About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
PPAR Research
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 483656, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/483656
Review Article

Effects of PPARγ Ligands on Leukemia

1Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Hongo 2-1-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8421, Japan
2Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX 77030, USA
3Department of Transfusion Medicine and Stem Cell Regulation, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Hongo 2-1-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8421, Japan

Received 1 January 2012; Accepted 21 March 2012

Academic Editor: Stefan Alexson

Copyright © 2012 Yoko Tabe et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) and retinoic acid receptors (RARs), members of the nuclear receptor superfamily, are transcription factors that regulate a variety of important cellular functions. PPARs form heterodimers retinoid X receptor (RXR), an obligate heterodimeric partner for other nuclear receptors. Several novel links between retinoid metabolism and PPAR responses have been identified, and activation of PPAR/RXR expression has been shown to increase response to retinoids. PPARγ has emerged as a key regulator of cell growth and survival, whose activity is modulated by a number of synthetic and natural ligands. While clinical trials in cancer patients with thiazolidinediones (TZD) have been disappointing, novel structurally different PPARγ ligands, including triterpenoids, have entered clinical arena as therapeutic agents for epithelial and hematopoietic malignancies. Here we shall review the antitumor advances of PPARγ, alone and in combination with RARα ligands in control of cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis and their potential therapeutic applications in hematological malignancies.

1. Introduction

Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) remains incurable in most patients because of the likelihood of relapse and the development of resistant disease [1]. Many novel agents do not improve survival of patients once relapse occurs, which enforces the need for more effective treatment strategies for AML exploiting apoptosis and/or differentiation induction.

Ligands of nuclear hormone receptors (NHRs) have been shown to induce apoptosis and/or inhibiting proliferation in a variety of preclinical models. The most striking improvement in AML therapy was achieved by the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) using the retinoic acid (RA) receptor- (RAR-) specific ligand, all-trans RA (ATRA) [2, 3]. ATRA, combined with chemotherapy, results in complete remission (CR) rates ranging from 72% to 90% in APL patients with the oncogenic transcriptional repressor PML-RARα [48]. However, approximately 10% to 30% of patients relapse [8] and frequently develop resistance to ATRA [9, 10]. Acquisition of specific mutations in the ligand binding site, which leads to altered interactions with transcriptional coregulators, is a well-documented mechanism of acquired ATRA resistance [11, 12]. In addition, several alternative mechanisms such as DNA methylation [13] or impaired telomerase regulation [14] have been proposed to cause ATRA-resistant disease.

Considering the potential of using PPARγ ligands in APL “transcriptional” therapy, this paper summarizes the effects of endogenous and synthetic PPARγ ligands in AML and focuses on elucidating the mechanisms underlying the anti-tumor effects of novel synthetic PPARγ ligand 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO) in APL.

2. PPARγ and PPARγ Ligands

PPARs belong to the NHR superfamily of ligand-dependent transcription factors, which includes RAR and RXR among others. Three PPAR isotypes have been identified: PPARγ, PPARα, and PPARβ/δ. PPARγ exists as a heterodimer with RXR, and upon activation by endogenous or synthetic ligands, PPARγ/RXR binds to the specific response elements PPRE in the promoter regions of target genes, respectively, which in turn functions as a transcription factor [1517].

PPARγ modulates gene networks involved in controlling growth, cellular differentiation, and apoptosis [18]. PPARγ receptor can be activated by endogenous ligands (e.g., prostaglandin D2 (PGD2), 15-deoxy prostaglandin J2 (15dPGJ2), or 15-hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid (15-HETE)) [19, 20], and synthetic ligands that include insulin sensitizing antidiabetic thiazolidinediones (TZD); troglitazone (TGZ), rosiglitazone (RGZ), ciglitazone (CGZ), or pioglitazone (PGZ) [2123]; nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory compounds indomethacin, ibuprofen, flufenamic acid, or fenoprofen [24]; triterpenoids 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO) [25] are a semisynthetic triterpenoid derived from oleanolic acid, whose structure contains two α, β-unsaturated carbonyl moieties. CDDO was shown to release nuclear receptor corepressor (NCoR) and recruit CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein (CBP/p300) to PPARγ [25] (Figure 1).

483656.fig.001
Figure 1: Molecular structure of CDDO 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO).

PPARγ ligands induce differentiation and inhibit proliferation in several tumor models [2634]. The regulation of gene transcription by ligand-bound PPARγ involves cofactor proteins, which bridge transcription factors to the basal transcriptional machinery or modify chromatin structure. These include release of small accessory molecules known as corepressors (e.g., NCoR or silencing mediator for retinoid receptor and thyroid hormone receptors (SMRT)) and recruitment of coactivators (e.g., CBP/p300, cyclic adenosine monophosphate response-element binding protein (CREB), steroid receptor coactivator-1 (SRC-1), receptor interacting protein 140(RIP140), or PPARγ interacting protein (PRIP/RAP250) [3540]. The multiprotein complex induces transcription by chromatin remodeling and interaction with the basal transcriptional machinery [41, 42], and the relative levels of cofactor expression (e.g., availability of cofactors CBP/p300 versus SRC-1) also control the specificity of the physiological response to target gene transcription [43].

3. Antitumor Effects of PPARγ in AML

High PPARγ expression was observed in normal bone marrow and peripheral blood CD34+ progenitor cells [44]. Furthermore, significantly higher PPARγ mRNA expression was observed in primary AML cases compared to normal peripheral blood or bone marrow mononuclear cells [45, 46].

