You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Role of Nuclear Receptors in Esophageal Cancer: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Dean Liu and Version 1 by Alan Prem Kumar.

Esophageal cancer (EC), an aggressive and poorly understood disease, is one of the top causes of cancer-related fatalities. GLOBOCAN 2020 reports that there are 544,076 deaths and 604,100 new cases expected worldwide. Even though there are various advancements in treatment procedures, this cancer has been reported as one of the most difficult cancers to cure, and to increase patient survival; treatment targets still need to be established. Nuclear receptors (NRs) are a type of transcription factor, which has a key role in several biological processes such as reproduction, development, cellular differentiation, stress response, immunity, metabolism, lipids, and drugs, and are essential regulators of several diseases, including cancer.

  • esophageal cancer
  • nuclear receptors
  • agonists
  • antagonists

1. Introduction

Esophageal cancer (EC) is an aggressive and poorly understood disease that remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths around the world [1,2][1][2]. This cancer is fundamentally resistant to systemic therapy due to morphological, molecular, and etiological heterogeneity [3]. Even though there are various advancements in treatment procedures, this cancer has been reported as one of the most difficult cancer to cure, and a favorable prognosis is only possible in the pilot stages [4]. EC is one of the most common types of cancer in people; GLOBOCAN 2020 estimated 604,100 new cases and 544,076 fatal cases worldwide [5]. 

2. Nuclear Receptors in Esophageal Cancer

2.1. Androgen Receptors (ARs)

AR is a ligand-activated TFs in the steroid receptor family [180][6]. Growth factors, natural hormones, peptides, and synthetic compounds are all examples of ligands that can activate these receptors [180][6]. The AR is found in skeletal muscle, the prostate, the testes, the uterus, the breast, and other tissues [181][7]. The AR gene, which is 90 kb in size and situated on the X chromosome, is coded by eight exons [182][8]. Different domains in the AR include the N-terminal domain (NTD), DNA-binding domain (DBD), and ligand-binding domain (LBD). The least homologous section of the AR is its N-terminal region (amino acids 1–559), with less than 15–20% similarity among the class I members. AF-1, crucial for AR activity, is present in the NTD [183][9]. AR’s AF-1 contains all of AR’s phosphorylation sites except for three and is a target for several growth factors that phosphorylate the sites and activate the AR ligand on their own [184,185][10][11]. The DBD helps the AR to bind to the androgen Response Elements (ARE) in the regulatory regions of androgen-responsive genes. The DBD contains two zinc finger motifs necessary for DNA binding and dimerization and is highly conserved among receptors. The DBD and LBD’s lysine-rich hinge regions are essential for the nuclear localization of the receptor [186][12]. The AR’s LBD is responsible for ligand binding, is only minimally conserved among receptors, and contains AF-2, which is required for full receptor activation in the presence of ligand [180][6]. AF-2 refers to residues in the LBD that are implicated in transcription control. In a hormone-dependent way, this region of the AR recruits a set of coregulatory proteins known as p160 coactivators (e.g., steroid receptor coactivator-1 (SRC-1)) [187][13]. Interestingly, it was reported that AR is implicated in the development and progression of various cancer types, including prostate, breast, ovarian, etc. [188,189,190,191,192][14][15][16][17][18]. Therefore, AR’s expression and function are often investigated in cell lines and tumor specimens. However, the role of AR expression and function in the development and progression of EC is still poorly understood. Increasing lines of evidence suggest that AR and AR responsive are highly overexpressed and activated in EC and controls the survival and prognosis of patients. For example, a study in 40 ESCC tumor tissues demonstrated high levels of AR expression in invasive ESCC tissues. In addition, ithis study is also showed that the knockdown of the KYSE450 EC cell line with AR shRNA decreased the expression of AR, cell invasion, pAkt, and matrix metalloproteinase 2 (MMP2) [119][19]. Another clinical study showed high expression of AR in tissues from tobacco using ESCC patients compared with normal esophageal squamous tissues. Besides, higher expression of AR was also observed in the EC109, EC9706, HKESC-2, and TE-12 EC cell lines. Moreover, the inhibition of AR by shRNA reduced cell viability, cell growth, colony formation, anchorage-independent growth, and the S and G2/M phase. In addition, in mice with various androgen status, the overexpression of AR enhanced tumor growth. Further, AR promotes interleukin 6 (IL6), a common AR target gene in ESCC, transcription by binding directly to the IL6 promoter, and IL6 can then activate AR expression. Furthermore, prominent levels of AR and IL6 expression in human ESCC predict a worse clinical outcome in tobacco users [120][20]. Another clinical study demonstrated that AR gene expression was substantially higher in normal squamous epithelium than in esophageal adenocarcinomas [165][21]. According to another study, higher levels of dihydrotestosterone (DHT) inhibited the proliferation and cell division, induced cell cycle arrest and cell senescence and also altered androgen-responsive genes in OE33-AR, JH-AR, and OE19-AR EAC cell lines [148][22]. In addition, another study showed an increase of FK506-binding protein 5 (FKBP5), which is an androgen-responsive gene in AR-transduced OE33 cells (OE33-AR) [147][23]. Taken together, these findings demonstrated the significance of AR in the development and spread of EC, and additional research is required to identify the potential use AR as a therapeutic target in EAC and ESCC.

2.2. Estrogen Receptors (ERs)

Estrogen receptors (ERs) belong to the NR superfamily, which also comprises receptors that mediate the effects of thyroid hormones, steroid hormones, retinoids, and vitamin D [193][24]. ERs, similar to other steroid receptors, primarily serve as ligand-inducible TFs that bind chromatin at specific response regions as homodimers [193][24]. To interact with estrogen response elements (EREs) or other TFs, ERs dimerize and move to the nucleus, where they interact with them. This causes the recruitment of coregulatory proteins (coactivators or corepressors), an increase or decrease in mRNA levels and associated protein synthesis, as well as physiological responses [194,195,196][25][26][27]. The ligand-induced transcriptional activity of ER is mediated by two distinct activation functions, AF-1 and AF-2 [194,195,196][25][26][27]. ERs, similar to other members of the NR family, have structurally and functionally different domains. The DNA recognition and binding are carried out by the C or DNA-binding domain (DBD), which is the protein’s central and most conserved domain, while the COOH-terminal multifunctional D/E/F or ligand-binding domain (LBD) is responsible for ligand binding. The NH2-terminal or A/B domain is the least conserved and has the greatest variation in sequence and length [197,198][28][29]. Based on sequence homology with other receptors, the domains in the receptor have been split into six regions, A-F. Exon 1 codes for the N-terminal domain (regions A and B), exons 2 and 3 for the DNA-binding domain (region C), exon 4/hinge region (region D), and exons 5-8 for the hormone binding domain (regions E and F) [199][30]. ERs are divided into two subtypes: estrogen receptors α (ERα, also known as ER1 or ESR1) and estrogen receptors β (ERβ, also known as ER2 or ESR2), which are encoded by the estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) and 2 (ESR2) genes, respectively. They are members who belong to the NR superfamily and carry out a range of biological processes [194,200,201][25][31][32]. In humans, ERα and ERβ play a critical role in the control of various intricate physiological processes. A multitude of disorders is linked to abnormal ER signaling, including cancer, metabolic and cardiovascular disease, neurodegeneration, inflammation, and osteoporosis [202,203,204][33][34][35]. For years, scientists have known that estrogen and its receptors play a critical role in cancer development [205][36]. Multiple investigations using esophageal tissues and various cell lines have demonstrated higher expression of both ERα and ERβ at variable levels, pointing to the significance of ER in the development of EC. For example, a recent study on EC has proved that apart from typical risk factors, the hormonal environment may play a crucial role in EC development [206][37]. Studies have demonstrated that positive ERα expression in combination with negative ERβ expression is an unfavorable independent prognostic predictor in ESCC [166,167][38][39]. In tumor tissues, the expression of ERβ is higher in AC and poorly differentiated SCC, and it increases with tumor stage and dedifferentiation. As a result, ERβ seems to be a sign of poor biological function, dedifferentiation, or a more advanced stage of disease [125][40]. Further studies on ESCC tissues showed that the levels of ERα and ERβ were inversely connected, and the downregulation of ERα and the overexpression of ERβ could indicate a poor prognosis [121][41]. Another study has demonstrated that the different isoforms of ERβ (ER-B1, ER-B2, ER-B3, and ER-B5) were shown to be overexpressed in EA tissues and suggests a possible role of antiestrogens in the treatment of EA [124][42]. Interestingly, it was noted that in EC cells, estrogen ligands such as 17β-estradiol and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM) inhibited cell proliferation. The amount of anti-growth effects caused by receptor agonists was proportional to the quantity of ER expression in the cell lines. Therefore, this research revealed that selective ER ligand treatment in EC and BE cells results in decreased cell growth and induced apoptosis [126,150][43][44]. In a distinct study, 1, 3, 5-tris (4-hydroxyphenyl)-4-propyl-1H-pyrazole (PPT), an ERα agonist, was shown to reduce the number of ECGI10 + ERα cells. Moreover, estradiol significantly increased the cell proliferation of ECGI10 + ERβ  cells, and the addition of ICI 182780 dramatically reduced estradiol-mediated cell proliferation. In conclusion, this study’s e findings unequivocally show that the presence of ERβ was strongly correlated with poor prognosis in ESCC, possibly by affecting the proliferation of carcinoma cells [123][45]. Another study showed that the ER system contributes to the spread of EC, and a highly selective ERα antagonist (MPP) and an ERβ-specific antagonist (PHTPP) elicited a concentration-dependent reduction in proliferation in EC cell lines. In addition, caspase 3/7 activity was significantly elevated in OE33 cell lines treated with MPP and PHTPP, and there was an increase in LDH activity in the presence of MPP-treated OE-33 cell lines [122][46]. However, a recent study showed that 17β-E2 inhibited the proliferation of human EC109 ESCC cells in a dose-dependent manner, which was inhibited by the ER antagonist ICI 182,780. Additionally, 17β-E2 significantly increased the release of intracellular Ca2+ and the entry of extracellular Ca2+  into ESCC cells, which was also inhibited by the ER antagonist IC1 82,780. When combined, this study showsit is showed that estrogen inhibits the proliferation of human ESCC cells, most likely via the ER-Ca2+ signaling pathway and it could a reason for the male predominance of ESCC [149][47]. In conclusion, it is evident that in a vast majority of cases of EC, ERs are markedly overexpressed and play a critical role in cell survival. Moreover, ES cancer cell invasion, migration, and proliferation have all been demonstrated to be inhibited by ER targeting, which also causes apoptosis. Additionally, the development of particular ER modulators would help in the prevention and treatment of ESCC patients.

