4.7 Article

Urinary excretion of three nucleic acid oxidation adducts and isoprostane F2α measured by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry in smokers, ex-smokers, and nonsmokers

Journal

FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
Volume 35, Issue 10, Pages 1301-1309

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2003.07.003

Keywords

isoprostanes; oxidative stress; smoking; nucleic acids; free radicals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To assess novel liquid chromatography/mass spectrometric methods for measuring oxidative damage to nucleic acids and lipids, we compared urinary excretion of 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG), 5-hydroxymethyl-2'-deoxyuridine (5-OHmU), and 8-hydroxyguanosine (S-OxoG), and an isoprostane, 8-iso-prostaglandin F(2)alpha (IsopF(2)alpha) in 234 healthy men (n = 113) and women (n = 121), 80 current smokers, 96 never-smokers), and 58 ex-smokers (no tobacco use for 3 years). The 8-OHdG and 8-OxoG did not differ significantly by group; 5-OHmU was higher in smokers, compared with ex- (p < .003) and never- (p < .0001) smokers and in ex- vs. never-smokers (p = .014) at, respectively, 13.5 +/- 0.7, 11.3 +/- 1.0, and 8.7 +/- 0.3 mu/g creatinine. IsopF(2)alpha was higher in smokers, compared with ex(p = .007) and never-smokers (p < .0001) and in ex- vs. never- smokers (p = .002) at, respectively, 1.1 +/- 0.10; 0.74 +/- 0.07, and 0.51 +/- 0.04 mug/g creatinine. There were significant correlations among all three nucleic acid adducts and between IsopF(2)alpha and both 5-OHmU and 8-OHdG. Many smokers and ex-smokers had high levels of either 5-OHmU excretion or IsopF(2)alpha excretion, but not both. We conclude that 5-OHmU and IsopF2a are more discriminating of oxidative stress from tobacco smoke than the other two compounds measured. Whether characteristic patterns of excretion of these indicators forecast differential disease risk should be explored in future research. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc.

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