4.7 Article

Hypoxia-reperfusion affects osteogenic lineage and promotes sickle cell bone disease

期刊

BLOOD
卷 126, 期 20, 页码 2320-2328

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2015-04-641969

关键词

-

资金

  1. PRIN [201228PNX83]
  2. FUR_UNIVR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a worldwide distributed hereditary red cell disorder, characterized by severe organ complication. Sickle bone disease (SBD) affects a large part of the SCD patient population, and its pathogenesis has been only partially investigated. Here, we studied bone homeostasis in a humanized mouse model for SCD. Under normoxia, SCD mice display bone loss and bone impairment, with increased osteoclast and reduced osteoblast activity. Hypoxia/reperfusion (H/R) stress, mimicking acute vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs), increased bone turnover, osteoclast activity (RankL), and osteoclast recruitment (Rank) with upregulation of IL-6 as proresorptive cytokine. This was associated with further suppression of osteogenic lineage (Runx2, Sparc). To interfere with the development of SBD, zoledronic acid (Zol), a potent inhibitor of osteoclast activity/osteoclastogenesis and promoter of osteogenic lineage, was used in H/R-exposed mice. Zol markedly inhibited osteoclast activity and recruitment, promoting osteogenic lineage. The recurrent H/R stress further worsened bone structure, increased bone turnover, depressed osteoblastogenesis (Runx2, Sparc), and increased both osteoclast activity (RankL, Cathepsin k) and osteoclast recruitment (Rank) in SCD mice compared with either normoxic or single-H/R-episode SCD mice. Zol used before recurrent VOCs prevented bone impairment and promoted osteogenic lineage. Our findings support the view that SBD is related to osteoblast impairment, and increased osteoclast activity resulted from local hypoxia, oxidative stress, and the release of proresorptive cytokine such as IL-6. Zol might act on both the osteoclast and osteoblast compartments as multimodal therapy to prevent SBD.

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

4.7
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