4.7 Article

Oral adsorbent AST-120 decreases serum levels of AGEs in patients with chronic renal failure

期刊

MOLECULAR MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 7-8, 页码 180-184

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.2119/2005-00034.Ueda

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) are senescent macroprotein derivatives that are formed at an accelerated rate in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF). AGE formation and accumulation in plasma and vascular tissues contribute to accelerated atherosclerosis in this devastating disorder. AST-120 is an oral adsorbent that attenuates the progression of CRF by removing uremic toxins. Recently, AST-120 has been reported to reduce the progression of atherosclerosis as well. However, whether AST-120 decreases serum levels of AGEs and subsequently exerts atheroprotective properties remains to be elucidated, Ten nondiabetic CRF patients were enrolled in this study. All patients were kept on regular therapeutic diet and medications throughout the study. Serum AGE levels before and after AST-120 treatments were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Effects of patient-derived serum on atherosclerosis-related gene expression in cultured human umbilical vein enclothelial cells (HUVECs) were analyzed by semiquantitative RT-PCR, Administration of AST-120 (6 g/day) for 3 months significantly decreased serum levels of AGEs in non-diobetic CRF patients, whereas AGE levels remained unchanged in age- and renal function-matched CRF patients without AST-120 treatment (n = 6). Patient serum after AST-120 treatment significantly reduced mRNA levels of receptor for AGEs, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, and vascular adhesion molecule-1 in HUVECs compared with serum before treatment. Moreover, in vitro, AST-120 was found to adsorb carboxymethyllysine (CML), one of the well-characterized, digested food-derived AGEs. This study suggests that atheroprotective properties of AST-120 can be ascribed, at least in part, to its AGE-lowering ability via absorption of CML.

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