Full antagonism of the estrogen receptor without a prototypical ligand side chain

  • A Corrigendum to this article was published on 17 May 2017
  • An Erratum to this article was published on 17 May 2017

Abstract

Resistance to endocrine therapies remains a major clinical problem for the treatment of estrogen receptor-α (ERα)-positive breast cancer. On-target side effects limit therapeutic compliance and use for chemoprevention, highlighting an unmet need for new therapies. Here we present a full-antagonist ligand series lacking the prototypical ligand side chain that has been universally used to engender antagonism of ERα through poorly understood structural mechanisms. A series of crystal structures and phenotypic assays reveal a structure-based design strategy with separate design elements for antagonism and degradation of the receptor, and access to a structurally distinct space for further improvements in ligand design. Understanding structural rules that guide ligands to produce diverse ERα-mediated phenotypes has broad implications for the treatment of breast cancer and other estrogen-sensitive aspects of human health including bone homeostasis, energy metabolism, and autoimmunity.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Overview of the ligand-dependent modulation of ERα activity.
Figure 2: OBHS-N analogs exhibit growth-inhibitory and anti-inflammatory effects.
Figure 3: Modulation of ERα signaling by OBHS-N analogs in cells in vitro and in the mouse uterus in vivo. (a–e) Dotted lines represent values for 10 nM E2 (black), 1 μM 4-OHT (blue) and 1 μM fulvestrant (Fulv, red).
Figure 4: Ligand-dependent proteasomal degradation of ERα.
Figure 5: Structural basis for full antagonism of ERα by OBHS-N analogs.
Figure 6: Antagonism of ERα-Y537S.

Accession codes

Primary accessions

Protein Data Bank

Referenced accessions

Protein Data Bank

Change history

  • 17 March 2017

    In the version of this article initially published, Figure 1 was missing the ring designation letters, the substituent designation (R1/R2) and the ring locant numbers for the compounds in panel a. The error has been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.

  • 17 March 2017

    In the version of this article initially published, some of the chemical compounds were incorrectly numbered as stereoisomers instead of racemates and some of the stereoisomers were marked with incorrect stereocenter configurations. In numerous instances throughout the main text and Online Methods, compounds 1–13 were incorrectly called 1R–13R (6 instances of 13R are correct and were left unchanged). In the legend for Figure 5: 1S, 4S, 11S, 12S, 13S were incorrectly called 1R, 4R, 11R, 12R, 13R, respectively; in the left column of p.115: 1S, 4S, 11S were incorrectly called 1R, 4R, 11R, respectively; and in the left column of p.116: 13S was incorrectly called 13R. The errors have been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.

