4.5 Article

Airway smooth muscle NOX4 is upregulated and modulates ROS generation in COPD

期刊

RESPIRATORY RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-016-0403-y

关键词

COPD; Oxidative stress; Reactive oxygen species; Airway smooth muscle; NOX4

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust Senior Clinical Fellowship (CEB)
  2. Airway Disease Predicting Outcomes through Patient Specific Computational Modelling (AirPROM) project (FP7 EU grant)
  3. Leicester NIHR Respiratory Biomedical Unit
  4. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The burden of oxidative stress is increased in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, whether the intra-cellular mechanisms controlling the oxidant/anti-oxidant balance in structural airway cells such as airway smooth muscle in COPD is altered is unclear. We sought to determine whether the expression of the NADPH oxidase (NOX)-4 is increased in airway smooth muscle in COPD both in vivo and primary cells in vitro and its role in hydrogen peroxide-induced reactive oxygen species generation. We found that in vivo NOX4 expression was up-regulated in the airway smooth muscle bundle in COPD (n = 9) and healthy controls with >20 pack year history (n = 4) compared to control subjects without a significant smoking history (n = 6). In vitro NOX4 expression was increased in airway smooth muscle cells from subjects with COPD (n = 5) compared to asthma (n = 7) and upregulated following TNF-alpha stimulation. Hydrogen peroxide-induced reactive oxygen species generation by airway smooth muscle cells in COPD (n = 5) was comparable to healthy controls (n = 9) but lower than asthma (n = 5); and was markedly attenuated by NOX4 inhibition. Our findings demonstrate that NOX4 expression is increased in vivo and in vitro in COPD and although we did not observe an intrinsic increase in oxidant-induced reactive oxygen species generation in COPD, it was reduced markedly by NOX4 inhibition supporting a potential therapeutic role for NOX4 in COPD.

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

4.5
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