4.7 Article

Systemic oxidative and antioxidative status in Chinese patients with asthma

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 114, 期 2, 页码 260-264

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.05.013

关键词

asthma; superoxide dismutase; catalase; glutathione peroxidase; erythrocyte; oxidized glutathione; oxidative stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Patients with asthma generate an increased amount of reactive oxygen species from peripheral blood cells. Reactive oxygen species produce many of the pathophysiologic changes associated with asthma and may contribute to its pathogenesis. Objective: We investigated changes in antioxidant enzyme activities and oxidized glutathione (glutathione disulfide; GSSG) levels in erythrocytes from a group of healthy control Chinese subjects (n = 135) and patients with asthma (n = 106). Methods: Baseline pulmonary function was measured for all subjects. Antioxidant status was evaluated by measuring erythrocyte superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione peroxidase activities. Oxidative stress was also measured in terms of GSSG in erythrocytes with a kinetic microassay. Results: Patients with asthma had significantly increased erythrocyte superoxide dismutase and catalase activities compared with controls (61.10 +/- 1.30 U/g hemoglobin [Hb] vs 55.51 +/- 1.82 U/g Hb [P = .018] and 0.0637 +/- 0.0021 U/g Hb vs 0.0257 +/- 0.0120 U/g Hb [P < .001] for the asthma and control groups, respectively). Conversely, erythrocyte glutathione peroxidase activity decreased (44.21 +/- 1.33 mU/g Hb vs 50.07 +/- 1.39 mU/g Hb for the asthma and control groups, respectively; P = .003). Patients with asthma also had significantly higher GSSG levels in erythrocyte hemolysates compared with controls (167.40 +/- 2.93 mumol/L vs 44.98 +/- 0.44 mumol/L for the asthma and control groups, respectively; P < .001), indicating increased oxidative stress. Conclusions: Asthma is accompanied by an alteration in systemic antioxidant status due to possible oxidative stress in this disease.

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