Literature DB >> 24333871

A supra-cellular model for coupling of bone resorption to formation during remodeling: lessons from two bone resorption inhibitors affecting bone formation differently.

Pia Rosgaard Jensen1, Thomas Levin Andersen2, Brenda L Pennypacker3, Le T Duong4, Lars H Engelholm5, Jean-Marie Delaissé6.   

Abstract

The bone matrix is maintained functional through the combined action of bone resorbing osteoclasts and bone forming osteoblasts, in so-called bone remodeling units. The coupling of these two activities is critical for securing bone replenishment and involves osteogenic factors released by the osteoclasts. However, the osteoclasts are separated from the mature bone forming osteoblasts in time and space. Therefore the target cell of these osteoclastic factors has remained unknown. Recent explorations of the physical microenvironment of osteoclasts revealed a cell layer lining the bone marrow and forming a canopy over the whole remodeling surface, spanning from the osteoclasts to the bone forming osteoblasts. Several observations show that these canopy cells are a source of osteoblast progenitors, and we hypothesized therefore that they are the likely cells targeted by the osteogenic factors of the osteoclasts. Here we provide evidence supporting this hypothesis, by comparing the osteoclast-canopy interface in response to two types of bone resorption inhibitors in rabbit lumbar vertebrae. The bisphosphonate alendronate, an inhibitor leading to low bone formation levels, reduces the extent of canopy coverage above osteoclasts. This effect is in accordance with its toxic action on periosteoclastic cells. In contrast, odanacatib, an inhibitor preserving bone formation, increases the extent of the osteoclast-canopy interface. Interestingly, these distinct effects correlate with how fast bone formation follows resorption during these respective treatments. Furthermore, canopy cells exhibit uPARAP/Endo180, a receptor able to bind the collagen made available by osteoclasts, and reported to mediate osteoblast recruitment. Overall these observations support a mechanism where the recruitment of bone forming osteoblasts from the canopy is induced by osteoclastic factors, thereby favoring initiation of bone formation. They lead to a model where the osteoclast-canopy interface is the physical site where coupling of bone resorption to bone formation occurs.
Copyright © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bisphosphonates; Bone remodeling compartment canopy; Cathepsin K inhibitor; Coupling; Osteoclast anabolics; Osteoprogenitors

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24333871     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2013.12.036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun        ISSN: 0006-291X            Impact factor:   3.575


  9 in total

Review 1.  Molecular and cellular basis of bone resorption.

Authors:  Reinhard Gruber
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2014-09-16

2.  Absence of an osteopetrosis phenotype in IKBKG (NEMO) mutation-positive women: A case-control study.

Authors:  Morten Frost; Michaela Tencerova; Christina M Andreasen; Thomas L Andersen; Charlotte Ejersted; Dea Svaneby; Weimin Qui; Moustapha Kassem; Allahdad Zarei; William H McAlister; Deborah J Veis; Michael P Whyte; Anja L Frederiksen
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 4.398

3.  Early reversal cells in adult human bone remodeling: osteoblastic nature, catabolic functions and interactions with osteoclasts.

Authors:  Mohamed Essameldin Abdelgawad; Jean-Marie Delaisse; Maja Hinge; Pia Rosgaard Jensen; Ragad Walid Alnaimi; Lars Rolighed; Lars H Engelholm; Niels Marcussen; Thomas Levin Andersen
Journal:  Histochem Cell Biol       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 4.304

Review 4.  Novel advances in the treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Christopher K Y Chan; Alice Mason; Cyrus Cooper; Elaine Dennison
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 4.291

Review 5.  The reversal phase of the bone-remodeling cycle: cellular prerequisites for coupling resorption and formation.

Authors:  Jean-Marie Delaisse
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2014-08-06

Review 6.  Perspective of the GEMSTONE Consortium on Current and Future Approaches to Functional Validation for Skeletal Genetic Disease Using Cellular, Molecular and Animal-Modeling Techniques.

Authors:  Martina Rauner; Ines Foessl; Melissa M Formosa; Erika Kague; Vid Prijatelj; Nerea Alonso Lopez; Bodhisattwa Banerjee; Dylan Bergen; Björn Busse; Ângelo Calado; Eleni Douni; Yankel Gabet; Natalia García Giralt; Daniel Grinberg; Nika M Lovsin; Xavier Nogues Solan; Barbara Ostanek; Nathan J Pavlos; Fernando Rivadeneira; Ivan Soldatovic; Jeroen van de Peppel; Bram van der Eerden; Wim van Hul; Susanna Balcells; Janja Marc; Sjur Reppe; Kent Søe; David Karasik
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 5.555

Review 7.  New insights into treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Piet Geusens
Journal:  RMD Open       Date:  2015-08-15

8.  Tumor-associated Endo180 requires stromal-derived LOX to promote metastatic prostate cancer cell migration on human ECM surfaces.

Authors:  Matthew P Caley; Helen King; Neel Shah; Kai Wang; Mercedes Rodriguez-Teja; Julian H Gronau; Jonathan Waxman; Justin Sturge
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 5.150

Review 9.  Estrogen-progestin therapy causes a greater increase in spinal bone mineral density than estrogen therapy - a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials with direct randomization.

Authors:  J C Prior; V R Seifert-Klauss; D Giustini; J D Adachi; S Kalyan; A Goshtasebi
Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 2.041

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.