4.6 Article

The flavanol (-)-epicatechin prevents stroke damage through the Nrf2/HO1 pathway

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
Volume 30, Issue 12, Pages 1951-1961

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2010.53

Keywords

epicatechin; heme oxygenase 1; MCAO; Nrf2; stroke; NF-E2-related factor-2

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [AT001836, AA014911, AT002113, NS046400]
  2. American Heart and Stroke Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Epidemiologic studies have shown that foods rich in polyphenols, such as flavanols, can lower the risk of ischemic heart disease; however, the mechanism of protection has not been clearly established. In this study, we investigated whether epicatechin (EC), a flavanol in cocoa and tea, is protective against brain ischemic damage in mice. Wild-type mice pretreated orally with 5, 15, or 30 mg/kg EC before middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) had significantly smaller brain infarcts and decreased neurologic deficit scores (NDS) than did the vehicle-treated group. Mice that were posttreated with 30mg/kg of EC at 3.5 hours after MCAO also had significantly smaller brain infarcts and decreased NDS. Similarly, WT mice pretreated with 30 mg/kg of EC and subjected to N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)-induced excitotoxicity had significantly smaller lesion volumes. Cell viability assays with neuronal cultures further confirmed that EC could protect neurons against oxidative insults. Interestingly, the EC-associated neuroprotection was mostly abolished in mice lacking the enzyme heme oxygenase 1 (HO1) or the transcriptional factor Nrf2, and in neurons derived from these knockout mice. These results suggest that EC exerts part of its beneficial effect through activation of Nrf2 and an increase in the neuroprotective HO1 enzyme. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2010) 30, 1951-1961; doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2010.53; published online 5 May 2010

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available