. A decade of molecular biology of retinoic acid receptors, FASEB (Fed Am Soc Exp Biol) J, 1996, 10, 940–954.[Abstract]
Chen J-Y, Penco S, Ostrowski J, Balaguer P, Pons M, Starrett JE, Reczek PR, Chambon P & Gronemeyer H. RAR-specific agonist/antagonists which dissociate transactivation and AP1 transrepression inhibit anchorage-independent cell proliferation, EMBO (Eur Mol Biol Organ) J, 1995, 14, 1187–1197.[Medline]
Chen J-Y, Clifford J, Zusi C, Starrett J, Tortolani D, Ostrowski J, Reczek PR, Chambon P & Gronemeyer H. Two distinct actions of retinoid-receptor ligands, Nature (Lond), 1996, 382, 819–822.[Medline]
Chiba H, Clifford J, Metzger D & Chambon P. Distinct retinoid X receptor heterodimers are differentially involved in the control of expression of retinoid target genes in F9 embryonal carcinoma cells, Mol Cell Biol, 1997, 17, 3013–3020.[Abstract]
Clifford J, Chiba H, Sobieszczuk D, Metzger D & Chambon P. RXR-null F9 embryonal carcinoma cells are resistant to the differentiation, anti-proliferative and apoptotic effects of retinoids, EMBO (Eur Mol Biol Organ) J, 1996, 15, 4142–4155.[Medline]
De Luca LM. Retinoids and their receptors in differentiation, embryogenesis, and neoplasia, FASEB (Fed Am Soc Exp Biol) J, 1991, 5, 2924–2933.[Abstract]
Durand B, Saunders M, Gaudon C, Roy B, Losson R & Chambon P. Activation function 2 (AF-2) of retinoic acid receptor and 9-cis retinoic acid receptor: presence of a conserved autonomous constitutive activating domain and influence of the nature of the response element on AF-2 activity, EMBO (Eur Mol Biol Organ) J, 1994, 13, 5370–5382.[Medline]
Forman BM, Umesono K, Chen J & Evans RM. Unique response pathways are established by allosteric interactions among nuclear hormone receptors, Cell, 1995, 81, 541–550.[Medline]
Gaub M-P, Rochette-Egly C, Lutz Y, Ali S, Matthes H, Scheuer I & Chambon P. Immunodetection of multiple species of retinoic acid receptor : evidence for phosphorylation, Exp Cell Res, 1992, 201, 335–346.[Medline]
Giguère V. Retinoic acid receptors and cellular retinoid binding proteins: complex interplay in retinoid signaling, Endocr Rev, 1994, 15, 61–79.
Glass CK. Differential recognition of target genes by nuclear receptor monomers, dimers, and heterodimers, Endocr Rev, 1994, 15, 391–407.
Green S, Issemann I & Scheer E. A versatile in vivo and in vitroeukaryotic expression vector for protein engineering, Nucl Acids Res, 1988, 16, 369, .
Gronemeyer H & Laudet V. Transcription factors 3: nuclear receptors, Protein Profile, 1995, 2, 1173–1308.[Medline]
Gudas, L.J., M.B. Sporn, and A.B. Roberts. 1994. Cellular biology and biochemistry of the retinoids. In The Retinoids: Biology, Chemistry and Medicine. M.B. Sporn, A.B. Roberts, and D.S. Goodman, editors. Raven Press, New York. 443–520.
Hashimoto Y, Kagechika H & Shudo K. Expression of retinoic acid receptor genes and the ligand-binding selectivity of retinoic acid receptors (RARs), Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 1990, 166, 1300–1307.[Medline]
Hogan BLM, Barlow D & Tilly R. F9 teratocarcinoma cells as a model for the differentiation of parietal and visceral endoderm in the mouse embryo, Cancer Surv, 1983, 2, 115–140.
Horn V, Minucci S, Ogryzko VV, Adamson ED, Howard BH, Levin AA & Ozato K. RAR and RXR selective ligands cooperatively induce apoptosis and neuronal differentiation in P19 embryonal carcinoma cells, FASEB (Fed Am Soc Exp Biol) J, 1996, 10, 1071–1077.[Abstract]
Imler JL, Chartier C, Dreyer D, Dieterle A, Sainte M, Maie, Faure T, Pavirani A & Methali M. Novel complementation cell lines derived from human lung carcinoma A549 cells support the growth of E1-deleted adenovirus vectors, Gene Ther, 1996, 3, 75–84.[Medline]
Kastner P, Krust A, Mendelsohn C, Garnier JM, Zelent A, Leroy P, Staub A & Chambon P. Murine isoforms of retinoic acid receptor with specific patterns of expression, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1990, 87, 2700–2704.
Kastner, P., M. Leid, and P. Chambon. 1994. The role of nuclear retinoic acid receptors in the regulation of gene expression. In Vitamin A in Health and Disease. R. Blomhoff, editor. Marcel Dekker, New York. 189–238.
