4.7 Article

Status of glutathione and other thiols and disulfides in human plasma

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 60, 期 1, 页码 19-29

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-2952(00)00293-8

关键词

glutathione; cysteine; homocysteine; thiols; disulfides; human blood

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA68384, CA17613] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG14102] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While plasma thiols, including homocysteine (HCys), glutathione (GSH), and cysteine (Cys), are being investigated as potential indicators of disease risk and health status, low levels, poor stability, and the lack of comprehensive methodologies have hampered their accurate assessment. Using our previously described HPLC with electrochemical detection method, our goal was to assess levels, stability, and distribution of biologically relevant thiols and disulfides in human plasma. In fresh plasma, processed immediately after collection, low levels of Cys, cystine, Cys-Gly, and the mixed disulfide Cys-GSH (CSSG) were consistently observed, whereas the levels of GSH and Cys Gly disulfide were often below the limits of detection. These profiles were a consequence of poor thiol stability, as thiol standards added to human plasma were lost rapidly due to autoxidation or formation of mixed disulfides. A 75% loss of added GSH observed after 30 min was accounted for completely by the formation of GSH disulfide (24%) and CSSG (74%). Similar changes were found with other thiols when added to plasma. Thiols lost to oxidation were recovered quantitatively by reducing samples with potassium borohydride (KBH4) prior to analysis. In a study of 106 healthy adults, mean total thiol levels in plasma were: Cys (201 mu M) > Cys-Gly (101 mu M) > HCys (7 mu M) > gamma-Glu-Cys (5 mu M) > GSH (4 mu M). All together, these results account for the poor stability of thiols in plasma and provide a method for their comprehensive and accurate determination. BIOCHEM PHARMACOL 60;1:19-29, 2000. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

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