Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 539 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
29.08.2026
Размер:
26 Мб
Скачать
196
https://t.me/medicina_free
S. Mihalceanu et al.
28. Phinney DG, Prockop DJ.Concise review: mes­enchymal stem/multipotent stromal cells: the state of transdifferentiation and modes of tissue repair--current views. Stem Cells. 2007;25(11): 2896–902.
29. Hocking AM. Mesenchymal stem cell ther­apy for cutaneous wounds. Adv Wound Care. 2012;1(4):166–71.
30. Sasaki M, Abe R, Fujita Y, Ando S, Inokuma D, Shimizu H. Mesenchymal stem cells are recruited into wounded skin and contribute to wound repair by transdifferentiation into multiple skin cell type. J Immunol. 2008;180(4):2581–7.
31. Eming SA, Krieg T, Davidson JM.Inammation in wound repair: molecular and cellular mechanisms. J Invest Dermatol. 2007;127(3):514–25.
32. Nuschke A. Activity of mesenchymal stem cells in therapies for chronic skin wound healing. Organogenesis. 2014;10(1):29–37.
33. Park SR, Kim JW, Jun HS, Roh JY, Lee HY, Hong IS. Stem cell secretome and its effect on cellular mechanisms relevant to wound healing. Mol Ther. 2018;26(2):606–17.
34. Park BS, Jang KA, Sung JH, Park JS, Kwon YH, Kim KJ, Kim WS.Adipose-derived stem cells and their secretory factors as a promising therapy for skin aging. Dermatol Surg. 2008;34(10):1323–6.
35. Kapur SK, Katz AJ. Review of the adi­pose derived stem cell secretome. Biochimie. 2013;95(12):2222–8.
36. Kober J, Gugerell A, Schmid M, Zeyda M, Buchberger E, Nickl S, Hacker S, Ankersmit HJ, Keck M. Wound healing effect of conditioned media obtained from adipose tissue on human skin cells: a comparative invitro study. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;77(2):156–63.
37. Cerqueira MT, Pirraco RP, Marques AP.Stem cells in skin wound healing: are we there yet? Adv Wound Care. 2016;5(4):164–75.
38. Jayaraman P, Nathan P, Vasanthan P, Musa S, Govindasamy V.Stem cells conditioned medium: a new approach to skin wound healing management. Cell Biol Int. 2013;37(10):1122–8.
39. Na YK, Ban JJ, Lee M, Im W, Kim M.Wound healing potential of adipose tissue stem cell extract. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2017;485(1):30–4.
40. Krasnodembskaya A, Song Y, Fang X, Gupta N, Serikov V, Lee JW, Matthay MA. Antibacterial effect of human mesenchymal stem cells is mediated in part from secretion of the antimicrobial peptide LL-37. Stem Cells. 2010;28(12):2229–38.
41. Mei SH, Haitsma JJ, Dos Santos CC, Deng Y, Lai PF, Slutsky AS, Liles WC, Stewart DJ. l. Mesenchymal stem cells reduce inammation while enhancing bacterial clearance and improving survival in sepsis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;182(8):1047–57.
42. Friedenstein AJ, Piatetzky S II, Petrakova KV. Osteogenesis in transplants of bone marrow cells. J Embryol Exp Morphol. 1966;16(3):381–90.
43. Friedenstein AJ, Piatetzky-Shapiro II, Petrakova KV. Osteogenesis in transplants of bone mar­row cells. J Embryol Exp Morphol. 1966;16(3): 381–90.
44. Friedenstein AJ.Stromal mechanisms of bone mar­row: cloning invitro and retransplantation invivo. Haematol Blood Transfus. 1980;25:19–29.
45. Owen M, Friedenstein AJ. Stromal stem cells: marrow-derived osteogenic precursors. Ciba Found Symp. 1988;136:42–60.
46. Grigoriadis AE, Heersche JN, Aubin JE. Differentiation of muscle, fat, cartilage, and bone from progenitor cells present in a bone-derived clonal cell population: effect of dexamethasone. J Cell Biol. 1988;106(6):2139–51.
47. Wakitani S, Saito T, Caplan AI. Myogenic cells derived from rat bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells exposed to 5-azacytidine. Muscle Nerve. 1995;18(12):1417–26.
48. Ferrari G, Cusella-De Angelis G, Coletta M, Paolucci E, Stornaiuolo A, Cossu G, Mavilio F.Muscle regen­eration by bone marrow-derived myogenic progeni­tors. Science. 1998;279(5356):1528–30.
49. Johnstone B, Hering TM, Caplan AI, Goldberg VM, Yoo JU. In vitro chondrogenesis of bone marrow­derived mesenchymal progenitor cells. Exp Cell Res. 1998;238(1):265–72.
50. Pittenger MF, Mackay AM, Beck SC, Jaiswal RK, Douglas R, Mosca JD, Moorman MA, Simonetti DW, Craig S, Marshak DR. Multilineage potential of adult human mesenchymal stem cells. Science. 1999;284(5411):143–7.
51. Arici V, Perotti C, Fabrizio C, Del Fante C, Ragni F, Alessandrino F, Viarengo G, Pagani M, Moia A, Tinelli C, Bozzani A.Autologous immuno magneti­cally selected CD133+ stem cells in the treatment of no-option critical limb ischemia: clinical and con­trast enhanced ultrasound assessed results in eight patients. J Transl Med. 2015;13:342.
