4.6 Article

Oxidases and reductases are involved in metronidazole sensitivity in Helicobacter pylori

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S1357-2725(00)00085-6

关键词

metronidazole resistance; Helicobacter pylori; nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidases; nitroreductases; native gel activity staining

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Helicobacter pylori is a contributing factor to the development of gastric and duodenal ulcers and some gastric cancers. Some therapeutic regimes comprise of a number of components, one of which is the antimicrobial metronidazole. A problem with these therapies is the increasing prevalence of metronidazoIe-resistant (MtrR) H. pylori strains. Several resistance mechanisms have been proposed, and this study addresses the 'scavenging of oxygen' hypothesis. Spectrophotometric assays of cytosolic fractions indicated that metronidazole-sensitive (MtrS) H. pylori isolates had 2.6-fold greater nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) oxidase activity, 34-fold greater NADH nitroreductase activity, and eightfold greater nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) nitroreductase activity than cytosolic fractions from matched MtrR strains. Electrophoresis of cytosolic fractions in non-denaturing gels showed up to 10 protein bands when stained with Coomassie blue. Activity staining of non-denaturing, non-reducing polyacrylamide gels detected NAD(P)H oxidase, disulphide reductase, tetrazolium reductase and nitroreductase activities in the protein bands. Oxidase and reductase activities observed in a band from MtrS strains were absent in the corresponding band from MtrR strains. This band comprised at least 13 proteins, and the major constituent was identified as an alkyl hydroperoxide reductase AhpC subunit. The absence of oxidase and reductase activities in the band from MtrR strains indicated a correlation between the activity of the proteins in this band and the metronidazole-sensitive phenotype. (C) 2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

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