Keloidal pathophysiology: Current notions

Introduction: Keloids are pathological scars that are notorious for their chronic and relentless invasion into adjacent healthy skin, with commonly seen post-therapeutic recurrence after monotherapies. Methods: An English literature review on keloid pathophysiology was performed by searching the PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases, to find out the up-to-date relevant articles. The level of evidence was evaluated based on the included studies with the highest level of evidence first. Results: Keloid morphology, signs, symptoms and the histopathological changes that occur in the local cells and extracellular matrix components are described. The theories on the pathophysiology of keloidogenesis that have been proposed to date are also covered; these include endocrinological, nutritional, vascular, and autoimmunological factors. In addition, we describe the local mechanical forces (and the mechanosignalling pathways by which these forces shape keloid cell activities) that promote keloid formation and determine the direction of invasion of keloids and the body sites that are prone to them. Conclusion: A better understanding of this pathological entity, particularly its mechanobiology, will aid the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for use in the clinic to prevent, reduce or even reverse the growth of this pathological scar. Lay Summary Keloids are skin scars that are famous for their chronic invasion into healthy skin, with commonly seen recurrence after surgeries. Cells such as lymphocytes, macrophages, mast cells and endothelial cells are involved in keloid growth. Particularly, endocrinological, nutritional, vascular, autoimmunological and mechanical factors actively take part in keloid progression.

HOXA5 counteracts the function of pathological scar-derived fibroblasts by partially activating p53 signaling

The inactivation of p53 can lead to the formation of pathological scars, including hypertrophic scars and keloids. HOXA5 has been reported to be a critical transcription factor in the p53 pathway in cancers. However, whether HOXA5 also plays a role in pathological scar progression through activating p53 signaling remains unknown. In this study, we first demonstrated that HOXA5 overexpression in hypertrophic scar-or keloids-derived fibroblasts decreased cell proliferation, migration and collagen synthesis, whereas increased cell apoptosis. Furthermore, the results of luciferase activity assays and ChIP PCR assays indicated that HOXA5 transactivated p53 by binding to the ATTA-rich core motif in the p53 promoter. HOXA5 also increased the levels of p21 and Mdm2, which are downstream targets of p53. Interestingly, silencing p53 in these pathological scar-derived fibroblasts partially attenuated HOXA5-mediated growth inhibition effect and HOXA5-induced apoptosis. In addition, 9-cis-retinoic acid augmented the expression of HOXA5 and promoted the effects of HOXA5 on pathological scar-derived fibroblasts, and these effects could be suppressed by HOXA5 knockdown. Thus, our study reveals a role of HOXA5 in mediating the cellular processes of pathological scar-derived fibroblasts by transcriptionally activating the p53 signaling pathway, and 9-cis-retinoic acid may be a potential therapy for pathological scars.

The role of macrophages in the formation of hypertrophic scars and keloids

Numerous studies have shown that macrophages can orchestrate the microenvironment from the early stage of wound healing to the later stages of scar formation. However, few reviews have highlighted the significance of macrophages during the formation of abnormal scars. The purpose of this review was to outline the polarization of macrophages from early to late stage of pathological scar formation, focusing on spatiotemporal diversity of M1 and M2 macrophages. In this review, the role of macrophages in the formation of hypertrophic scars and keloids is summarized in detail. First, an increased number of M2 cells observed before injuries are significantly associated with susceptibility to abnormal scar pathogenesis. Second, decreased expression of M1 at the early stage and delayed expression of M2 at the late stage results in pathological scar formation. Third, M2 cells are highly expressed at both the margin and the superficial region, which is consistent with the invasive property of keloids. Finally, this review helps to characterize strategies for the prediction and prevention of pathological scar formation.

Mechanobiology of Cutaneous Scarring

The last phase of cutaneous wound healing produces the scar. Under normal circumstances, the immature scar then undergoes the scar maturation process over several months. This process involves tissue remodeling, which associates with a natural decrease in the inflammation and the numbers of blood vessels, collagen fibers, and fibroblasts. However, sometimes the scar maturation process is not properly engaged because inflammation continues in the scar. Consequently, the immature scar stage is prolonged. This results in the pathological scars called hypertrophic scars and keloids. Many factors that prolong the inflammatory stage have been identified. However, multiple lines of evidence acquired in recent years suggest that mechanical force can be an important cause of pathological scar development.

The influence of GSTT/GSTM null genotypes in scarring

Background and aims. The process of scarring is a common denominator of interest for the medical field. From general medicine to dentistry, pathological scar tissue represents a challenge in providing optimal care to a patient. The present study aims to investigate whether a systemically reduced antioxidant potential, revealed by null isoforms of glutathione S transferase, affects the process of scarring in a group of female patients. Methods. The study is based on a group of 54 patients with physiological scars after a 6-month observation period, as well as 18 patients with hypertrophic or atrophic scars. Peripheral venous blood was collected, from which DNA was extracted using a commercial kit. Genotyping followed a Multiplex PCR protocol for GSTT1/GSTM1. Results. In a dominant model, the combination of wild type (heterozygous or homozygous) GSTT1 and GSTM1 was negatively associated with pathological scarring, with the wild type (heterozygous or homozygous) GSTM1 genotype being potentially responsible for this effect. Other factors affecting pathological scarring were investigated: family history, phototype, as well as scores on the POSAS and SCAR scales. Conclusions. The presence of GSTT1 and GSTM1 alleles brings forward an increased antioxidant capacity, serving as a protective factor for patients during scar formation.