Research progress in mechanism of traumatic brain injury affecting speed of fracture healing / 中华创伤杂志(英文版)

In patients who have sustained traumatic brain injury with associated extremity fracture, there is often a clinical perception that the rate of new bone formation around the fracture site increases.(1) An overgrowth of callus is observed and ectopic ossification even occurs in the muscle,(2) but the mechanism remains unclear. Whether this rapidly-formed new bone is fracture callus or a variant of heterotopic ossification, a common complication of traumatic brain injury, is the subject of some debates.(3) It is generally believed that the process of fracture healing is a recapitulation of normal embryonic osteogenesis,(4) i.e. ,a series of changes in the intracellular and extracellular matrix, which start from the injury of cells, blood vessels and bone matrix to a complete reconstruction of the bone.(5) It is a complex process influenced by multi-level and multi-route regulations of the general and local environments in the body, and many growth factors participate in this process, which is the base of bone healing;(6) whatever methods are used to promote bone healing, they are based on accelerating the changes of growth factors.(7) So it is worth making a thorough study on the mechanism, by which traumatic brain injury influences the expression levels of growth factors and consequently affects the speed of bone healing.

Oncogene interaction in basal cell carcinomas of human skin

The expression of the p53 protein (p53) was compared with those of several oncogenes including c-fos (Fos), c-jun (Jun), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR1) using immunohistochemistry in frozen and paraffin-embedded sections of 25 basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) to find out any correlation between p53 and oncogenes in the pathogenesis of human BCC. In normal skin, positive reactions were obtained for EGFR1 and Fos, while p53 and Jun were negative in all cases. In the lesions, EGFR1 was observed in all cases and p53 was positive in 9 of 25 (36%). Fos was expressed in 21 of 25 (84%) and four negative cases were all p53-positive; this negative correlation between p53 and Fos staining was statistically significant (P< 0.01). Jun was detected in 14 of 20 (70%) and no significant relationship was observed between the expression of Jun and Fos or p53. These data suggest the possibility of down regulation of Fos expression by high levels of p53 protein. Further work is necessary to determine the mechanism of this interaction.