SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

NADPH oxidase in brain injury and neurodegenerative disorders.

Mol Neurodegener · 2017-01-17

DOI: 10.1186/s13024-017-0150-7PMID: 28095923

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Oxidative stress is a common denominator in the pathology of neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and multiple sclerosis, as well as in ischemic and traumatic brain injury. The brain is highly vulnerable to oxidative damage due to its high metabolic demand. However, therapies attempting to scavenge free radicals have shown little success. By shifting the focus to inhibit the generation of damaging free radicals, recent studies have identified NADPH oxidase as a major contributor to disease pathology. NADPH oxidase has the primary function to generate free radicals. In particular, there is growing evidence that the isoforms NOX1, NOX2, and NOX4 can be upregulated by a variety of neurodegenerative factors. The majority of recent studies have shown that genetic and pharmacological inhibition of NADPH oxidase enzymes are neuroprotective and able to reduce detrimental aspects of pathology following ischemic and traumatic brain injury, as well as in chronic neurodegenerative disorders. This review aims to summarize evidence supporting the role of NADPH oxidase in the pathology of these neurological disorders, explores pharmacological strategies of targeting this major oxidative stress pathway, and outlines obstacles that need to be overcome for successful translation of these therapies to the clinic.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.