OPINION article

Front. Genet., 22 June 2018

Sec. Computational Genomics

Volume 9 - 2018 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00211

Time Heals all Wounds- but Scars Remain. Can Personalized Medicine Help?

  • 1. Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada

  • 2. Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

  • 3. Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

New advances in Omics approaches have facilitated the stratification of patients and may identify the patients that would scar more aggressively. These advances may prevent undertreating patients and avoid their exposure to unnecessary treatment with side effects.

Scars have been documented for 3,700 years, yet they are still not entirely preventable. Can personalized medicine help?

In the ancient Egyptian medical text, Edwin Smith Papyrus, along with 47 other cases, scarring was first described (Berman and Bieley, 1995). Despite advancement in the management of several diseases during the last centuries, scarring remains a tremendous clinical challenge to patients and clinicians. The precise incidence and prevalence of scars like keloids are unknown. Keloid incidences have been reported as high as 16% in individuals of Hispanic and African ancestry (Niessen et al., 1999). They are aesthetically disfiguring, functionally debilitating, emotionally distressing, and psychologically damaging, resulting in a significant burden for patients. While our knowledge about scarring continues to advance, we are still puzzled by this fibrodysplastic response.

The increased incidence of scar formation in specific ethnic groups such as blacks, Hispanics points to there being a genetic predisposition to keloid formation (Niessen et al., 1999). In Asians, it is reported that the annual keloid incidence rate is about 0.15% of the general population, with women outnumbering men by a ratio of 1.33 (Sun et al., 2014). Patients with darker skin are 15 times more likely than patients with lighter skin to develop keloids (Miller and Nanchahal, 2005). These all suggest that genetic factors are important in understanding the pathobiology of keloids. However, no responsible genes have yet been identified for Keloids. A genome-wide association study on 517 cases and 2,385 controls, has shown that four SNP loci (rs873549 at 1q41, rs940187, and rs1511412 at 3q22.3, rs8032158 at 15p21.3) associate significantly with keloid development in the Japanese population (Nakashima et al., 2010) and these regions include genes such as FOXL2, NEDD4. However, the relevance of these genes in keloid formation is not fully unraveled. Besides the genomic variabilities, epigenetic and transcriptional variability contribute to the diversity of cellular phenotypes in diseases, including scar formation.

An initial insult is necessary to develop scars. This raises the possibility that initial events post injury (e.g., inflammation) are the essential components for the development of scars (e.g., keloid) in an already susceptible individual. If the inflammation fails to subside, and instead, becomes increasingly prominent, it keeps the process of wound healing active which eventually yields pathological scars, which become apparent a few months after the initial insult. Besides inflammatory cells, an essential role for mesenchymal progenitor cells has been extrapolated during normal as well as fibrotic responses (Bielefeld et al., 2013). In the case of keloids, it has also been shown that keloids are populated by mesenchymal progenitor cells (Iqbal et al., 2012). However, it is not clear what cues attract mesenchymal progenitor cell into the healing wounds which generate scars. Nonetheless, wound healing is a complex phenomenon, and it is difficult to attribute scar formation to a specific phase or a specific cell type.

If not excessive scarring, the minimal consequence of a deep skin injury is a “physiologic scar.” Most people recovering from surgery, burn or other traumatic injury are left with some scarring (Amini-Nik et al., 2017). Besides the aesthetic outcomes which are essential for patients, the functional result of skin healing and prevention of disfigurement are necessary. Although novel medications show promising effects in vitro and in vivo in regard to preventing scar formation, it has yet to be examined in patients (Poon et al., 2012). The differences in responses, using currently approved medications, may be explained by Omics variation, particularly Genomics approaches (Zurada et al., 2006; Kerwin et al., 2014; Sidgwick et al., 2015). Thus, a substantial unmet clinical need for prediction of scar formation and their diverse response to the treatment exists (Amini-Nik et al., 2017). New predictive biomarkers may help clinicians to predict the risk of skin scar formation and then tailor the antifibrotic treatment strategies to each patient. To reach this goal, we need operative scar biobanking of patient tissue, genomics, and proteomics approach to verify predictive as well as mechanistic biomarkers. An extensive collection of patient samples (scar tissue and blood specimens), with well-annotated patient clinical and pathological data, are the essential components of efficient scar biobanking. Identifying predictive and mechanistic biomarkers allows for the implementation of scar therapeutics aligned to the molecular changes during scar development of the individual. This approach not only helps to prevent undertreating patients but also prevents their exposure to unnecessary treatment with side effects.

The new advances in genotyping, explicitly next-generation whole genome sequencing, high-resolution imaging technologies and proteomics approaches in finding biomarkers, all will help to identify the groups of patients that would scar more aggressively (Figure 1; Kwon et al., 2014; Arevalo et al., 2016; Jason et al., 2017). High-resolution imaging can make major contributions by allowing earlier diagnosis and predicting treatment response by visualizing target molecules-of-interest. In diseases like cancer, next-generation sequencing (NSG) is now being combined with routine clinical diagnostics. This not only helps in the diagnosis of patients, but also identifies therapeutic targets, unravels resistive mechanisms, and facilitates monitoring of the disease (Hsieh et al., 2017).