The mechanisms of cell differentiation and cell cycle arrest by activated PPARγ depend heavily on the specificity of PPARγ ligands. The induction of differentiation by activation of PPARγ may represent a promising novel therapeutic approach for cancer as already demonstrated for liposarcoma [27] and in xenograft models of prostate [47] and colon cancer [30]. Differentiation therapy may well play a role in acute myeloid leukemias, analogous to ATRA-induced differentiation in APL. PPARγ is known to be induced and/or expressed in cells of the myeloid/monocytic lineage [48, 49].

In PPARγ expressing AML cell lines, PPARγ ligand TGZ suppressed their clonal growth with G1 cell cycle phase arrest, induced differentiation into monocytes, and increased apoptosis at higher concentrations [50, 51]. Troglitazone-induced G0/G1 cell cycle arrest with upregulation of p21 mRNA in myeloid leukemia cell lines [52]. In concert with these findings, PPARγ ligand PGZ and 15dPGJ2 suppressed proliferation, and the combined treatment with ATRA synergistically induced myeloid differentiation in promyelocytic leukemia NB4 cells [53]. Furthermore, simultaneous treatment with TGZ and RXR or RAR ligands resulted in additive suppression of growth indicating that PPARγ ligand combined with a retinoid is a potent inhibitor of clonogenic growth of AML [50]. CDDO has been reported to induce monocytic differentiation of human myeloid leukemia cells and adipogenic differentiation of mouse fibroblasts [54].

CDDO-Me also induced granulo-monocytic differentiation in primary AML cells and cell lines. Combinations with ATRA or the RXR-specific ligand LG100268 enhanced the effects of CDDO-Me on cell viability and/or terminal differentiation of myeloid leukemic cell lines [54]. CDDO-Me-induced enhanced apoptosis when combined with ara-C and retinoids indicating potential activity in the future therapy for AML [55].

With respect to the mechanisms of PPARγ-ligand-induced differentiation, CCAAT enhancer-binding protein alpha (CEBPA) translational upregulation has been reported to be required for CDDO-induced granulocytic differentiation of AML patients samples and cell lines [56]. CDDO increases the ratio of transcriptionally active p42 and the inactive p30 CEBPA isoform, which in turn leads to transcriptional activation of CEBPA-regulated genes and associates with dephosphorylation of eIF2alpha and phosphorylation of eIF4E [56].

PPARγ ligands are additionally known to induce apoptosis. The mechanisms of apoptosis induction by activated PPARγ depend heavily on the specificity of PPARγ ligands. PPARγ activation by natural ligand 15dPGJ2 and synthetic ligand TGZ induce apoptosis accompanied by caspase-3 activation and downregulated c-myc gene expression in myeloid leukemic cells [57]. 15dPGJ2 and TGZ have been also reported to induce upregulation of bax and downregulation of antiapoptotic proteins survivin and bcl-2 in AML and CML [58]. Furthermore, downregulation of cyclooxygenase-2 expression, disruption of mitochondrial membrane potential, activation of caspase-3, downregulation of Bcl-2, Bcl-Xl, and Mcl-1, and upregulation of Bax by these PPARγ agonists 15dPGJ2 and TGZ has been reported in human monocytic leukemia cells [59]. Semisynthetic oleanane triterpenoid CDDO has potent differentiating, antiproliferative, anti-inflammatory, and apoptosis-inducing properties [54]. CDDO has been reported to activate caspase-8 and -3 and to induce mitochondrial cytochrome c release in leukemic cells and in osteosarcoma cells [6062]. CDDO has been further shown to activate the intrinsic pathway of apoptosis that involves the release of cytochrome c and AIF and initiates caspase-dependent and independent cell death in AML [63]. The C-28 methyl ester of CDDO, CDDO-Me [55], and C-28 imidazolide imide of CDDO (CDDO-Im) [64] has been shown to be more potent than CDDO in inducing apoptosis and differentiation of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells. CDDO-Me is 3- to 5-fold more active than CDDO in inhibiting the viability of AML cells in an MDR-1- and p53-independent manner, inducing apoptosis through a loss of mitochondrial membrane potential, and increasing caspase-3 cleavage and proapoptotic Bax protein. It has significantly less cytotoxicity against normal CD34+ progenitor cells, assuring therapeutic window [55].

In addition, CDDO was shown to inhibit NF-κB-mediated gene expression in leukemic cells [62]. CDDO/tumor-necrosis-factor- (TNF-) induced apoptosis occurs through selective inhibition of NF-κB-dependent antiapoptotic proteins, bypassing potential mitochondrial resistance mechanisms [62]. CDDO-Me also inhibits both constitutive and inducible NF-κB through inhibition of IκB α kinase, leading to the suppression of expression of NF-κB-regulated gene products and enhancement of apoptosis induced by TNFα [65].

