The Impact of mRNA Technology in Regenerative Therapy: Lessons for Oral Tissue Regeneration.

Oral tissue regeneration following chronic diseases and injuries is limited by the natural endogenous wound-healing process. Current regenerative approaches implement exogenous systems, including stem cells, scaffolds, growth factors, and plasmid DNA/viral vectors, that induce variable clinical outcomes. An innovative approach that is safe, effective, and inexpensive is needed. The lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (mRNA) platform has proven to be a successful vaccine modality against coronavirus disease 2019, demonstrating safety and high efficacy in humans. The same fundamental technology platform could be applied to facilitate the development of mRNA-based regenerative therapy. While the platform has not yet been studied in the field of oral tissue regeneration, mRNA therapeutics encoding growth factors have been evaluated and demonstrated promising findings in various models of soft and hard tissue regeneration such as myocardial infarction, diabetic wound healing, and calvarial and femoral bone defects. Because restoration of both soft and hard tissues is crucial to oral tissue physiology, this new therapeutic modality may help to overcome challenges associated with the reconstruction of the unique and complex architecture of oral tissues. This review discusses mRNA therapeutics with an emphasis on findings and lessons in different regenerative animal models, and it speculates how we can apply mRNA-based platforms for oral tissue regeneration.

In vivo effects of abolishing the single canonical sumoylation site in the C-terminal region of Drosophila p53.

Using yeast two-hybrid screens we determined that Drosophila (Dm)p53 interacts with proteins involved in sumoylation (UBA2, UBC9 and PIAS) through different regions of its C-terminal domain. A K302R point mutation within a single canonical sumoylation site of Dmp53 did not abolish the observed interactions. These observations prompted us to analyze whether Dmp53 sumoylation at this site has any functional role in vivo. Genetic assays showed that deleting one copy of genes involved in sumoylation (lwr, Su(var)2-10 or smt3 heterozygosity) enhanced slightly the mutator phenotype of Dmp53. We compared the in vivo effects of wild type and K302R Dmp53 overproduced from transgenes and determined that similar levels of expression of the mutant and wild type proteins resulted in similar phenotype, and the two proteins showed similar cellular localization. The half life and the trans-activator activity of K302R mutant and wild type Dmp53 were also comparable. Lastly, by analyzing wild type and K302R Dmp53 expressed at different levels in animals and in S2 cells we detected no differences between the mobility of the mutant and wild-type protein. From these data we conclude that under normal developmental conditions the loss of SUMO modification at K302 does not affect Dmp53 function significantly.