4.7 Review

Glia-Derived Extracellular Vesicles in Parkinson's Disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 9, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9061941

关键词

glia; extracellular vesicles; exosomes; cell-to-cell communication; biomarkers; nanotherapeutics; Parkinson's disease

资金

  1. Brains2South grant (Fondazione con il Sud -Bando Capitale Umano ad Alta Qualificazione 2015)
  2. Italian Ministry of Health
  3. University of Catania

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glial cells are fundamental players in the central nervous system (CNS) development and homeostasis, both in health and disease states. In Parkinson's disease (PD), a dysfunctional glia-neuron crosstalk represents a common final pathway contributing to the chronic and progressive death of dopaminergic (DAergic) neurons of the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNpc). Notably, glial cells communicating with each other by an array of molecules, can acquire a beneficial or destructive phenotype, thereby enhancing neuronal death/vulnerability and/or exerting critical neuroprotective and neuroreparative functions, with mechanisms that are actively investigated. An important way of delivering messenger molecules within this glia-neuron cross-talk consists in the secretion of extracellular vesicles (EVs). EVs are nano-sized membranous particles able to convey a wide range of molecular cargoes in a controlled way, depending on the specific donor cell and the microenvironmental milieu. Given the dual role of glia in PD, glia-derived EVs may deliver molecules carrying various messages for the vulnerable/dysfunctional DAergic neurons. Here, we summarize the state-of-the-art of glial-neuron interactions and glia-derived EVs in PD. Also, EVs have the ability to cross the blood brain barrier (BBB), thus acting both within the CNS and outside, in the periphery. In these regards, this review discloses the emerging applications of EVs, with a special focus on glia-derived EVs as potential carriers of new biomarkers and nanotherapeutics for PD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据