4.8 Article

Alterations in the immuno-skeletal interface drive bone destruction in HIV-1 transgenic rats

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003020107

关键词

AIDS; osteoprotegerin; osteoporosis; receptor activator of NF-kappa B ligand; osteoclast

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [P30-AR46031]
  2. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases [AR059364, AR053607, AR056090, MZ AR053898]
  3. Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development Service of the Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development [5I01BX000105]
  4. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [K23 A1073119]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Osteoporosis and bone fractures are increasingly recognized complications of HIV-1 infection. Although antiretroviral therapy itself has complex effects on bone turnover, it is now evident that the majority of HIV-infected individuals already exhibit reduced bone mineral density before therapy. The mechanisms responsible are likely multifactorial and have been difficult to delineate in humans. The HIV-1 transgenic rat recapitulates many key features of human AIDS. We now demonstrate that, like their human counterparts, HIV-1 transgenic rats undergo severe osteoclastic bone resorption, a consequence of an imbalance in the ratio of receptor activator of NF-kappa B ligand, the key osteoclastogenic cytokine, to that of its physiological decoy receptor osteoprotegerin. This imbalance stemmed from a switch in production of osteoprotegerin to that of receptor activator of NF-kappa B ligand by B cells, and was further compounded by a significantly elevated number of osteoclast precursors. With the advancing age of individuals living with HIV/AIDS, low bone mineral density associated with HIV infection is likely to collide with the pathophysiology of skeletal aging, leading to increased fracture risk. Understanding the mechanisms driving bone loss in HIV-infected individuals will be critical to developing effective therapeutic strategies.

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

4.8
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