BACKGROUND: Keratinocyte migration is essential for wound healing and diabetic wound keratinocytes migrate poorly. Keratinocyte migration and anchorage appears to be mediated by laminin-332 (LM-332). Impaired diabetic wound healing may be due to defective LM-332 mediated keratinocyte migration. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate LM-332 expression in diabetic (db/db) and control (db/-) mice and to test LM-332 wound healing effects when applied to mouse wounds. METHODS: LM-332 expression in mouse wounds was evaluated using immunohistochemistry. LM-332 wound healing effects were evaluated by directly applying soluble LM-332, a LM-332 biomaterial, or a control to mouse wounds. Percent wound closure and histology score, based on healing extent, were measured. RESULTS: Precursor LM-332 expression was markedly reduced in db/db when compared to db/- mice. In vitro, soluble LM-332 and LM-332 biomaterial demonstrated significant keratinocyte adhesion. In vivo, soluble LM-332 treated wounds had the highest histology score, but significant differences were not found between wound treatments (p>0.05). No differences in percentage wound closure between treatment and control wounds were found (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The db/db wounds express less precursor LM-332 when compared to db/-. However, LM-332 application did not improve db/db wound healing. LM-332 purified from keratinocytes was primarily physiologically cleaved LM-332 and may not regulate keratinocyte migration. Application of precursor LM-332 rather than cleaved LM-332 may be necessary to improve wound healing, but this isoform is not currently available in quantities sufficient for testing.
BACKGROUND: Keratinocyte migration is essential for wound healing and diabetic wound keratinocytes migrate poorly. Keratinocyte migration and anchorage appears to be mediated by laminin-332 (LM-332). Impaired diabetic wound healing may be due to defective LM-332 mediated keratinocyte migration. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate LM-332 expression in diabetic (db/db) and control (db/-) mice and to test LM-332 wound healing effects when applied to mouse wounds. METHODS: LM-332 expression in mouse wounds was evaluated using immunohistochemistry. LM-332 wound healing effects were evaluated by directly applying soluble LM-332, a LM-332 biomaterial, or a control to mouse wounds. Percent wound closure and histology score, based on healing extent, were measured. RESULTS: Precursor LM-332 expression was markedly reduced in db/db when compared to db/- mice. In vitro, soluble LM-332 and LM-332 biomaterial demonstrated significant keratinocyte adhesion. In vivo, soluble LM-332 treated wounds had the highest histology score, but significant differences were not found between wound treatments (p>0.05). No differences in percentage wound closure between treatment and control wounds were found (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The db/db wounds express less precursor LM-332 when compared to db/-. However, LM-332 application did not improve db/db wound healing. LM-332 purified from keratinocytes was primarily physiologically cleaved LM-332 and may not regulate keratinocyte migration. Application of precursor LM-332 rather than cleaved LM-332 may be necessary to improve wound healing, but this isoform is not currently available in quantities sufficient for testing.
Authors: Michelle L Spenny; Pornprom Muangman; Stephen R Sullivan; Nigel W Bunnett; John C Ansel; John E Olerud; Nicole S Gibran Journal: Wound Repair Regen Date: 2002 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 3.617
Authors: B D Ring; S Scully; C R Davis; M B Baker; M J Cullen; M A Pelleymounter; D M Danilenko Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: Katherine M Malinda; Annette B Wysocki; Jennifer E Koblinski; Hynda K Kleinman; M Lourdes Ponce Journal: Int J Biochem Cell Biol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 5.085
Authors: Peter J Amos; Sahil K Kapur; Peter C Stapor; Hulan Shang; Stefan Bekiranov; Moshe Khurgel; George T Rodeheaver; Shayn M Peirce; Adam J Katz Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Philip Fleckman; Marcia Usui; Ge Zhao; Robert Underwood; Max Maginness; Andrew Marshall; Christine Glaister; Buddy Ratner; John Olerud Journal: J Biomed Mater Res A Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: Alexander Nyström; Daniela Velati; Venugopal R Mittapalli; Anja Fritsch; Johannes S Kern; Leena Bruckner-Tuderman Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2013-07-08 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Tarek El-Hamoly; Csaba Hegedűs; Petra Lakatos; Katalin Kovács; Péter Bai; Mona A El-Ghazaly; Ezzeddin S El-Denshary; Éva Szabó; László Virág Journal: Mol Med Date: 2014-08-26 Impact factor: 6.354