Notably, certain PPARγ ligands execute anti-tumor activities without requiring interaction with the PPAR ligand binding domain [66]. For example, CDDO, CDDO-Me, and CDDO-Im activate PPARγ-dependent and -independent pathways that inhibit cancer-cell growth [67]. They activate PPARγ in transactivation assays, and CDDO-induced apoptosis was diminished by dominant-negative PPARγ in myeloid HL-60 cells and by T007 in myeloid U937 cells [68], but CDDO-Im-induced differentiation in leukemia cells was not inhibited by the PPARγ antagonist GW9662 [61], and T007 did not affect inhibition of SKOV3 ovarian cancer cell growth by CDDO [69]. In these scenarios, interaction with the PPARγ receptor is irrelevant to the anti-cancer effects, which may depend on cell type, presence/activity of the receptor(s), and cellular abundance of coactivators/corepressors. PPAR-independent effects of PPARγ ligands are due in part to their electrophilic nature, proteasomal degradation of cell cycle-, and apoptosis-regulatory proteins, transcriptional repression, and other mechanisms [7072]. Both, PPARγ-dependent and -independent pathways that contribute to inhibition of cancer cell growth may be beneficial for cancer chemotherapy [67].

4. Antitumor Effects of PPARγ-Active Triterpenoid CDDO on APL

RARs bind with high affinity to the RA-responsive element (RARE) as a heterodimer with RXR, which also heterodimerizes with other nuclear receptors, such as PPARγ.

In APL cells, the oncogenic transcription factor PML-RARα, a dominant negative transcriptional repressor, targets consist of two copies of an AGGTCA, a highly conserved consensus for RARα. PML-induced dimerization allows the two RARα moieties of PML-RARα to bind very distant monomeric DNA sites. The spectrum of response elements for PML-RARα and PML-RARα-RXR (DR1-DR16 response elements) is much broader than one for the wild-type RAR-RXR (DR1, DR2, and DR5), and PML-RARα-RXR oligomers silence a wide range of nuclear receptor target genes [73].

X-RARα fusion proteins in APL have been demonstrated to negatively affect transactivation of PPARγ [74], indicating that inhibition of PPARγ activity may contribute to the pathophysiology of the differentiation block in APL, and that PPARγ ligands could sensitize APL cells to the differentiating effects of ATRA including ATRA-resistant cells [45].

PML-RARα recruits the nuclear corepressors and histone deacetylase (HDAC), which leads to histone condensation and transcriptional repression [7577]. ATRA acts by causing the PML-RARα/HDAC complex to dissociate, thereby converting PML-RARα into a transcriptional activator [76]. Reactivation of ATRA target genes by inducing an appropriate level of histone acetylation in their promoters is a potential strategy for restoring anticancer effects of ATRA in refractory APL [77]. Differentiating agents including ATRA, arsenic, cAMP, HDAC inhibitors, and rexinoids relieve this repression through various molecular mechanisms, allowing spontaneous differentiation of leukemic blasts [73].

In fact, it has been demonstrated that HDAC inhibitors (HDACI) such as trichostatin A (TSA), sodium phenylbutyrate (PB), and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) can augment the cell growth inhibition induced by ATRA, and that ATRA combined with SAHA increased survival and induced remissions in APL transgenic mice harboring the PLZF-RARα translocation [78]. In addition, the PML-RARα fusion protein was observed to induce hypermethylation on RAR promoter, and the DNA methyltransferase inhibitor 5-asa-2′-deoxycytidine (5-Aza-dC) enhanced ATRA-induced RAR promoter transactivation in APL cells [13].

Induction of APL cell differentiation by ATRA is associated with modulation of several critical genes, including RARβ2 [78], C/EBPβ [79], p21 [80], PU.1 [81], or a dominant repressor of RAR signaling PRAME [82]. Notably, PML-RARα has a significant affinity for DR1 [83], a binding site for RXR/PPARγ heterodimers, and negatively contributes to transactivation by ligand-activated PPRE.

The RA-target gene RARβ plays a crucial role in mediating the growth-inhibitory and tumor suppressive effects of retinoids in various cancer cells [8487], and RARβ is silenced in many tumors [84, 87, 88] and myeloid leukemias [89, 90] including APL [13]. Its upregulation has been proposed as a general mechanism of retinoid-induced growth inhibition and differentiation induction [72]. RARβ2 induction has been implicated in several tumor cell models in which retinoids inhibit growth and induce differentiation [91]. In HeLa cells, the transfected RARβ2 transgene inhibits proliferation, while exogenous RA further increases the ability of the transgene to inhibit proliferation [92]. Disruption of RARβ2 expression in RARβ2 positive cancer cells abolishes RA effects of growth arrest [72], and the presence of RARβ2 antisense predisposed the murine lung tissue to tumor formation [91].

Semisynthetic PPARγ ligand triterpenoid CDDO augmented the ATRA-induced reactivation of RARβ2 in APL via histone acetylation [93]. In combination with ATRA, CDDO may activate the transcription of PPARγ target genes, which in turn increase the affinity of RARβ for βRARE. CDDO caused a prominent increase in RARβ2 binding to the response element in the gel shift assay, and ATRA/CDDO combination increased H3-Lys9 acetylation in RARβP2 and RARβ2 transcription [93]. These findings support the concept that ligation of the PPARγ and RAR nuclear receptors is capable of inducing cell maturation and enhances proapoptotic effects of ATRA in APL cells. PPARγ and RXR form a complex with βRARE in the RARβ promoter, and the combination of ligands of PPARγ and RXR was reported to induce RARβ in ATRA-resistant breast cancer cells in the presence of histone deacetylase inhibitor [94]. Based on these findings, CDDO may induce recruitment of PPARγ/RXR to the RARE, which promotes affinity of RARβ for βRARE.

