MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2044430434 · doi:10.1007/s12079-008-0019-1

CCN3: A novel function in vivo

2007· article· en· W2044430434 sur OpenAlexaff
Andrew Leask

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Cell Communication and Signaling · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueConnective Tissue Growth Factor Research
Établissements canadiensWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCTGFCYR61Wnt signaling pathwayBiologyCell biologyMatricellular proteinFibulinGrowth factorRegeneration (biology)ThrombospondinExtracellular matrixCancer researchSignal transductionGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abnormal skeletal and cardiac development, cardiomyopathy, muscle atrophy and cataracts in mice with a targeted disruption of the Nov (Ccn3) gene Heath et al., BMC Dev Biol. 2008; 8: 18. Development, tissue regeneration and disease are regulated through complex interactions among molecules which signal to regulate cellular processes such as proliferation, survival, differentiation, adhesion and migration. The CCN family of matricellular proteins is a central player in regulating several of these signaling molecules (reviewed Leask and Abraham 2006). Thus CCN family members profoundly affect cellular behavior in development, wound healing, tissue homeostasis and in a range of pathologies, including fibrosis and cancer. There are six members of the CCN family: CCN1 (cysteine-rich 61, Cyr61), CCN2 (connective tissue growth factor, CTGF), CCN3 (nephroblastoma overexpressed gene, NOV), CCN4 (Wnt-induced secreted protein-1, WISP1), CCN5 (WISP2/rCOP-1) and CCN6 (WISP3). Their effects are mediated by four cysteine-rich conserved domains which are shared by all members of the family, with the exception of WISP2 which lacks the C-terminal domain (Bork 1993; Perbal 2004). Through these domains, CCN proteins interact with a variety of extra-cellular signaling molecules, thereby regulating their activities. Recent evidence has shown that, in spite of their structural similarity, CCN proteins have a diverse range of activities. In particular, results revealed using genetically-deficient mice and cells derived thereof have revealed essential non-redundant functions for CCN family members. Targeted disruption of CCN2/CTGF identified a role in coordinating chondrogenesis and angiogenesis (Ivkovic et al. 2003) while knock out mice lacking CCN1/CYR61 show that it is required for placental development and vascular integrity (Mo et al. 2002). Experiments using CCN2-deficient cells have shown that CCN2 is required for optimal adhesion, contraction, migration and gene transcription both basally and in response to fibronectin, transforming growth factor-beta 1 and micromass culture (Chen et al. 2004; Shi-wen et al. 2006; Kennedy et al. 2007; Nishida et al. 2007; Pala et al. 2008). CCN3/nov (nephroblastoma overexpressed) was initially identified in a chick nephroblastoma caused by the mouse adenovirus type 1 (MAV-1) retrovirus (Joliot et al. 1992). CCN3 is over-expressed in all MAV-induced avian nephroblastomas studied and deregulated in a variety of other tumor types, including Wilms’ tumors (Chevalier et al. 1998) and musculoskeletal tumors (Manara et al. 2002). Although these results suggest that CCN3 may contribute to tumorigenesis, whether CCN3 plays an essential role in vivo is unknown. To investigate the in vivo function of CCN3, Heath and colleagues (2008) generated mice carrying a targeted mutation of CCN3. These mice produce no full length NOV protein, but express at a barely detectable level a mutant NOV protein that lacks the van Willebrand domain. Mutating CCN3 resulted in abnormal skeletal and cardiac development, including joint abnormalities, cardiomyopathy, and premature tissue degeneration culminating in muscle atrophy and cataracts in adult mice. In development at E16.5, CCN3 expression was found in the mesenchyme surrounding cartilage condensations, and in the tendons and myotendinous junctions. Chondrocytes were enlarged and the region in which chondrocytes were present was enlarged. Ossification was severely impaired in mutant embryos. These results differed significantly from those seen in CCN2 knockout mice which die shortly after birth with severely malformed rib cages (Ivkovic et al. 2003). In these latter animals, delayed ossification was also observed, but these mice had enlarged pre-hypertrophic/hypertrophic zones and thinner bone collars. In contrast, in CCN3 mutant mice, the size of the prehypertrophic/hypertrophic zone was reduced, and the bone collars were increased in thickness. The basis of the phenotype of the CCN3-deficient mice was not explored mechanistically. It is unclear whether the phenotypes observed are due to the loss of full length CCN3, or to possible novel functions of the very low level of mutant CCN3 expression. Moreover, expression of key players in chondrogenesis and ossification (e.g., the sox family of transcription factors) were not examined. Moreover, it has been recently shown that CCN2, but not CCN3, is induced by Wnt3a, which plays a key role in signaling in chondrogenesis, osteoblastogenesis, and osteoclastogenesis (Si et al. 2006; Chen et al. 2008). An intriguing possibility exists that the differential results between the CCN2 and CCN3 animals may arise due to differential responses in expression to Wnt3a. Nonetheless, the results presented by Heath and colleagues (2008) are intriguing at they point to clear functional differences in vivo among the different CCN family members. These differences which may reflect divergences not only regarding the proteins with which they interact with, but also regarding the expression patterns in response to various stimuli in vivo.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,027
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,184

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,297
Écart entre enseignants0,272 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Cell Communication and SignalingMême sujetConnective Tissue Growth Factor ResearchTravaux en français237 207