52. Kirana S, Stratmann B, Prante C, Prohaska W, Koerperich H, Lammers D, Gastens MH, Quast T, Negrean M, Stirban OA, Nandrean SG, Götting C, Minartz P, Kleesiek K, Tschoepe D. Autologous stem cell therapy in the treatment of limb isch­aemia induced chronic tissue ulcers of diabetic foot patients. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66(4):384–93.
53. Kirana S, Stratmann B, Lammers D, Negrean M, Stirban A, Minartz P, Koerperich H, Gastens MH, Götting C, Prohaska W, Kleesiek K, Tschoepe D. Wound therapy with autologous bone marrow stem cells in diabetic patients with ischaemia­induced tissue ulcers affecting the lower limbs. Int J Clin Pract. 2007;61(4):690–2.
54. Klepanec A, Mistrik M, Altaner C, Valachovicova M, Olejarova I, Slysko R, Balazs T, Urlandova T, Hladikova D, Liska B, Tomka J, Vulev I, Madaric J. No difference in intra-arterial and intramuscular delivery of autologous bone marrow cells in patients with advanced critical limb ischemia. Cell Transpl. 2012;21(9):1909–18.
18 Stem Cell Therapies forTissue Regeneration andWound Healing: Strategies toEnhance Therapeutic…
https://t.me/medicina_free
197
55. Yoshikawa T, Mitsuno H, Nonaka I, Sen Y, Kawanishi K, Inada Y, Takakura Y, Okuchi K, Nonomura A. Wound therapy by marrow mesen­chymal cell transplantation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(3):860–77.
56. Zuk PA, Zhu M, Ashjian P, De Ugarte DA, Huang JI, Mizuno H, Alfonso ZC, Fraser JK, Benhaim P, Hedrick MH. Human adipose tissue is a source of multipotent stem cells. Mol Biol Cell. 2002;13(12):4279–95.
57. Sekiya I, Larson BL, Smith JR, Pochampally R, Cui JG, Prockop DJ. Expansion of human adult stem cells from bone marrow stroma: conditions that maximize the yields of early progenitors and evalu­ate their quality. Stem Cells. 2002;20(6):530–41.
58. Hausman GJ.Techniques for studying adipocytes. Stain Technol. 1981;56(3):149–54.
59. Pettersson P, Cigolini M, Sjostrom L, Smith U, Bjorntorp P. Cells in human adipose tissue developing into adipocytes. Acta Med Scand. 1984;215(5):447–51.
60. Bourin P, Bunnell BA, Casteilla L, Dominici M, Katz AJ, March KL, Redl H, Rubin JP, Yoshimura K, Gimble JM. Stromal cells from the adipose tissue- derived stromal vascular fraction and culture expanded adipose tissue-derived stromal/stem cells: a joint statement of the International Federation for Adipose Therapeutics and Science (IFATS) and the International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT). Cytotherapy. 2013;15(6):641–8.
61. Astori G, Vignati F, Bardelli S, Tubio M, Gola M, Albertini V, Bambi F, Scali G, Castelli D, Rasini V, Soldati G, Moccetti T. “In vitro” and multicolor phe­notypic characterization of cell subpopulations iden­tied in fresh human adipose tissue stromal vascular fraction and in the derived mesenchymal stem cells. J Transl Med. 2007;5:55.
62. Strutt B, Khalil W, Killinger D. Growth and differ­entiation of human adipose stromal cells in culture. Meth Mol Med. 1996;2:41–51.
63. Gronthos S, Franklin DM, Leddy HA, Robey PG, Storms RW, Gimble JM. Surface protein charac­terization of human adipose tissue-derived stromal cells. J Cell Physiol. 2001;189(1):54–63.
64. Musina RA, Bekchanova ES, Sukhikh GT. Comparison of mesenchymal stem cells obtained from different human tissues. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2005;139(4):504–9.
65. Ashjian PH, Elbarbary AS, Edmonds B, DeUgarte D, Zhu M, Zuk PA, Lorenz HP, Benhaim P, Hedrick MH. In vitro differentiation of human processed lipoaspirate cells into early neural progenitors. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;111(6):1922–31.
66. Trottier V, Marceau-Fortier G, Germain L, Vincent C, Fradette J. IFATS collection: using human adipose- derived stem/stromal cells for the pro­duction of new skin substitutes. Stem Cells. 2008;26(10):2713–23.
67. Seo MJ, Suh SY, Bae YC, Jung JS.Differentiation of human adipose stromal cells into hepatic lineage
invitro and invivo. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2005;328(1):258–64.
68. Kim WS, Park BS, Sung JH, Yang JM, Park SB, Kwak SJ, Park JS.Wound healing effect of adipose­derived stem cells: a critical role of secretory fac­tors on human dermal broblasts. J Derm Sci. 2007;48(1):15–24.
69. Rehman J, Traktuev D, Li J, Merfeld-Clauss S, Temm-Grove CJ, Bovenkerk JE, Pell CL, Johnstone BH, Considine RV, March KL.Secretion of angio­genic and antiapoptotic factors by human adipose stromal cells. Circulation. 2004;109(10):1292–8.