2.3. Farnesoid X Receptors (FXRs)

The farnesoid X receptor (FXR) is a ligand-activated TF that belongs to the family of the NR, which is also classified as a nuclear bile acid (BA) receptor [207][48]. BAs operate as powerful endogenous ligands for FXR activation in the body [207][48]. FXR is a common receptor present in the intestine and liver that regulates bile acid, glucose, lipid metabolism, and energy balance to aid in maintaining systemic metabolic equilibrium [207,208][48][49]. FXR is encoded by the NR1H4 gene and controls the activities of several organs, including the brain, breast, cardiovascular system, gut, kidney, liver, and pancreas. As a result, FXR has become a popular therapeutic target for a wide range of disorders [207,208][48][49]. FXR detects physiologic and pathological metabolic changes and alters by regulating the transcription of genes related to cholesterol, fatty acid (FA), glucose, and amino acid balance. FXRα (NR1H4) and FXRβ (NR1H5) are two FXR genes that have been discovered, and the FXRα gene encodes four physiologically active versions (FXRα1, α2, α3, α4) as a result of several promoters and RNA splicing [209,210][50][51]. FXRα1/α2 and FXRα3/α4 are expressed at equal levels in the liver, whereas FXRα3/α4 isoforms are mostly expressed in the gut [211][52]. FXR binds to DNA (i.e., FXR response elements) as a monomer or as a heterodimer with the retinoid X receptor (RXR), another ligand-activated TF [210][51]. The N-terminal ligand-independent transcriptional activation AF-1 domain, DBD, a hinge region, and the C-terminal LBD comprising a transcriptional AF-2 comprises the structure of FXR, which is the same as the typical NR structure [212][53]. The hinge region sequence and the length of the AF-1 region differ between the four FXR isoforms. FXR agonists bind to the pocket produced by LBD, promoting its binding to FXR response regions in downstream target genes, which stimulates transcriptional activation [213][54]. According to recent research, FXR overexpression has been linked to the development and progression of breast, lung, pancreas, and esophageal malignancies. It has also been linked to tissue and cell-specific involvement in a variety of malignancies. It was also noted that FXR is strongly expressed in esophagitis, BE, and EAC [39][55]. For example, a study has demonstrated that FXR is overexpressed in BE, and guggulsterone, an FXR antagonist, significantly enhances apoptosis in a human BE-derived cell line which implies that FXR may play a role in apoptosis regulation [127][56]. According to another similar study, the suppression of FXR with FXR shRNA or guggulsterone reduced tumor cell survival and metastasis and induced apoptosis in vitro, as well as decreased EC growth in nude mice xenografts [64][57]. Another study demonstrated that, FXR was expressed in GERD tissues, and the level of expression has greatly increased in esophagitis [128][58]. In addition, the same study showed that FXR and basal TLR2 expression were linked, and TLR2 and FXR were significantly elevated during reflux esophagitis [128][58]. On the contrary, an in vitro and in vivo investigation has reported that the activation of FXR performs an antitumor role in the ESCC. FXR activation by its ligand GW4064 inhibited the ERK1/2 pathway and cell growth, increased apoptosis, and caused cell cycle arrest in ESCC cells. Further, the FXR ligand GW4064 reduced the growth of ESCC in a mouse xenograft model [151][59]. Altogether, it was identified that FXR could be a potential target for the management of ESCC.

2.4. Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors (PPARs)

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are fatty acid-activated TFs, which belong to the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily, that control energy metabolism. PPARα (NR1C1), PPARγ (NR2C2), and PPARδ (NR3C3) (also known as PPARβ) are the three PPAR subtypes that have been discovered so far [214,215,216,217,218,219][60][61][62][63][64][65]. All PPARs, which have four functional domains termed A/B, C, D, and E/F, share the fundamental structural characteristics of the majority of NRs. The PPAR is phosphorylated by the ligand-independent AF-1 in the N-terminal (A/B) domain [220][66]. PPARs bind to the peroxisome proliferator response element (PPRE) in the promoter of PPAR target genes, and this interaction is mediated by the two-zinc fingered conserved core DBD, also referred to as the C domain. The cofactor docking site is the D domain, and the E domain is also known as the LBD. The E/F domain’s ligand-dependent AF-2 mediates the recruitment of PPAR cofactors involved in the transcription processes [220][66]. PPARα and PPARδ are also expressed in oxidative tissues and control gene expression involved in oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS), substrate delivery, and oxidation. PPARα stimulates energy dissipation and is found mostly in the brown adipose tissue (BAT), gut, heart, kidney, liver, and skeletal muscles [221,222][67][68]. PPARα influences esterification, fatty acid transport, and oxidation to mediate its actions. PPARβ/δ is widely expressed and plays a role in fatty acid oxidation as well as blood glucose control. White adipose tissue (WAT) has the highest levels of PPARγ expression, which is largely engaged in energy storage through promoting adipogenesis and lipid synthesis [220][66]. The PPARγ is expressed mainly in the gut, immune cells, liver, and skeletal muscles [221,223][67][69]. The binding of cognate lipid ligands, heterodimerization with another NR (RXR), the interaction of a few transcriptional coactivators, including PPAR coactivator-1 (PGC-1), as well as binding of the complex to PPAR response elements (PPREs) in the promoter of target genes are necessary for PPARs to function as NRs for transcription [223][69]. PPARs are triggered by several ligands. Eicosanoids and long-chain fatty acids (FAs) are examples of some common endogenous ligands for PPARα and PPARβ/δ, PPARγ on the other hand, is activated by arachidonic acid metabolites [224,225][70][71]. Pioglitazone, GW1929, and GW2090 are anti-diabetic thiazolidinedione (TZD) substances that specifically activate PPARγ, whereas GW501516 is a highly selective PPARβ/δ ligand [216,226][62][72]. The activation of PPAR by ligands has been linked with several malignancies. In vitro investigations on human cancer cells indicated growth-inhibitory effects such as cell-cycle arrest, differentiation, and death induced by PPAR ligands [227][73]. For example, a study has demonstrated the expression of PPARγ in T. Tn, and EC-GI-10 ESCC cell lines and revealed the marked growth inhibitory ability of PPARγ-ligands (Troglitazone, Pioglitazone, and 15d-PGJ2) to prevent the growth of human ESCC. Moreover, this effect was evident by the dose-dependent inhibition of deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis and G1 arrest and an increased level of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p27 (Kip1), p21 (Cip1/Waf1), and p18(Ink4c). In addition, troglitazone treatment increased the expression of interleukin-1 alpha in EC-G1-10 cells [152][74]. Similarly, another study showed that troglitazone, a PPARγ-ligand, treatment in TE-13 cells inhibited the development of human ESCC through G1 cell cycle arrest by increasing p27 expression and induced apoptosis by increasing the expression of Bid, Bax, PARP, and caspase 3 and reducing the expression of cyclin E, MDM2, p16, cytochrome C, caspase 8, and Bcl-XL [153][75]. Interestingly, another study using 55 primary ESCC tissue samples has shown that the expression level of PPARγ mRNA was decreased in ESCC compared with normal esophageal mucosa, and this was correlated with poor prognosis [129][76]. Moreover, PPARγ and SIRT1 were substantially expressed in ESCC tissues, but high PPARγ expression was correlated with tumor grading but not with poor prognosis [168][77]. In this study, it was observed that increased tumor growth and poor prognosis were associated with the high expression of SIRT1, a protein that supports cell survival and angiogenesis in ESCC patients. However, SIRT1 expression was positively linked with EGFR but not with PPARγ or survivin [168][77]. In another study, it was observed that miR-10b was elevated while the expression of PPARγ was downregulated in EC tissues and ESCC cell lines EC109 and TE10, which established that PPARγ is a legitimate miR-10b target. Additionally, miR-10b suppression improved the chemosensitivity of EC cells to DDP in vitro and in vivo, and the overexpression of miR-10b decreased the PPARγ-mediated DDP sensitivity. The Akt/mTOR/p70S6K signaling pathway was also activated as a result of the overexpression of miR10b, and the deactivation of Akt/mTOR/p70S6K by Akt inhibitor (GSK690693) reduced miR-10b-induced DDP resistance in EC cells. Together, these findings show that PPARγ inhibition by miR-10b increased DDP resistance in EC by increasing Akt/mTOR/P70S6K signaling. Moreover, it was observed that after DDP treatment, the activation of PPARγ significantly aided DDP-induced apoptosis in EC109 and TE10 cells. In addition, elevated PPARγ consistently resulted in a rise in Bax levels and a decrease in Bcl2 levels after DDP treatment [133][78]. Interestingly, lycopene, a natural compound, was shown to suppress NF-κB and COX-2 expression and enhance the protein expression of PPARγ and cleaved caspase 3, which leads to an increase in apoptotic proteins and a decrease in inflammatory cytokines. These findings showed that an effective amount of lycopene could prevent the development of EC in NMBzA-injected F344 rats through potential anti-inflammatory and pro-apoptotic pathways [155][79]. Another study showed that Da Ea (ethyl acetate extract of D. altaica), which has anti-cancer effects, increased PPARγ expression levels, induced apoptosis and S phase cell cycle arrest, which prevented the proliferation of ECA 109 cells [97][80]. In addition, an in vitro and in vivo study in EC cells and ESO26 cells injected mice treated with T0070907 has demonstrated the transcriptional feedback loop between the PPARγ and the master regulator transcription factors (MRTF) that are particular to EC and fatty acid production. PPARγ overexpression was caused by MRTFs functioning together to promote PPARγ  transcription by directly controlling its promoter and a distal EAC-specific enhancer. Moreover, this study it also shows a decrease in cell proliferation and induced apoptosis in T0070907 treated OE33 AND ESO26 cell lines. In addition, in vivo study has demonstrated a decrease in the expression of FASN, ACC, ACLY, SCD and tumor growth in ESO26 cells injected mice [156][81]. Another study showed increased expressions of PPARγ, COX-2, HGF, gastrin, and NF-κB activity in BE tissues. Moreover, the increased NF-κB activity is probably linked to increased IL-8 and COX-2 expression [130][82]. Similarly, in EC tissues, upregulation of PPARγ was observed, and the treatment of EC cell lines with PPARγ antagonists (T0070907 and GW9662) decreased EC cell adhesion, expression of p-focal adhesion kinase (p-FAK) and pERK and induced apoptosis [131][83]. Another study has reported the reduced expression of PPARγ in esophageal tumor lesions and proved that ESCC cell proliferation could be inhibited by efatutazone, a PPARγ agonist, by inactivating the PI3K–Akt and MAPK pathways [154][84]. Interestingly, an in vitro and in vivo study demonstrated that the activation of PPARγ inhibits cancer cell growth in vitro by inducing apoptosis through increasing caspase 3 activity, but systemic PPARγ activation increased the growth of OE33-derived transplantable adenocarcinomas in vivo due to increased cell proliferation [132][85]. Collectively, these data suggest that PPARs play a critical role in the emergence of EC and might serve as a novel therapeutic target.

