4.7 Article

Analysis of proteins released from osteoarthritic cartilage by compressive loading

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-45472-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identified the proteins released from osteoarthritis (OA) cartilage by using antibody array analyses and a quantitative proteomic analysis. The results revealed that various biologically active proteins, including alarmins, complement proteins and angiogenic proteins, are released from degenerated areas of OA cartilage. These findings provide valuable insights into the pathology of OA.
In osteoarthritis (OA), synovial pathology may be induced by proteins released from degenerated cartilage. This study was conducted to identify the proteins released from OA cartilage. OA cartilage was obtained from OA knees at macroscopically preserved areas (PRES) and degenerated areas (DEG), while control cartilage (CONT) was collected from non-arthritic knees. Released proteins were obtained from these cartilage samples by repeatedly applying compressive loading, which simulated loading on cartilage in vivo. The released proteins were analyzed comprehensively by antibody array analyses and a quantitative proteomic analysis. For several proteins, the exact amounts released were determined by Luminex assays. The amount of active TGF-beta that was released was determined by an assay using genetically-engineered HEK cells. The results of the antibody array and proteomic analyses revealed that various biologically active proteins are released from OA cartilage, particularly from DEG, by loading. The Luminex assay confirmed that several alarmins, complement proteins C3a and C5a, and several angiogenic proteins including FGF-1, FGF-2 and VEGF-A were released in greater amounts from DEG than from CONT. The HEK cell assay indicated that active TGF-beta was released from DEG at biologically significant levels. These findings may be helpful in understanding the pathology of OA.

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