Ligand-bound RAR/RXR heterodimer has been shown to recruit the histone acetylase PCAF and the coactivator CBP/p300, which accumulates the HAT activity on the heterodimer/DNA complex and finally leads to enhanced retinoid-responsive transcription [95]. Likewise, the regulation of gene transcription by ligand-bound PPARγ involves the recruitment of coactivator proteins, including CBP/p300 and SRC-1 [17, 25, 39, 40]. CDDO has been shown to induce transactivation and PPARγ interaction with multiple coactivators including SRC-1, SRC-2, SRC-3, TRAP 220, CARM-1, and PGC-1 in colon cancer cells [67]. While CDDO alone did not recruit CBP to the RARβ2 promoter, the CDDO/ATRA combination increased ATRA-induced CBP recruitment. Altogether, the ability of ATRA/CDDO to restore RAR signaling and to cause cell maturation might be in part dependent on the PPARγ-mediated induction of histone acetylation and reactivation of ATRA target genes (Figure 2).

483656.fig.002
Figure 2: CDDO augments ATRA-induced reactivation of RARβ2 in APL via histone acetylation. Combination of all-trans RA (ATRA) and 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO) increases H3-Lys9 acetylation in RARβP2 and RARβ2 transcription. CDDO-bound PPARγ may recruit coactivator proteins, including CBP-p300 and SRC-1 to PPARγ/RXR, which in turn induce histone acetylation and reactivation of ATRA target genes. Ac: acetylated histone H3-Lys9, HDAC: histone deacetylase, mSin3: mammalian homolog of the S. cerevisiae corepressor, Sin 3, NCoR: nuclear receptor corepressor, SRC-1: steroid receptor coactivator-1, CBP/p300: CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein, PCAF: P300/CBP-associated factor.

ATRA is a nonselective retinoid capable of transactivating both, RARα and RXR receptors [96, 97]. Although PPARγ/RXR heterodimers promote transcriptional activity of PPARγ [16], RXR-selective ligand LG100268 and CDDO combination was not sufficient for RARβ2 induction, suggesting that RARβ2 gene induction is not due to ligand-induced RXR activation in APL cells [93].

Whereas CDDO alone failed to induce maturation of APL cells, the combination of CDDO with ATRA induced ATRA sensitive- and resistant-APL cells to differentiate into mature granulocytes with striking increase in Nitro Blue Tetrazolium (NBT) reduction positive and CD11b-positive cells above effects elicited by single agent ATRA [93]. Furthermore, the combined use of CDDO derivative CDDO-Me and ATRA in the murine model of APL resulted in the significant increase of mature granulocytic cells in peripheral blood and prolongation of survival compared to the single compound treatment of ATRA or CDDO. Ikeda et al. [64] also demonstrated that CDDO-Im selectively downregulated expression of PML-RARα fusion protein with an activation of caspase 8, which might contribute to enhanced ATRA-induced differentiation in APL cells, and arsenic-trioxide- (ATO-) induced apoptosis in both ATRA-sensitive NB4 and resistant R2 cell lines and primary APL cells.

RA signaling is a common mechanism in AML other than APL, and HDAC inhibitors have been shown to restore RA-dependent transcriptional activation and trigger terminal differentiation of primary blasts from AML patients [89]. Recent reports of in vivo differentiation of the leukemic clone following HDAC inhibitor valproic acid/ATRA treatment in AML patients [98] further suggest the possibility that the ATRA/CDDO or its more potent derivatives combination may be useful transcriptional/differentiation therapy in non-APL AML. Randomized trial AML HD98B showed that administration of ATRA in addition to intensive chemotherapy improved the outcomes of the patients with genotype of “mutant (mt-) NPM1 without FLT3-ITD” [99]. NPM1 has been reported to be a possible transcriptional corepressor [100]. Inhibition of NPM1 oligomerization or knockdown of NPM1-induced apoptosis and sensitized to ATRA in mt-NPM1-bearing AML cells [101]. These findings suggest new avenues of exploration for ATRA and CDDO derivatives combination therapy targeting “mt-NPM1 wt-FLT3” genotype AML.

Acknowledgment

The authors thank an anonymous for the paper review. There is no conflict of interests between the paper's authors and the companies involved in the paper.