2.5. Retinoic Acid Receptors (RARs)

RARs are TFs that belong to the NR superfamily which can have non-genomic effects by triggering kinase signaling pathways that regulate the transcription of RA target genes [228,229][86][87]. RARs have a significant role in a variety of physiological processes, including embryonic development and organ homeostasis. RARs also help to regulate gene networks that control cell growth, differentiation, survival, and cell death at the cellular level [228,229][86][87]. RARs are divided into three different subtypes: RARα, RARβ, and RARγ and each subtype has different isoforms. RARβ is divided into four isoforms (β1, β2, β3, and β4), each with differing affinities for retinoids and biological roles [230][88]. The first nuclear RAR in humans, RARα (NR1B1), has a high affinity for ATRA and has preserved the NR modular organization structure. RARβ (NR1B2) and the RARγ (NR1B3) are the second and the third RAR gene respectively [228][86]. RAR’s modular structure, which includes many domains and functions, allows them to process both ligand binding and transcription [231][89]. The transactivation domain, AF-1, is found in the amino terminus (A/B region) and forms a recognition surface for co-activators and other TFs [231][89]. For DNA recognition, the DBD holds two zinc finger motifs, and the LBD of the family members are highly conserved. It has a ligand-induced activation factor called AF-2, which is important in transcriptional coregulator interactions [231][89]. RARs can bind to specific enhancer regions in DNA, known as retinoic acid response elements (RAREs) in target gene promoters, after dimerization with RXR, resulting in transcriptional activation of target genes in the presence of ligand [228,232][86][90]. Retinoids can induce cell differentiation and inhibit proliferation, which is one of the reasons why they are used to treat cancer [233][91]. Surfeit numbers of clinical evidence have demonstrated that RARβ2 expression is usually inversely linked with tumor grade and frequently lost or epigenetically silenced in human malignancies [230,234][88][92]. According to a clinical investigation, the state of squamous differentiation and the increase in RARβ-expression are early events connected to EC [169][93]. Several clinical, in vitro, and in vivo studies have reported the leading role of RARs in the development and growth of EC cells. For example, it was found that expression levels of RARα and RARβ increased significantly in the higher stages of Barrett’s adenocarcinoma while expression of RARγ was significantly reduced. Therefore, RARγ may have a tumor suppressor role in Barrett’s carcinogenesis [135][94]. In EC cases, RARβ2 mRNA expressions were markedly decreased, whereas RARβ4 mRNA expression was elevated. Additionally, when compared to normal tissues, tumors had higher expressions of cyclin D1 and EGFR, while lower expressions of RARβ1, COUP-TFI (COUP transcription factor 1), and COUP-TFII were observed. Therefore, in tumor samples, decreased RARβ2 expression was linked with increased RARβ4 expression and the inhibition of COUP-TFI and COUP-TFII [141][95]. Another study has proven that RARα was overexpressed in human EC tissues, and further, it was demonstrated that RARα knockdown by siRNA inhibited EC cell proliferation by downregulating proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), Ki67, MMP7, and MMP9 expression and increased the drug sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin [136][96]. Benzo-[a]pyrene diol epoxide (BPDE) is found to be an active metabolite of tobacco procarcinogens, and a study has proven that by suppressing RARβ2 transcription, BPDE reduced RARβ2 mRNA and protein levels. Moreover, retinoic acid was able to partially block BPDE’s inhibitory effect on RARβ2 expression while increasing the cell cycle G1 phase. Additionally, BPDE-induced COX-2 expression was linked to RARβ2 inhibition. The expression of EGFR, ERK1/2 phosphorylation, c-Jun, and COX-2 were decreased after the RARβ2-expression vector was transfected into EC cells. Additionally, there was little change in the expression of c-Jun and COX-2 after co-treatment of RARβ2 positive cells with BPDE. These studies have proved that BPDE may cause EC via inhibiting RARβ2 [158,161,163][97][98][99]. Another study showed that RARβ2′s tumor suppressor function may be linked to its ability to decrease COX-2 expression, which plays a role in carcinogenesis and metastasis, and 13 cis-RA mediated activation of RARβ2 suppressed COX-2 expression, implying that COX-2 inhibition is dependent on RARβ2 expression. BPDE significantly caused time-dependent methylation of the RARβ2 gene promoter in esophageal cancer cells, as well as suppression of EGFR, ERK1/2 phosphorylation, c-Jun, and COX-2 expression. RARβ2 expression is decreased by BPDE, and the restoration of RARβ2 expression lowers COX-2 protein in esophageal cancer cells, implying that RARβ2 plays a significant role in preventing esophageal carcinogenesis [159,162][100][101]. It was also observed that RARβ expression was gradually lost, starting with the mildly dysplastic stage of esophageal mucosae. Additionally, the expression of RARβ was reduced as a result of the differentiation of esophageal squamous. Further, P53 and Ki67 were accumulated in the later precancerous stage of EC. TResesarchis study suers suggests that the expression of RARβ, P53, and Ki67 could be used as biomarkers for early EC diagnosis in high-risk populations [137,170,172][102][103][104]. In ESCC, DNA methylation frequently results in the inactivation of the genes RARβ, RARβ2, CRBP1, and TIG1, which are linked to retinoic acid signaling, and in contrast, another study revealed that RARβ2, p16, MGMT, CLDN3, CRBP, and MT1G were increased in ESCC tissues [171,173][105][106]. In mice tumors, 4- nitroquinoline 1-oxide (4-NQO), a carcinogen, inhibited RARβ2 but increased the expression of p-ERK1/2, c-FOS, and COX-2 proteins, as well as the methylation of the RARβ2 gene promoter. Moreover, it was shown that RARβ2 expression was decreased and p-ERK1/2, and COX-2 expression were increased by treatment with 4-NQO in human EC cells in vitro. Moreover, upregulated p-ERK1/2 and COX-2 expression were found in EC tissues, and p-ERK1/2 expressions were linked to a more advanced clinical tumor stage [164][107]. In addition, it was observed that overexpression of RARβ2 induced retinoid receptor-induced gene 1 (RRIG1) and inhibited Erk1/2 phosphorylation and COX-2 expression [142][108]. Another study showed that the knockdown of DNA (cytosine-5)-methyltransferase1 (DNMT1) in KYSE30 and TE-1 EC cells led to promoter demethylation and RARβ  overexpression. This study s It is showed that smoking status and low RARβ expression were associated with DNMT1 overexpression in esophageal SCC patients. Through the activation of DNMT1 in esophageal squamous epithelial cells, NNK, a tobacco-specific carcinogen, might cause RARβ promoter hypermethylation, which ultimately increased cell proliferation and inhibited apoptosis [138][109]. Another study showed that N-(4-hydroxyphenyl) retinamide (4HPR) but not RA suppressed the proliferation of the ESCC cell line EC109 in vitro. In addition, RARβ2 induction is correlated with growth inhibition in RA-responsive cells, whereas a failure in RARβ2 inducibility is correlated with RA resistance. These results suggest that 4HPR may operate as a growth inhibitor through direct or indirect interactions with RARβ2 [160][110]. Several clinical studies investigated the methylation status and the expression of the RARβ2 promoter area and revealed a significant relationship between RARβ2 methylation status and tumor grade. Further, only G2 stage (intermediate grade) tumors showed a link between methylation status and lower expression of RARβ2, and its restoration was accompanied by growth inhibition after 5-aza-dc treatment [139,140,174][111][112][113]. Therefore, RARs (α, β, γ) can be targeted and used as markers for the prevention and treatment of both EACs and ESCCs.

