4.6 Article

The cross-talk between electrophiles, antioxidant defence and the endocannabinoid system in fibroblasts and keratinocytes after UVA and UVB irradiation

期刊

JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGICAL SCIENCE
卷 81, 期 2, 页码 107-117

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2015.11.005

关键词

UV radiation; Fibroblasts; Keratinocytes; ROS; Nrf2

资金

  1. COST action [B35]
  2. Medical University of Bialystok as part of the OP DEP, Priority Axis I.3 [POPW.01.03.00-20-022/09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: UV, including UVA and UVB radiation, is one of the most ubiquitous environmental stress factors to human skin and leads to redox imbalance and, consequently, photoaging and cancer development. The aim of the study was to verify which skin cells, keratinocytes or fibroblasts, were more susceptible to UVA or UVB irradiation. Objective: Keratinocytes and fibroblasts were subjected to UVA and UVB irradiation. Methods: The redox potential (superoxide anion generation and antioxidant level/activity), electrophile level and endocannabinoid system were estimated. Results: The results presented in this paper demonstrate a strong relationship between UV-induced oxidative stress and changes in the endocannabinoid system. Simultaneously, in irradiated cells, the transcription factors Nrf1, Nrf2 and NF kappa B are activated to varying degrees. Fibroblasts have a greater susceptibility to ROS generation and transcription factor activation after both UVA and UVB irradiation than keratinocytes. Keratinocytes are more sensitive to changes in the electrophile levels connected with oxidative stress compared to fibroblasts. Conclusion: The differences demonstrated in the response of the tested cells to UV irradiation allow for a better understanding of the mechanisms occurring in the human skin, which may be exploited for future therapies in dermatology. (C) 2015 Japanese Society for Investigative Dermatology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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