4.7 Article

Hypoxia in multiple sclerosis; is it he chicken or the egg?

Journal

BRAIN
Volume 144, Issue 2, Pages 402-410

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/brain/awaa427

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis; hypoxia; blood vessels; inflammation; blood-brain barrier integrity

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health R56 [NS095753]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Multiple sclerosis is an autoimmune disease that may be affected by hypoxia as a new potential trigger for the inflammatory demyelinating process. Studies have shown the presence of hypoxia in early demyelinating lesions, prompting researchers to investigate how oxygen levels impact disease progression.
Over the past 50 years, intense research effort has taught us a great deal about multiple sclerosis. We know that it is the most common neurological disease affecting the young-middle aged, that it affects two to three times more females than males, and that it is characterized as an autoimmune disease, in which autoreactive T lymphocytes cross the blood-brain barrier, resulting in demyelinating lesions. But despite all the knowledge gained, a key question still remains; what is the initial event that triggers the inflammatory demyelinating process? While most research effort to date has focused on the immune system, more recently, another potential candidate has emerged: hypoxia. Specifically, a growing number of studies have described the presence of hypoxia (both `virtual' and real) at an early stage of demyelinating lesions, and several groups, including our own, have begun to investigate how manipulation of inspired oxygen levels impacts disease progression. In this review we summarize the findings of these hypoxia studies, and in particular, address three main questions: (i) is the hypoxia found in demyelinating lesions 'virtual' or real; (ii) what causes this hypoxia; and (iii) how does manipulation of inspired oxygen impact disease progression?

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available