4.7 Review

The role of host defences in Covid 19 and treatments thereof

期刊

MOLECULAR MEDICINE
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/s10020-020-00216-9

关键词

Hydrogen sulfide; SARS-Cov-2; Covid 19; Heme oxygenase 1; Carbon monoxide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a natural defence against the infections from enveloped RNA viruses and is likely involved also in Covid 19. It was already shown to inhibit growth and pathogenic mechanisms of a variety of enveloped RNA viruses and it was now found that circulating H2S is higher in Covid 19 survivors compared to fatal cases. H2S release is triggered by carbon monoxide (CO) from the catabolism of heme by inducible heme oxygenase (HO-1) and heme proteins possess catalytic activity necessary for the H2S signalling by protein persulfidation. Subjects with a long promoter for theHMOX1gene, coding for HO-1, are predicted for lower efficiency of this mechanism. SARS-cov-2 exerts ability to attack the heme of hemoglobin and other heme-proteins thus hampering both release and signalling of H2S. Lack of H2S-induced persulfidation of the K(ATP)channels of leucocytes causes adhesion and release of the inflammatory cytokines, lung infiltration and systemic endothelial damage with hyper-coagulability. These events largely explain the sex and age distribution, clinical manifestations and co-morbidities of Covid-19. The understanding of this mechanism may be of guidance in re-evaluating the ongoing therapeutic strategies, with special attention to the interaction with mechanical ventilation, paracetamol and chloroquine use, and in the individuation of genetic traits causing increased susceptibility to the disruption of these physiologic processes and to a critical Covid 19. Finally, an array of therapeutic interventions with the potential to clinically modulate the HO-1/CO/H2S axis is already available or under development. These include CO donors and H2S donors and a boost to the endogenous production of H2S is also possible.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据