THEMES
Nitric Oxide
III. A molecular prelude to intestinal inflammation*

Mark J. S. Miller and Manuel Sandoval

Department of Pediatrics, Albany Medical College, Albany, New York 12208


    ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

Nitric oxide (NO) synthesis is markedly augmented in states of inflammation, largely due to the expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS). Although NO has anti-inflammatory consequences under basal conditions, it remains enigmatic as to why NO displays proinflammatory characteristics in chronic inflammation. Either the anti-inflammatory actions are weak and of little consequence or, alternatively, other factors influence the role of NO in chronic inflammation. We propose that the answer to this enigma lies in the conversion of NO to other higher oxides of nitrogen (NO2, nitrogen dioxide; N2O3, dinitrogen trioxide; and ONOO-, peroxynitrite). Emerging therapeutic strategies may be independent of NO synthesis; e.g., antioxidants have no direct interaction with NO but attenuate the levels and activity of higher nitrogen oxides. Thus, whereas iNOS may be a marker for the proinflammatory actions of NO, the species that mediate tissue injury/dysfunction in inflammation are likely to be nitrogen oxides other than NO.

peroxynitrite; apoptosis; oxidant; cytokine


    INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

NITRIC OXIDE (NO) is a free radical; it has an unpaired electron in its outer orbit, and this is the basis of its biological activity, allowing for electrochemical interactions between NO and metals, e.g., the active site of guanylate cyclase. However, as a free radical species, its reactivity is quite weak. This poor reactivity, combined with its lipophilicity, allows NO to be remarkably diffusible (8, 23). In vivo, this diffusion may be largely regulated by its reaction with hemoglobin, as determined by the extent of tissue vascularity (11).

Species that will react with NO · are actually limited. They are basically oxygen, transition metals, and other radicals. Often, discussions on the biological consequences of NO formation encompass all the redox forms of NO (NO ·, NO+, and NO-), which may cause serious confusion. Furthermore, there is a need to consider the biological results of products generated from the oxidation of NO. NO is a precursor to a family of reactive compounds, collectively called reactive nitrogen species, in a manner analogous to the fate of superoxide and its family of reactive oxygen species. Table 1 highlights some of the reactive nitrogen species to be considered and their potential effects. One misconception is that NO (NO ·) reacts with amines (to form nitrosamines) and thiols (to form nitrosothiols). These are nitrosation reactions and are mediated by nitrosonium (NO+); nitrosylation is the reaction with NO ·, and nitrosylation of thiols and amines does not occur biologically, although the nitrosylation of transition metals is common. Thus, in discussions of the consequences of NO reactivity, the mixing and matching of NO · and NO+ and NO- is not appropriate because these forms react with quite different substrates and result in divergent products and consequences. It should also be noted that a major source of NO+ biologically is dinitrogen trioxide (N2O3), which breaks down into NO+ and nitrite (NO-2). Acidification of nitrite to form N2O3, and hence a nitrosating species, is the basis of the griess reaction, a common assay to measure NO production.

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1.   Nitrogen oxides that have been implicated in the biological sequelae of nitric oxide formation

The interaction of NO with superoxide is an example of its reactivity with other free radical species (1). In this case, the product is peroxynitrite (ONOO-), a potent and toxic oxidizing species. Peroxynitrite is not a radical because the unpaired electrons of its precursors are now paired. However, peroxynitrite is a far more cytotoxic species than either of its parents, NO or superoxide. The same analogy holds true for reactive oxygen species. Superoxide is a relatively innocuous free radical. However, the species derived from superoxide (collectively termed reactive oxygen species) can be far more injurious [hydroxyl radical (OH ·), H2O2, lipid peroxides, and so forth]. NO could be viewed as the mother of a similar family of reactive species, the reactive nitrogen species, some of which are radicals. The advantage of forming these species at a distance from the original source is that the cellular site of NO formation will not be subjected to the same chemical stress as would happen if these more toxic species were formed directly. This strategy is the basis of cellular host defense and facilitates the survival of the cells generating these toxic species while still facilitating the cells' role in host defense.


    INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE AS A MARKER FOR NO-MEDIATED TISSUE INJURY
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

Experiments that have demonstrated that NO production results in anti-inflammatory consequences have almost uniformly been acute in nature (7). In terms of sources of NO production, this means that the constitutive, calcium-independent forms of nitric oxide synthase (cNOS) are responsible for NO synthesis. Because these isoforms (neuronal and endothelial) release NO in a manner that is regulated primarily by intracellular calcium concentrations, the production is reduced compared with inducible NOS (iNOS) and perhaps, more importantly, not sustained.

Regulation of iNOS is primarily at the level of transcription; once expressed, iNOS produces NO independent of intracellular calcium. Thus, in acute experiments, there is invariably insufficient time for iNOS to be expressed. As a consequence, only the contributions of cNOS are evident. The effects of bacterial endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide, LPS) on gut injury may best characterize this divergence in the biological roles of NO with time (isoform expression). When administered intravenously, LPS produces marked gut injury within 3 h of administration due to the activation of circulating leukocytes, vasculature, and resident immune-related cells in the gut. In a 3-h protocol, inhibitors of NOS exacerbate injury and NO donors reduce the degree of gut damage. Clearly, NO is protective under these circumstances. If, however, the protocol is extended to 6 h, sufficient time is now available for the expression of the otherwise quiescent iNOS and a different pattern emerges (9). LPS administration still results in gut injury, but if the NOS inhibitors are administered at the 3-h mark, half-way through the protocol when iNOS is being expressed, then they are protective. In other words, after 3 h the same therapy that previously exacerbated injury is now protective. NO has gone from being protective to being injurious (or has it?).

The explanation for this stark contrast in effects has been that after 3 h iNOS has been expressed and more NO is being produced, and when NO levels are elevated NO flips from being protective to being injurious. We believe that this explanation is partly correct. Although iNOS expression is most certainly a key element, it remains incredibly difficult to reconcile that NO goes from being helpful to being harmful with a relatively minor change in production. Something is missing in this explanation. We propose that it is inappropriate to consider a radical species, like NO, in isolation. Unless one accounts for the oxidative end products of NO, then one is considering only a small component of a family of molecules that are being generated.

In terms of the application of this knowledge base to therapeutics, the influence of time for applying the best and appropriate therapy must be appreciated. For example, in reperfusion injury, NO donors at the onset of reperfusion would indeed be helpful (7). On the other hand, in a chronic inflammation (gastritis, inflammatory bowel disease, arthritis, and so forth), inhibition of NO production appears to be beneficial (5, 14-16).

Certainly, it is a reasonable generalization that the deleterious effects of nitrogen oxides are in states characterized by iNOS expression and hence elevated NO production. The expression of iNOS can be useful to infer a deleterious role of nitrogen oxides. One exception to that "rule" is stroke, during which neuronal NOS behaves in a similar manner to iNOS because of the profoundly deranged intracellular calcium levels. It is no mere coincidence that the expression of iNOS coincides with cell injury both in terms of time and location (5, 12, 15, 16). Combined with the cytoprotective effects of selective iNOS inhibitors, one can infer that iNOS contributes to tissue injury, commensurate with its role in killing tumors and invading microorganisms. However, this host defense role is not due to the enzyme itself, and it is questionable that this enzyme's initial product, NO, is the mediator.


    THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

The expression of iNOS is not always correlated with tissue injury. Perhaps the best example of this is pregnancy, during which iNOS is expressed (constitutively) in the maternal uterus, placenta, and fetal organs (2, 17-19). Here is an example in which the nomenclature breaks down, since iNOS is constitutively expressed in pregnancy. Unlike inflammation, the expression of iNOS in pregnancy is not associated with cell death; apoptosis is not colocalized with iNOS sites of expression.