70. Nie C, Yang D, Xu J, Si Z, Jin X, Zhang J.Locally administered adipose-derived stem cells accelerate wound healing through differentiation and vasculo­genesis. Cell Transpl. 2011;20(2):205–16.
71. Salgado AJ, Reis RL, Sousa NJ, Gimble JM.Adipose tissue derived stem cells secretome: soluble factors and their roles in regenerative medicine. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther. 2010;5(2):103–10.
72. Hassan WU, Greiser U, Wang W.Role of adipose­derived stem cells in wound healing. Wound Repair Regen. 2014;22(3):313–25.
73. Bura A, Planat-Benard V, Bourin P, Silvestre JS, Gross F, Grolleau JL, Saint-Lebese B, Peyratte JA, Fleury S, Gadelorge M, Taurand M, Dupuis-Coronas S, Leobon B, Casteilla L. Phase I trial: the use of autologous cultured adipose-derived stroma/stem cells to treat patients with non-revascularizable criti­cal limb ischemia. Cytotherapy. 2014;16(2):245–57.
74. Yoshimura K, Suga H, Eto H.Adipose-derived stem/ progenitor cells: roles in adipose tissue remodeling and potential use for soft tissue augmentation. Regen Med. 2009;4(2):265–73.
75. Gurtner GC, Werner S, Barrandon Y, Longaker MT. Wound repair and regeneration. Nature. 2008;453(7193):314–21.
76. Hu MS, Leavitt T, Malhotra S, Duscher D, Pollhammer MS, Walmsley GG, Maan ZN, Cheung AT, Schmidt M, Huemer GM, Longaker MT, Lorenz HP.Stem cell-based therapeutics to improve wound healing. Plast Surg Int. 2015;2015:383581.
77. Whittam AJ, Maan ZN, Duscher D, Wong VW, Barrera JA, Januszyk M, Gurtner GC. Challenges and opportunities in drug delivery for wound heal­ing. Adv Wound Care. 2016;5(2):79–88.
78. Rennert RC, Sorkin M, Januszyk M, Duscher D, Kosaraju R, Chung MT, Lennon J, Radiya-Dixit A, Raghvendra S, Maan ZN, Hu MS, Rajadas J, Rodrigues M, Gurtner GC. Diabetes impairs the angiogenic potential of adipose-derived stem cells by selectively depleting cellular subpopulations. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2014;5(3):79.
79. Falanga V.Wound healing and its impairment in the diabetic foot. Lancet. 2005;366(9498):1736–43.
80. Trengove NJ, Stacey MC, Macauley S, Bennett N, Gibson J, Burslem F, Murphy G, Schultz G.Analysis of the acute and chronic wound environments: the role of proteases and their inhibitors. Wound Repair Regen. 1999;7(6):442–52.
198
https://t.me/medicina_free
S. Mihalceanu et al.
81. Koenen P, Spanholtz TA, Maegele M, Sturmer E, Brockamp T, Neugebauer E, Thamm OC. Acute and chronic wound uids inversely inuence adipose-derived stem cell function: molecular insights into impaired wound healing. Int Wound J. 2015;12(1):10–6.
82. Cianfarani F, Toietta G, Di Rocco G, Cesareo E, Zambruno G, Odorisio T.Diabetes impairs adipose tissue-derived stem cell function and efciency in promoting wound healing. Wound Rep Regen. 2013;21(4):545–53.
83. Choudhery MS, Badowski M, Muise A, Pierce J, Harris DT. Donor age negatively impacts adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cell expansion and differentiation. J Transl Med. 2014;12:8.
84. Duscher D, Barrera J, Wong VW, Maan ZN, Whittam AJ, Januszyk M, Gurtner GC.Stem cells in wound healing: the future of regenerative medicine? Mini­Rev Gerontol. 2016;62(2):216–25.
85. Duscher D, Rennert RC, Januszyk M, Anghel E, Maan ZN, Whittam AJ, Perez MG, Kosaraju R, Hu MS, Walmsley GG, Atashroo D, Khong S, Butte AJ, Gurtner GC.Aging disrupts cell subpopulation dynamics and diminishes the function of mesenchy­mal stem cells. Sci Rep. 2014;4:7144.
86. Fisher C, Grahovac TL, Schafer ME, Shippert RD, Marra KG, Rubin JP. Comparison of har­vest and processing techniques for fat grafting and adipose stem cell isolation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132(2):351–61.
87. Shridharani SM, Broyles JM, Matarasso A. Liposuction devices: technology update. Med Dev. 2014;7:241–51.
88. Duscher D, Luan A, Rennert RC, Atashroo D, Maan ZN, Brett EA, Whittam AJ, Ho N, Lin M, Hu MS, Walmsley GG, Wenny R, Schmidt M, Schilling AF, Machens HG, Huemer GM, Wan DC, Longaker MT, Gurtner GC.Suction assisted liposuction does not impair the regenerative potential of adipose derived stem cells. J Transl Med. 2016;14(1):126.
89. Duscher D, Maan ZN, Luan A, Aitzetmuller MM, Brett EA, Atashroo D, Whittam AJ, Hu MS, Walmsley GG, Houschyar KS, Schilling AF, Machens HG, Gurtner GC, Longaker MT, Wan DC. Ultrasound-assisted liposuction provides a source for functional adipose-derived stromal cells. Cytotherapy. 2017;19(12):1491–500.
90. Januszyk M, Gurtner GC. High-throughput single­cell analysis for wound healing applications. Adv Wound Care. 2013;2(9):457–69.
91. Rennert RC, Januszyk M, Sorkin M, Rodrigues M, Maan ZN, Duscher D, Whittam AJ, Kosaraju R, Chung MT, Paik K, Li AY, Findlay M, Glotzbach JP, Butte AJ, Gurtner GC.Microuidic single-cell tran­scriptional analysis rationally identies novel sur­face marker proles to enhance cell-based therapies. Nat Commun. 2016;7:11945.
92. Grayson WL, Zhao F, Bunnell B, Ma T.Hypoxia enhances proliferation and tissue formation of
human mesenchymal stem cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2007;358(3):948–53.
93. Lee EY, Xia Y, Kim WS, Kim MH, Kim TH, Kim KJ, Park BS, Sung JH.Hypoxia-enhanced wound­healing function of adipose-derived stem cells: increase in stem cell proliferation and up­of VEGF and bFGF. Wound Repair Regen. 2009;17(4):540–7.
94. Rubina K, Kalinina N, Emenko A, Lopatina T, Melikhova V, Tsokolaeva Z, Sysoeva V, Tkachuk V, Parfyonova Y. Adipose stromal cells stimulate angiogenesis via promoting progenitor cell dif­ferentiation, secretion of angiogenic factors, and enhancing vessel maturation. Tissue Eng Part A. 2009;15(8):2039–50.
95. Richmond NA, Lamel SA, Davidson JM, Martins­Green M, Sen CK, Tomic-Canic M, Vivas AC, Braun LR, Kirsner RS. US-National Institutes of Health­funded research for cutaneous wounds in 2012. Wound Repair Regen. 2013;21(6):789–92.
96. Altman AM, Matthias N, Yan Y, Song YH, Bai X, Chiu ES, Slakey DP, Alt EU.Dermal matrix as a car­rier for in vivo delivery of human adipose-derived stem cells. Biomaterials. 2008;29(10):1431–42.
97. Rustad KC, Wong VW, Sorkin M, Glotzbach JP, Major MR, Rajadas J, Longaker MT, Gurtner GC.Enhancement of mesenchymal stem cell angio­genic capacity and stemness by a biomimetic hydro­gel scaffold. Biomaterials. 2012;33(1):80–90.
98. Garg RK, Rennert RC, Duscher D, Sorkin M, Kosaraju R, Auerbach LJ, Lennon J, Chung MT, Paik K, Nimpf J, Rajadas J, Longaker MT, Gurtner GC. Capillary force seeding of hydrogels for adipose-
derived stem cell delivery in wounds. Stem
Cells Transl Med. 2014;3(9):1079–89.
99. Alvarez Garcia J, Garcia Gomez-Heras S, Riera Del Moral L, Largo C, Garcia-Olmo D, Garcia-Arranz M. The effects of allogenic stem cells in a murine model of hind limb diabetic ischemic tissue. Peer J. 2017;5:e3664.
100. Puissant B, Barreau C, Bourin P, Clavel C, Corre J, Bousquet C, Taureau C, Cousin B, Abbal M, Laharrague P, Penicaud L, Casteilla L, Blancher A. Immunomodulatory effect of human adi­pose tissue- derived adult stem cells: comparison with bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Br J Haematol. 2005;129(1):118–29.
101. Lin CS, Lin G, Lue TF.Allogeneic and xenogeneic transplantation of adipose-derived stem cells in immunocompetent recipients without immunosup­pressants. Stem Cells Dev. 2012;21(15):2770–8.
102. Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of plu­ripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult broblast cultures by dened factors. Cell. 2006;126(4):663–76.
103. Yu J, Vodyanik MA, Smuga-Otto K, Antosiewicz­Bourget J, Frane JL, Tian S, Nie J, Jonsdottir GA, Ruotti V, Stewart R, Slukvin II, Thomson JA.Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science. 2007;318(5858):1917–20.
regulation
18 Stem Cell Therapies forTissue Regeneration andWound Healing: Strategies toEnhance Therapeutic…
https://t.me/medicina_free
199
104. Takahashi K, Tanabe K, Ohnuki M, Narita M, Ichisaka T, Tomoda K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human broblasts by dened factors. Cell. 2007;131(5):861–72.
105. Takahashi K, Okita K, Nakagawa M, Yamanaka S.Induction of pluripotent stem cells from broblast cultures. Nat Protoc. 2007;2(12):3081–9.
106. Itoh M, Umegaki-Arao N, Guo Z, Liu L, Higgins CA, Christiano AM.Generation of 3D skin equivalents fully reconstituted from human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e77673.
107. Sebastiano V, Zhen HH, Haddad B, Bashkirova E, Melo SP, Wang P, Leung TL, Siprashvili Z, Tichy A, Li J, Ameen M, Hawkins J, Lee S, Li L, Schwertschkow A, Bauer G, Lisowski L,
Kay MA, Kim SK, Lane AT, Wernig M, Oro AE. Human COL7A1-corrected induced pluripo­tent stem cells for the treatment of recessive dys­trophic epidermolysis bullosa. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6(264):264ra163.
108. Hewitt KJ, Shamis Y, Hayman RB, Margvelashvili M, Dong S, Carlson MW, Garlick JA. Epigenetic and phenotypic prole of broblasts derived from induced pluripotent stem cells. PLoS One. 2011;6(2):e17128.
109. Yang R, Zheng Y, Burrows M, Liu S, Wei Z, Nace A, Guo W, Kumar S, Cotsarelis G, Xu X. Generation of folliculogenic human epithelial stem cells from induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat Commun. 2014;5:3071.
Iron Chelators & HIF-1α: ANew
https://t.me/medicina_free
Frontier forSkin Rejuvenation
AndreaPagani, MatthiasM.Aitzetmüller, andDominikDuscher
19
19.1 Mechanisms ofSkin-Aging
The human skin belongs to the integumentary system and represents the largest organ in the human body, comprising about 15% of the body weight. The total skin surface of an adult ranges from 12 to 20 square feet, and the skin is com­posed of 70% water, 25% protein and 2% lipids. Different cell types like broblasts, keratino­cytes, and melanocytes build the external (epider­mal), the middle (dermal), and the inner (subdermal) layer. The skin derives from the ectodermal tissue, interfaces with the environ­ment, and thereby acts as the rst line of defense against microbiological invasions, physical
A. Pagani Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany e-mail: andrea.pagani@studenti.unipd.it
M. M. Aitzetmüller Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Westfaelische Wilhelms, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany e-mail: matthias.aitzetmueller@tum.de
D. Duscher (*) Department for Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, Division of Experimental Plastic Surgery, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
aggressions, and chemical assaults. In addition, this particular composition plays an important role in insulation, temperature regulation, sensa­tion, and is key to the production of vitamin D [1]. All of these functions are based on physio­logical tissue homeostasis and require an intact epidermis, dermis, and hypodermis [2]. The thickness of skin signicantly depends on body location. In humans, the skin located around the eyes and eyelids is the thinnest in the body (0.5 mm thick) and is one of the rst areas to show signs of aging, colloquially known as “crow's feet”. In other parts of the body like palms and soles of the feet, the skin can be up to 4mm thick. Skin is a multifunctional organ and, like any other organ system subject to different stress factors, leading to specic impairments in its composition and functionality over time [3, 4].
In the last decade, healthy-aging principles and longevity pathways were studied [5]. At a cellular and molecular level, aging is characterized by the accumulation of damage such as DNA oxidation and progressive loss of physiological integrity, leading to impaired function and increased vul­nerability, and subsequently death. At present, progressive aging in humans cannot be success­fully and satisfactorily stopped. Researchers are only just beginning to understand the biological basis of aging even in relatively simple and short­lived organisms such as yeast [6]. Derived from these studies, numerous hypotheses have been formulated with the aim to explain the aging phe-
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 D. Duscher, M. A. Shiffman (eds.), Regenerative Medicine and Plastic Surgery,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19958-6_19
201
202
ab
https://t.me/medicina_free
A. Pagani et al.
Fig. 19.1 Differences between young and aged skin. (a) Youthful healthy skin presents thick epidermis, a strong dermo-epidermal junction, normal collagen content, and healthy vascularity. (b) Aged skin contains several signs
nomenon. Aging could be the natural result of entropy on the cells, tissues, and organs [7]. However, evidence is accumulating showing that aging is in part genetically regulated. In parallel, other approaches show that the regulation and the subsequent breakdown of cellular processes rep­resent a programmatic decision by the cell to either continue or abandon maintenance proce­dures with age [8]. Regarding the skin, it is widely accepted that advanced age brings changes to all components of the integumentary system with consequent signs of deterioration on epidermis, dermis, and hypodermis. During the aging pro­cess, skin gets progressively thinner and the blood capillaries of the dermis become sparse and more fragile, resulting in wrinkles and a paler, translu­cent appearance [9] (Fig.19.1).
Due to increasing understanding of genetic path­ways and biochemical processes, research about the cutaneous aging process has experienced an unprec­edented advance within the last years [10]. Generally, age-related skin changes are triggered by a combination of intrinsic factors and extrinsic ones (e.g. ultraviolet/infrared light exposure, smoking). Intrinsic or innate aging is a degenerative process, which affects the skin in the same way as it affects all other organs. Intrinsic skin aging represents the biological clock of the human body and reects the reduction of function that is extensively described to affect internal organs [11]. This loss of function is
of degeneration, such as uneven epidermis, thinner dermo- epidermal junction, inadequate collagen content, and compromised vascularity [71]. Reprinted with permission
mainly characterized by the decreased ability of response to exogenous and endogenous stress [12]. Three main protagonists of innate/intrinsic cutane­ous aging are: telomere-loss, oxidative stress, and DNA-damage [1315]. Several studies indicate that telomere length is able to modulate the pace of aging and onset of age-associated diseases [16, 17]. However, there is emerging evidence showing that lifestyle factors (obesity, smoking, and alcohol) may inuence health and lifespan of an individual by directly affecting telomere length [18] demon­strating the strong interplay between the triggers of aging. Recent studies from our group and others, involving free radicals (Reactive oxygen species­ROS), suggest that oxidative stress may damage not only the lipid bi-layer in cell membranes but also connective tissue components, particularly elastin bers and collagen [19]. Additionally, ROS also interact directly with the DNA leading to base loss, DNA modication or breakage of strains, making DNA lesions an important factor involved in the aging process [20].