References

  1. E. H. Estey, “Treatment of relapsed and refractory acute myelogenous leukemia,” Leukemia, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 476–479, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. L. Degos, C. Chomienne, M. T. Daniel et al., “Treatment of first relapse in acute promyelocytic leukaemia with all-trans retinoic acid,” The Lancet, vol. 336, no. 8728, pp. 1440–1441, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. Z. X. Chen, Y. Q. Xue, R. Zhang et al., “A clinical and experimental study on all-trans retinoic acid-treated acute promyelocytic leukemia patients,” Blood, vol. 78, no. 6, pp. 1413–1419, 1991. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. H. Meng-er, Y. Yu-chen, C. Shu-rong et al., “Use of all-trans retinoic acid in the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia,” Blood, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 567–572, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. R. P. Warrell, S. R. Frankel, W. H. Miller et al., “Differentiation therapy of acute promyelocytic leukemia with tretinoin (all-trans-retinoic acid),” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 324, no. 20, pp. 1385–1393, 1991. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. F. Mandelli, D. Diverio, G. Avvisati et al., “Molecular remission in PML/RARα-positive acute promyelocytic leukemia by combined all-trans retinoic acid and Idarubicin (AIDA) therapy,” Blood, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 1014–1021, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S. Castaigne, C. Chomienne, M. T. Daniel et al., “All-trans retinoic acid as a differentiation therapy for acute promyelocytic leukemia. I. Clinical results,” Blood, vol. 76, no. 9, pp. 1704–1709, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. M. S. Tallman, “Therapy of acute promyelocytic leukemia: all-trans retinoic acid and beyond,” Leukemia, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. S37–S40, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. R. P. Warrell, “Retinoid resistance in acute promyelocytic leukemia: new mechanisms, strategies, and implications,” Blood, vol. 82, no. 7, pp. 1949–1953, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. M. Cornic and C. Chomienne, “Induction of retinoid resistance by all-trans retinoic acid in acute promyelocytic leukemia after remission,” Leukemia and Lymphoma, vol. 18, no. 3-4, pp. 249–257, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. W. Shao, L. Benedetti, W. W. Lamph, C. Nervi, and W. H. Miller, “A retinoid-resistant acute promyelocytic leukemia subclone expresses a dominant negative PML-RARα mutation,” Blood, vol. 89, no. 12, pp. 4282–4289, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. S. Cote, D. Zhou, A. Bianchini, C. Nervi, R. E. Gallagher, and W. H. Miller, “Altered ligand binding and transcriptional regulation by mutations in the PML/RARα ligand-binding domain arising in retinoic acid-resistant patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia,” Blood, vol. 96, no. 9, pp. 3200–3208, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. L. Di Croce, V. A. Raker, M. Corsaro et al., “Methyltransferase recruitment and DNA hypermethylation of target promoters by an oncogenic transcription factor,” Science, vol. 295, no. 5557, pp. 1079–1082, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. F. Pendino, T. Sahraoui, M. Lanotte, and E. Ségal-Bendirdijian, “A novel mechanism of retinoic acid resistance in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells through a defective pathway in telomerase regulation,” Leukemia, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 826–832, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. D. J. Mangelsdorf, C. Thummel, M. Beato et al., “The nuclear receptor super-family: the second decade,” Cell, vol. 83, no. 6, pp. 835–839, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. I. G. Schulman, G. Shao, and R. A. Heyman, “Transactivation by retinoid X receptor-peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) heterodimers: intermolecular synergy requires only the PPRAγ hormone-dependent activation function,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 3483–3494, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. E. D. Rosen and B. M. Spiegelman, “PPARγ: a nuclear regulator of metabolism, differentiation, and cell growth,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 276, no. 41, pp. 37731–37734, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. M. Pfahl, R. Apfel, I. Bendik et al., “Nuclear retinoid receptors and their mechanism of action,” Vitamins and Hormones, vol. 49, no. C, pp. 327–382, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. J. T. Huang, J. S. Welch, M. Ricote et al., “Interleukin-4-dependent production of PPAR-γ ligands in macrophages by 12/15-lipoxygenase,” Nature, vol. 400, no. 6742, pp. 378–382, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. L. Nagy, P. Tontonoz, J. G. A. Alvarez, H. Chen, and R. M. Evans, “Oxidized LDL regulates macrophage gene expression through ligand activation of PPARγ,” Cell, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 229–240, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J. Berger, P. Bailey, C. Biswas et al., “Thiazolidinediones produce a conformational change in peroxisomal proliferator-activated receptor-γ: binding and activation correlate with antidiabetic actions in db/db mice,” Endocrinology, vol. 137, no. 10, pp. 4189–4195, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. J. M. Lehmann, L. B. Moore, T. A. Smith-Oliver, W. O. Wilkison, T. M. Willson, and S. A. Kliewer, “An antidiabetic thiazolidinedione is a high affinity ligand for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ),” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 270, no. 22, pp. 12953–12956, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. K. G. Lambe and J. D. Tugwood, “A human peroxisome-proliferator-activated receptor-γ is activated by inducers of adipogenesis, including thiazalidinedione drugs,” European Journal of Biochemistry, vol. 239, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. J. M. Lehmann, J. M. Lenhard, B. B. Oliver, G. M. Ringold, and S. A. Kliewer, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors α and γ are activated by indomethacin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 272, no. 6, pp. 3406–3410, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. Y. Wang, W. W. Porter, N. Suh et al., “A synthetic triterpenoid, 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO), is a ligand for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ,” Molecular Endocrinology, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1550–1556, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. P. Tontonoz, S. Singer, B. M. Forman et al., “Terminal differentiation of human liposarcoma cells induced by ligands for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ and the retinoid X receptor,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 237–241, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. G. D. Demetri, C. D. M. Fletcher, E. Mueller et al., “Induction of solid tumor differentiation by the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ ligand troglitazone in patients with