Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine

Sleep disturbance is the most prominent symptom in depressive patients and was formerly regarded as a main secondary manifestation of depression. However, many longitudinal studies have identified insomnia as an independent risk factor for the development of emerging or recurrent depression among young, middle‐aged and older adults. This bidirectional association between sleep disturbance and depression has created a new perspective that sleep problems are no longer an epiphenomenon of depression but a predictive prodromal symptom. In this review, we highlight the treatment of sleep disturbance before, during and after depression, which probably plays an important role in improving outcomes and preventing the recurrence of depression. In clinical practice, pharmacological therapies, including hypnotics and antidepressants, and non‐pharmacological therapies are typically applied. A better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms between sleep disturbance and depression can help psychiatrists better manage this comorbidity.

Thrombospondin‐1 (TSP‐1) is a matricellular glycoprotein that influences cellular phenotype and the structure of the extracellular matrix. These effects are important components of the tissue remodeling that is associated with angiogenesis and neoplasia. The genetic mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes that occur within tumor cells are frequently associated with decreased expression of TSP‐1. However, the TSP‐1 that is produced by stromal fibroblasts, endothelial cells and immune cells suppresses tumor progression. TSP‐1 inhibits angiogenesis through direct effects on endothelial cell migration and survival and through indirect effects on growth factor mobilization. TSP‐1 that is present in the tumor microenvironment also acts to suppress tumor cell growth through activation of transforming growth factor β in those tumor cells that are responsive to TGFβ. In this review, the molecular basis for the role of TSP‐1 in the inhibition of tumor growth and angiogenesis is summarized.

Ramon y Cajal discovered a particular cell type in the gut, which he named ‘interstitial neurons’ more that 100 years ago. In the early 1970s, electron microscopy/electron microscope (EM) studies showed that indeed a special interstitial cell type corresponding to the cells discovered by Cajal is localized in the gut muscle coat, but it became obvious that they were not neurons. Consequently, they were renamed ‘interstitial cells of Cajal’ (ICC) and considered to be pace‐makers for gut motility. For the past 10 years many groups were interested in whether or not ICC are present outside the gastrointestinal tract, and indeed, peculiar interstitial cells were found in: upper and lower urinary tracts, blood vessels, pancreas, male and female reproductive tracts, mammary gland, placenta, and, recently, in the heart as well as in the gut. Such cells, now mostly known as interstitial Cajal‐like cells (ICLC), were given different and confusing names. Moreover, ICLC are only apparently similar to canonical ICC. In fact, EM and cell cultures revealed very particular features of ICLC, which unequivocally distinguishes them from ICC and all other interstitial cells: the presence of 2–5 cell body prolongations that are very thin (less than 0.2 μm, under resolving power of light microscopy), extremely long (tens to hundreds of μm), with a moniliform aspect (many dilations along), as well as caveolae. Given the unique dimensions of these prolongations (very long and very thin) and to avoid further confusion with other interstitial cell types (e.g. fibroblast, fibrocyte, fibroblast‐like cells, mesenchymal cells), we are proposing the term TELOCYTES for them, and TELOPODES for their prolongations, by using the Greek affix ‘telos’.

For multicellular organisms, the rigorous control of programmed cell death is as important as that of cell proliferation. The mechanisms involved in the regulation of cell death are not yet understood, but a key component is the family of caspases which are activated in a cascade and are responsible for the apoptotic‐specific changes and disassembly of the cell. Although the caspases represent a central point in apoptosis, their activation is regulated by a variety of other factors. Among these, Bcl‐2 family plays a pivotal role in caspases activation, by this deciding whether a cell will live or die. Bcl‐2 family members are known to focus much of their response to the mitochondria level, upstream the irreversible cellular damage, but their functions are not yet well defined. This review summarizes the recent data regarding the Bcl‐2 proteins and the ways they regulate the apoptosis.