The second main variable of cutaneous aging, also known as “photoaging”, is a result of the extrinsic capacity of the environment to damage the skin surface. This “extrinsic aging” is the result of skin exposure to external factors, most impor­tantly ultraviolet (UV) radiation [12]. Age related changes are able to impair the two most important features of the skin: strength and elasticity [21, 22].
19 Iron Chelators & HIF-1α: ANew Frontier forSkin Rejuvenation
https://t.me/medicina_free
203
The so-called “elastosis” represents a progressive accumulation of elastic bres in the upper and mid­layers of the dermis and is heavily driven by sun­exposure (therefore also named “solar elastosis”) [23]. Altogether, the cutaneous aging phenomenon manifests as an observable change in the external appearance of the skin with a loss of function of cells [24]. Considering both innate and exogenous factors, aging leads to degradation and the break­age of collagen bers, microtextural impairments, and loss of connective tissue structures.
The intracellular and the extracellular machin­ery is heavily impaired in aged skin [25, 26]. Aged and senescent cutaneous cells have the ability to modify their biosynthetic network by the expres­sion of different genes such as ID3, SMAD7, and FAM83G [27]. It has been demonstrated that the rate of collagen biosynthesis is markedly lower in aged skin than in infant or foetal tissue [28]. In addition to wound healing disorders, this reduced collagen production leads to the atrophy of the dermis effecting wrinkle formation. Similarly, the rate of elastin gene expression is markedly reduced after the fourth decade of life [29]. Elastin is of paramount importance for the connective tissues by allowing the skin to return to its shape after stretching or contracting. Lack of elastin explains the impaired pliability of aged skin. An imbalance between biosynthesis and degradation of elastin bres clinically manifests as atrophy and loss of recoil. Recent evidence further identied matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) as important media­tors of this degeneration [30]. By destroying the endogenous collagen network, proteoglycans, bronectin, and other components of the dermis, these enzymes are leading to a rapid, but not irre­versible, cutaneous aging effect [31]. Altogether, the interplay of these mechanisms affects all three layers of the skin, with its biggest inuence on the dermis result in signicant impairments of the regenerative capacity of aging skin [32, 33].
19.2 The Role ofHIF-1
inSkin Aging
Intensive study efforts are currently undertaken to develop agents capable of mitigating or revers­ing the signs of cutaneous aging. Nevertheless,
no single approach has been identied to address all important factors, structural and physiological components, epidermal and dermal atrophy, and loss of connective tissue structure and vascular­ity. While most cosmetic products only provide adequate skin hydration, they lack the ability to actively support the biological processes, which are known to be diminished in aged population.
Similar to chronic wounds, skin-aging is char­acterized by the dysfunction of key cellular regu­latory pathways. Recent evidence suggests that the same mechanisms, which hinder the physio­logic healing response in chronic wounds, are the reason for impaired tissue homeostasis in aged skin [
3439]. The Hypoxia Inducible Factor 1
alpha (HIF-1α) pathway represents one key­mechanism in both conditions [34, 39, 40]. It is widely accepted that the physiological activation of the dimeric protein HIF-1α), representing the main transcriptional factor of the HIF-1 pathway, is signicantly involved in tissue homeostasis and neovascularization. Therefore, activation leads to production of new collagen strains, elas­tin, glycosaminoglycans, and nutritive blood ves­sels [41, 42]. Slight modulation of the functionality of this pathway has been clearly demonstrated to signicantly enhance tissue regeneration [35, 36, 4346]. Advanced age, sim- ilar to diabetes and other degenerative skin dis­eases, has been shown to correlate with attenuated HIF-1α function [3439].
In aging, HIF-1α is destabilized by enhanced activity of the oxygen-sensitive prolyl­hydroxylases (PHD) [34, 39] resulting in impaired release of growth factors, reduced neo­vascularization, and inadequate tissue quality and regeneration. As mentioned above, the Hypoxia Inducible Factor (HIF-1) is a dimeric transcrip­tion factor, composed of two subunits, HIF-1α and HIF-1β. These two proteins have different molecular characteristics. While HIF-1α is an oxygen sensitive subunit, which is activated under hypoxic conditions, HIF-1β is constitu­tively expressed. This special geometry is essen­tial to allow heterodimer formation between the two proteins HIF-1α and HIF-1β, such as binding to DNA on the target hypoxia response elements (HRE). In addition, the HIF-1α subunit has two different transactivation domains (TAD): NH2-
204
https://t.me/medicina_free
A. Pagani et al.
terminal [N-TAD] and COOH-terminal [C-TAD]. These two domains are responsible for the tran­scriptional activity by interacting with co­activators of HRE such as p300 or the cyclic-AMP binding protein (CBP) and stabilizing HIF-1α against degradation.
