ABSTRACT
Mitochondrial injury and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress are considered to be the key mechanisms of renal ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury. Mitochondria are membrane-bound organelles that form close physical contact with a specific domain of the ER, known as mitochondrial-associated membranes. The close physical contact between them is mainly restrained by ER-mitochondria tethering complexes, which can play an important role in mitochondrial damage, ER stress, lipid homeostasis, and cell death. Several ER-mitochondria tethering complex components are involved in the process of renal I/R injury. A better understanding of the physical and functional interaction between ER and mitochondria is helpful to further clarify the mechanism of renal I/R injury and provide potential therapeutic targets. In this review, we aim to describe the structure of the tethering complex and elucidate its pivotal role in renal I/R injury by summarizing its role in many important mechanisms, such as mitophagy, mitochondrial fission, mitochondrial fusion, apoptosis and necrosis, ER stress, mitochondrial substance transport, and lipid metabolism.
Subject(s)
Humans , Endoplasmic Reticulum/metabolism , Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress , Mitochondria , Mitochondrial Membranes/metabolism , Mitophagy , Reperfusion Injury/metabolismABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Huayu Tongbi Recipe (HTR) combined methotrexate (MTX) in treating refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RRA).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Totally 167 RRA patients were assigned to the treatment group (73 cases) and the control group (94 cases) according to different therapeutic methods. Patients in the treatment group were treated with HTR combined MTX, while those in the control group were treated with leflunomide (LEF) combined MTX. Clinical signs and symptoms, RF, CRP, ESR, disease activity score 28 (DAS28), and safety indicators were compared between the two groups before treatment, at week 12 and 24 after treatment. The efficacy and safety indices were also evaluated.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>At week 12 after treatment the total effective rate was 82.2% (60/73 cases) in the treatment group and 79.8% (75/94 cases) in the control group, showing no statistical difference between the two groups (chi2 = 0.15, P > 0.05). At week 24 after treatment the total effective rate was 78.1% (57/73 cases) in the treatment group and 755% (71/94 cases) in the control group, showing no statistical difference between the two groups (chi2 = 0.15, P > 0.05). There was statistical difference in the total effective rate between week 24 and week 12 in the control group (chi2 = 0.49, P < 0.05). Clinical signs and symptoms, RF, CRP, ESR, and DAS28 were significantly improved in the two groups after 12- and 24-week treatment (P < 0.01). There was no statistical difference in the improvement at week 12 after treatment between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was statistical difference in time of morning stiffness, tender joint numbers, swollen joint numbers, patient global assessment, RF, CRP, and DAS28 at week 24 after treatment between the two groups (P < 0.05). Besides, adverse reactions occurred less in the treatment group than in the control group (P < 0.01).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>The efficacy of HTR combined MTX was equivalent to that of LEF (10 mg per day) combined MTX, but with more stable therapeutic effects and less adverse reactions.</p>