SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Oxidative stress and molecular chaperones: a dynamic crosstalk in neurodegenerative disorders.

Transl Neurosci · 2026-01-01

DOI: 10.1515/tnsci-2025-0397PMID: 42359349

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

Neurodegenerative diseases (NDs), such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and Huntington's disease are discussed as representative examples of conditions in which oxidative stress and proteostasis imbalance contribute to progressive neuronal dysfunction. Oxidative stress, defined as an imbalance between reactive oxygen species (ROS) production and antioxidant defenses, is widely recognized as a key contributor to ND pathogenesis. Excessive ROS disrupt cellular homeostasis and promotes protein misfolding and aggregation, thereby compromising the proteostasis network. In response to this stress, molecular chaperones, including members of heat shock protein (Hsp) family, play a crucial protective role by maintaining protein folding integrity and preventing toxic aggregation. Furthermore, mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) serve as carriers of bioactive molecules, including antioxidants and molecular chaperones, offering a unique mechanism to restore cellular homeostasis. This review explores the interplay between oxidative stress and molecular chaperones in the pathogenesis of NDs and highlights the emerging therapeutic potential of MSC-EVs as modulators of oxidative and proteostatic imbalance.

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.