In normoxia, HIF-1α protein levels are low due to constant ubiquitination-dependent degra­dation via the Von Hippel-Landau (VHL) E3 ligase protein [47], which recognizes proline hydroxylated (Pro-OH) HIF-1α on both transac­tivation domains [4850]. These hydroxylation reactions lead to degradation of HIF-1 α and are catalyzed by the oxygen-sensitive PHD.Another level of control lies within the oxygen-sensitive asparaginyl hydroxylase FIH, a factor inhibiting HIF.The oxygen-sensitive asparaginyl hydroxy­lase FIH hydroxylates the HIF-1α protein and inhibits subsequently the recruitment of tran-
a
scriptional co-activators p300 and CBP, thereby the HIF transcriptional activity progressively decreases [5153]. However, in addition to the absences of oxygen, lack of local free iron is also able to inhibit of HIF-1α degradation. The conse­quences are decreased HIF-1α hydroxylation, decreased pVHL mediated ubiquitination, degra­dation and increased HIF-1α protein stability [50] (Fig. 19.2).
HIF-1 alpha is essential for skin homeostasis and is mainly expressed in the basal layer of the epidermis [5456]. Molecular pathways between broblasts and keratinocytes are cru­cial for the skin environment, especially in the basal layers of the epidermis. Therefore, slight modulation of HIF-1 activity could be strongly involved in novel approaches for skin rejuvena­tion. The possibilities of a therapeutical modulation of some of these networks are prom-
b
Fig. 19.2 Modulation of HIF pathway regulation. (a) HIF pathway activation in the presence of iron. Hydroxylation occurs by PHD, followed by ubiquitina­tion by VHL, which facilitates enzymatic degradation of HIF1α. (b) Truncated HIF-1α breakdown pathway in the
presence of an iron chelator. PHD is inactivated, allowing HIF1α to remain intact and free to dimerize for down­stream HIF-1 pathway activation. (DFO Deferoxamine, DFP Deferiprone) [71]. Reprinted with permission
19 Iron Chelators & HIF-1α: ANew Frontier forSkin Rejuvenation
https://t.me/medicina_free
205
ising. The further activation of over 100 down­stream genes of the HIF-1α pathway was proven to modulate angiogenesis, cell proliferation, migration, and glucose metabolism [5759]. Regulation of HIF-1 has been demonstrated to be crucially involved in skin homeostasis [60] and wound healing [61, 62]. Therefore, local­ized control of tissue blood ow, or autoregula­tion, is a key factor in regulating tissue perfusion and oxygenation. Recently, it was demonstrated that the balance between the two transcription factor isoforms, HIF-1 alpha and HIF-2 alpha, is an essential mechanism regulating both local and systemic blood ow [63].
Recent studies using human epidermal cells showed that the controlled upregulation of HIF-1 substantially increases the growth potential of keratinocytes and broblasts improving the for­mation of viable and stratied epidermis [37, 38]. HIF-1 alpha overexpression expands dermal vas­culature, suggesting a substantial inuence on blood vessel formation by cutaneous cells through this pathway [64, 65]. HIF-1 has also been shown to drive the expression of Ln-332 [66], a high-molecular weight (400–900 kDa) protein of the extracellular matrix composed by an alpha-chain, a beta-chain, and a gamma-chain. Ln-332 is the major component of the basal lam­ina, a protein network foundation for most cells and organs, inuencing cell differentiation, migration, and adhesion. The main role of Ln­332 is the maintenance of epithelial- mesenchymal cohesion in tissues that are exposed to external forces such as the skin [67]. An interaction with the heterodimeric cell surface receptors mediates adhesion of the extracellular matrix (ECM) to the cytoskeleton [68]. Notably, a diminution of kera­tinocyte growth potential following HIF-1 silenc­ing was associated with a decreased expression of Ln-322 [38].
The concept of intrinsic and extrinsic damage can further be linked to age-related loss of epi­dermal HIF-1 expression [38]. Recent ndings shown that cutaneous HIF-1 expression is modu­lated after UVB exposure, and that HIF-1α has an important role in the regulation of cellular responses to this type of genotoxic stress. Lastly, UVB induces ROS, which in turn inuences
HIF-1α expression affecting DNA repair and keratinocyte survival [69].
19.3 Iron Chelation forHIF-1 Modulation
Upregulation of HIF-1 reverses age-dependent functional impairments of the skin, and results in improved regeneration of aged tissues [70]. The biochemical reactions regulating HIF-1 signaling provide simple therapeutic strategies to promote HIF-1α stabilization and transactivation. PHD and FIH, the hydroxylases responsible for HIF-1 degradation, both belong to a family of iron­dependent dioxygenases that require iron, oxy­gen, and 2-oxaloglutarate (2-OG) as cofactors for the hydroxylation process [71]. Therefore, these enzymes are diminished in the absence of oxy­gen. Hypoxic conditions can be mimicked by the presence of iron chelators, such as deferoxamine or deferiprone, or in the presence of a 2-OG com­petitive inhibitor such as dimethyloxalylglycine (DMOG) [72, 73]. Our group has recently dem­onstrated certain advantages for utilizing iron chelators to stimulate HIF-1 and tissue regenera­tion [36, 70]. In this approach, the removal of iron to deprive HIF-1 degradation of a necessary co-factor is further complemented by reducing ROS stress via the binding of iron molecules. While iron is essential for cellular metabolism, an excess of iron can be toxic and accelerate the aging process through catalyzing the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), thus stimulat­ing oxidative damage [60]. Well known as treat­ment option for Beta-Thalassemia and Hemochromatosis [74, 75], iron chelating drugs have shown benets in the eld of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. With their regenerative potential, they have the ability to increase the retention rate of fat grafts, the survival rate of free aps, and the healing process of diabetic wounds [76, 77].