References

  1. 1

    Yu, K.D., Wu, J., Shen, Z.Z. & Shao, Z.M. Hazard of breast cancer-specific mortality among women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer after five years from diagnosis: implication for extended endocrine therapy. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 97, E2201–E2209 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Dunnwald, L.K., Rossing, M.A. & Li, C.I. Hormone receptor status, tumor characteristics, and prognosis: a prospective cohort of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res. 9, R6 (2007).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Kennecke, H. et al. Metastatic behavior of breast cancer subtypes. J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 3271–3277 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Lai, A. et al. Identification of GDC-0810 (ARN-810), an orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) that demonstrates robust activity in tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer xenografts. J. Med. Chem. 58, 4888–4904 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Wardell, S.E., Nelson, E.R., Chao, C.A., Alley, H.M. & McDonnell, D.P. Evaluation of the pharmacological activities of RAD1901, a selective estrogen receptor degrader. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 22, 713–724 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    McKenna, N.J., Lanz, R.B. & O'Malley, B.W. Nuclear receptor coregulators: cellular and molecular biology. Endocr. Rev. 20, 321–344 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Métivier, R. et al. Estrogen receptor-alpha directs ordered, cyclical, and combinatorial recruitment of cofactors on a natural target promoter. Cell 115, 751–763 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Cicatiello, L. et al. Estrogens and progesterone promote persistent CCND1 gene activation during G1 by inducing transcriptional derepression via c-Jun/c-Fos/estrogen receptor (progesterone receptor) complex assembly to a distal regulatory element and recruitment of cyclin D1 to its own gene promoter. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24, 7260–7274 (2004).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Brzozowski, A.M. et al. Molecular basis of agonism and antagonism in the oestrogen receptor. Nature 389, 753–758 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Shiau, A.K. et al. The structural basis of estrogen receptor/coactivator recognition and the antagonism of this interaction by tamoxifen. Cell 95, 927–937 (1998).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Pike, A.C. et al. Structural insights into the mode of action of a pure antiestrogen. Structure 9, 145–153 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Wu, Y.L. et al. Structural basis for an unexpected mode of SERM-mediated ER antagonism. Mol. Cell 18, 413–424 (2005).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Willson, T.M. et al. Dissection of the molecular mechanism of action of GW5638, a novel estrogen receptor ligand, provides insights into the role of estrogen receptor in bone. Endocrinology 138, 3901–3911 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Laxmi, Y.R. et al. Anti-breast cancer potential of SS1020, a novel antiestrogen lacking estrogenic and genotoxic actions. Int. J. Cancer 127, 1718–1726 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Shiau, A.K. et al. Structural characterization of a subtype-selective ligand reveals a novel mode of estrogen receptor antagonism. Nat. Struct. Biol. 9, 359–364 (2002).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Nettles, K.W. et al. NF kappa B selectivity of estrogen receptor ligands revealed by comparative crystallographic analyses. Nat. Chem. Biol. 4, 241–247 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Zheng, Y. et al. Development of selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM)-like activity through an indirect mechanism of estrogen receptor antagonism: defining the binding mode of 7-oxabicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene scaffold core ligands. ChemMedChem 7, 1094–1100 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Zhu, M. et al. Bicyclic core estrogens as full antagonists: synthesis, biological evaluation and structure-activity relationships of estrogen receptor ligands based on bridged oxabicyclic core arylsulfonamides. Org. Biomol. Chem. 10, 8692–8700 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Kastrati, I., Canestrari, E. & Frasor, J. PHLDA1 expression is controlled by an estrogen receptor-NFκB-miR-181 regulatory loop and is essential for formation of ER+ mammospheres. Oncogene 34, 2309–2316 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Cvoro, A. et al. Distinct roles of unliganded and liganded estrogen receptors in transcriptional repression. Mol. Cell 21, 555–564 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Nettles, K.W. et al. CBP Is a dosage-dependent regulator of nuclear factor-kappaB suppression by the estrogen receptor. Mol. Endocrinol. 22, 263–272 (2008).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Chinenov, Y., Gupte, R. & Rogatsky, I. Nuclear receptors in inflammation control: repression by GR and beyond. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 380, 55–64 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Nwachukwu, J.C. et al. Resveratrol modulates the inflammatory response via an estrogen receptor-signal integration network. eLife 3, e02057 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Srinivasan, S. et al. Ligand-binding dynamics rewire cellular signaling via estrogen receptor-α. Nat. Chem. Biol. 9, 326–332 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Nwachukwu, J.C. et al. Predictive features of ligand-specific signaling through the estrogen receptor. Mol. Syst. Biol. 12, 864 (2016).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Carlson, K.E., Choi, I., Gee, A., Katzenellenbogen, B.S. & Katzenellenbogen, J.A. Altered ligand binding properties and enhanced stability of a constitutively active estrogen receptor: evidence that an open pocket conformation is required for ligand interaction. Biochemistry 36, 14897–14905 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Nettles, K.W. et al. Structural plasticity in the oestrogen receptor ligand-binding domain. EMBO Rep. 8, 563–568 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Delfosse, V. et al. Structural and mechanistic insights into bisphenols action provide guidelines for risk assessment and discovery of bisphenol A substitutes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 14930–14935 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Bruning, J.B. et al. Coupling of receptor conformation and ligand orientation determine graded activity. Nat. Chem. Biol. 6, 837–843 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Jeselsohn, R. et al. Emergence of constitutively active estrogen receptor-α mutations in pretreated advanced estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 20, 1757–1767 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Li, S. et al. Endocrine-therapy-resistant ESR1 variants revealed by genomic characterization of breast-cancer-derived xenografts. Cell Rep. 4, 1116–1130 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Robinson, D.R. et al. Activating ESR1 mutations in hormone-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Nat. Genet. 45, 1446–1451 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Toy, W. et al. ESR1 ligand-binding domain mutations in hormone-resistant breast cancer. Nat. Genet. 45, 1439–1445 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Patani, N. & Martin, L.A. Understanding response and resistance to oestrogen deprivation in ER-positive breast cancer. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 382, 683–694 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Kuske, B. et al. Endocrine therapy resistance can be associated with high estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha) expression and reduced ERalpha phosphorylation in breast cancer models. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 13, 1121–1133 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Billon-Galés, A. et al. The transactivating function 1 of estrogen receptor alpha is dispensable for the vasculoprotective actions of 17beta-estradiol. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 2053–2058 (2009).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Abot, A. et al. The AF-1 activation function of estrogen receptor α is necessary and sufficient for uterine epithelial cell proliferation in vivo. Endocrinology 154, 2222–2233 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Bhatt, S., Xiao, Z., Meng, Z. & Katzenellenbogen, B.S. Phosphorylation by p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase promotes estrogen receptor α turnover and functional activity via the SCF(Skp2) proteasomal complex. Mol. Cell. Biol. 32, 1928–1943 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Fan, M., Bigsby, R.M. & Nephew, K.P. The NEDD8 pathway is required for proteasome-mediated degradation of human estrogen receptor (ER)-alpha and essential for the antiproliferative activity of ICI 182,780 in ERalpha-positive breast cancer cells. Mol. Endocrinol. 17, 356–365 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Lupien, M. et al. Raloxifene and ICI182,780 increase estrogen receptor-alpha association with a nuclear compartment via overlapping sets of hydrophobic amino acids in activation function 2 helix 12. Mol. Endocrinol. 21, 797–816 (2007).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Andruska, N.D. et al. Estrogen receptor α inhibitor activates the unfolded protein response, blocks protein synthesis, and induces tumor regression. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 4737–4742 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Connor, C.E. et al. Circumventing tamoxifen resistance in breast cancers using antiestrogens that induce unique conformational changes in the estrogen receptor. Cancer Res. 61, 2917–2922 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Wardell, S.E., Marks, J.R. & McDonnell, D.P. The turnover of estrogen receptor α by the selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) fulvestrant is a saturable process that is not required for antagonist efficacy. Biochem. Pharmacol. 82, 122–130 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. 44