liposarcoma,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 96, no. 7, pp. 3951–3956, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. E. Elstner, C. Müller, K. Koshizuka et al., “Ligands for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptory and retinoic acid receptor inhibit growth and induce apoptosis of human breast cancer cells in vitro and in BNX mice,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 95, no. 15, pp. 8806–8811, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. E. Mueller, P. Sarraf, P. Tontonoz et al., “Terminal differentiation of human breast cancer through PPARγ,” Molecular Cell, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 465–470, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. P. Sarraf, E. Mueller, D. Jones et al., “Differentiation and reversal of malignant changes in colon cancer through PPARγ,” Nature Medicine, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 1046–1052, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. P. Sarraf, E. Mueller, W. M. Smith et al., “Loss-of-function mutations in PPARγ associated with human colon cancer,” Molecular Cell, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 799–804, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. E. Mueller, M. Smith, P. Sarraf et al., “Effects of ligand activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ in human prostate cancer,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 97, no. 20, pp. 10990–10995, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. T. H. Chang and E. Szabo, “Induction of differentiation and apoptosis by ligands of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ in non-small cell lung cancer,” Cancer Research, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1129–1138, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. F. Marra, E. Efsen, R. G. Romanelli et al., “Ligands of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ modulate profibrogenic and proinflammatory actions in hepatic stellate cells,” Gastroenterology, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 466–478, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. S. Westin, R. Kurokawa, R. T. Nolte et al., “Interactions controlling the assembly of nuclear-receptor heterodimers and co-activators,” Nature, vol. 395, no. 6698, pp. 199–202, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. P. Puigserver, G. Adelmant, Z. Wu et al., “Activation of PPARγ coactivator-1 through transcription factor docking,” Science, vol. 286, no. 5443, pp. 1368–1371, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. P. Tontonoz, E. Hu, and B. M. Spiegelman, “Stimulation of adipogenesis in fibroblasts by PPARγ2, a lipid-activated transcription factor,” Cell, vol. 79, no. 7, pp. 1147–1156, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. R. T. Nolte, G. B. Wisely, S. Westin et al., “Ligand binding and co-activator assembly of the peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor-γ,” Nature, vol. 395, no. 6698, pp. 137–143, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. W. Yang, C. Rachez, and L. P. Freedman, “Discrete roles for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ and retinoid X receptor in recruiting nuclear receptor coactivators,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 20, no. 21, pp. 8008–8017, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. Y. Kodera, K. I. Takeyama, A. Murayama, M. Suzawa, Y. Masuhiro, and S. Kato, “Ligand type-specific interactions of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ with transcriptional coactivators,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 275, no. 43, pp. 33201–33204, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. J. Chen, H. K. Kinyamu, and T. K. Archer, “Changes in attitude, changes in latitude: nuclear receptors remodeling chromatin to regulate transcription,” Molecular Endocrinology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. M. G. Rosenfeld, V. V. Lunyak, and C. K. Glass, “Sensors and signals: a coactivator/corepressor/epigenetic code for integrating signal-dependent programs of transcriptional response,” Genes and Development, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1405–1428, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. J. N. Feige, L. Gelman, L. Michalik, B. Desvergne, and W. Wahli, “From molecular action to physiological outputs: peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors are nuclear receptors at the crossroads of key cellular functions,” Progress in Lipid Research, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 120–159, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. T. Ikezoe, C. W. Miller, S. Kawano et al., “Mutational analysis of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ in human malignancies,” Cancer Research, vol. 61, no. 13, pp. 5307–5310, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. M. Konopleva and M. Andreeff, “Role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ in hematologic malignancies,” Current Opinion in Hematology, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 294–302, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. T. Tsao, S. Kornblau, S. Safe et al., “Role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ and its coactivator DRIP205 in cellular responses to CDDO (RTA-401) in acute myelogenous leukemia,” Cancer Research, vol. 70, no. 12, pp. 4949–4960, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. T. Kubota, K. Koshizuka, E. A. Williamson et al., “Ligand for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (Troglitazone) has potent antitumor effect against human prostate cancer both in vitro and in vivo,” Cancer Research, vol. 58, no. 15, pp. 3344–3352, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. P. Tontonoz, L. Nagy, J. G. A. Alvarez, V. A. Thomazy, and R. M. Evans, “PPARγ promotes monocyte/macrophage differentiation and uptake of oxidized LDL,” Cell, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 241–252, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. K. J. Moore, E. D. Rosen, M. L. Fitzgerald et al., “The role of PPAR-γ in macrophage differentiation and cholesterol uptake,” Nature Medicine, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 41–47, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. H. Asou, W. Verbeek, E. Williamson et al., “Growth inhibition of myeloid leukemia cells by troglitazone, a ligand for peroxisome proliferator activated receptor gamma, and retinoids,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 1027–1031, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. S. Fujimura, J. Suzumiya, K. Nakamura, and J. Ono, “Effects of troglitazone on the growth and differentiation of hematopoietic cell lines,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1263–1267, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. A. Sugimura, Y. Kiriyama, H. Nochi et al., “Troglitazone suppresses cell growth of myeloid leukemia cell lines by induction of p21WAF1/CIP1 cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 261, no. 3, pp. 833–837, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. E. Yasugi, A. Horiuchi, I. Uemura et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ ligands stimulate myeloid differentiation and lipogenensis in human leukemia NB4 