4.4 Article

Dexamethasone stimulates differentiation of odontoblast-like cells in human dental pulp cultures

期刊

CELL AND TISSUE RESEARCH
卷 321, 期 3, 页码 391-400

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00441-005-1115-7

关键词

dental pulp; regeneration; odontoblasts; dexamethasone; human

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Regenerative dental pulp strategies require the identification of precursors able to differentiate into odontoblast-like cells that secrete reparative dentin after injury. Pericytes have the ability to give rise to osteoblasts, chondrocytes, and adipocytes, a feature that has led to the suggestion that odontoblast-like cells could derive from these perivascular cells. In order to gain new insights into this hypothesis, we investigated the effects of dexamethasone (Dex), a synthetic glucocorticoid employed to induce osteogenic differentiation in vitro, in a previously reported model of human dental pulp cultures containing pericytes as identified by their expression of smooth muscle actin (SMA) and their specific ultrastructural morphology. Our data indicated that Dex (10(-8) M) significantly inhibited cell proliferation and markedly reduced the proportion of SMA-positive cells. Conversely, Dex strongly stimulated alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity and induced the expression of the transcript encoding the major odontoblastic marker, dentin sialophosphoprotein. Nevertheless, parathyroid hormone/parathyroid hormone-related peptide receptor, core-binding factor a1/osf2, osteonectin, and lipoprotein lipase mRNA levels were not modified by Dex treatment. Dex also increased the proportion of cells expressing STRO-1, a marker of multipotential mesenchymal progenitor cells. These observations indicate that glucocorticoids regulate the commitment of progenitors derived from dental pulp cells to form odontoblast-like cells, while reducing the proportion of SMA-positive cells. These results provide new perspectives in deciphering the cellular and molecular mechanisms leading to reparative dentinogenesis.

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