4.7 Article

Cellular senescence contributes to radiation-induced hyposalivation by affecting the stem/progenitor cell niche

Journal

CELL DEATH & DISEASE
Volume 11, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41419-020-03074-9

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. China Scholarship Council
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [82003312]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Radiotherapy for head and neck cancer is associated with impairment of salivary gland function and consequent xerostomia, which has a devastating effect on the quality of life of the patients. The mechanism of radiation-induced salivary gland damage is not completely understood. Cellular senescence is a permanent state of cell cycle arrest accompanied by a secretory phenotype which contributes to inflammation and tissue deterioration. Genotoxic stresses, including radiation-induced DNA damage, are known to induce a senescence response. Here, we show that radiation induces cellular senescence preferentially in the salivary gland stem/progenitor cell niche of mouse models and patients. Similarly, salivary gland-derived organoids show increased expression of senescence markers and pro-inflammatory senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) factors after radiation exposure. Clearance of senescent cells by selective removal of p16Ink4a-positive cells by the drug ganciclovir or the senolytic drug ABT263 lead to increased stem cell self-renewal capacity as measured by organoid formation efficiency. Additionally, pharmacological treatment with ABT263 in mice irradiated to the salivary glands mitigates tissue degeneration, thus preserving salivation. Our data suggest that senescence in the salivary gland stem/progenitor cell niche contributes to radiation-induced hyposalivation. Pharmacological targeting of senescent cells may represent a therapeutic strategy to prevent radiotherapy-induced xerostomia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available