cells,” Development Growth and Differentiation, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 177–188, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. N. Suh, Y. Wang, T. Honda et al., “A novel synthetic oleanane triterpenoid, 2-cyano-3,12-dioxoolean-1,9- dien-28-oic acid, with potent differentiating, antiproliferative, and anti- inflammatory activity,” Cancer Research, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 336–341, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. M. Konopleva, T. Tsao, P. Ruvolo et al., “Novel triterpenoid CDDO-Me is a potent inducer of apoptosis and differentiation in acute myelogenous leukemia,” Blood, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 326–335, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. S. Koschmieder, F. D'Alò, H. Radomska et al., “CDDO induces granulocytic differentiation of myeloid leukemic blasts through translational up-regulation of p42 CCAAT enhancer-binding protein alpha,” Blood, vol. 110, no. 10, pp. 3695–3705, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. N. Yamakawa-Karakida, K. Sugita, T. Inukai et al., “Ligand activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ induces apoptosis of leukemia cells by down-regulating the c-myc gene expression via blockade of the Tcf-4 activity,” Cell Death and Differentiation, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 513–526, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. J. J. Liu, R. W. Huang, D. J. Lin et al., “Expression of survivin and bax/bcl-2 in peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-γ ligands induces apoptosis on human myeloid leukemia cells in vitro,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 455–459, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. J. J. Liu, P. Q. Liu, D. J. Lin et al., “Downregulation of cyclooxygenase-2 expression and activation of caspase-3 are involved in peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ agonists induced apoptosis in human monocyte leukemia cells in vitro,” Annals of Hematology, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 173–183, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. Y. Ito, P. Pandey, A. Place et al., “The novel triterpenoid 2-cyano-3,12-dioxoolean-1,9-dien-28-oic acid induces apoptosis of human myeloid leukemia cells by a caspase-8-dependent mechanism,” Cell Growth and Differentiation, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 261–267, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. Y. Ito, P. Pandey, M. B. Sporn, R. Datta, S. Kharbanda, and D. Kufe, “The novel triterpenoid CDDO induces apoptosis and differentiation of human osteosarcoma cells by a caspase-8 dependent mechanism,” Molecular Pharmacology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 1094–1099, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. T. A. Stadheim, N. Suh, N. Ganju, M. B. Sporn, and A. Eastman, “The novel triterpenoid 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO) potently enhances apoptosis induced by tumor necrosis factor in human leukemia cells,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 277, no. 19, pp. 16448–16455, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. M. Konopleva, T. Tsao, Z. Estrov et al., “The synthetic triterpenoid 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid induces caspase-dependent and -independent apoptosis in acute myelogenous leukemia,” Cancer Research, vol. 64, no. 21, pp. 7927–7935, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. T. Ikeda, F. Kimura, Y. Nakata et al., “Triterpenoid CDDO-Im downregulates PML/RARα expression in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells,” Cell Death and Differentiation, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 523–531, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. S. Shishodia, G. Sethi, M. Konopleva, M. Andreeff, and B. B. Aggarwal, “A synthetic triterpenoid, CDDO-Me, inhibits IκBα kinase and enhances apoptosis induced by TNF and chemotherapeutic agents through down-regulation of expression of nuclear factor κB-regulated gene products in human leukemic cells,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1828–1838, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. P. J. Simpson-Haidaris, S. J. Pollock, S. Ramon, et al., “Anticancer role of PPARgamma agonists in hematological malignancies found in the vasculature, marrow, and eyes,” PPAR Research, vol. 2010, article 814609, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  67. S. Chintharlapalli, S. Papineni, M. Konopleva, M. Andreef, I. Samudio, and S. Safe, “2-Cyano-3,12-dioxoolean-1,9-dien-28-oic acid and related compounds inhibit growth of colon cancer cells through peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ-dependent and -independent pathways,” Molecular Pharmacology, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 119–128, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. M. Konopleva, E. Elstner, T. J. McQueen et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor and retinoid X receptor ligands are potent inducers of differentiation and apoptosis in leukemias,” Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 1249–1262, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. B. Melichar, M. Konopleva, W. Hu, K. Melicharova, M. Andreeff, and R. S. Freedman, “Growth-inhibitory effect of a novel synthetic triterpenoid, 2-cyano-3,12-dioxoolean-1,9-dien-28-oic acid, on ovarian carcinoma cell lines not dependent on peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ expression,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 149–154, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. D. M. Ray, K. M. Morse, S. P. Hilchey et al., “The novel triterpenoid 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO) induces apoptosis of human diffuse large B-cell lymphoma cells through a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma-independent pathway,” Experimental Hematology, vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 1202–1211, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. D. M. Ray, F. Akbiyik, and R. P. Phipps, “The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) ligands 15-deoxy-Δ12,14-prostaglandin J2 and ciglitazone induce human B lymphocyte and B cell lymphoma apoptosis by PPARγ-independent mechanisms,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 177, no. 8, pp. 5068–5076, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. S. Wei, J. Yang, S. L. Lee, S. K. Kulp, and C. S. Chen, “PPARγ-independent antitumor effects of thiazolidinediones,” Cancer Letters, vol. 276, no. 2, pp. 119–124, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. D. Kamashev, D. Vitoux, and H. De Thé, “PML-RARA-RXR oligomers mediate retinoid and rexinoid/cAMP cross-talk in acute promyelocytic leukemia cell differentiation,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 199, no. 8, pp. 1163–1174, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. S. A. Hamadani, T. Zhang, C. Dorrell, et al., “X-retinoic acid receptor a fusion genes in acute promyelocytic leukemia interfere with retinoid and peroxisome-proliferator signaling pathways,” Blood, vol. 98, p. 88a, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  75. L. Z. He, F. Guidez, C. Tribioli et al., “Distinct