4.7 Article

Sub-chronic administration of doxorubicin to Wistar rats results in oxidative stress and unaltered apoptotic signaling in the lung

Journal

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS
Volume 188, Issue 3, Pages 478-486

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2010.09.027

Keywords

Doxorubicin; Lung toxicity; Mitochondria; Apoptosis; Oxidative stress

Funding

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [PTDC-SAU-OSM-64084-2006, PTDC/SAU-OSM/104731/2008]
  2. [SFRH-BD-36938-2007]
  3. [SFRH-BD-64247-2009]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PTDC/SAU-OSM/64084/2006, SFRH/BD/64247/2009, PTDC/SAU-OSM/104731/2008] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite the vast published data on cardiac toxicity, there is still little work done regarding the toxicity of the antineoplastic agent Doxorubicin (DOX) in the lung. The aim of the present work was to determine if DOX causes alterations in selected apoptotic proteins and oxidative stress in the lung, in a similar manner to what occurs in the heart. For that purpose, lungs from Wistar-Han rats sub-chronically treated with vehicle or DOX for seven weeks were collected and analyzed concerning several proteins involved in mitochondrial permeabilization and apoptotic pathways, including p53. Bax and Bcl-2 and different oxidative stress markers. After sub-chronic DOX treatment, no alterations in lung proteins involved in mitochondrial membrane permeabilization or caspase 3 and 9-like activities were found. Nevertheless, an increase in malondialdehyde levels and a decrease in the lung concentration of vitamin E were detected, despite no alterations in reduced and oxidized glutathione. The results obtained indicate for the first time that lungs from DOX-treated rats appear to be susceptible to increased lipid peroxidation, which can explain some cases of DOX-induced lung toxicity. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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