2.6. Retinoid X Receptors (RXRs)

Retinoid X receptors (RXRs) are heterodimeric partners of other members of the NR superfamily [235][114]. There are three types of RXRs: RXRα, RXRβ, and RXRγ, all of which are nuclear transcriptional transactivator proteins that bind to DNA and are ligand-dependent [175][115]. The “permissive” subclass of heterodimers, such as PPAR, LXR, and FXR, is transcriptionally activated by RXR ligands (“rexinoids”) either independently or in conjunction with partner ligands in the “non-permissive” subclass, such as RAR, VDR, and TR [235][114]. The morphogenesis, development, growth, and differentiation of cells are all regulated by RXR, and its expression is found to be altered in several solid tumors [175][115]. RXR modulators have therapeutic potential for cancer and other disorders involving the acquisition and disposal of nutrients, such as metabolic diseases [236][116]. A surfeit number of studies have proven that RXR is essential for the development of EC. For example, in a study, it was demonstrated that the mRNA expression of the three different subtypes of RXR is significantly different in EC tissues and RXR mRNA expression levels may be useful biomarkers for BE and related adenocarcinoma since changes in the mRNA expression of all three RXR subtypes (RXRα, RXRβ, and RXRγ) are frequently observed in the development and progression of these diseases [175][115]. According to another study, EC tissues had higher levels of RXR mRNA and protein than normal esophageal tissues. The level of RXR overexpression was linked to tumor differentiation, TNM stage, and lymph node metastasis in EC patients. Further, EC patients with high RXR expression had considerably worse disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival rates (OS). Moreover, multivariate analysis showed that the expression of RXR may be a predictor of DFS and OS in EC patients [176][117]. Another study showed that all six retinoid receptor subtypes, including RXR, were active in the tissues of EC patients. RXRβ was inversely correlated with patient lymph node metastatic status and was linked with a better clinical outcome across these receptor subtypes. According to these findings, retinoid receptors, particularly, RXRs play significant roles in ESCC and are associated with patient prognosis [172][104]. Furthermore, another study has revealed that both mRNA and protein of PPARγ and RXRα were expressed in ESCC cell lines from the KYSE series. Moreover, EC cell growth was decreased by the PPARγ ligand troglitazone (TRO), and RXRα ligand 9-cis retinoic acid (9CRA) administration had a synergistic impact. The combined treatment with TRO and 9CRA, which also markedly elevated the sub-G1 phase, showed that ligand administration was predominantly responsible for inducing apoptotic cell death in EC cells. Additionally, TRO + 9CRA treatment significantly inhibited the growth of tumors implanted in nude mice [157][118].

2.7. Vitamin D Receptor (VDR)

The vitamin D receptor (VDR) belongs to the NR superfamily and is involved in vitamin D’s biological activities [237][119]. The VDR ligand regulates the expression of many genes involved in calcium/phosphate balance, cellular proliferation and differentiation, and immunological response [237][119]. VDR is abundantly expressed in cardiomyocytes, vascular endothelial cells, and vascular smooth muscle cells [238][120]. One of three retinoid X receptors (RXRα, RXRβ, and RXRγ) forms dimers with VDR. The VDR homodimer or VDR-RXR heterodimer attaches to vitamin D response elements (VDREs), which are enhancer elements [239][121]. In combination with the RXR, ligand binding induces VDR nuclear localization and promotes VDR–DNA complexation. Particular VDREs have been discovered in the promoter sequences of genes that are activated or repressed by VDR. Interactions with coregulators are required for VDR-mediated gene regulation (coactivator and corepressor) [240][122]. The natural ligand of the VDR is 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D (1,25(OH)2D3), a hormonal metabolite of vitamin D. VDR enters the nucleus after binding to 1,25(OH)2D3 and forms a heterodimer with retinoid X receptor (RXR), which regulates gene transcription by interacting with response elements in target gene promoters [241][123]. An N-terminal domain, a conserved DNA-binding domain, a flexible hinge region, and a conserved ligand-binding domain make up VDR’s structure [241,242][123][124]. The LBD has 12 helices and takes the form of a small, 3D structure when bound to a ligand. Deep inside the receptor, the ligand-binding pocket enables highly selective interactions with natural ligands such as 1,25(OH)2D3 [240][122]. In a study, it was demonstrated that through a bile acid ligand, VDR plays a role in the early development of EC. Interestingly, it has been shown that in both EAC and columnar cell metaplasia (CCM), VDR expression was considerably higher in male patients than in females. Moreover, VDR amplification was linked to a worse prognosis but not VDR protein expression [144][125]. However, another study has shown that both JNK1 and VDR were decreased in ESCC epithelial cells in comparison to the normal esophagus. JNK1 and VDR stromal expression also reduced the motility, migration, and proliferation of ESCC cells by blocking signaling pathways involved in proliferation and metastasis. Therefore, stromal JNK1 and VDR function as tumor suppressors in ESCC, and the degree of their stromal expression may affect the prognosis of ESCC [146][126]. Moreover, it was observed that EAC exhibits VDR expression, and as the tumor dedifferentiates, the expression level of VDR also decreases [143,177][127][128]. In contrast, another clinical study has demonstrated that the mRNA expression of VDR was higher in BE tissues compared to the normal squamous epithelium tissues [145][129]. In addition, it was shown that variable polymorphisms in genes involved in vitamin D metabolism are connected to the probability of reflux-BE-EAC development. In addition, low expression of VDR and CYP27B1 and high expression of CYP24A1 were observed in EAC tumor tissues compared to normal esophageal tissues [179][130]. Another study showed that claudin-2 was found to be strongly expressed in EAC and ESCC tissues, and its expression was linked to the expression of the bile acid receptors VDR and TGR5 [178][131]. These studies showed that dysregulation of VDR plays a critical role in the development of EC.

2.8. Other Nuclear Receptors

Several other NRs have also been thoroughly investigated and examined for their crucial function in esophageal carcinogenesis. One such receptor is the pregnane X receptor (PXR, NR1I2), also known as PAR (the receptor activated by pregnane) and SXR (steroid and xenobiotic receptor), which is the NR super family’s archetypal member [243][132]. Both endobiotics and xenobiotics can activate PXR. PXR’s biological function as a major xenobiotic receptor is primarily mediated by its ligand-dependent binding to regulatory gene sequences [244][133]. The 50 kDa PXR protein is composed of the DBD, the relatively short hinge region, and LBD with AF-1 and AF-2 regions [245][134]. PXR signaling has also been linked to cancer-related processes such as cell survival, proliferation, angiogenesis, and oxidative stress [246][135]. It was noted that PXR is associated with the development of EC. For example, a study has reported that PXR is highly overexpressed in BE and EAC patients and revealed their nuclear localization in adenocarcinoma tissues. Furthermore, PXR translocates to the nuclei of adenocarcinoma cells after being stimulated with lithocholic acid. This result, together with the discovery of a link between a PXR polymorphism and BE, suggests that PXR may have a role in esophageal illness prognosis and treatment [134][136]. Hence, insights into NRs and how they interact with TFs can lead to the discovery of novel drug targets that can be used to treat esophageal carcinogenesis.

