4.6 Review

Next Generation Transcriptomics and Genomics Elucidate Biological Complexity of Microglia in Health and Disease

期刊

GLIA
卷 64, 期 2, 页码 197-213

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/glia.22866

关键词

gene expression; aging; Alzheimer's disease; amyotrophic lateral sclerosisl epigenetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genome-wide expression profiling technology has resulted in detailed transcriptome data for a wide range of tissues, conditions and diseases. In neuroscience, expression datasets were mostly generated using whole brain tissue samples, resulting in data from a mixture of cell types, including glial cells and neurons. Over the past few years, a rapidly increasing number of expression profiling studies using isolated microglial cell populations have been reported. In these studies, the microglia transcriptome was compared to other cell types, such as other brain cells and peripheral tissue macrophages, and related to aging and neurodegenerative conditions. A commonality found in many of these studies was that microglia possess distinct gene expression signatures. This repertoire of selectively-expressed microglial genes highlight functions beyond immune responses, such as synaptic modulation and neurotrophic support, and open up avenues to explore as-yet-unexpected roles. These data provide improved understanding of disease pathology, and complement not only the aforementioned whole brain tissue transcriptome studies, but also genome- and epigenome-wide association studies. In this review, insights obtained from isolated microglia transcriptome studies are presented, and compared to studies using other genome-wide approaches. The relation of microglia to other tissue macrophages and glial cell populations, as well as the role of microglia in the aging brain and in neurodegenerative conditions, will be discussed. Many more of these types of studies are expected in the near future, hopefully leading to the identification of novel genes and targets for neurodegenerative conditions.

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

4.6
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