4.7 Article

Modulation of Osteogenic Gene Expression by Human Osteoblasts Cultured in the Presence of Bisphenols BPF, BPS, or BPAF

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24054256

关键词

bisphenol S; bisphenol F; bisphenol AF; osteoblast; gene expression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed the effect of BPA analogs on the gene expression of osteogenic markers and found that they inhibit the expression of these markers, including COL-1, OSC, and BMP2. Further research is needed to determine the possible contribution of Bisphenol exposure to the development of bone diseases such as osteoporosis.
Bone effects attributed to bisphenols (BPs) include the inhibition of growth and differentiation. This study analyzes the effect of BPA analogs (BPS, BPF, and BPAF) on the gene expression of the osteogenic markers RUNX2, osterix (OSX), bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2), BMP-7, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), collagen-1 (COL-1), and osteocalcin (OSC). Human osteoblasts were obtained by primary culture from bone chips harvested during routine dental work in healthy volunteers and were treated with BPF, BPS, or BPAF for 24 h at doses of 10(-5), 10(-6), and 10(-7) M. Untreated cells were used as controls. Real-time PCR was used to determine the expression of the osteogenic marker genes RUNX2, OSX, BMP-2, BMP-7, ALP, COL-1, and OSC. The expression of all studied markers was inhibited in the presence of each analog; some markers (COL-1; OSC, BMP2) were inhibited at all three doses and others only at the highest doses (10(-5) and 10(-6) M). Results obtained for the gene expression of osteogenic markers reveal an adverse effect of BPA analogs (BPF, BPS, and BPAF) on the physiology of human osteoblasts. The impact on ALP, COL-1, and OSC synthesis and therefore on bone matrix formation and mineralization is similar to that observed after exposure to BPA. Further research is warranted to determine the possible contribution of BP exposure to the development of bone diseases such as osteoporosis.

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