Search

Several experimental studies have linked adenosine's neuroprotective role in cerebral ischemia. During ischemia, adenosine is formed due to intracellular ATP breakdown into ADP, further when phosphate is released from ADP, the adenosine monophosphate is formed. It acts via A1, A2, and A3 receptors found on neurons, blood vessels, glial cells, platelets, and leukocytes. It is related to various effector systems such as adenyl cyclase and membrane ion channels via G-proteins. Pharmacological manipulation of adenosine receptors by agonists (CCPA, ADAC, IB-MECA) increases ischemic brain damage in various in vivo and in vitro models of cerebral ischemia whereas, agonist can also be neuroprotective. Mainly, receptor antagonists (CGS15943, MRS1706) indicated neuroprotection. Later, various studies also revealed that the downregulation or upregulation of specific adenosine receptors is necessary during the recovery of cerebral ischemia by activating several downstream signaling pathways. In the current review, we elaborate on the dual roles of adenosine and its receptor subtypes A1, A2, and A3 and their involvement in the pathobiology of cerebral ischemic injury. Adenosine-based therapies have the potential to improve the outcomes of cerebral injury patients, thereby providing them with a more optimistic future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Signal transduction governs cellular behavior, and its dysregulation often leads to human disease. To understand this process, we can use network models based on prior knowledge, where nodes represent biomolecules, usually proteins, and edges indicate interactions between them. Several computational methods combine untargeted omics data with prior knowledge to estimate the state of signaling networks in specific biological scenarios. Here, we review, compare, and classify recent network approaches according to their characteristics in terms of input omics data, prior knowledge and underlying methodologies. We highlight existing challenges in the field, such as the general lack of ground truth and the limitations of prior knowledge. We also point out new omics developments that may have a profound impact, such as single‐cell proteomics or large‐scale profiling of protein conformational changes. We provide both an introduction for interested users seeking strategies to study cell signaling on a large scale and an update for seasoned modelers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mechanically stretched skeletal muscle undergoes dramatic shifts in structure, mass, and function. In vitro tensile strain models have demonstrated that myogenic progenitor cells, including satellite cells and myoblasts, are highly mechanosensitive cells, and respond to mechanical strain in a wide variety of aspects. However, the experimental results from different researchers and laboratories are not always in support of each other. Moreover, some specific molecules or signaling pathways were reported to play distinct roles in stretched myogenic cells, according to the statements of different studies. The purpose of this review is to integrate the researches conducting in vitro culture of satellite cells or myoblasts and exploring their mechanoresponses using in vitro stretching apparatus. These responses will be categorized into several groups, such as activation, proliferation, myogenic differentiation, cellular damage or apoptosis, properties of plasma membrane, transdifferentiation, reorientation, etc. In addition, detailed experimental designs like culturing conditions and straining regimens will be displayed and compared, to interpret some contradictory statements in different studies. Furthermore, the currently known interconnections among some mechanosensitive pathways will be pictured to give a better understanding about the complex regulations of myogenic cell responses to mechanical stretch. Hopefully, by summarizing the published studies about mechanoresponses of myogenic progenitor cells, future directions, and perspectives would be made clearer to researchers in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]