4.7 Review

Pharmacological Tuning of Adenosine Signal Nuances Underlying Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PHARMACOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.724320

关键词

adenosine; adenosine receptor; preserved ejection fraction heart failure; cardiac comorbidities; cardiac fibrosis and hypertrophy; endothelial dysfunction

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [UIDB/04308/2020]
  2. FCT (FEDER) [SFRH/BD/104114/2014]
  3. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [UIDB/04308/2020, SFRH/BD/104114/2014] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

HFpEF represents half of cardiac failure events in developed countries and is one of the greatest unmet clinical necessities worldwide. Adenosine, by activating plasma membrane-bound P1 receptors, exerts cardioprotective, neuromodulatory, and immunosuppressive effects, with proven benefits demonstrated in preclinical animal tests. Tuning adenosine signaling pathways in HFpEF offers therapeutic advantages.
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) roughly represents half of the cardiac failure events in developed countries. The proposed 'systemic microvascular paradigm' has been used to explain HFpHF presentation heterogeneity. The lack of effective treatments with few evidence-based therapeutic recommendations makes HFpEF one of the greatest unmet clinical necessities worldwide. The endogenous levels of the purine nucleoside, adenosine, increase significantly following cardiovascular events. Adenosine exerts cardioprotective, neuromodulatory, and immunosuppressive effects by activating plasma membrane-bound P1 receptors that are widely expressed in the cardiovascular system. Its proven benefits have been demonstrated in preclinical animal tests. Here, we provide a comprehensive and up-to-date critical review about the main therapeutic advantages of tuning adenosine signalling pathways in HFpEF, without discounting their side effects and how these can be seized.

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