4.7 Article

Noncanonical WNT-5A signaling impairs endogenous lung repair in COPD

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
卷 214, 期 1, 页码 143-163

出版社

ROCKEFELLER UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1084/jem.20160675

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Respiratory Society [LTRF 79-2012]
  2. Helmholtz Zentrum Germany [PFP PD-135]
  3. European Research Council Starting Grant (ERC-StG-LS7) [261302]
  4. European Research Council (ERC) [261302] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of death worldwide. One main pathological feature of COPD is the loss of functional alveolar tissue without adequate repair (emphysema), yet the underlying mechanisms are poorly defined. Reduced WNT-beta-catenin signaling is linked to impaired lung repair in COPD; however, the factors responsible for attenuating this pathway remain to be elucidated. Here, we identify a canonical to noncanonical WNT signaling shift contributing to COPD pathogenesis. We demonstrate enhanced expression of noncanonical WNT-5A in two experimental models of COPD and increased posttranslationally modified WNT-5A in human COPD tissue specimens. WNT-5A was increased in primary lung fibroblasts from COPD patients and induced by COPD-related stimuli, such as TGF-beta, cigarette smoke (CS), and cellular senescence. Functionally, mature WNT-5A attenuated canonical WNT-driven alveolar epithelial cell wound healing and transdifferentiation in vitro. Lung-specific WNT-5A overexpression exacerbated airspace enlargement in elastase-induced emphysema in vivo. Accordingly, inhibition of WNT-5A in vivo attenuated lung tissue destruction, improved lung function, and restored expression of beta-catenin-driven target genes and alveolar epithelial cell markers in the elastase, as well as in CS-induced models of COPD. We thus identify a novel essential mechanism involved in impaired mesenchymal-epithelial cross talk in COPD pathogenesis, which is amenable to therapy.

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