Figure 1

In therapeutics, the emerging role of stem cells during healing, their effect- or their secretome's effect, will help to develop a more personalized and stratified approach for management of skin scars. This needs an active collaboration between stem cell biologists, biomaterial scientists, clinicians, pharmaceutical, and biotech companies.

It is time to plan Precision Scar Medicine (PSM) to verify mechanistic gatekeepers and use targeted therapies to match the complexity of scar formation based on evidence-based medicine that supports clinical decision-making.

Statements

Author contributions

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and approved it for publication.

Funding

This work is supported by EMH-Seed grant from the University of Toronto.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks, all mentors, and trainees that contributed to his scientific career. The author thanks, Dr. Maryam Sharifian and Dr. Kirsten Bielefeld for proofreading of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  • 1

    Amini-NikS.YousufY.JeschkeM. G. (2017). Scar management in burn injuries using drug delivery and molecular signaling: Current treatments and future directions. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.123, 135154. 10.1016/j.addr.2017.07.017

  • 2

    ArevaloH. J.VadakkumpadanF.GuallarE.JebbA.MalamasP.WuK. C.et al. (2016). Arrhythmia risk stratification of patients after myocardial infarction using personalized heart models. Nat. Commun.7:11437. 10.1038/ncomms11437

  • 3

    BermanB.BieleyH. C. (1995). Keloids. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.33, 117123. 10.1016/0190-9622(95)90035-7

  • 4

    BielefeldK. A.Amini-NikS.AlmanB. A. (2013). Cutaneous wound healing: recruiting developmental pathways for regeneration. Cell. Mol. Life Sci.70, 20592081. 10.1007/s00018-012-1152-9

  • 5

    HsiehJ. J.LeV.CaoD.ChengE. H.CreightonC. J. (2017). Genomic classifications of renal cell carcinoma: a critical step towards the future application of personalized kidney cancer care with pan-omics precision. J. Pathol.244, 525537. 10.1002/path.5022

  • 6

    IqbalS. A.SidgwickG. P.BayatA. (2012). Identification of fibrocytes from mesenchymal stem cells in keloid tissue: a potential source of abnormal fibroblasts in keloid scarring. Arch. Dermatol. Res.304, 665671. 10.1007/s00403-012-1225-5

  • 7

    JasonF.FuchsbergerC.MahajanA.TeslovichT. M.AgarwalaV.GaultonK. J.et al. (2017). Sequence data and association statistics from 12,940 type 2 diabetes cases and controls. Sci. Data4:170179. 10.1038/sdata.2017.179

  • 8

    KerwinL. Y.El TalA. K.StiffM. A.FakhouriT. M. (2014). Scar prevention and remodeling: a review of the medical, surgical, topical and light treatment approaches. Int. J. Dermatol.53, 922936. 10.1111/ijd.12436

  • 9

    KwonD. H.HachamovitchR.AdeniyiA.NutterB.PopovicZ. B.WilkoffB. L.et al. (2014). Myocardial scar burden predicts survival benefit with implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation in patients with severe ischaemic cardiomyopathy: influence of gender. Heart100, 206213. 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304261

  • 10

    MillerM. C.NanchahalJ. (2005). Advances in the modulation of cutaneous wound healing and scarring. BioDrugs19, 363381. 10.2165/00063030-200519060-00004

  • 11

    NakashimaM.ChungS.TakahashiA.KamataniN.KawaguchiT.TsunodaT.et al. (2010). A genome-wide association study identifies four susceptibility loci for keloid in the Japanese population. Nat. Genet.42, 768771. 10.1038/ng.645

  • 12

    NiessenF. B.SpauwenP. H.SchalkwijkJ.KonM. (1999). On the nature of hypertrophic scars and keloids: a review. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.104, 14351458. 10.1097/00006534-199910000-00031

  • 13

    PoonR.HongH.WeiX.PanJ.AlmanB. A. (2012). A high throughput screen identifies Nefopam as targeting cell proliferation in beta-catenin driven neoplastic and reactive fibroproliferative disorders. PLoS ONE7:e37940. 10.1371/journal.pone.0037940

  • 14

    SidgwickG. P.McGeorgeD.BayatA. (2015). A comprehensive evidence-based review on the role of topicals and dressings in the management of skin scarring. Arch. Dermatol. Res.307, 461477. 10.1007/s00403-015-1572-0

  • 15

    SunL. M.WangK. H.LeeY. C. (2014). Keloid incidence in Asian people and its comorbidity with other fibrosis-related diseases: a nationwide population-based study. Arch. Dermatol. Res.306, 803808. 10.1007/s00403-014-1491-5

  • 16

    ZuradaJ. M.KriegelD.DavisI. C. (2006). Topical treatments for hypertrophic scars. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.55, 10241031. 10.1016/j.jaad.2006.03.022

Summary

Keywords

personalized medicine, precision medicine, skin scar, keloids, scar, genomics, proteomics, mesenchymal stem cell

Citation

Amini-Nik S (2018) Time Heals all Wounds- but Scars Remain. Can Personalized Medicine Help?. Front. Genet. 9:211. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2018.00211

Received

26 March 2018

Accepted

25 May 2018

Published

22 June 2018

Volume

9 - 2018

Edited by

Shrikant S. Mantri, National Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute, India

Reviewed by

Lei Song, National Cancer Institute (NCI), United States

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Saeid Amini-Nik

This article was submitted to Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Genetics

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics