doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.590273
(Circulation. 2006;113:5-8.)
© 2006 American Heart Association, Inc.
Editorial |
Liver X Receptor Activation and High-Density Lipoprotein Biology
A Reversal of Fortune?
From the Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard School of Public Health (C.-H.L.); Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women’s Hospital (J.P.); and Donald Reynolds Center for Clinical Cardiovascular Research, Harvard Medical School (J.P.), Boston, Mass.
Correspondence to Jorge Plutzky, MD, 77 Ave Louis Pasteur, NRB 740, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail jplutzky{at}rics.bwh.harvard.edu
Key Words: Editorials • lipids • lipoproteins • liver X receptor • peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors
A fortunate development in medicine has been the unraveling of the relationship between LDLs and atherosclerosis, as evidenced by the dramatic impact of LDL lowering on cardiovascular events.1,2 Risk reduction by decreasing LDL could also be considered fortuitous; average LDL levels in Western society may well be nearly double "ideal," even if "normal" or "physiological" cholesterol levels remain difficult to define. Humans typically are born with LDL levels in the 30-µg/dL range; in more agrarian societies, LDL levels average 70 to 100 mg/dL.3 Thus, the cardiovascular benefits documented over the past decade with HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) have occurred through large-scale reductions of LDL by 30% to 70%.4 In contrast, in most cases, halving blood pressure or glucose would not be tolerated. Together, these observations support an "overflow" model in which LDL promotes atherosclerosis at levels that far outstrip any physiological role or survival advantage. Despite this, an asymptote of risk reduction may be reached once LDL levels have been lowered to currently recommended levels, leaving scientists and clinicians to look elsewhere for therapeutic opportunities to reduce the on-treatment event rate evident in statin trials, even at LDL levels well below 100 mg/dL.5 In this regard, HDL cholesterol (HDL) has received considerable attention given strong epidemiological data for its protective effects, encouraging clinical data with even modest HDL raising, and a rational scientific mechanism through HDL-mediated reverse cholesterol transport.6
Article p 90
One approach to raising HDL is to activate nuclear hormone nuclear receptors that control transcription of key HDL components like apolipoprotein A1 (apoA1). The identification of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR
, 
, and ß/
) and liver X receptors (LXR and ß) as "sensors" of dietary lipids and cholesterol has provided just such an opportunity.7 Like other steroid hormone nuclear receptors, PPARs and LXRs are ligand-activated transcriptional factors regulating expression of gene targets involved in metabolic homeostasis.8 PPAR, for instance, is the nuclear target for the thiazolidinediones, a drug class that increases insulin sensitivity through PPAR-dependent transcriptional regulation in adipose tissues and possibly in muscle and liver.9 PPAR is the target for the triglyceride-lowering fibrates.10 Both PPAR and PPAR agonists raise HDL.11 Considerable in vitro, animal model, and human surrogate marker studies implicate PPARs as also limiting inflammation and atherosclerosis.12,13 The fact that PPARs have been proved "drugable" targets has further increased interest in the pharmacological activation of other nuclear receptors like LXR for therapeutic purposes. LXRs, activated by oxysterols, are key regulators of several members of the ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter family important for reverse cholesterol transport and hence potentially atherosclerosis.14
Reverse cholesterol transport can be reduced to 3 major steps (see the Figure).15 First, cholesterol located in the periphery is taken up by tissue-based macrophages and moved to HDL through transporters like ABCA1 and ABCG1. HDL can then return to the liver where its cholesterol can be converted to bile acids through a process mediated mainly by cholesterol 7-hydroxylase (Cyp7a). Finally, bile acids and cholesterol are delivered to intestine where they can be excreted in feces. Although the excretory mechanisms remain largely elusive, ABCG5 and ABCG8 appear important to cholesterol handling.16 This simplified schema supports reverse cholesterol transport as a potentially central pathway for limiting or slowing atherosclerosis by promoting cholesterol removal from macrophages and foam cells at the arterial wall. The protective benefits of markedly elevated HDL levels and the decrease in atherosclerosis seen after the injection of synthetic forms of apoA1 Milano support such notions and the pursuit of LXR agonists as novel antiatherogenic agents.6,17 Indeed, studies from several groups have demonstrated that 5 critical reverse cholesterol transport genes are LXR regulated.14 Consistent with this, LXR ligands increase cholesterol efflux in cultured macrophages and suppress atherosclerosis in both LDLR–/– and apoE–/– mice.18 Despite these studies identifying LXRs as key reverse cholesterol transport regulators, it has remained unclear whether these LXR/macrophage effects in vitro can also occur in vivo and whether LXR activation involves all 3 reverse cholesterol transport components.
|
In this issue of Circulation, Naik and colleagues19 use a simple yet clever approach to address these questions directly. In this study, reverse cholesterol transport was tracked by injecting 3H-cholesterol-loaded J774 macrophage-like cells intraperitoneally into 3 mouse models: wild-type C57BL/6, LDLR/apobec-1 double knockout, and human apoB/cholesterol esterase transfer protein (CETP) double-transgenic mice. Each model also received either the LXR synthetic ligand GW3965 by gavage for 10 days before the experiment or vehicle alone. This approach allowed the investigators to separately test the impact of treating the J774 macrophages with GW3965 before injection. By analyzing 3H tracer levels in serum, bile acids, and feces, the authors could quantify reverse cholesterol transport in vivo. When these 3H tracer levels were analyzed, systemic GW3965 treatment increased macrophage-derived labeled cholesterol in serum and feces in all 3 models and increased HDL levels in C57BL/6 and apobec/CETP transgenic mice. In so doing, these investigators provide in vivo proof that LXR activation increases (reverses) cholesterol transport from macrophages through to excretion.
The study by Naik et al19 provides an important proof of concept with regard to LXR and reverse cholesterol transport while also offering several other interesting observations. First, pretreating J774 cells with the LXR ligand had no effect on reverse cholesterol transport. This finding may suggest that macrophage cholesterol efflux does not play an important role in LXR actions or that the cellular effects of the LXR agonist were short-lived on injection. Of note, a prior report using bone marrow transplantation demonstrated that macrophages are essential for LXR-mediated atheroprotection.20 Thus, all 3 components of the reverse cholesterol transport may be coordinately regulated and required for efficient cholesterol elimination. Naik et al19 also found unchanged fecal bile acid excretion (except for LDLR/apobec-1–knockout mice) after LXR ligand treatment despite overall increased cholesterol excretion. The authors suggest that this may have been due to rapid turnover. Bile acid synthesis is regulated by a variety of mechanisms, including negative feedback regulation of Cyp7a by bile acids themselves; when this pathway is suppressed, other regulators such as Cyp27a in mice can compensate. This study also supports LXR activation as modulating cholesterol excretion in addition to its known effects on decreasing cholesterol absorption in enterocytes through changes in ABCG5 and ABCG8.14 In this study, GW3965 treatment consistently increased excretion of macrophage-derived cholesterol in all models studied here, indicating that these 2 transporters may also facilitate cholesterol excretion. Because Cyp7a is not regulated by LXRs in humans, this study suggests that LXR agonists may still be able to promote cholesterol excretion in the intestine independently of Cyp7a. The relevance of these reverse cholesterol transport assay in peritoneal macrophages to the macrophages in the arterial wall remains to be established but is certainly plausible.
LXR activation may have benefits beyond cholesterol homeostasis because these receptors also modulate innate immunity.21 LXR ligands inhibit the expression of inflammatory mediators, including interleukin-6, inducible nitric oxide, and cyclooxygenase-2, all of which have been implicated in atherosclerosis.2 This coordinated regulation of cholesterol homeostasis and inflammation by LXRs further supports these receptors as promising antiatherosclerotic targets. There are, however, several important issues to be resolved. First, mouse and human lipid metabolism differs, an ongoing challenge in translating mouse data to humans. Furthermore, mouse and human LXRs appear to direct distinct transcriptional activities. For example, human LXR activity can be amplified through positive autoregulation.22 In addition, CETP expression in humans is induced by LXRs, but Cyp7a is not.14 It is unclear how upregulation of CETP by LXRs affects levels of HDL and atherogenesis. Most importantly, activation of LXRs increases sterol regulatory element-binding protein-1c expression in liver, raising concern about hepatic steatosis.14 Indeed, animal studies have demonstrated that LXR ligand treatment can significantly increase circulating triglyceride levels, although that did not occur here with GW3965.18 This LXR/triglyceride effect is mediated predominantly through hepatic LXR. One attractive strategy for avoiding hypertriglyceridemia is to develop LXRß-specific agonists or tissue-specific LXR modulators. It is interesting to note that LXR is transcriptionally controlled by PPAR in the macrophage but not in the liver.23 The development of modulators of PPARs and LXRs that amplify the PPAR-LXR transcriptional activity locally in the macrophage could also be a useful approach.
LXR agonists can be placed in the context of other drugs being developed that focus on HDL.6,24 CETP inhibitors potently increase HDL levels. CETP mediates the exchange of cholesteryl ester in HDL for triglyceride in VLDL, thus decreasing levels of HDL and increasing proatherogenic VLDL and LDL. CETP inhibitors maintain HDL levels by blocking this process. Torcetrapib and JTT-705 are 2 CETP inhibitors that increase HDL in humans.24 Although the impact of such drugs on human atherosclerosis remains under study, the effect of JTT-705 on atherosclerotic lesion development in cholesterol-fed rabbits has been variable. One study showed a 70% reduction in the total atherosclerotic lesion area after 6 months of treatment25; a second found no difference between control and JTT-705–treated groups after 3 months26 despite similar increases in HDL levels (&2 fold) in both reports. PPAR ligands also increase HDL levels &40% in primates, although no PPAR agonist has yet been approved for clinical use.27
The present study establishes that LXR agonists promote cholesterol efflux from macrophages to HDL and ultimately intestinal excretion. Interestingly, in the LDLR–/– background, the LXR ligand GW3965 did not raise HDL but lowered total cholesterol and reduced the lesion size by 50%,18 indicating that the rate of cholesterol excretion exceeds or equals that of efflux. Perhaps the ability of HDL to promote cholesterol throughput and the absolute level of HDL represent separate and not always parallel parameters. Interestingly, although individuals with the apoA1 Milano genotype have low HDL levels, they have no increased risk of atherosclerosis.3 The implications of throughput capacity in terms of the clinical responses to CETP inhibition remain to be determined.
No doubt, insights into nuclear receptor biology will continue to be applied to treating human disorders. Indeed, in 2005, the first large-scale clinical cardiovascular thiazolidinedione trial was reported, a study in which HDL increases may have contributed to the results seen13; findings from a large fibrate/PPAR agonist trial were released28; and a dual PPAR/ agonist was submitted to the Food and Drug Administration for approval.29 Each of these steps generated controversy, but it is likely that progress will continue, extending to ongoing attempts to harness LXR activation, including its effects on cholesterol transport and excretion that Naik and colleagues19 have proved occur in vivo with LXR agonists. Ultimately, clinical end points will be needed if we are to move beyond limiting cholesterol overflow and toward understanding if increased reverse cholesterol "throughput," by LXR activation or any other approach, is truly a reversal of fortune for patients at risk for atherosclerosis and its complications.
 |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Disclosures
None.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association.
|
References |
|---|
 Top References |
|---|
1. Brown MS, Goldstein JL. Koch’s postulates for cholesterol. Cell. 1992; 71: 187–188.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
2. Libby P, Theroux P. Pathophysiology of coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2005; 111: 3481–3488.
3. Durrington PN. Hyperlipidemia. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1995.
4. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, Brewer HB Jr, Clark LT, Hunninghake DB, Pasternak RC, Smith SC Jr, Stone NJ. Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44: 720–732.
5. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, Rader DJ, Rouleau JL, Belder R, Joyal SV, Hill KA, Pfeffer MA, Skene AM. Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350: 1495–1504.
6. Linsel-Nitschke P, Tall AR. HDL as a target in the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005; 4: 193–205.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
7. Chawla A, Repa JJ, Evans RM, Mangelsdorf DJ. Nuclear receptors and lipid physiology: opening the X-files. Science. 2001; 294: 1866–1870.
8. Willson TM, Brown PJ, Sternbach DD, Henke BR. The PPARs: from orphan receptors to drug discovery. J Med Chem. 2000; 43: 527–450.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Yki-Jarvinen H. Thiazolidinediones. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 1106–1118.
10. Staels B, Dallongeville J, Auwerx J, Schoonjans K, Leitersdorf E, Fruchart JC. Mechanism of action of fibrates on lipid and lipoprotein metabolism. Circulation. 1998; 98: 2088–2093.
11. Pelton PD, Patel M, Demarest KT. Nuclear receptors as potential targets for modulating reverse cholesterol transport. Curr Top Med Chem. 2005; 5: 265–282.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
12. Plutzky J. PPARs as therapeutic targets: reverse cardiology? Science. 2003; 302: 406–407.
13. Dormandy JA, Charbonnel B, Eckland DJ, Erdmann E, Massi-Benedetti M, Moules IK, Skene AM, Tan MH, Lefebvre PJ, Murray GD, Standl E, Wilcox RG, Wilhelmsen L, Betteridge J, Birkeland K, Golay A, Heine RJ, Koranyi L, Laakso M, Mokan M, Norkus A, Pirags V, Podar T, Scheen A, Scherbaum W, Schernthaner G, Schmitz O, Skrha J, Smith U, Taton J. Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROACTIVE Study (Prospective Pioglitazone Clinical Trial in Macrovascular Events): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005; 366: 1279–1289.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
14. Tontonoz P, Mangelsdorf DJ. Liver X receptor signaling pathways in cardiovascular disease. Mol Endocrinol. 2003; 17: 985–993.
15. Groen AK, Oude Elferink RP, Verkade HJ, Kuipers F. The ins and outs of reverse cholesterol transport. Ann Med. 2004; 36: 135–45.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
16. Berge KE, Tian H, Graf GA, Yu L, Grishin NV, Schultz J, Kwiterovich P, Shan B, Barnes R, Hobbs HH. Accumulation of dietary cholesterol in sitosterolemia caused by mutations in adjacent ABC transporters. Science. 2000; 290: 1771–1775.
17. Nissen SE, Tsunoda T, Tuzcu EM, Schoenhagen P, Cooper CJ, Yasin M, Eaton GM, Lauer MA, Sheldon WS, Grines CL, Halpern S, Crowe T, Blankenship JC, Kerensky R. Effect of recombinant ApoA-I Milano on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003; 290: 2292–2300.
18. Joseph SB, McKilligin E, Pei L, Watson MA, Collins AR, Laffitte BA, Chen M, Noh G, Goodman J, Hagger GN, Tran J, Tippin TK, Wang X, Lusis AJ, Hsueh WA, Law RE, Collins JL, Willson TM, Tontonoz P. Synthetic LXR ligand inhibits the development of atherosclerosis in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99: 7604–7609.
19. Naik SU, Wang X, Da Silva JS, Jaye M, Macphee CH, Reilly MP, Billheimer JT, Rothblat GH, Rader DJ. Pharmacological activation of liver X receptors promotes reverse cholesterol transport in vivo. Circulation. 2006; 113: 90–97.
20. Levin N, Bischoff ED, Daige CL, Thomas D, Vu CT, Heyman RA, Tangirala RK, Schulman IG. Macrophage liver X receptor is required for antiatherogenic activity of LXR agonists. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2005; 25: 135–142.
21. Joseph SB, Castrillo A, Laffitte BA, Mangelsdorf DJ, Tontonoz P. Reciprocal regulation of inflammation and lipid metabolism by liver X receptors. Nat Med. 2003; 9: 213–219.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
22. Laffitte BA, Joseph SB, Walczak R, Pei L, Wilpitz DC, Collins JL, Tontonoz P. Autoregulation of the human liver X receptor alpha promoter. Mol Cell Biol. 2001; 21: 7558–7568.
23. Chawla A, Boisvert WA, Lee CH, Laffitte BA, Barak Y, Joseph SB, Liao D, Nagy L, Edwards PA, Curtiss LK, Evans RM, Tontonoz P. A PPAR-LXR-ABCA1 pathway in macrophages is involved in cholesterol efflux and atherogenesis. Mol Cell. 2001; 7: 161–171.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
24. Brewer HB Jr. Increasing HDL cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350: 1491–1494.
25. Okamoto H, Yonemori F, Wakitani K, Minowa T, Maeda K, Shinkai H. A cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor attenuates atherosclerosis in rabbits. Nature. 2000; 406: 203–207.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
26. Huang Z, Inazu A, Nohara A, Higashikata T, Mabuchi H. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor (JTT-705) and the development of atherosclerosis in rabbits with severe hypercholesterolaemia. Clin Sci (Lond). 2002; 103: 587–594.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Wallace JM, Schwarz M, Coward P, Houze J, Sawyer JK, Kelley KL, Chai A, Rudel LL. Effects of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha/delta agonists on HDL cholesterol in vervet monkeys. J Lipid Res. 2005; 46: 1009–1016.
28. Keech A, Simes RJ, Barter P, Best J, Scott R, Taskinen MR, Forder P, Pillai A, Davis T, Glasziou T, Drury P, Kesaniemi YA, Suliivan D, Hunt D, Colman P, d’Emden M, Whiting M, Ehnholm C, Laakso M; FIELD Study Investigators. Effects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9759 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005; 366: 1849–1861.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
29. Buse JB, Rubin CJ, Frederich R, Viraswami-Appanna K, Lin KC, Montoro R, Shockey G, Davidson JA. Muraglitazar, a dual (alpha/gamma) PPAR activator: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 24-week monotherapy trial in adult patients with type 2 diabetes. Clin Ther. 2005; 27: 1181–1195.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  L. Calpe-Berdiel, N. Rotllan, C. Fievet, R. Roig, F. Blanco-Vaca, and J. C. Escola-Gil Liver X receptor-mediated activation of reverse cholesterol transport from macrophages to feces in vivo requires ABCG5/G8 J. Lipid Res., September 1, 2008; 49(9): 1904 - 1911. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||