interactions of PML-RARα and PLZF-RARα with co-repressors determine differential responses to RA in APL,” Nature Genetics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 126–135, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. F. Grignani, S. De Matteis, C. Nervi et al., “Fusion proteins of the retinoic acid receptor-α recruit histone deacetylase in promyelocytic leukaemia,” Nature, vol. 391, no. 6669, pp. 815–818, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. L. Z. He, T. Tolentino, P. Grayson et al., “Histone deacetylase inhibitors induce remission in transgenic models of therapy-resistant acute promyelocytic leukemia,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 108, no. 9, pp. 1321–1330, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. T. N. Faria, C. Mendelsohn, P. Chambon, and L. J. Gudas, “The targeted disruption of both alleles of RARβ2 in F9 cells results in the loss of retinoic acid-associated growth arrest,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 274, no. 38, pp. 26783–26788, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. E. Duprez, K. Wagner, H. Koch, and D. G. Tenen, “C/EBPβ: a major PML-RARA-responsive gene in retinoic acid-induced differentiation of APL cells,” EMBO Journal, vol. 22, no. 21, pp. 5806–5816, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. M. Liu, A. Iavarone, and L. P. Freedman, “Transcriptional activation of the human p21(WAF1/CIP1) gene by retinoic acid receptor. Correlation with retinoid induction of U937 cell differentiation,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 271, no. 49, pp. 31723–31728, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. B. U. Mueller, T. Pabst, J. Fos et al., “ATRA resolves the differentiation block in t(15;17) acute myeloid leukemia by restoring PU.1 expression,” Blood, vol. 107, no. 8, pp. 3330–3338, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. M. T. Epping, L. Wang, M. J. Edel, L. Carlée, M. Hernandez, and R. Bernards, “The human tumor antigen PRAME is a dominant repressor of retinoic acid receptor signaling,” Cell, vol. 122, no. 6, pp. 835–847, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. A. Perez, P. Kastner, S. Sethi, Y. Lutz, C. Reibel, and P. Chambon, “PMLRAR homodimers: distinct DNA binding properties and heteromeric interactions with RXR,” EMBO Journal, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 3171–3182, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. Y. Li, M. I. Dawson, A. Agadir, et al., “Regulation of RARβ expression by RAR- and RXR-selective retinoids in human lung cancer cell lines: effect on growth inhibition and apoptosis induction,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 75, pp. 88–95, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  85. B. Houle, C. Rochette-Egly, and W. E. C. Bradley, “Tumor-suppressive effect of the retinoic acid receptor β in human epidermoid lung cancer cells,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 985–989, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. Y. Liu, M. O. Lee, H. G. Wang et al., “Retinoic acid receptor β mediates the growth-inhibitory effect of retinoic acid by promoting apoptosis in human breast cancer cells,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1138–1149, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. C. Li and Y. J. Y. Wan, “Differentiation and antiproliferation effects of retinoic acid receptor β in hepatoma cells,” Cancer Letters, vol. 124, no. 2, pp. 205–211, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. B. R. Haugen, L. L. Larson, U. Pugazhenthi et al., “Retinoic acid and retinoid X receptors are differentially expressed in thyroid cancer and thyroid carcinoma cell lines and predict response to treatment with retinoids,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 272–280, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. F. F. Ferrara, F. Fazi, A. Bianchini et al., “Histone deacetylase-targeted treatment restores retinoic acid signaling and differentiation in acute myeloid leukemia,” Cancer Research, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 2–7, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  90. S. Lehmann, C. Paul, and H. Törmä, “The expression of cellular retinoid binding proteins in non-APL leukemic cells and its association with retinoid sensitivity,” Leukemia and Lymphoma, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 851–858, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  91. P. Chambon, “A decade of molecular biology of retinoic acid receptors,” FASEB Journal, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 940–954, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. S. P. Si, X. Lee, H. C. Tsou, et al., “ARγ2-mediated growth inhibition in HeLa cells,” Experimental Cell Research, vol. 223, pp. 102–111, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  93. Y. Tabe, M. Konopleva, Y. Kondo et al., “PPARγ-active triterpenoid CDDO enhances ATRA-induced differentiation in APL,” Cancer Biology and Therapy, vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 1967–1977, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. S. Y. James, F. Lin, S. K. Kolluri, M. I. Dawson, and X. K. Zhang, “Regulation of retinoic acid receptor β expression by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ ligands in cancer cells,” Cancer Research, vol. 63, no. 13, pp. 3531–3538, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  95. J. C. G. Blanco, S. Minucci, J. Lu et al., “The histone acetylase PCAF is a nuclear receptor coactivator,” Genes and Development, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1638–1651, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. D. J. Mangelsdorf, E. S. Ong, J. A. Dyck, and R. M. Evans, “Nuclear receptor that identifies a novel retinoic acid response pathway,” Nature, vol. 345, no. 6272, pp. 224–229, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. R. A. Heyman, D. J. Mangelsdorf, J. A. Dyck et al., “9-Cis retinoic acid is a high affinity ligand for the retinoid X receptor,” Cell, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 397–406, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. G. Cimino, F. Lo-Coco, S. Fenu et al., “Sequential valproic acid/all-trans retinoic acid treatment reprograms differentiation in refractory and high-risk acute myeloid leukemia,” Cancer Research, vol. 66, no. 17, pp. 8903–8911, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  99. R. F. Schlenk, K. Döhner, M. Kneba, et al., “German-Austrian AML Study Group (AMLSG). Gene mutations and response to treatment with all-trans retinoic acid in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia: results from the AMLSG Trial AML HD98B,” Haematologica, vol. 94, pp. 54–60, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  100. H. Liu, B. C. M. Tan, K. H. Tseng et al., “Nucleophosmin acts as a novel AP2α-binding transcriptional corepressor during cell differentiation,” EMBO Reports, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 394–400, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. R. Balusu, W. Fiskus, R. Rao, et al., “Targeting levels or oligomerization of nucleophosmin 1 induces differentiation and loss of survival of human AML cells with mutant NPM1,” Blood, vol. 118, pp. 3096–3106, 2011. View at Google Scholar