4.5 Article

Osteogenic differentiation of recombinant adeno-associated virus 2-transduced murine mesenchymal stem cells and development of an immunocompetent mouse model for ex vivo osteoporosis gene therapy

期刊

HUMAN GENE THERAPY
卷 15, 期 12, 页码 1197-1206

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/hum.2004.15.1197

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [P30-AR46031] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [P30-DK56336] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gene therapy for osteopenic conditions including osteoporosis is a potential alternative to pharmacotherapy for cost effectiveness, long-term viability, and the ability to enhance bone mass by anabolic approaches. Increased understanding of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) lineage differentiation during osteogenesis, and of the molecular pathways involved in bone cell production, provides an opportunity for the advancement of gene therapy approaches for osteopenic conditions. The potential of MSCs in osteoblast differentiation and the relative ease of MSC isolation and culturing offer a promising resource for the development of ex vivo gene therapy for bone defects. In an effort to develop ex vivo gene therapy for osteoporosis, we used gene-modified MSCs in a preclinical mouse model to determine the efficiency of transduction of murine MSCs by recombinant adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV) vectors carrying reporter genes and determined their osteogenic potential after recombinant AAV-mediated expression of bone morphogenic protein 2, known to induce osteoblast differentiation. Although surgical ovariectomy is believed to induce progressive bone loss in mouse models, similar to an osteoporosis-like phenotype in humans, several factors, including hormonal alteration and dietary habits, significantly affect both the onset and progression of the disease. Thus, in the present study, we determined the influence of these factors and developed an immunocompetent mouse model of osteoporosis with degenerative bone loss as in the human pathology.

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

4.5
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