4.7 Review

Therapeutic potential of glutathione-enhancers in stress-related psychopathologies

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS
卷 114, 期 -, 页码 134-155

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.03.015

关键词

Psychogenic stress; Brain; Oxidative stress; Glutathione (GSH); Nuclear factor erythroid-2-related factor 2 (Nrf2); Depression; Anxiety; N-acetyl-cysteine; Glycine; Taurine; Whey proteins; Glutamine; Sulforaphane; Dimethyl fumarate; Curcumin; Melatonin; Trehalose; Ergothioneine; L-carnitine; Puerarin

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [31003A-152614, 51NF40-158776]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [31003A_152614, 51NF40-158776] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mammalian brain has high energy demands, which may become higher in response to environmental challenges such as psychogenic stress exposure. Therefore, efficient neutralization of reactive oxygen species that are produced as a by-product of ATP synthesis is crucial for preventing oxidative damage and ensuring normal energy supply and brain function. Glutathione (GSH) is arguably the most important endogenous antioxidant in the brain. In recent years, aberrant GSH levels have been implicated in different psychiatric disorders, including stress-related psychopathologies. In this review, we examine the available data supporting a role for GSH levels and antioxidant function in the brain in relation to anxiety and stress-related psychopathologies. Additionally, we identify several promising compounds that could raise GSH levels in the brain by either increasing the availability of its precursors or the expression of GSH-regulating enzymes through activation of Nuclear factor erythroid-2-related factor 2 (Nrf2). Given the high tolerability and safety profile of these compounds, they may represent attractive new opportunities to complement existing therapeutic manipulations against stress-related psychopathologies.

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