4.6 Article

Evaluation of Oxidative Stress Markers in Human Conjunctival Epithelial Cells Exposed to Diesel Exhaust Particles (DEP)

期刊

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
卷 56, 期 12, 页码 7058-7066

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-16864

关键词

conjunctiva; oxidative stress; antioxidants; environmental pollution; diesel exhaust particles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate oxidative stress markers in human conjunctival epithelial cells (IOBA-NHC) exposed to diesel exhaust particles (DEP). METHODS. Reactive oxygen (ROS) and nitrogen (RNS) species production; hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) levels; protein oxidation; antioxidant enzymes activities (superoxide dismutase [SOD], catalase [CAT], glutathione peroxidase [GPx], glutathione S-transferase [GST], and glutathione reductase [GR]); total reactive antioxidant potential (TRAP); reduced (GSH) and oxidized glutathione (GSSG) were evaluated. Transmission electron microscopy was performed to evaluate DEP uptake. RESULTS. Diesel exhaust particles were entrapped by membrane protrusions developed by IOBA-NHC. Cells exposed to DEP 50 and 100 mu g/mL showed a significant increase in ROS, RNS, H2O2 levels, SOD, GPx, and GST compared with the control group. A significant decay in GR was observed in both groups, meanwhile CAT levels remained unchanged. The group exposed to DEP 100 mu g/mL displayed a significant increase in protein oxidation. In both groups, TRAP was significantly reduced as well as the GSH/GSSG ratio. CONCLUSIONS. The decrease in nonenzymatic antioxidants and the compensatory increase of SOD, GPX, and GST activities are consequence of the increase in ROS and RNS production due to DEP exposure and its accumulation inside the cells. The decay in GR activity leads to the decrease in GSH/GSSG recycling. These results suggest that oxidative stress could play an important role in the development of DEP effects on human conjunctival epithelial cells.

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

4.6
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