4.7 Article

Down-regulated TINAGL1 in fibroblasts impairs wound healing in diabetes

期刊

FASEB JOURNAL
卷 36, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1096/fj.202101438RR

关键词

diabetes; fibroblasts; high glucose; TINAGL1; wound healing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TINAGL1 plays an important role in diabetic wound healing and its expression is regulated by high glucose. Administration of exogenous TINAGL1 can promote wound healing in diabetic mice. These findings provide new insights for the treatment of diabetic wounds.
Matricellular proteins, a group of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins, are key regulators of skin repair and their dysregulation impairs wound healing in diabetes. Tubulointerstitial nephritis antigen like 1 (TINAGL1) is a new member of matricellular protein family, and the understanding of its functional role is still relatively limited. In the current study, we detected the expression of TINAGL1 in diabetic skin wound tissues through RT-PCR, ELISA and Western blot analysis, investigated the contribution of TINAGL1 to wound healing through cutaneous administration of recombinant TINAGL1 protein, and characterized its regulation by hyperglycemia through RNA-seq and signal pathway inhibition assay. We showed that TINAGL1 expression has dynamic change and reaching a peak on day-9 after wound during the wound healing process in wild-type (WT) mice. Interestingly, decreased TINAGL1 expression is detected in skin tissues of diabetic patients and mice after wound. Then, we found that high glucose (HG), an important factor that impairs wound healing, reduces the expression of TINAGL1 in fibroblasts through JNK pathway. Notably, the histology analysis, Masson trichrome assay and IHC assay showed that exogenous TINAGL1 promotes wound healing in diabetic mice by accelerating the formation of granulation tissues. Our study provides evidence that TINAGL1 has an essential role in diabetic wound healing, and meanwhile, indicates that manipulation of TINAGL1 might be a possible therapeutic approach.

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