References

  1. Arnal, M.J.D.; Arenas, Á.F.; Arbeloa, Á.L. Esophageal cancer: Risk factors, screening and endoscopic treatment in Western and Eastern countries. World J. Gastroenterol. 2015, 21, 7933–7943.
  2. Huang, F.-L.; Yu, S.-J. Esophageal cancer: Risk factors, genetic association, and treatment. Asian J. Surg. 2018, 41, 210–215.
  3. Kelly, R.J. Emerging multimodality approaches to treat localized esophageal cancer. J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2019, 17, 1009–1014.
  4. Kato, H.; Nakajima, M. Treatments for esophageal cancer: A review. Gen. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2013, 61, 330–335.
  5. Sung, H.; Ferlay, J.; Siegel, R.L.; Laversanne, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Jemal, A.; Bray, F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021, 71, 209–249.
  6. Narayanan, R.; Coss, C.C.; Dalton, J.T. Development of selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs). Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2018, 465, 134–142.
  7. Tan, J.-a.; Joseph, D.R.; Quarmby, V.E.; Lubahn, D.B.; Sar, M.; French, F.S.; Wilson, E.M. The rat androgen receptor: Primary structure, autoregulation of its messenger ribonucleic acid, and immunocytochemical localization of the receptor protein. Mol. Endocrinol. 1988, 2, 1276–1285.
  8. Lubahn, D.B.; Joseph, D.R.; Sar, M.; Tan, J.-a.; Higgs, H.N.; Larson, R.E.; French, F.S.; Wilson, E.M. The human androgen receptor: Complementary deoxyribonucleic acid cloning, sequence analysis and gene expression in prostate. Mol. Endocrinol. 1988, 2, 1265–1275.
  9. Jenster, G.; van der Korput, H.A.; Trapman, J.; Brinkmann, A.O. Identification of two transcription activation units in the n-terminal domain of the human androgen receptor. J. Biol. Chem. 1995, 270, 7341–7346.
  10. Kato, S.; Endoh, H.; Masuhiro, Y.; Kitamoto, T.; Uchiyama, S.; Sasaki, H.; Masushige, S.; Gotoh, Y.; Nishida, E.; Kawashima, H. Activation of the estrogen receptor through phosphorylation by mitogen-activated protein kinase. Science 1995, 270, 1491–1494.
  11. Ward, R.D.; Weigel, N.L. Steroid receptor phosphorylation: Assigning function to site-specific phosphorylation. Biofactors 2009, 35, 528–536.
  12. Ylikomi, T.; Bocquel, M.; Berry, M.; Gronemeyer, H.; Chambon, P. Cooperation of proto-signals for nuclear accumulation of estrogen and progesterone receptors. EMBO J. 1992, 11, 3681–3694.
  13. Culig, Z.; Klocker, H.; Bartsch, G.; Hobisch, A. Androgen receptors in prostate cancer. Endocr.-Relat. Cancer 2002, 9, 155–170.
  14. Di Leone, A.; Fragomeni, S.M.; Scardina, L.; Ionta, L.; Mule, A.; Magno, S.; Terribile, D.; Masetti, R.; Franceschini, G. Androgen receptor expression and outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2021, 25, 1910–1915.
  15. Liu, W.; Wang, C.; Wang, S.; Zeng, K.; Wei, S.; Sun, N.; Sun, G.; Wang, M.; Zou, R.; Liu, W.; et al. PRPF6 promotes androgen receptor/androgen receptor-variant 7 actions in castration-resistant prostate cancer cells. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 17, 188–203.
  16. Zhu, H.; Zhu, X.; Zheng, L.; Hu, X.; Sun, L.; Zhu, X. The role of the androgen receptor in ovarian cancer carcinogenesis and its clinical implications. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 29395–29405.
  17. Anestis, A.; Zoi, I.; Papavassiliou, A.G.; Karamouzis, M.V. Androgen receptor in breast cancer-clinical and preclinical research insights. Molecules 2020, 25, 358.
  18. Tan, M.H.; Li, J.; Xu, H.E.; Melcher, K.; Yong, E.L. Androgen receptor: Structure, role in prostate cancer and drug discovery. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 2015, 36, 3–23.
  19. Zhang, Y.; Pan, T.; Zhong, X.; Cheng, C. Androgen receptor promotes esophageal cancer cell migration and proliferation via matrix metalloproteinase 2. Tumor Biol. 2015, 36, 5859–5864.
  20. Dong, H.; Xu, J.; Li, W.; Gan, J.; Lin, W.; Ke, J.; Jiang, J.; Du, L.; Chen, Y.; Zhong, X. Reciprocal androgen receptor/interleukin-6 crosstalk drives oesophageal carcinoma progression and contributes to patient prognosis. J. Pathol. 2017, 241, 448–462.
  21. Awan, A.K.; Iftikhar, S.; Morris, T.; Clarke, P.; Grabowska, A.; Waraich, N.; Watson, S. Androgen receptors may act in a paracrine manner to regulate oesophageal adenocarcinoma growth. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2007, 33, 561–568.
  22. Palethorpe, H.M.; Drew, P.A.; Smith, E. Androgen signaling in esophageal adenocarcinoma cell lines in vitro. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2017, 62, 3402–3414.
  23. Smith, E.; Palethorpe, H.M.; Ruszkiewicz, A.R.; Edwards, S.; Leach, D.A.; Underwood, T.J.; Need, E.F.; Drew, P.A. Androgen receptor and androgen-responsive gene FKBP5 are independent prognostic indicators for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2016, 61, 433–443.
  24. Pakdel, F. Molecular pathways of estrogen receptor action. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 2591.
  25. Arnal, J.-F.; Lenfant, F.; Metivier, R.; Flouriot, G.; Henrion, D.; Adlanmerini, M.; Fontaine, C.; Gourdy, P.; Chambon, P.; Katzenellenbogen, B. Membrane and nuclear estrogen receptor alpha actions: From tissue specificity to medical implications. Physiol. Rev. 2017, 97, 1045–1087.
  26. Ascenzi, P.; Bocedi, A.; Marino, M. Structure–function relationship of estrogen receptor α and β: Impact on human health. Mol. Asp. Med. 2006, 27, 299–402.
  27. Deroo, B.J.; Korach, K.S. Estrogen receptors and human disease. J. Clin. Investig. 2006, 116, 561–570.
  28. Nilsson, S.; Makela, S.; Treuter, E.; Tujague, M.; Thomsen, J.; Andersson, G.r.; Enmark, E.; Pettersson, K.; Warner, M.; Gustafsson, J.-Å. Mechanisms of estrogen action. Physiol. Rev. 2001, 81, 1535–1565.
  29. Heldring, N.; Pike, A.; Andersson, S.; Matthews, J.; Cheng, G.; Hartman, J.; Tujague, M.; Strom, A.; Treuter, E.; Warner, M. Estrogen receptors: How do they signal and what are their targets. Physiol. Rev. 2007, 87, 905–931.
  30. Parker, M. Structure and function of estrogen receptors. Vitam. Horm. 1995, 51, 267–287.
  31. Eyster, K.M. The estrogen receptors: An overview from different perspectives. In Estrogen Receptors; Methods in Molecular Biology; Humana Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016; Volume 1366, pp. 1–10.
  32. Chantalat, E.; Valera, M.-C.; Vaysse, C.; Noirrit, E.; Rusidze, M.; Weyl, A.; Vergriete, K.; Buscail, E.; Lluel, P.; Fontaine, C. Estrogen receptors and endometriosis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2815.
  33. Jia, M.; Dahlman-Wright, K.; Gustafsson, J.-Å. Estrogen receptor alpha and beta in health and disease. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2015, 29, 557–568.
  34. Loo, S.Y.; Syn, N.L.; Koh, A.P.; Teng, J.C.; Deivasigamani, A.; Tan, T.Z.; Thike, A.A.; Vali, S.; Kapoor, S.; Wang, X.; et al. Epigenetic derepression converts PPARγ into a druggable target in triple-negative and endocrine-resistant breast cancers. Cell Death Discov. 2021, 7, 265.
  35. Kirtonia, A.; Gala, K.; Fernandes, S.G.; Pandya, G.; Pandey, A.K.; Sethi, G.; Khattar, E.; Garg, M. Repurposing of drugs: An attractive pharmacological strategy for cancer therapeutics. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2021, 68, 258–278.
  36. Chen, G.G.; Zeng, Q.; Tse, G.M. Estrogen and its receptors in cancer. Med. Res. Rev. 2008, 28, 954–974.
  37. Kalita, D.; Bannoth, S.; Purkayastha, J.; Talukdar, A.; Das, G.; Singh, P. A study of hormonal receptors in esophageal carcinoma: Northeast indian tertiary cancer center study. South Asian J. Cancer 2020, 9, 222–226.
  38. Nozoe, T.; Oyama, T.; Takenoyama, M.; Hanagiri, T.; Sugio, K.; Yasumoto, K. Significance of immunohistochemical expression of estrogen receptors α and β in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Clin. Cancer Res. 2007, 13, 4046–4050.
  39. Zhang, D.; Ku, J.; Liu, R.; Wu, H.; Liang, G.; Wei, Y.; Chen, P.; Zhao, X.; Liu, S.; Li, Y. Characterization of serum estradiol level and tissue estrogen receptor immunostaining with clinical response and reproductive factor changes in Chinese female patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2017, 93, 879–884.
  40. Kalayarasan, R.; Ananthakrishnan, N.; Kate, V.; Basu, D. Estrogen and progesterone receptors in esophageal carcinoma. Dis. Esophagus 2008, 21, 298–303.
  41. Dong, J.; Jiang, S.-W.; Niu, Y.; Chen, L.; Liu, S.; Ma, T.; Chen, X.; Xu, L.; Su, Z.; Chen, H. Expression of estrogen receptor α and β in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Oncol. Rep. 2013, 30, 2771–2776.
  42. Liu, L.; Chirala, M.; Younes, M. Expression of estrogen receptor-β isoforms in Barrett’s metaplasia, dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2004, 24, 2919–2924.
  43. Wang, Q.-M.; Qi, Y.-J.; Jiang, Q.; Ma, Y.-F.; Wang, L.-D. Relevance of serum estradiol and estrogen receptor β expression from a high-incidence area for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China. Med. Oncol. 2011, 28, 188–193.
  44. Sukocheva, O.; Wee, C.; Ansar, A.; Hussey, D.; Watson, D. Effect of estrogen on growth and apoptosis in esophageal adenocarcinoma cells. Dis. Esophagus 2013, 26, 628–635.
  45. Zuguchi, M.; Miki, Y.; Onodera, Y.; Fujishima, F.; Takeyama, D.; Okamoto, H.; Miyata, G.; Sato, A.; Satomi, S.; Sasano, H. Estrogen receptor α and β in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Sci. 2012, 103, 1348–1355.
  46. Al-Khyatt, W.; Tufarelli, C.; Khan, R.; Iftikhar, S.Y. Selective oestrogen receptor antagonists inhibit oesophageal cancer cell proliferation in vitro. BMC Cancer 2018, 18, 121.
  47. Zhang, Z.; He, Q.; Fu, S.; Zheng, Z. Estrogen receptors in regulating cell proliferation of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Involvement of intracellular Ca2+ signaling. Pathol. Oncol. Res. 2017, 23, 329–334.
  48. Hou, Y.; Fan, W.; Yang, W.; Samdani, A.Q.; Jackson, A.O.; Qu, S. Farnesoid X receptor: An important factor in blood glucose regulation. Clin. Chim. Acta 2019, 495, 29–34.
  49. Zhang, C.; Wang, Z.; Feng, Q.; Chen, W.-D.; Wang, Y.-D. Farnesoid X receptor: A potential therapeutic target in multiple organs. Histol. Histopathol. 2021, 35, 1403–1414.
  50. Massafra, V.; van Mil, S. FXR: A “homeostat” for hepatic nutrient metabolism. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Mol. Basis Dis. 2017, 1864, 45–59.
  51. Han, C.Y. Update on FXR biology: Promising therapeutic target? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 2069.
  52. Wang, H.; He, Q.; Wang, G.; Xu, X.; Hao, H. FXR modulators for enterohepatic and metabolic diseases. Expert Opin. Ther. Pat. 2018, 28, 765–782.
  53. Modica, S.; Gadaleta, R.M.; Moschetta, A. Deciphering the nuclear bile acid receptor FXR paradigm. Nucl. Recept. Signal. 2010, 8, e005.
  54. Forman, B.M.; Goode, E.; Chen, J.; Oro, A.E.; Bradley, D.J.; Perlmann, T.; Noonan, D.J.; Burka, L.T.; McMorris, T.; Lamph, W.W.; et al. Identification of a nuclear receptor that is activated by farnesol metabolites. Cell 1995, 81, 687–693.
  55. Girisa, S.; Henamayee, S.; Parama, D.; Rana, V.; Dutta, U.; Kunnumakkara, A.B. Targeting Farnesoid X receptor (FXR) for developing novel therapeutics against cancer. Mol. Biomed. 2021, 2, 21.
  56. De Gottardi, A.; Dumonceau, J.M.; Bruttin, F.; Vonlaufen, A.; Morard, I.; Spahr, L.; Rubbia-Brandt, L.; Frossard, J.L.; Dinjens, W.N.; Rabinovitch, P.S.; et al. Expression of the bile acid receptor FXR in Barrett’s esophagus and enhancement of apoptosis by guggulsterone in vitro. Mol. Cancer 2006, 5, 48.
  57. Guan, B.; Li, H.; Yang, Z.; Hoque, A.; Xu, X. Inhibition of farnesoid X receptor controls esophageal cancer cell growth in vitro and in nude mouse xenografts. Cancer 2013, 119, 1321–1329.
  58. Nortunen, M.; Vakiparta, N.; Porvari, K.; Saarnio, J.; Karttunen, T.J.; Huhta, H. Pathophysiology of reflux oesophagitis: Role of Toll-like receptors 2 and 4 and Farnesoid X receptor. Virchows Arch. 2021, 479, 285–293.
  59. Feng, Q.; Zhang, H.; Yao, D.; Zhang, X.; Chen, W.D.; Wang, Y.D. Activation of FXR suppresses esophageal squamous cell carcinoma through antagonizing ERK1/2 signaling pathway. Cancer Manag. Res. 2021, 13, 5907–5918.
  60. Michalik, L.; Auwerx, J.; Berger, J.P.; Chatterjee, V.K.; Glass, C.K.; Gonzalez, F.J.; Grimaldi, P.A.; Kadowaki, T.; Lazar, M.A.; O’Rahilly, S.; et al. International union of pharmacology. LXI. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors. Pharmacol. Rev. 2006, 58, 726–741.
  61. Mirza, A.Z.; Althagafi, I.I.; Shamshad, H. Role of PPAR receptor in different diseases and their ligands: Physiological importance and clinical implications. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2019, 166, 502–513.
  62. Wang, Y.; Nakajima, T.; Gonzalez, F.J.; Tanaka, N. PPARs as metabolic regulators in the liver: Lessons from liver-specific PPAR-null mice. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2061.
  63. Li, X.; Zhu, Y.; Keaton, M.; Baranova, A.; Liu, S.; Hu, X.; Li, Q.; Cheng, L.; Zhou, P.; Cao, H.; et al. Variants and expression changes in PPAR-encoding genes display no significant association with schizophrenia. Biosci. Rep. 2020, 40, BSR20201083.
  64. Gee, V.M.; Wong, F.S.; Ramachandran, L.; Sethi, G.; Kumar, A.P.; Yap, C.W. Identification of novel peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) agonists using molecular modeling method. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2014, 28, 1143–1151.
  65. Ramachandran, L.; Manu, K.A.; Shanmugam, M.K.; Li, F.; Siveen, K.S.; Vali, S.; Kapoor, S.; Abbasi, T.; Surana, R.; Smoot, D.T.; et al. Isorhamnetin inhibits proliferation and invasion and induces apoptosis through the modulation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ activation pathway in gastric cancer. J. Biol. Chem. 2012, 287, 38028–38040.
  66. Christofides, A.; Konstantinidou, E.; Jani, C.; Boussiotis, V.A. The role of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) in immune responses. Metab. Clin. Exp. 2021, 114, 154338.
  67. Chawla, A.; Repa, J.J.; Evans, R.M.; Mangelsdorf, D.J. Nuclear receptors and lipid physiology: Opening the X-files. Science 2001, 294, 1866–1870.
  68. Sikka, S.; Chen, L.; Sethi, G.; Kumar, A.P. Targeting PPARγ signaling cascade for the prevention and treatment of prostate cancer. PPAR Res. 2012, 2012, 968040.
  69. Berger, J.; Moller, D.E. The mechanisms of action of PPARs. Annu. Rev. Med. 2002, 53, 409–435.
  70. Yu, K.; Bayona, W.; Kallen, C.B.; Harding, H.P.; Ravera, C.P.; McMahon, G.; Brown, M.; Lazar, M.A. Differential activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors by eicosanoids. J. Biol. Chem. 1995, 270, 23975–23983.
  71. Altmann, R.; Hausmann, M.; Spottl, T.; Gruber, M.; Bull, A.W.; Menzel, K.; Vogl, D.; Herfarth, H.; Scholmerich, J.; Falk, W.; et al. 13-Oxo-ODE is an endogenous ligand for PPARγ in human colonic epithelial cells. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2007, 74, 612–622.
  72. Marion-Letellier, R.; Savoye, G.; Ghosh, S. Fatty acids, eicosanoids and PPAR gamma. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2016, 785, 44–49.
  73. Chen, L.; Yuan, Y.; Kar, S.; Kanchi, M.M.; Arora, S.; Kim, J.E.; Koh, P.F.; Yousef, E.; Samy, R.P.; Shanmugam, M.K.; et al. PPARγ ligand-induced annexin A1 expression determines chemotherapy response via deubiquitination of death domain kinase RIP in triple-negative breast cancers. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2017, 16, 2528–2542.
  74. Rumi, M.A.; Sato, H.; Ishihara, S.; Ortega, C.; Kadowaki, Y.; Kinoshita, Y. Growth inhibition of esophageal squamous carcinoma cells by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ ligands. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 2002, 140, 17–26.
  75. Fujii, D.; Yoshida, K.; Tanabe, K.; Hihara, J.; Toge, T. The ligands of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) gamma inhibit growth of human esophageal carcinoma cells through induction of apoptosis and cell cycle arrest. Anticancer Res. 2004, 24, 1409–1416.
  76. Terashita, Y.; Sasaki, H.; Haruki, N.; Nishiwaki, T.; Ishiguro, H.; Shibata, Y.; Kudo, J.; Konishi, S.; Kato, J.; Koyama, H.; et al. Decreased peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma gene expression is correlated with poor prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002, 32, 238–243.
  77. Han, F.; Zhang, S.; Liang, J.; Qiu, W. Clinicopathological and predictive significance of SIRT1 and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: The correlation with EGFR and Survivin. Pathol. Res. Pract. 2018, 214, 686–690.
  78. Wu, K.; Hu, Y.; Yan, K.; Qi, Y.; Zhang, C.; Zhu, D.; Liu, D.; Zhao, S. microRNA-10b confers cisplatin resistance by activating AKT/mTOR/P70S6K signaling via targeting PPARγ in esophageal cancer. J. Cell. Physiol. 2020, 235, 1247–1258.
  79. Cui, L.; Xu, F.; Wu, K.; Li, L.; Qiao, T.; Li, Z.; Chen, T.; Sun, C. Anticancer effects and possible mechanisms of lycopene intervention on N-methylbenzylnitrosamine induced esophageal cancer in F344 rats based on PPARγ. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2020, 881, 173230.
  80. Kizaibek, M.; Wubuli, A.; Gu, Z.; Bahetjan, D.; Tursinbai, L.; Nurhamit, K.; Chen, B.; Wang, J.; Tahan, O.; Cao, P. Effects of an ethyl acetate extract of Daphne altaica stem bark on the cell cycle, apoptosis and expression of PPARγ in Eca109 human esophageal carcinoma cells. Mol. Med. Rep. 2020, 22, 1400–1408.
  81. Ma, S.; Zhou, B.; Yang, Q.; Pan, Y.; Yang, W.; Freedland, S.J.; Ding, L.W.; Freeman, M.R.; Breunig, J.J.; Bhowmick, N.A.; et al. A transcriptional regulatory loop of master regulator transcription factors, PPARG, and fatty acid synthesis promotes esophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Res. 2021, 81, 1216–1229.
  82. Konturek, P.C.; Nikiforuk, A.; Kania, J.; Raithel, M.; Hahn, E.G.; Muhldorfer, S. Activation of NFκB represents the central event in the neoplastic progression associated with Barrett’s esophagus: A possible link to the inflammation and overexpression of COX-2, PPARγ and growth factors. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2004, 49, 1075–1083.
  83. Takahashi, H.; Fujita, K.; Fujisawa, T.; Yonemitsu, K.; Tomimoto, A.; Ikeda, I.; Yoneda, M.; Masuda, T.; Schaefer, K.; Saubermann, L.J.; et al. Inhibition of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma activity in esophageal carcinoma cells results in a drastic decrease of invasive properties. Cancer Sci. 2006, 97, 854–860.
  84. Sawayama, H.; Ishimoto, T.; Watanabe, M.; Yoshida, N.; Sugihara, H.; Kurashige, J.; Hirashima, K.; Iwatsuki, M.; Baba, Y.; Oki, E. Small molecule agonists of PPAR-γ exert therapeutic effects in esophageal cancer. Cancer Res. 2014, 74, 575–585.
  85. Al-Taie, O.H.; Graf, T.; Illert, B.; Katzenberger, T.; Mörk, H.; Kraus, M.R.; Barthelmes, H.U.; Scheurlen, M.; Seufert, J. Differential effects of PPARγ activation by the oral antidiabetic agent pioglitazone in Barrett’s carcinoma in vitro and in vivo. J. Gastroenterol. 2009, 44, 919–929.
  86. di Masi, A.; Leboffe, L.; De Marinis, E.; Pagano, F.; Cicconi, L.; Rochette-Egly, C.; Lo-Coco, F.; Ascenzi, P.; Nervi, C. Retinoic acid receptors: From molecular mechanisms to cancer therapy. Mol. Asp. Med. 2015, 41, 1–115.
  87. Sun, S.Y.; Lotan, R. Retinoids and their receptors in cancer development and chemoprevention. Crit. Rev. Oncol./Hematol. 2002, 41, 41–55.
  88. Xu, X.C. Tumor-suppressive activity of retinoic acid receptor-β in cancer. Cancer Lett. 2007, 253, 14–24.
  89. Alvarez, S.; Bourguet, W.; Gronemeyer, H.; de Lera, A.R. Retinoic acid receptor modulators: A perspective on recent advances and promises. Expert Opin. Ther. Pat. 2011, 21, 55–63.
  90. Breems-de Ridder, M.C.; Lowenberg, B.; Jansen, J.H. Retinoic acid receptor fusion proteins: Friend or foe. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2000, 165, 1–6.
  91. Mongan, N.P.; Gudas, L.J. Diverse actions of retinoid receptors in cancer prevention and treatment. Differentiation 2007, 75, 853–870.
  92. Altucci, L.; Leibowitz, M.D.; Ogilvie, K.M.; de Lera, A.R.; Gronemeyer, H. RAR and RXR modulation in cancer and metabolic disease. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2007, 6, 793–810.
  93. Qiu, H.; Zhang, W.; El-Naggar, A.K.; Lippman, S.M.; Lin, P.; Lotan, R.; Xu, X.C. Loss of retinoic acid receptor-β expression is an early event during esophageal carcinogenesis. Am. J. Pathol. 1999, 155, 1519–1523.
  94. Lord, R.V.; Tsai, P.I.; Danenberg, K.D.; Peters, J.H.; Demeester, T.R.; Tsao-Wei, D.D.; Groshen, S.; Salonga, D.; Park, J.M.; Crookes, P.F.; et al. Retinoic acid receptor-α messenger RNA expression is increased and retinoic acid receptor-γ expression is decreased in Barrett’s intestinal metaplasia, dysplasia, adenocarcinoma sequence. Surgery 2001, 129, 267–276.
  95. Xu, X.C.; Lee, J.J.; Wu, T.T.; Hoque, A.; Ajani, J.A.; Lippman, S.M. Increased retinoic acid receptor-β4 correlates in vivo with reduced retinoic acid receptor-β2 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2005, 14, 826–829.
  96. Mao, X.M.; Li, H.; Zhang, X.Y.; Zhou, P.; Fu, Q.R.; Chen, Q.E.; Shen, J.X.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Q.X.; Shen, D.Y. Retinoic acid receptor α knockdown suppresses the tumorigenicity of esophageal carcinoma via Wnt/β-catenin pathway. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2018, 63, 3348–3358.
  97. Song, S.; Xu, X.C. Effect of benzopyrene diol epoxide on expression of retinoic acid receptor-β in immortalized esophageal epithelial cells and esophageal cancer cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2001, 281, 872–877.
  98. Song, S.; Lippman, S.M.; Zou, Y.; Ye, X.; Ajani, J.A.; Xu, X.C. Induction of cyclooxygenase-2 by benzopyrene diol epoxide through inhibition of retinoic acid receptor-β 2 expression. Oncogene 2005, 24, 8268–8276.
  99. Ye, F.; Xu, X.C. Benzopyrene diol epoxide suppresses retinoic acid receptor-β2 expression by recruiting DNA (cytosine-5-)-methyltransferase 3A. Mol. Cancer 2010, 9, 93.
  100. Li, M.; Song, S.; Lippman, S.M.; Zhang, X.K.; Liu, X.; Lotan, R.; Xu, X.C. Induction of retinoic acid receptor-β suppresses cyclooxygenase-2 expression in esophageal cancer cells. Oncogene 2002, 21, 411–418.
  101. Song, S.; Guan, B.; Men, T.; Hoque, A.; Lotan, R.; Xu, X.C. Antitumor effect of retinoic acid receptor-β2 associated with suppression of cyclooxygenase-2. Cancer Prev. Res. 2009, 2, 274–280.
  102. Xu, M.; Jin, Y.L.; Fu, J.; Huang, H.; Chen, S.Z.; Qu, P.; Tian, H.M.; Liu, Z.Y.; Zhang, W. The abnormal expression of retinoic acid receptor-β, p 53 and Ki67 protein in normal, premalignant and malignant esophageal tissues. World J. Gastroenterol. 2002, 8, 200–202.
  103. Zhang, W.; Rashid, A.; Wu, H.; Xu, X.C. Differential expression of retinoic acid receptors and p53 protein in normal, premalignant, and malignant esophageal tissues. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2001, 127, 237–242.
