4.7 Article

Aging, Cellular Senescence, and Alzheimer's Disease

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23041989

关键词

aging; cellular senescence; Alzheimer's disease; neurodegeneration; late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD); telomere shortening; beta-amyloid peptides (A beta); tauopathy; oxidative stress; plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1)

资金

  1. National Institute of Health
  2. National Institute of Aging [R56HL131054, AG046701]
  3. Department of Defense [PR190313]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cellular senescence plays a significant role in Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology, and targeting senescent cells may offer a promising approach for effective treatment of aging-related diseases like AD. However, the mechanisms promoting cell senescence and their contribution to AD neuropathophysiology remain largely unknown.
Aging is the greatest risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD), which accounts for > 95% of Alzheimer's disease (AD) cases. The mechanism underlying the aging-related susceptibility to LOAD is unknown. Cellular senescence, a state of permanent cell growth arrest, is believed to contribute importantly to aging and aging-related diseases, including AD. Senescent astrocytes, microglia, endothelial cells, and neurons have been detected in the brain of AD patients and AD animal models. Removing senescent cells genetically or pharmacologically ameliorates beta-amyloid (A beta) peptide and tau-protein-induced neuropathologies, and improves memory in AD model mice, suggesting a pivotal role of cellular senescence in AD pathophysiology. Nonetheless, although accumulated evidence supports the role of cellular senescence in aging and AD, the mechanisms that promote cell senescence and how senescent cells contribute to AD neuropathophysiology remain largely unknown. This review summarizes recent advances in this field. We believe that the removal of senescent cells represents a promising approach toward the effective treatment of aging-related diseases, such as AD.

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