4.6 Article

Decreased peroxynitrite inhibitory activity in induced sputum in patients with bronchial asthma

期刊

THORAX
卷 57, 期 6, 页码 509-512

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/thorax.57.6.509

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The production of peroxynitrite, an extremely potent oxidant, is increased in inflammatory lung disease. It is therefore important to measure antioxidant activity against peroxynitrite in epithelial lining fluid to examine the physiological effects of peroxynitrite in the airways of patients with asthma. This study was designed to determine whether peroxynitrite inhibitory activity in induced sputum is correlated with clinical characteristics and airway inflammatory indices in asthmatic patients. Methods: Inflammatory indices were measured in induced sputum from 25 patients with asthma and 12 normal control subjects. Peroxynitrite inhibitory activity was also measured by monitoring rhodamine formation in sputum samples. Results: Peroxynitrite inhibitory activity in induced sputum was significantly lower in asthmatic patients (52.4 (24.5)%) than in normal control subjects (92.1 (3.9)%, p<0.0001). Its activity was significantly correlated with forced expiratory volume in I second (FEV1) % predicted (r=0.774, p<0.0001) and bronchial hyperreactivity to methacholine (r=0.464, p=0.023). There was a significant negative correlation between peroxynitrite inhibitory activity and the degree of eosinophilic airway inflammation (% eosinophils, r=-0.758, p<0.0001; eosinophil cationic protein, r=-0.780, p<0.0001). Conclusions: Decreased peroxynitrite inhibitory activity occurs in induced sputum of asthmatic patients. Since even in patients with stable asthma the airway lining fluid locks peroxynitrite inhibitory activity, large amounts of peroxynitrite, which are further increased during an acute asthma attack, would not be completely inactivated and asthmatic airways might have markedly increased susceptibility to peroxynitrite induced airway injury.

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