4.7 Article

Dietary phenolic acids and ascorbic acid: Influence on acid-catalyzed nitrosative chemistry in the presence and absence of lipids

期刊

FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 763-771

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2009.12.011

关键词

Nitrite; N-nitrosation; Gastroesophageal junction; Cancer; Diet; Phenolic compounds; Free radicals

资金

  1. World Cancer Research Fund
  2. Chief Scientist Office [CZB/4/485] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acid-catalyzed nitrosation and production of potentially carcinogenic nitrosative species is focused at the gastroesophageal junction, where salivary nitrite, derived from dietary nitrate, encounters the gastric juice. Ascorbic acid provides protection by converting nitrosative species to nitric oxide (NO). However, NO may diffuse into adjacent lipid, where it reacts with O-2 to re-form nitrosative species and N-nitrosocompounds (NOC). In this way, ascorbic acid promotes acid nitrosation. Using a novel benchtop model representing the gastroesophageal junction, this study aimed to clarify the action of a range of water-soluble antioxidants on the nitrosative mechanisms in the presence or absence of lipids. Caffeic, ferulic, gallic, or chlorogenic and ascorbic acids were added individually to simulated gastric juice containing secondary amines, with or without lipid. NO and O-2 levels were monitored by electrochemical detection. NOC were measured in both aqueous and lipid phases by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. In the absence of lipids, all antioxidants tested inhibited nitrosation, ranging from 35.9 +/- 7.4% with gallic acid to 93 +/- 0.65; with ferulic acid. In the presence of lipids, the impact of each antioxidant on nitrosation was inversely correlated with the levels of NO they generated (R-2 = 0.95, p < 0.01): gallic, chlorogenic, and ascorbic acid promoted nitrosation, whereas ferulic and caffeic acids markedly inhibited nitrosation. (c) 2010 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