4.6 Article

Lymphocytes and the Dap12 Adaptor Are Key Regulators of Osteoclast Activation Associated with Gonadal Failure

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 2, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000585

关键词

-

资金

  1. Agence Nationale pour la Recherche, ANR
  2. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale (FRM)
  3. INSERM
  4. French Ministry of Research
  5. Association pour la Recherche contre le Cancer (ARC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bone resorption by osteoclasts is necessary to maintain bone homeostasis. Osteoclast differentiation from hematopoietic progenitors and their activation depend on M-CSF and RANKL, but also requires co-stimulatory signals acting through receptors associated with DAP12 and FcR gamma adaptors. Dap12 mutant mice (K Delta 75) are osteopetrotic due to inactive osteoclasts but, surprisingly, these mice are more sensitive than WT mice to bone loss following an ovariectomy. Because estrogen withdrawal is known to disturb bone mass, at least in part, through lymphocyte interaction, we looked at the role of mature lymphocytes on osteoclastogenesis and bone mass in the absence of functional DAP12. Lymphocytes were found to stimulate an early osteoclast differentiation response from Dap12-deficient progenitors in vitro. In vivo, Rag1-/- mice lacking mature lymphocytes did not exhibit any bone phenotype, but lost their bone mass after ovariectomy like K Delta 75 mice. K Delta 75; Rag1-/ double mutant female mice exhibited a more severe osteopetrosis than Dap12-deficient animals but lost their bone mass after ovariectomy, like single mutants. These results suggest that both DAP12 and mature lymphocytes act synergistically to maintain bone mass under physiological conditions, while playing similar but not synergistic co-stimulatory roles in protecting bone loss after gonadal failure. Thus, our data support a role for lymphocytes during osteoclast differentiation and suggest that they may function as accessory cells when regular osteoclast function is compromised.

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