4.6 Article

Mechanisms of parenchymal injury and signaling pathways in ectatic ducts of chronic pancreatitis: implications for pancreatic carcinogenesis

期刊

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
卷 89, 期 5, 页码 489-497

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/labinvest.2009.19

关键词

pancreatitis; parenchymal injury; pancreatic carcinogenesis; pancreas

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pathobiology of chronic pancreatitis (CP) remains enigmatic despite remarkable progress made recently in uncovering key mechanisms involved in the initiation and progression of the disease. CP is increasingly thought of as a multifactorial disorder. Apoptosis plays a role in parenchymal destruction, the pathological hallmark of CP. The apoptotic mechanisms preferentially target the exocrine compartment, leaving endocrine islets relatively intact for a prolonged period. Exocrine cells shed their 'immunoprivileged' status, express death receptors, and are rendered susceptible to apoptosis induced by death ligands on infiltrating lymphocytes, and released locally by activated pancreatic stellate cells. Islet cells retain their 'immunoprivileged' status and activate anti-apoptotic programs through NF-kappa B. Ductal changes, including distortion, dilatation, and pancreatic ductal hypertension in the setting of CP, induce genomic damage and increased cell turnover. In addition, signaling mechanisms that play a role in the development of embryonic pancreas are reinstated, thus, playing a role in repair, regeneration, and transformation. This, in turn, leads to acino-ductal metaplasia (ADM) and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN). Some of these pathways are activated in pancreatic cancer. We attempt to integrate the current knowledge and major concepts in the pathogenesis of CP and to explain the mechanism of differential cell loss. We also discuss the possible implications of signaling pathway activation in pancreatic inflammation, relevant to the cellular transformation that leads to pancreatic neoplasia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据