4.7 Article

In human keratinocytes the Common Deletion reflects donor variabilities rather than chronologic aging and can be induced by ultraviolet A irradiation

Journal

JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY
Volume 117, Issue 4, Pages 892-897

Publisher

BLACKWELL SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1046/j.0022-202x.2001.01513.x

Keywords

mitochondrial DNA; skin; TaqMan-PCR; ultraviolet radiation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mitochondrial DNA mutations play a major role in human aging processes and degenerative diseases. The most frequently reported marker for mutations of the mitochondrial DNA in human skin is a 4977 bp large-scale deletion, called the Common Deletion. Although this deletion is rarely detectable and constitutes only one example of the multitude of about 50,000 known mutations in mitochondrial DNA, it can represent the tip of the iceberg of all types of mitochondrial DNA mutations. We established a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assay to detect the Common Deletion in vitro as well as in vivo/ex vivo. In contrast to previous studies, we were able to demonstrate that the Common Deletion is frequently abundant in keratinocytes isolated from various donors. Quantitative analysis of the mutation indicated interperson variations but obviously no relation to the donors' ages. Prolonged proliferation of keratinocytes led to a distinct reduction in the amount of the Common Deletion. Single ultraviolet A irradiation (12 J per cm(2) and 15 J per cm(2)) neither in vitro nor in vivo increased the incidence of the mutation in keratinocytes, whereas repetitive irradiation resulted in a clear increase in vitro. Again, prolonged cultivation of these irradiated cells caused a significant reduction in the amounts of the deletion. In view of these results, the Common Deletion appears to be a useful marker rather for ultraviolet-A-induced alterations than for chronologic aging in human skin keratinocytes.

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