    Wardell, S.E., Nelson, E.R., Chao, C.A. & McDonnell, D.P. Bazedoxifene exhibits antiestrogenic activity in animal models of tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer: implications for treatment of advanced disease. Clin. Cancer Res. 19, 2420–2431 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Wittmann, B.M., Sherk, A. & McDonnell, D.P. Definition of functionally important mechanistic differences among selective estrogen receptor down-regulators. Cancer Res. 67, 9549–9560 (2007).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Dontu, G. et al. In vitro propagation and transcriptional profiling of human mammary stem/progenitor cells. Genes Dev. 17, 1253–1270 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. 47

    Gupta, P.B. et al. Identification of selective inhibitors of cancer stem cells by high-throughput screening. Cell 138, 645–659 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    Frasor, J. et al. Response-specific and ligand dose-dependent modulation of estrogen receptor (ER) alpha activity by ERbeta in the uterus. Endocrinology 144, 3159–3166 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. 49

    Minor, W., Cymborowski, M., Otwinowski, Z. & Chruszcz, M. HKL-3000: the integration of data reduction and structure solution--from diffraction images to an initial model in minutes. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 62, 859–866 (2006).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    Adams, P.D. et al. The Phenix software for automated determination of macromolecular structures. Methods 55, 94–106 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. 51

    Nwachukwu, J.C. et al. Improved crystallographic structures using extensive combinatorial refinement. Structure 21, 1923–1930 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. 52

    Debreczeni, J.E. & Emsley, P. Handling ligands with Coot. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 68, 425–430 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. 53

    McNicholas, S., Potterton, E., Wilson, K.S. & Noble, M.E. Presenting your structures: the CCP4mg molecular-graphics software. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 67, 386–394 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. 54

    Davis, I.W. et al. MolProbity: all-atom contacts and structure validation for proteins and nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, W375–W383 (2007).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. 55

    Chen, V.B. et al. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr. 66, 12–21 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. 56

    Chalmers, M.J. et al. Probing protein ligand interactions by automated hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry. Anal. Chem. 78, 1005–1014 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. 57

    Busby, S.A., Chalmers, M.J. & Griffin, P.R. Improving digestion efficiency under H/D exchange conditions with activated pepsinogen coupled columns. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 259, 130–139 (2007).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. 58

    Pascal, B.D. et al. HDX workbench: software for the analysis of H/D exchange MS data. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 23, 1512–1521 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research support from the National Institutes of Health (PHS 5R37DK015556 to J.A.K.; 5R33CA132022, 5R01DK077085 to K.W.N.; 1U01GM102148 to K.W.N and P.R.G., and 5R01CA130932 to J.F.), The Breast Cancer Research Foundation (to B.S.K.), BallenIsles Men's Golf Association (to J.C.N.), Frenchman's Creek Women for Cancer Research (to S.S.), Susan G. Komen for the Cure (PDF12229484 to IK), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81172935, 81373255, 81573279), Hubei Province's Outstanding Medical Academic Leader Program (to H.-B.Z.). Use of the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL), SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, is supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515. The SSRL Structural Molecular Biology Program is supported by the DOE Office of Biological and Environmental Research, and by the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) (including P41GM103393). The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS or the NIH.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

S.S. and J.C.N. contributed equally to this work. S.S. and J.C.N. designed and performed experiments, and wrote the manuscript; N.E.B., V.C., and J.N. performed in vitro experiments; P.R.G., S.N., V.D. and D.G. designed, performed and interpreted HDX based experiments; J.F. and I.K. contributed mammosphere assays; B.S.K., N.B. and Y.Z. designed and contributed experiments including in vivo experiments in mice; H-.B.Z., J.A.K., and J.M. designed, synthesized and performed chemical analysis of compounds; B.S.K. and J.A.K. contributed in writing and revising of the manuscript; K.W.N. designed experiments and wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kendall W Nettles.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Results, Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary Figures 1–16. (PDF 4539 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Srinivasan, S., Nwachukwu, J., Bruno, N. et al. Full antagonism of the estrogen receptor without a prototypical ligand side chain. Nat Chem Biol 13, 111–118 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.2236

Download citation

Further reading