4.6 Article

No Haploinsufficiency but Loss of Heterozygosity for EXT in Multiple Osteochondromas

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 177, 期 4, 页码 1946-1957

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2010.100296

关键词

-

资金

  1. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research [917-76-315]
  2. British Heart Foundation [FS/05/060]
  3. European Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multiple osteochondromas (MO) is an autosomal dominant disorder caused by germline mutations in EXT1 and/or EXT2. In contrast, solitary osteochondroma (SO) is nonhereditary. Products of the EXT gene are involved in heparan sulfate (HS) biosynthesis. In this study, we investigated whether osteochondromas arise via either loss of heterozygosity (2 hits) or haploinsufficiency. An in vitro three-dimensional chondrogenic pellet model was used to compare heterozygous bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs EXTwt/-) of MO patients with normal MSCs and the corresponding tumor specimens (presumed EXT-/-). We demonstrated a second hit in EXT in five of eight osteochondromas. HS chain length and structure, in vitro chondrogenesis, and EXT expression levels were identical in both EXTwt/- and normal MSCs. Immunohistochemistry for HS, HS proteoglycans, and HS-dependent signaling pathways (eg, TGF-beta/BMP, Wnt, and PTHLH) also showed no differences. The cartilaginous cap of osteochondroma contained a mixture of HS-positive and HS-negative cells. Because a heterozygous EXT mutation does not affect chondrogenesis, EXT, HS, or downstream signaling pathways in MSCs, our results refute the haploinsufficiency theory. We found a second hit in 63% of analyzed osteochondromas, supporting the hypothesis that osteochondromas arise via loss of heterozygosity. The detection of the second hit may depend on the ratio of HS-positive (normal) versus HS-negative (mutated) cells in the cartilaginous cap of the osteochondroma. (Am J Pathol 2010, 177:1946-1957; DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2010.100296)

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

4.6
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