| Literature DB >> 34992398 |
Qilin Pei1, Jun Li2, Pengfei Zhou3, Jun Zhang1, Peng Huang1, Jingchuan Fan1, Zhen Zou1, Xi Li1, Bin Wang1.
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with an increased risk of bone fracture, but the bone mineral density (BMD) is typically normal or higher in such patients. Because the fracture risk is independent of reduced BMD, bone fragility in T2DM may be partially due to poor bone quality. The mechanisms triggering bone quality abnormalities in T2DM are complex, and include the accumulation of advanced glycation end-products, the increased inflammation, and low bone turnover. Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) in bone can hydrolyze the bone matrix. Tissue inhibitors of MMPs (TIMPs) can inhibit the activity of MMPs. Both MMPs and TIMPs participate in mediating bone quality. Among all types of TIMPs, TIMP-1 is mostly reportedly increased in the serum of T2DM patients. Because osteocytes can express TIMP-1, and osteocyte pericellular matrix influences bone quality partially regulated by perilacunar/canalicular remodeling, we hypothesized that TIMP-1 at sites of osteocyte lacunar-canalicular system is involved in T2DM bone fragility.Entities:
Keywords: TIMP-1; bone fragility; lacunar-canalicular system; osteocyte; type 2 diabetes mellitus
Year: 2021 PMID: 34992398 PMCID: PMC8711839 DOI: 10.2147/DMSO.S345081
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes ISSN: 1178-7007 Impact factor: 3.168
Figure 1A conceptual framework of this hypothesis: TIMP-1 at sites of osteocyte lacunar-canalicular system (LCS) is partially involved in type 2 diabetes bone fragility. The two potential mechanisms by which TIMP-1 in LCS alters PLR are shown in the dotted boxes, and future studies are warranted to elucidate the precise mechanism for this hypothesis.
Summary of Association Between TIMP-1 Level in Blood and T2DM in Patients
| Reference | Subjects | Outcome of TIMP-1 (ng/mL) | Association of TIMP-1 and T2DM | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Numbers | Age (Years) | Country | |||
| Wang Y. et al, 2020 | Patients: 254 | 59±5.83 | Singaporea | 227.9±39* | Positive |
| Lee SW. et al, 2005 | Patients: 80 | 49.9±9.9 | Korea | 362.1±187.7* | Positive |
| Tayebjee M.H. et al, 2004 | Patients: 86 | 68±6 | UK | 397 (300–496) * | Positive |
| Sundstrom J. et al, 2004 | Whole samples: 1069, Diabetes: 9% | 56.3±9.9 | USA | 1.03b, (p=0.04) * | Positive |
| Papazafiropoulou A. et al, 2010 | Patients: 60 | 60.3±7.4 | Greece | 197.5±76.5* | Negative |
| Jayashree K. et al, 2018 | Patients: 41 | 35–65 | India | 454.40 (359–529) | No significant difference |
Note: aThe Chinese population in Singapore; bRatio of plasma level TIMP-1 between diabetes and control subjects; *P<0.05 was taken as statistically significant.