One of the rst approaches to use iron chela­tion for regenerative medicine can be dated back to 1993. It was described that deferoxamine induces Erythropoietin gene expression and HIF-1 DNA-binding activity [78]. Deferoxamine
206
https://t.me/medicina_free
A. Pagani et al.
(DFO) and Deferiprone (DFP) are FDA-approved molecules with different molar masses (DFO = 560.69 g/mol and DFP = 139.152 g/ mol). Because of its ability to chelate iron from ferritin and hemosiderin, hemoglobin and trans­ferrin, Deferoxamine is already a rst line ther­apy for Hemochromatosis. Deferiprone is an orally active agent rstly approved for use of treating thalassaemia. Due to the different molec­ular weight, scientists have successfully tried to exploit possible synergistic interactions to achieve a more relievable effect on iron chelation [79]. While DFO is hydrophilic, DFP belongs to the hydrophobic molecules. Despite these chemi­cal differences, iron chelators typically contain oxygen, nitrogen, or sulfur-donor atoms that form bonds with iron. The donor atoms of the ligand affect the preference of the molecule to chelate either Fe(II) or Fe(III) oxidation states. Chelators that prefer Fe(II) contain ‘soft’ donor atoms, such as nitrogen and sulfur, and conse­quently retain a relatively high afnity for other divalent metals such as Cu2+ and Zn2+. Iron chela­tors like DFO have an hexadentate arrangement, allowing to bind iron in a 1:1 ratio, and therefore show the highest afnity.
All molecules of the iron chelator family have been in clinical use for decades and have favor­able safety characteristics promising for thera­peutic HIF-1 signaling modulation. Using an iron-chelation approach for skin rejuvenation with an appropriate monitoring of the progres­sion of the effects on aged skin aims to become a new paradigm in anti-aging medicine. Although numerous studies are suggesting a powerful role for iron chelators in the emerging eld of regen­erative medicine, thorough basic science studies and a clinical proof of principle is mandatory to investigate a possible application of these mole­cules as cosmeceuticals.
19.4 Conclusion andOutlook
The possibilities of a therapeutic modulation of hypoxia inducible signaling pathways by repurpos­ing iron chelators are promising. An upregulation of HIF-1 alpha mediated by iron-chelation leads to
the correction of age-dependent changes of HIF-1 expression. This directly results in improved cuta­neous regeneration, as well as in resistance to exogenous stressors such as radiation and infec­tion. These benets are mediated through positive effects on all cutaneous cell types, the upregula­tion of pro-regenerative cytokines, growth factors and peptides, and the recruitment of circulating regenerative cells. However, the impact of such a modulation on skin homeostasis is not fully understood. A thorough investigation of the molecular effects of HIF-1α pathway alteration by iron chelators like DFO or DFP and their inu­ence on human keratinocytes and broblasts is warranted. If supported by solid clinical trial data, this approach would have the potential to become a paradigm shift in aesthetic and regenerative medicine.
References
1. Montagna W.The evolution of human skin (?). J Hum Evol. 1985;14(1):3–22.
2. Tissot FS, Boulter E, Estrach S, Feral CC.The body’s tailored suit: skin as a mechanical interface. Eur J Cell Biol. 2016;95(11):475–82.
3. Gniadecka M, Nielsen OF, Wessel S, Heidenheim M, Christensen DH, Wulf HC. Water and protein struc­ture in photoaged and chronically aged skin. J Invest Dermatol. 1998;111(6):1129–33.
4. Triassi M, Petrella M, Villari P, Pavia M. Trends and some characteristics of female genital neo­plasm mortality in the Campania Region. Ann Ig. 1990;2(4):251–62.
5. Brooks-Wilson AR. Genetics of healthy aging and longevity. Hum Genet. 2013;132(12):1323–38.
6. Sinclair DA, Guarente L. Extrachromosomal rDNA circles—a cause of aging in yeast. Cell. 1997;91(7):1033–42.
7. Hershey D, Lee WE.Entropy, aging and death. Syst Res Behav Sci. 1987;4(4):269–81.
8. DiLoreto R, Murphy CT.The cell biology of aging. Mol Biol Cell. 2015;26(25):4524–31.
9. Fisher GJ, Varani J, Voorhees JJ. Looking older: broblast collapse and therapeutic implications. Arch Dermatol. 2008;144(5):666–72.
10. Fries JF. Aging, natural death, and the compres­sion of morbidity. Bull World Health Organ. 2002;80(3):245–50.
11. Berneburg M, Plettenberg H, Krutmann J.Photoaging of human skin. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 2000;16(6):239–44.