Cardiovascular diseases account for more than half of total mortality before the age of 75 in industrialized countries. To develop therapies promoting the compensatory growth of blood vessels could be superior to palliative surgical surgical interventions. Therefore, much effort has been put into investigating underlying mechanisms. Depending on the initial trigger, growth of blood vessels in adult organisms proceeds via two major processes, angiogenesis and arteriogenesis. While angiogenesis is induced by hypoxia and results in new capillaries, arteriogenesis is induced by physical forces, most importantly fluid shear stress. Consequently, chronically elevated fluid shear stress was found to be the strongest trigger under experimental conditions. Arteriogenesis describes the remodelling of pre‐existing arterio‐arteriolar anastomoses to completely developed and functional arteries. In both growth processes, enlargement of vascular wall structures was proposed to be covered by proliferation of existing wall cells. Recently, increasing evidence emerges, implicating a pivotal role for circulating cells, above all blood monocytes, in vascular growth processes. Since it has been shown that monocytes/macrophage release a cocktail of chemokines, growth factors and proteases involved in vascular growth, their contribution seems to be of a paracrine fashion. A similar role is currently discussed for various populations of bone‐marrow derived stem cells and endothelial progenitors. In contrast, the initial hypothesis that these cells ‐after undergoing a (trans‐)differentiation‐ contribute by a structural integration into the growing vessel wall, is increasingly challenged.

Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) are RNAs longer than 200 nt in length that are characterized by low levels of sequence conservation and expression; lncRNAs modulate various biological functions at epigenetic, transcriptional and post‐transcriptional levels, or directly regulate protein activity. As a family of small and evolutionarily conserved noncoding RNAs, microRNAs (miRNAs) are capable of regulating physiological and pathological processes via inhibiting target mRNA translation or promoting mRNA degradation. A number of studies have confirmed that both lncRNAs and miRNAs are closely associated with the development of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), such as cardiac remodelling, heart failure, myocardial injury and arrhythmia, and that they act as biomarkers, potential therapeutic targets or strong indicators of prognosis; however, the underlying molecular mechanism has not been elucidated. Recently, emerging evidence showed that the novel regulatory mechanism underlying the crosstalk among lncRNAs, miRNAs and mRNAs plays a pivotal role in the pathophysiological processes of CVDs in response to stress stimuli. In this review, I comprehensively summarized the regulatory relationship of lncRNAs, miRNAs and mRNAs and highlighted the important role of the lncRNA‐miRNA‐mRNA axis in CVDs.

MicroRNAs are negative regulators of gene expression that play a key role in cell‐type specific differentiation and modulation of cell function and have been proposed to be involved in neovascularization. Previously, using an extensive cloning and sequencing approach, we identified miR‐126 to be specifically and highly expressed in human endothelial cells (EC). Here, we demonstrate EC‐specific expression of miR‐126 in capillaries and the larger vessels in vivo. We therefore explored the potential role of miR‐126 in arteriogenesis and angiogenesis. Using miR‐reporter constructs, we show that miR‐126 is functionally active in EC in vitro and that it could be specifically repressed using antagomirs specifically targeting miR‐126. To study the consequences of miR‐126 silencing on vascular regeneration, mice were injected with a single dose of antagomir‐126 or a control ‘scramblemir’ and exposed to ischemia of the left hindlimb by ligation of the femoral artery. Although miR‐126 was effectively silenced in mice treated with a single, high dose (HD) of antagomir‐126, laser Doppler perfusion imaging did not show effects on blood flow recovery. In contrast, quantification of the capillary density in the gastrocnemius muscle revealed that mice treated with a HD of antagomir‐126 had a markedly reduced angiogenic response. Aortic explant cultures of the mice confirmed the role of miR‐126 in angiogenesis. Our data demonstrate a facilitary function for miR‐126 in ischemia‐induced angiogenesis and show the efficacy and specificity of antagomir‐induced silencing of EC‐specific microRNAs in vivo.