4.4 Article

FGF-10 and specific structural elements of dermatan sulfate size and sulfation promote maximal keratinocyte migration and cellular proliferation

期刊

WOUND REPAIR AND REGENERATION
卷 17, 期 1, 页码 118-126

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2008.00449.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Veterans Affairs Merit Award
  2. National Institutes of Health
  3. NIH/NIAID [HHSN26620040029C]
  4. ADB [N01-AI-40029AI48176, AI052453, AR45676]
  5. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [P01HL057345] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  6. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI052453, N01AI040029, R37AI052453] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  7. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES [R01AR045676] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fibroblast growth factor-10 (FGF-10) is essential for epithelial development, while other members of this family, such as FGF-7, are not. FGF-10 is abundantly released into wounds following injury, and likely an essential growth factor required for this process. To evaluate how activation of this growth factor is controlled, multiple glycosaminoglycans were combined with FGF-10 assayed by measurement of the proliferation of cell lines expressing FGF receptor-2-IIIb, or keratinocyte migration in an in vitro wound repair assay. Dermatan sulfate (DS) exhibited greater potency than heparan sulfate or other chondroitin sulfates found in wounds. Structural variants of DS between 10 and 20 disaccharides containing iduronic acid showed maximal capacity to enable FGF-10 receptor stimulation. Furthermore, FGF-10 and DS markedly enhanced migration of keratinocytes in an in vitro wound scratch assay, while FGF-7 or other glycosaminoglycans did not. These data strongly suggest that FGF-10 activity is uniquely important in wound repair and that specific DS structural properties are necessary to promote FGF-10 function. These observations identify a novel interplay between DS and FGF-10 in mediating wound repair.

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

4.4
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