What do we know about bone morphogenetic proteins and osteochondroprogenitors in inflammatory conditions?

Batorek-Lukač, Nina; Katavić, Vedran; Novak, Sanja; Šućur, Alan; Filipović, Maša; Kalajzić, Ivo; Grčević, Danka; Kovačić, Nataša

doi:10.1016/j.bone.2020.115403

Cited by 25 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 177 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, CD200 was almost universally expressed on mature osteoblasts. A number of studies suggest that CD200 is present in various stem cell populations, but it definitely does not exclude all mature cells, so should be used with caution in settings where mature osteoblasts are present (13,16,65).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heterogeneity of murine periosteum progenitors involved in fracture healing

Matthews

Novak

Sbrana

et al. 2021

eLife

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The periosteum is the major source of cells involved in fracture healing. We sought to characterize progenitor cells and their contribution to bone fracture healing. The periosteum is highly enriched for progenitor cells, including Sca1+ cells, CFU-F and label-retaining cells compared to the endosteum and bone marrow. Using lineage tracing, we demonstrate that αSMA identifies long-term, slow-cycling, self-renewing osteochondroprogenitors in the adult periosteum that are functionally important for bone formation during fracture healing. In addition, Col2.3CreER-labeled osteoblast cells contribute around 10% of osteoblasts, but no chondrocytes in fracture calluses. Most periosteal osteochondroprogenitors following fracture, can be targeted by αSMACreER. Previously identified skeletal stem cell populations were common in periosteum, but contained high proportions of mature osteoblasts. We have demonstrated that the periosteum is highly enriched for skeletal progenitor cells and there is heterogeneity in the populations of cells that contribute to mature lineages during periosteal fracture healing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Heterogeneity of murine periosteum progenitors involved in fracture healing

Matthews

Novak

Sbrana

et al. 2021

eLife

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BMP pathway, including canonical drosophila mothers against decapentaplegic protein (Smad) signaling and non-Smad signaling (Sanchez-Duffhues et al, 2015), regulates the proliferation, differentiation, maturation and activity of osteoblasts in bone formation. Inflammatory cytokines in inflamed joints can regulate BMP signaling, and altered BMP signaling is essential for osteoblasts and their progenitors (Lukac et al, 2020). Therefore, targeting the BMP pathway may become a potential treatment for bone destruction in RA (He X. et al, 2019).…”

Section: Bone Destruction In Ramentioning

confidence: 99%

Roles of MicroRNAs in Bone Destruction of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Zhao

2020

Front. Cell Dev. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As an important pathological result of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), bone destruction will lead to joint injury and dysfunction. The imbalance of bone metabolism caused by increased osteoclast activities and decreased osteoblast activities is the main cause of bone destruction in RA. MicroRNAs (MiRNAs) play an important role in regulating bone metabolic network. Recent studies have shown that miRNAs play indispensable roles in the occurrence and development of bone-related diseases including RA. In this paper, the role of miRNAs in regulating bone destruction of RA in recent years, especially the differentiation and activities of osteoclast and osteoblast, is reviewed. Our results will not only help provide ideas for further studies on miRNAs' roles in regulating bone destruction, but give candidate targets for miRNAs-based drugs research in bone destruction therapy of RA as well.

show abstract

“…In summary, the improved performance of Ti‐ALN‐acBSP group over Ti was obvious at day 7 and remained evident through day 28, highlighting the former's potential to achieve a satisfactory long‐term osseointegration. [ 77,78 ] Furthermore, the bone structure—stained in red by methylene blue‐acid magenta and in green by Safranin O‐Fast Green—further validated the favorable pro‐osteogenic potential of ALN‐acBSP modification, with denser and more organized neo‐bone trabecula at the implantation interface (Figure 5J,K).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 76%

Switching On and Off Macrophages by a “Bridge‐Burning” Coating Improves Bone‐Implant Integration under Osteoporosis

Wang

Niu

Tian

et al. 2020

Adv Funct Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Osteoporosis poses substantial challenges for biomaterials implantation. New approaches to improve bone‐implant integration should resolve the fundamental dilemma of inflammation—proper inflammation is required at early stages but should be suppressed later for better healing, especially under osteoporosis. However, precisely switching on and off inflammation around implants in vivo remains unachieved. To address this challenge, a “bridge‐burning” coating material that comprises a macrophage‐activating glycan covalently crosslinked by a macrophage‐eliminating bisphosphonate to titanium implant surface is designed. Upon implantation, the glycan instructs host macrophages to release pro‐osteogenic cytokines (“switch‐on”), promoting bone cell differentiation. Later, increasingly mature bone cells secrete alkaline phosphatase to cleave the glycan‐bisphosphonate complexes from the implant, which in turn selectively kill the proinflammatory macrophages (“switch‐off”) that have completed their contribution—hence in the manner of “burning bridges”—to promote healing. In vivo examination in an osteoporotic rat model demonstrates that this coating significantly enhances bone‐implant integration (88.4% higher contact ratio) through modulating local inflammatory niches. In summary, a bioresponsive, endogenously triggered, smart coating material is developed to sequentially harness and abolish the power of inflammation to improve osseointegration under osteoporosis, which represents a new strategy for designing immunomodulatory biomaterials for tissue regeneration.

show abstract

What do we know about bone morphogenetic proteins and osteochondroprogenitors in inflammatory conditions?

Cited by 25 publications

References 177 publications

Heterogeneity of murine periosteum progenitors involved in fracture healing

Heterogeneity of murine periosteum progenitors involved in fracture healing

Roles of MicroRNAs in Bone Destruction of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Switching On and Off Macrophages by a “Bridge‐Burning” Coating Improves Bone‐Implant Integration under Osteoporosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About