6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Osteoblastic Lrp4 promotes osteoclastogenesis by regulating ATP release and adenosine-A 2AR signaling

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Lrp4 is mutated in patients with high-bone-mass diseases. Loss of Lrp4 in osteoblasts (OBs) increases bone formation by OBs and decreases bone resorption by osteoclasts through an unclear mechanism. Xiong et al. show that overproduction of extracellular adenosine in Lrp4-deficient OBs, which are derived from ATP hydrolysis and signals through A 2AR and RANK, may underlie Lrp4 regulation of osteoclastogenesis.

          Abstract

          Bone homeostasis depends on the functional balance of osteoblasts (OBs) and osteoclasts (OCs). Lrp4 is a transmembrane protein that is mutated in patients with high bone mass. Loss of Lrp4 in OB-lineage cells increases bone mass by elevating bone formation by OBs and reducing bone resorption by OCs. However, it is unclear how Lrp4 deficiency in OBs impairs osteoclastogenesis. Here, we provide evidence that loss of Lrp4 in the OB lineage stabilizes the prorenin receptor (PRR) and increases PRR/V-ATPase–driven ATP release, thereby enhancing the production of the ATP derivative adenosine. Both pharmacological and genetic inhibition of adenosine- 2A receptor (A 2AR) in culture and Lrp4 mutant mice diminishes the osteoclastogenic deficit and reduces trabecular bone mass. Furthermore, elevated adenosine-A 2AR signaling reduces receptor activator of nuclear factor κB (RANK)–mediated osteoclastogenesis. Collectively, these results identify a mechanism by which osteoblastic Lrp4 controls osteoclastogenesis, reveal a cross talk between A 2AR and RANK signaling in osteoclastogenesis, and uncover an unrecognized pathophysiological mechanism of high-bone-mass disorders.

          Related collections

          Most cited references70

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          WNT signaling in bone homeostasis and disease: from human mutations to treatments.

          Low bone mass and strength lead to fragility fractures, for example, in elderly individuals affected by osteoporosis or children with osteogenesis imperfecta. A decade ago, rare human mutations affecting bone negatively (osteoporosis-pseudoglioma syndrome) or positively (high-bone mass phenotype, sclerosteosis and Van Buchem disease) have been identified and found to all reside in components of the canonical WNT signaling machinery. Mouse genetics confirmed the importance of canonical Wnt signaling in the regulation of bone homeostasis, with activation of the pathway leading to increased, and inhibition leading to decreased, bone mass and strength. The importance of WNT signaling for bone has also been highlighted since then in the general population in numerous genome-wide association studies. The pathway is now the target for therapeutic intervention to restore bone strength in millions of patients at risk for fracture. This paper reviews our current understanding of the mechanisms by which WNT signalng regulates bone homeostasis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Nucleotide signalling during inflammation.

            Inflammatory conditions are associated with the extracellular release of nucleotides, particularly ATP. In the extracellular compartment, ATP predominantly functions as a signalling molecule through the activation of purinergic P2 receptors. Metabotropic P2Y receptors are G-protein-coupled, whereas ionotropic P2X receptors are ATP-gated ion channels. Here we discuss how signalling events through P2 receptors alter the outcomes of inflammatory or infectious diseases. Recent studies implicate a role for P2X/P2Y signalling in mounting appropriate inflammatory responses critical for host defence against invading pathogens or tumours. Conversely, P2X/P2Y signalling can promote chronic inflammation during ischaemia and reperfusion injury, inflammatory bowel disease or acute and chronic diseases of the lungs. Although nucleotide signalling has been used clinically in patients before, research indicates an expanding field of opportunities for specifically targeting individual P2 receptors for the treatment of inflammatory or infectious diseases.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Bisphosphonates: the first 40 years.