  104. Fujishima, F.; Suzuki, T.; Nakamura, Y.; Taniyama, Y.; Ono, K.; Sugawara, A.; Miyazaki, S.; Moriya, T.; Sato, A.; Satomi, S.; et al. Retinoid receptors in human esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Retinoid X receptor as a potent prognostic factor. Pathol. Int. 2011, 61, 401–408.
  105. Mizuiri, H.; Yoshida, K.; Toge, T.; Oue, N.; Aung, P.P.; Noguchi, T.; Yasui, W. DNA methylation of genes linked to retinoid signaling in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: DNA methylation of CRBP1 and TIG1 is associated with tumor stage. Cancer Sci. 2005, 96, 571–577.
  106. Roth, M.J.; Abnet, C.C.; Hu, N.; Wang, Q.H.; Wei, W.Q.; Green, L.; D’Alelio, M.; Qiao, Y.L.; Dawsey, S.M.; Taylor, P.R.; et al. p16, MGMT, RARβ2, CLDN3, CRBP and MT1G gene methylation in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and its precursor lesions. Oncol. Rep. 2006, 15, 1591–1597.
  107. Yang, Z.; Guan, B.; Men, T.; Fujimoto, J.; Xu, X. Comparable molecular alterations in 4-nitroquinoline 1-oxide-induced oral and esophageal cancer in mice and in human esophageal cancer, associated with poor prognosis of patients. In Vivo 2013, 27, 473–484.
  108. Liang, Z.D.; Lippman, S.M.; Wu, T.T.; Lotan, R.; Xu, X.C. RRIG1 mediates effects of retinoic acid receptor β2 on tumor cell growth and gene expression through binding to and inhibition of RhoA. Cancer Res. 2006, 66, 7111–7118.
  109. Wang, J.; Zhao, S.L.; Li, Y.; Meng, M.; Qin, C.Y. 4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone induces retinoic acid receptor β hypermethylation through DNA methyltransferase 1 accumulation in esophageal squamous epithelial cells. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2012, 13, 2207–2212.
  110. Liu, G.; Wu, M.; Levi, G.; Ferrari, N. Inhibition of cancer cell growth by all-trans retinoic acid and its analog N-(4-hydroxyphenyl) retinamide: A possible mechanism of action via regulation of retinoid receptors expression. Int. J. Cancer 1998, 78, 248–254.
  111. Liu, Z.; Zhang, L.; Ding, F.; Li, J.; Guo, M.; Li, W.; Wang, Y.; Yu, Z.; Zhan, Q.; Wu, M.; et al. 5-Aza-2′-deoxycytidine induces retinoic acid receptor-β2 demethylation and growth inhibition in esophageal squamous carcinoma cells. Cancer Lett. 2005, 230, 271–283.
  112. Liu, Z.M.; Ding, F.; Guo, M.Z.; Zhang, L.Y.; Wu, M.; Liu, Z.H. Downregulation of retinoic acid receptor-β2 expression is linked to aberrant methylation in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines. World J. Gastroenterol. 2004, 10, 771–775.
  113. Li, R.N.; Yu, F.J.; Wu, C.C.; Chen, Y.K.; Yu, C.C.; Chou, S.H.; Lee, J.Y.; Cheng, Y.J.; Wu, M.T.; Wu, I.C. Methylation status of retinoic acid receptor β2 promoter and global DNA in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J. Surg. Oncol. 2014, 109, 623–627.
  114. Dominguez, M.; Alvarez, S.; de Lera, A.R. Natural and Structure-based RXR Ligand Scaffolds and Their Functions. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2017, 17, 631–662.
  115. Brabender, J.; Lord, R.V.; Metzger, R.; Park, J.; Salonga, D.; Danenberg, K.D.; Holscher, A.H.; Danenberg, P.V.; Schneider, P.M. Role of retinoid X receptor mRNA expression in Barrett’s esophagus. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2004, 8, 413–422.
  116. Garcia, P.; Lorenzo, P.; de Lera, A.R. Natural ligands of RXR receptors. Methods Enzymol. 2020, 637, 209–234.
  117. Ren, H.Y.; Guo, Y.H.; Yang, L.M.; Dai, T.J.; Lin, M.Z.; Yu, L.; Zhu, Q.G.; Meng, J.R. Expression and clinical significance of retinoid X receptor α in esophageal carcinoma. Ann. Diagn. Pathol. 2018, 34, 110–115.
  118. Hashimoto, Y.; Shimada, Y.; Itami, A.; Ito, T.; Kawamura, J.; Kawabe, A.; Kaganoi, J.; Maeda, M.; Watanabe, G.; Imamura, M. Growth inhibition through activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ in human oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Eur. J. Cancer 2003, 39, 2239–2246.
  119. Wang, Y.; Zhu, J.; DeLuca, H.F. Where is the vitamin D receptor? Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2012, 523, 123–133.
  120. Lin, L.; Zhang, L.; Li, C.; Gai, Z.; Li, Y. Vitamin D and vitamin D receptor: New insights in the treatment of hypertension. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2019, 20, 984–995.
  121. Kato, S. The function of vitamin D receptor in vitamin D action. J. Biochem. 2000, 127, 717–722.
  122. Mutchie, T.R.; Yu, O.B.; Di Milo, E.S.; Arnold, L.A. Alternative binding sites at the vitamin D receptor and their ligands. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2019, 485, 1–8.
  123. Pike, J.W. Vitamin D3 receptors: Structure and function in transcription. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 1991, 11, 189–216.
  124. Yang, S.; Li, A.; Wang, J.; Liu, J.; Han, Y.; Zhang, W.; Li, Y.C.; Zhang, H. Vitamin D receptor: A novel therapeutic target for kidney diseases. Curr. Med. Chem. 2018, 25, 3256–3271.
  125. Zhou, Z.; Xia, Y.; Bandla, S.; Zakharov, V.; Wu, S.; Peters, J.; Godfrey, T.E.; Sun, J. Vitamin D receptor is highly expressed in precancerous lesions and esophageal adenocarcinoma with significant sex difference. Hum. Pathol. 2014, 45, 1744–1751.
  126. Bao, Y.; Zhang, S.; Guo, Y.; Wei, X.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Ma, M.; Yang, W. Stromal expression of JNK1 and VDR is associated with the prognosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Clin. Transl. Oncol. 2018, 20, 1185–1195.
  127. Trowbridge, R.; Sharma, P.; Hunter, W.J.; Agrawal, D.K. Vitamin D receptor expression and neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal adenocarcinoma. Exp. Mol. Pathol. 2012, 93, 147–153.
  128. Trowbridge, R.; Mittal, S.K.; Sharma, P.; Hunter, W.J.; Agrawal, D.K. Vitamin D receptor expression in the mucosal tissue at the gastroesophageal junction. Exp. Mol. Pathol. 2012, 93, 246–249.
  129. Janmaat, V.T.; Van De Winkel, A.; Peppelenbosch, M.P.; Spaander, M.C.; Uitterlinden, A.G.; Pourfarzad, F.; Tilanus, H.W.; Rygiel, A.M.; Moons, L.M.; Arp, P.P.; et al. Vitamin D receptor polymorphisms are associated with reduced esophageal vitamin D receptor expression and reduced esophageal adenocarcinoma risk. Mol. Med. 2015, 21, 346–354.
  130. Singhal, S.; Kapoor, H.; Subramanian, S.; Agrawal, D.K.; Mittal, S.K. Polymorphisms of genes related to function and metabolism of vitamin D in esophageal adenocarcinoma. J. Gastrointest. Cancer 2019, 50, 867–878.
  131. Abu-Farsakh, S.; Wu, T.; Lalonde, A.; Sun, J.; Zhou, Z. High expression of Claudin-2 in esophageal carcinoma and precancerous lesions is significantly associated with the bile salt receptors VDR and TGR5. BMC Gastroenterol. 2017, 17, 33.
  132. Oladimeji, P.O.; Chen, T. PXR: More than just a master xenobiotic receptor. Mol. Pharmacol. 2018, 93, 119–127.
  133. Pondugula, S.R.; Mani, S. Pregnane xenobiotic receptor in cancer pathogenesis and therapeutic response. Cancer Lett. 2013, 328, 1–9.
  134. Xing, Y.; Yan, J.; Niu, Y. PXR: A center of transcriptional regulation in cancer. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2020, 10, 197–206.
  135. Noreault, T.L.; Kostrubsky, V.E.; Wood, S.G.; Nichols, R.C.; Strom, S.C.; Trask, H.W.; Wrighton, S.A.; Evans, R.M.; Jacobs, J.M.; Sinclair, P.R. Arsenite decreases CYP3A4 and RXRα in primary human hepatocytes. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2005, 33, 993–1003.
  136. van de Winkel, A.; Menke, V.; Capello, A.; Moons, L.M.; Pot, R.G.; van Dekken, H.; Siersema, P.D.; Kusters, J.G.; van der Laan, L.J.; Kuipers, E.J. Expression, localization and polymorphisms of the nuclear receptor PXR in Barrett’s esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma. BMC Gastroenterol. 2011, 11, 108.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Academic Video Service
Feedback