3.9 Article

The complex dialogue between (myo)fibroblasts and the extracellular matrix during skin repair processes and ageing

期刊

PATHOLOGIE BIOLOGIE
卷 60, 期 1, 页码 20-27

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.patbio.2011.10.002

关键词

Myofibroblast; Extracellular matrix; Matrix metalloproteinase; Remodeling; Skin repair; Ageing

资金

  1. Fondation des Gueules Cassees (Paris, France) [03-2009]
  2. CASCADE [223236]
  3. Guerlain SA (Paris, France)
  4. Region Limousin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The fibroblasts and the myofibroblasts are key players for maintaining skin homeostasis and for orchestrating physiological tissue repair. The (myo)fibroblasts are embedded in a sophisticated extracellular matrix (ECM) that they secrete, and a complex and interactive dialogue exists between (myo)fibroblasts and their microenvironment. The composition of the ECM around (myo)fibroblasts is variable depending on the situation and, in addition to the secretion of the ECM, the (myo)fibroblasts, by secreting matrix metalloproteinases and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases can remodel this ECM. The (myo)fibroblasts and their microenvironment form a changing network with reciprocal actions leading to cell differentiation, proliferation, quiescence or apoptosis, and also acting on growth factor biodisponibility. In pathological situations (such as chronic wounds or excessive scarring), or during ageing, especially due to ultraviolet exposition, this dialogue between the (myo)fibroblasts and their microenvironment is disrupted, leading to repair defects or to skin injuries with unaesthetic alterations such as wrinkles. Knowing the intimate exchanges between the (myo)fibroblasts and their microenvironment represents a fascinating domain important not only for characterizing new targets and drugs able to prevent pathological developments but also for interfering with skin alterations observed during ageing. (C) 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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

3.9
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