Nox, Reactive Oxygen Species and Regulation of Vascular Cell Fate
Burtenshaw D., Hakimjavadi R., Redmond EM., Cahill PA.
Narrative Review, published in Antioxidants (Basel) (2017) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Antioxidants (Basel) (2017)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 29135921
- PMCID
- PMC5745500
- DOI
- 10.3390/antiox6040090
- Citations
- 94
Abstract (original English)
The generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and an imbalance of antioxidant defence mechanisms can result in oxidative stress. Several pro-atherogenic stimuli that promote intimal-medial thickening (IMT) and early arteriosclerotic disease progression share oxidative stress as a common regulatory pathway dictating vascular cell fate. The major source of ROS generated within the vascular system is the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) oxidase family of enzymes (Nox), of which seven members have been characterized. The Nox family are critical determinants of the redox state within the vessel wall that dictate, in part the pathophysiology of several vascular phenotypes. This review highlights the putative role of ROS in controlling vascular fate by promoting endothelial dysfunction, altering vascular smooth muscle phenotype and dictating resident vascular stem cell fate, all of which contribute to intimal medial thickening and vascular disease progression.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.