              R. Russell (2011)
              The first full publications on the biological effects of the diphosphonates, later renamed bisphosphonates, appeared in 1969, so it is timely after 40years to review the history of their development and their impact on clinical medicine. This special issue of BONE contains a series of review articles covering the basic science and clinical aspects of these drugs, written by some of many scientists who have participated in the advances made in this field. The discovery and development of the bisphosphonates (BPs) as a major class of drugs for the treatment of bone diseases has been a fascinating story, and is a paradigm of a successful journey from 'bench to bedside'. Bisphosphonates are chemically stable analogues of inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi), and it was studies on the role of PPi as the body's natural 'water softener' in the control of soft tissue and skeletal mineralisation that led to the need to find inhibitors of calcification that would resist hydrolysis by alkaline phosphatase. The observation that PPi and BPs could not only retard the growth but also the dissolution of hydroxyapatite crystals prompted studies on their ability to inhibit bone resorption. Although PPi was unable to do this, BPs turned out to be remarkably effective inhibitors of bone resorption, both in vitro and in vivo experimental systems, and eventually in humans. As ever more potent BPs were synthesised and studied, it became apparent that physico-chemical effects were insufficient to explain their biological effects, and that cellular actions must be involved. Despite many attempts, it was not until the 1990s that their biochemical actions were elucidated. It is now clear that bisphosphonates inhibit bone resorption by being selectively taken up and adsorbed to mineral surfaces in bone, where they interfere with the action of the bone-resorbing osteoclasts. Bisphosphonates are internalised by osteoclasts and interfere with specific biochemical processes. Bisphosphonates can be classified into at least two groups with different molecular modes of action. The simpler non-nitrogen containing bisphosphonates (such as etidronate and clodronate) can be metabolically incorporated into non-hydrolysable analogues of ATP, which interfere with ATP-dependent intracellular pathways. The more potent, nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates (including pamidronate, alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate and zoledronate) are not metabolised in this way but inhibit key enzymes of the mevalonate/cholesterol biosynthetic pathway. The major enzyme target for bisphosphonates is farnesyl pyrophosphate synthase (FPPS), and the crystal structure elucidated for this enzyme reveals how BPs bind to and inhibit at the active site via their critical N atoms. Inhibition of FPPS prevents the biosynthesis of isoprenoid compounds (notably farnesol and geranylgeraniol) that are required for the post-translational prenylation of small GTP-binding proteins (which are also GTPases) such as rab, rho and rac, which are essential for intracellular signalling events within osteoclasts. The accumulation of the upstream metabolite, isopentenyl pyrophosphate (IPP), as a result of inhibition of FPPS may be responsible for immunomodulatory effects on gamma delta (γδ) T cells, and can also lead to production of another ATP metabolite called ApppI, which has intracellular actions. Effects on other cellular targets, such as osteocytes, may also be important. Over the years many hundreds of BPs have been made, and more than a dozen have been studied in man. As reviewed elsewhere in this issue, bisphosphonates are established as the treatments of choice for various diseases of excessive bone resorption, including Paget's disease of bone, the skeletal complications of malignancy, and osteoporosis. Several of the leading BPs have achieved 'block-buster' status with annual sales in excess of a billion dollars. As a class, BPs share properties in common. However, as with other classes of drugs, there are obvious chemical, biochemical, and pharmacological differences among the various BPs. Each BP has a unique profile in terms of mineral binding and cellular effects that may help to explain potential clinical differences among the BPs. Even though many of the well-established BPs have come or are coming to the end of their patent life, their use as cheaper generic drugs is likely to continue for many years to come. Furthermore in many areas, e.g. in cancer therapy, the way they are used is not yet optimised. New 'designer' BPs continue to be made, and there are several interesting potential applications in other areas of medicine, with unmet medical needs still to be fulfilled. The adventure that began in Davos more than 40 years ago is not yet over. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Cell Biol
                J. Cell Biol
                jcb
                jcb
                The Journal of Cell Biology
                The Rockefeller University Press
                0021-9525
                1540-8140
                6 March 2017
                : 216
                : 3
                : 761-778
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA 30912
                [2 ]Department of Neurology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA 30912
                [3 ]Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center, Augusta, GA 30912
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Lin Mei: lmei@ 123456augusta.edu ; or Wen-Cheng Xiong: wxiong@ 123456augusta.edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9071-7598
                Article
                201608002
                10.1083/jcb.201608002
                5350517
                28193701
                e6465d61-6805-42e6-b1f5-d15f30c08fd8
                © 2017 Xiong et al.

                This article is distributed under the terms of an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike–No Mirror Sites license for the first six months after the publication date (see http://www.rupress.org/terms/). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 4.0 International license, as described at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).

                History
                : 01 August 2016
                : 23 November 2016
                : 10 January 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health, DOI https://doi.org/10.13039/100000002;
                Funded by: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, DOI https://doi.org/10.13039/100000738;
                Categories
                Research Articles
                Article
                23
                38
                1

                Cell biology
                Cell biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article