4.4 Article

In vivo partial reprogramming alters age-associated molecular changes during physiological aging in mice

期刊

NATURE AGING
卷 2, 期 3, 页码 243-+

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s43587-022-00183-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Universidad Catolica San Antonio de Murcia
  2. Fundacion Dr. Pedro Guillen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Partial reprogramming can restore a youthful epigenetic signature to aging cells and extend the lifespan of a premature aging mouse model. Long-term partial reprogramming has rejuvenating effects on different tissues and at the organismal level. The extent of the beneficial effects depends on the duration of the treatment. The rejuvenating effects are associated with a reversion of the epigenetic clock and changes in metabolism and gene expression.
Partial reprogramming by expression of reprogramming factors (Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c-Myc) for short periods of time restores a youthful epigenetic signature to aging cells and extends the life span of a premature aging mouse model. However, the effects of longer-term partial reprogramming in physiologically aging wild-type mice are unknown. Here, we performed various long-term partial reprogramming regimens, including different onset timings, during physiological aging. Long-term partial reprogramming lead to rejuvenating effects in different tissues, such as the kidney and skin, and at the organismal level; duration of the treatment determined the extent of the beneficial effects. The rejuvenating effects were associated with a reversion of the epigenetic clock and metabolic and transcriptomic changes, including reduced expression of genes involved in the inflammation, senescence and stress response pathways. Overall, our observations indicate that partial reprogramming protocols can be designed to be safe and effective in preventing age-related physiological changes. We further conclude that longer-term partial reprogramming regimens are more effective in delaying aging phenotypes than short-term reprogramming.

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

4.4
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