4.7 Article

Severe oxidative damage in multiple sclerosis lesions coincides with enhanced antioxidant enzyme expression

期刊

FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
卷 45, 期 12, 页码 1729-1737

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2008.09.023

关键词

Multiple sclerosis; Reactive oxygen species; Oxidative damage; Antioxidant enzymes; Free radicals

资金

  1. Stichting Vrienden MS Research, The Netherlands [MS 05-567, MS 05-358c]
  2. Institute for Clinical and Experimental Neurosciences, VU University Medical Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and subsequent oxidative damage may contribute to the formation and persistence of multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions by acting on distinct pathological processes. ROS initiate lesion formation by inducing blood-brain barrier disruption, enhance leukocyte migration and myelin phagocytosis, and contribute to lesion persistence by mediating cellular damage to essential biological macromolecules of vulnerable CNS cells. Relatively little is known about which CNS cell types are affected by oxidative injury in MS lesions. Here, we show the presence of extensive oxidative damage to proteins, lipids, and nucleotides occurring in active demyelinating MS lesions, predominantly in reactive astrocytes and myelin-laden macrophages. Oxidative stress can be counteracted by endogenous antioxidant enzymes that confer protection against oxidative damage. Here, we show that antioxidant enzymes, including superoxide dismutase I and 2, catalase, and heme oxygenase 1, are markedly upregulated in active demyelinating MS lesions compared to normal-appearing white matter and white matter tissue from nonneurological control brains. Particularly, hypertrophic astrocytes and myelin-laden macrophages expressed an array of antioxidant enzymes. Enhanced antioxidant enzyme production in inflammatory MS lesions may reflect an adaptive defense mechanism to reduce ROS-induced cellular damage. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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