Kastner P, Mark M & Chambon P. Nonsteroid nuclear receptors: what are genetic studies telling us about their role in real life? , Cell, 1995, 83, 859–869.[Medline]
Kastner P, Mark M, Ghyselinck N, Krezel W, Dupé V, Grondona JM & Chambon P. Genetic evidence that the retinoid signal is transduced by heterodimeric RXR/RAR functional unit during mouse development, Development (Camb), 1997, 124, 313–326.[Abstract]
Keaveney, M., and H.G. Stunnenberg. 1995. Retinoic acid receptors. In Inducible Gene Expression. vol. 2. P.A. Bauerle, editor. Birkhäeuser, Boston. 187–242.
Koshimizu U, Watanabe M & Nakatsuji N. Retinoic acid is potent growth activator of mouse primordial germ cells in vitro, Dev Biol, 1995, 168, 683–685.[Medline]
Lehmann JM, Jong L, Fanjul A, Cameron JF, Lu XP, Haefner P, Dawson MI & Pfahl M. Retinoids selective for retinoid X receptor response pathways, Science (Wash DC), 1992, 258, 1944–1946.
Leid M, Kastner P & Chambon P. Multiplicity generates diversity in the retinoic acid signaling pathways, Trends Biochem Sci, 1992a, 17, 427–433.[Medline]
Leid M, Kastner P, Lyons R, Nakshatri H, Saunders M, Zacharewski T, Chen J-Y, Staub A, Garnier J-M, Mader S et al.. Purification, cloning, and RXR identity of the HeLa cell factor with which RAR or TR heterodimerizes to bind target sequences efficiently, Cell, 1992b, 68, 377–395.[Medline]
Leroy P, Krust A, Zelent A, Mendelsohn C, Garnier J-M, Kastner P, Dierich A & Chambon P. Multiple isoforms of the mouse retinoic acid receptor are generated by alternative splicing and differential induction by retinoic acid, EMBO (Eur Mol Biol Organ) J, 1991, 10, 59–69.[Medline]
Lohnes D, Kastner P, Dierich A, Mark M, LeMeur M & Chambon P. Function of retinoic acid receptor in the mouse, Cell, 1993, 73, 643–658.[Medline]
Mangelsdorf DJ & Evans RM. The RXR heterodimers and orphan receptors, Cell, 1995, 83, 841–850.[Medline]
Mangelsdorf, D.J., K. Umesono, and R.M. Evans. 1994. The retinoid receptors. In The Retinoids: Biology, Chemistry and Medicine. M.B. Sporn, A.B. Roberts, and D.S. Goodman, editors. Raven Press, New York. 319–349.
Martin CA, Ziegler LM & Napoli JL. Retinoic acid, dibutyryl-cAMP, and differentiation affect the expression of retinoic acid receptors in F9 cells, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1990, 87, 4804–4808.
Metzger D, Clifford J, Chiba H & Chambon P. Conditional site-specific recombination in mammalian cells using a ligand-dependent chimeric Cre-recombinase, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1995, 92, 6991–6995.
Rochette-Egly C, Lutz Y, Saunders M, Scheuer I, Gaub M-P & Chambon P. Retinoic acid receptor : specific immunodetection and phosphorylation, J Cell Biol, 1991, 115, 535–545.
Roy B, Taneja R & Chambon P. Synergistic activation of expression of retinoic acid (RA)-responsive genes and induction of embryonal carcinoma cell differentiation by an RA receptor (RAR)-, RARβ-, or RAR-selective ligand in combination with a retinoid X receptor-specific ligand, Mol Cell Biol, 1995, 15, 6481–6487.[Abstract]
Sauer B & Henderson N. Targeted insertion of exogenous DNA into the eukaryotic genome by the Cre recombinase, New Biol, 1990, 2, 441–449.[Medline]
Sleigh MJ. Differentiation and proliferation in mouse embryonal carcinoma cells, Bioessays, 1992, 14, 769–775.[Medline]
Strickland S. Mouse teratocarcinoma cells: prospects for the study of embryogenesis and neoplasia, Cell, 1981, 24, 277–278.[Medline]
Taneja R, Bouillet P, Boylan JF, Gaub M-P, Roy B, Gudas LJ & Chambon P. Reexpression of retinoic acid receptor (RAR) or overexpression of RAR or RARβ in RAR-null F9 cells reveals a partial functional redundancy between the three RAR types, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1995, 92, 7854–7858.
Taneja R, Roy B, Plassat J-L, Zusi CF, Ostrowski J, Reczek PR & Chambon P. Cell-type and promoter-context dependent RAR redundancies for RARβ2 and Hoxa-1 activation in F9 and P19 cells can be artefactually generated by gene knockouts, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1996, 93, 6197–6202.
Wan Y-J, Wang L & Wu T-C. The expression of retinoid X receptor genes is regulated by all-trans and 9-cis-retinoic acid in F9 teratocarcinoma cells, Exp Cell Res, 1994, 210, 56–61.[Medline]
Zelent A, Krust A, Petkovich M, Kastner P & Chambon P. Cloning of murine and β retinoic acid receptors and a novel receptor predominantly expressed in skin, Nature (Lond), 1989, 339, 714–717.[Medline]
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Facebook 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
G1mRAR
