4.7 Review

Telomere Attrition and Clonal Hematopoiesis of Indeterminate Potential in Cardiovascular Disease

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22189867

关键词

atherosclerosis; clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential; telomere; TCA axis

资金

  1. National Health Research Institute [NHRIEX106-10617SI, NHRI-110A1-CSCO-17212418]
  2. National Science Council [105-2628-B-182-009-MY4, 109-2314-B-182-070-MY3]
  3. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [CMRPG3H0133, CMRPG3I0323, CMRPG3H0843, CMRPG3L0871]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies have highlighted the important roles of telomere, CHIP, and atherosclerosis in cardiovascular disease. Telomere attrition is associated with CHIP, commonly observed in elderly patients. Telomeres, CHIP, and atherosclerosis contribute to chronic inflammation and proinflammatory cytokine expression.
Clinical evidence suggests that conventional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors cannot explain all CVD incidences. Recent studies have shown that telomere attrition, clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), and atherosclerosis (telomere-CHIP-atherosclerosis, TCA) evolve to play a crucial role in CVD. Telomere dynamics and telomerase have an important relationship with age-related CVD. Telomere attrition is associated with CHIP. CHIP is commonly observed in elderly patients. It is characterized by an increase in blood cell clones with somatic mutations, resulting in an increased risk of hematological cancer and atherosclerotic CVD. The most common gene mutations are DNA methyltransferase 3 alpha (DNMT3A), Tet methylcytosine dioxygenase 2 (TET2), and additional sex combs-like 1 (ASXL1). Telomeres, CHIP, and atherosclerosis increase chronic inflammation and proinflammatory cytokine expression. Currently, their epidemiology and detailed mechanisms related to the TCA axis remain incompletely understood. In this article, we reviewed recent research results regarding the development of telomeres and CHIP and their relationship with atherosclerotic CVD.

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