4.7 Article

Cellular Senescence and Aging in Myotonic Dystrophy

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23042339

关键词

repeat expansion; accelerated aging; alternative splicing

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [JP 19K17007, 21H02839]
  2. AMED [21ek0109438]
  3. Intramural Research Grant for Neurological and Psychiatric Disorders of NCNP [2-5]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21H02839] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Myotonic dystrophy is a genetic disorder affecting multiple organs with clinical similarities to aging. Cellular senescence plays a key role in the pathogenesis of myotonic dystrophy.
Myotonic dystrophy (DM) is a dominantly inherited multisystemic disorder affecting various organs, such as skeletal muscle, heart, the nervous system, and the eye. Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) and type 2 (DM2) are caused by expanded CTG and CCTG repeats, respectively. In both forms, the mutant transcripts containing expanded repeats aggregate as nuclear foci and sequester several RNA-binding proteins, resulting in alternative splicing dysregulation. Although certain alternative splicing events are linked to the clinical DM phenotypes, the molecular mechanisms underlying multiple DM symptoms remain unclear. Interestingly, multi-systemic DM manifestations, including muscle weakness, cognitive impairment, cataract, and frontal baldness, resemble premature aging. Furthermore, cellular senescence, a critical contributor to aging, is suggested to play a key role in DM cellular pathophysiology. In particular, several senescence inducers including telomere shortening, mitochondrial dysfunction, and oxidative stress and senescence biomarkers such as cell cycle inhibitors, senescence-associated secretory phenotype, chromatin reorganization, and microRNA have been implicated in DM pathogenesis. In this review, we focus on the clinical similarities between DM and aging, and summarize the involvement of cellular senescence in DM and the potential application of anti-aging DM therapies.

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