4.6 Article

Singleton-Merten Syndrome-like Skeletal Abnormalities in Mice with Constitutively Activated MDA5

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 203, 期 5, 页码 1356-1368

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1900354

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Science and Technology Agency
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [24115004]
  3. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development [JP17ek0109100h0003, JP18ek0109387h0001]
  4. Kato Memorial Trust for Nambyo Research
  5. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Core to Core Program
  6. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation) under Germany's Excellence Strategy [EXC2151 - 390873048, TRR237]
  7. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24115004] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Singleton-Merten syndrome (SMS) is a type I interferonopathy characterized by dental dysplasia, aortic calcification, skeletal abnormalities, glaucoma, and psoriasis. A missense mutation in IFIH1 encoding a cytoplasmic viral RNA sensor MDA5 has recently been identified in the SMS patients as well as in patients with a monogenic form of lupus. We previously reported that Ifih1(gs/+) mice express a constitutively active MDA5 and spontaneously develop lupus-like nephritis. In this study, we demonstrate that the Ifih1(gs/+) mice also exhibit SMS-like bone abnormalities, including decreased bone mineral density and thin cortical bone. Histological analysis revealed a low number of osteoclasts, low bone formation rate, and abnormal development of growth plate cartilages in Ifih1(gs/+) mice. These abnormalities were not observed in Ifih1(gs/+). Mavs(-/-) and /Ifih1(gs/+). Ifnar1(-/-) mice, indicating the critical role of type I IFNs induced by MDA5/MAVS-dependent signaling in the bone pathogenesis of Ifih1(gs/+) mice, affecting bone turnover. Taken together, our findings suggest the inhibition of type I IFN signaling as a possible effective therapeutic strategy for bone disorders in SMS patients.

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