4.8 Review

Fibroblast heterogeneity: implications for human disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 128, 期 1, 页码 26-35

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI93555

关键词

-

资金

  1. Academy of Medical Sciences
  2. Wellcome Trust-Medical Research Council
  3. Cancer Research UK
  4. Medical Research Council [G1100073, MR/L022699/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. National Institute for Health Research [CL-2013-17-002] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. MRC [MR/L022699/1, G1100073] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fibroblasts synthesize the extracellular matrix of connective tissue and play an essential role in maintaining the structural integrity of most tissues. Researchers have long suspected that fibroblasts exhibit functional specialization according to their organ of origin, body site, and spatial location. In recent years, a number of approaches have revealed the existence of fibroblast subtypes in mice. Here, we discuss fibroblast heterogeneity with a focus on the mammalian dermis, which has proven an accessible and tractable system for the dissection of these relationships. We begin by considering differences in fibroblast identity according to anatomical site of origin. Subsequently, we discuss new results relating to the existence of multiple fibroblast subtypes within the mouse dermis. We consider the developmental origin of fibroblasts and how this influences heterogeneity and lineage restriction. We discuss the mechanisms by which fibroblast heterogeneity arises, including intrinsic specification by transcriptional regulatory networks and epigenetic factors in combination with extrinsic effects of the spatial context within tissue. Finally, we discuss how fibroblast heterogeneity may provide insights into pathological states including wound healing, fibrotic diseases, and aging. Our evolving understanding suggests that ex vivo expansion or in vivo inhibition of specific fibroblast subtypes may have important therapeutic applications.

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

4.8
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