ReviewJournal of anatomy2019
Of skin and bone: did Langerhans cells and osteoclasts evolve from a common ancestor?
Review in Journal of anatomy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Gene Expression and Immune Cell Infiltration in Patients with Steroid-induced Necrosis of the Femoral Head.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2024Article
- A view on the skin-bone axis: unraveling similarities and potential of crosstalk.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Crosstalk between bone and other organs.Medical review (2021) · 2022Review
- Human dendritic cell subsets: an update.Immunology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Skin Langerhans cells are antigen-presenting cells of the interfollicular epidermis and the upper part of the hair follicle, whereas osteoclasts are specialized bone-resorbing macrophages. Although at first view these two cell types appear to have little in common, a closer analysis reveals shared features, and when taking into account their surrounding environment, a hypothesis can be developed that Langerhans cells and osteoclasts have evolved from a common ancestral cell type. In this mini-review, we have compared the ontogenetic features of Langerhans cells and osteoclasts from a genetic and a functional point of view, an issue that so far has been overlooked. The gene programs that control cell differentiation, and the body parts where they reside, present surprising similarities. Whereas the function of osteoclasts in bone degradation has been established since the first vertebrates, Langerhans cells may have undergone a stepwise adaptation from aquatic to terrestrial life. Their cell function co-evolved with the imperatives of the skin to protect against physical impact, heat, water loss and pathogens, which implied the capacity of Langerhans cells to associate with skin appendages and to develop immunostimulatory functions. For the highly versatile and efficient immune system of modern vertebrates, Langerhans cells may be a memory of the past.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.