In the fetus, it appears that iNOS plays a role that would otherwise be assigned to cNOS, since iNOS, together with cNOS, regulates vascular tone in the fetal circulation (2, 19). The need to utilize iNOS for NO production in the fetus may be due to hypoxic conditions of the fetus, thereby reducing NO production, but iNOS is also expressed in the immediate postpartum period, when the newborn is normoxic. Competition for L-arginine for tissue growth may also be an explanation for the utilization of iNOS. In uterine, placental, and fetal tissue explants, NO production is in the micromolar range (17), compatible with chronic inflammation; however, whether this is indicative of in vivo production is not quite clear.

How the fetus manages to express iNOS and not suffer any deleterious consequences may be critical to our understanding of the role of nitrogen oxides in tissue injury. One critical observation is that, despite the presence of iNOS, nitrotyrosine formation (an index of peroxynitrite formation) is absent in pregnancy unless it is accompanied by a secondary perturbation, e.g., LPS administration or diabetes (17, 18). In pregnancy, the generation of nitrating species is linked to apoptosis and dysfunction and the expression of iNOS is not.


    OXIDATION OF NO TO OTHER TOXIC NITROGEN OXIDES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

As discussed in the introduction, NO has limited reactivity but it does react with oxygen. The final product of this reaction is nitrite, but the intermediates are NO2 and N2O3, highly reactive and short-lived species. It is the reaction with oxygen that explains the degradation of NO in aerobic solutions. This reaction is second order, with two NO molecules reacting with each oxygen molecule (Fig. 1). Consequently, the half-life of NO, as determined by this reaction, depends on the NO concentration: NO half-life is shorter at high concentrations and longer at low concentrations.


View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   A schematic diagram of the conversion of nitric oxide (NO) to other nitrogen oxides. Hydrophilic interior of membranes will act as a lens to magnify the oxidation of NO to NO2 or N2O3. The profound reactivity of these nitrogen oxides, as well as the formation of the highly cytotoxic peroxynitrite (ONOO-), likely mediates cellular injury and tissue dysfunction in response to augmented NO production. These higher nitrogen oxides are susceptible to pharmacological manipulation; the ability of ascorbate to degrade ONOO- and N2O3 is given as an example.

Thus any site that concentrates NO and oxygen should facilitate their reaction, and the half-life of NO should be reduced. Are there sites that would tend to focus the reaction of NO and oxygen in biology? The answer is yes: membranes. The hydrophobic interior of membranes is lipophilic, and both oxygen and NO concentrate in lipophilic environments. Thus one would predict that the reaction of NO and oxygen is accelerated in the hydrophobic milieu of membranes and indeed it is accelerated, ~310-fold (10).

This is critical not simply because it defines a locus for the biological degradation of NO but because it raises the issue as to whether the products of this reaction (NO and O2) contribute to cellular responses. One could state that for the same rate of NO synthesis the rate of NO2 and N2O3 production is 310-fold greater in membranes than in the cytosol. Taken together with an increased NO synthesis during inflammation due to iNOS expression, the potential rate of NO2 and N2O3 formation in inflammation could be accelerated 15,000-fold in membranes compared with the cytosol under basal conditions. Finally, we have a potential explanation as to why a modest increase in NO synthesis (50-fold) can result in a total reversal of biological actions. An increased production by four orders of magnitude of toxic species is far more likely to account for the cytotoxicity attributed to nitrogen oxides than that from modest increases in the synthesis of a weakly reactive free radical, NO.

One could predict that these toxic species would be generated in a heterogeneous manner. Organelles that have a high membrane content would be particularly sensitive, e.g., mitochondria. The myelin sheath of neuronal cells would also be a prime target for this effect. Structures that are perimembrane or transmembrane in location would be particularly sensitive, and, because of the chemical reactivity of NO2 and N2O3, amines, thiols, and metals would be focal points of reactivity. However, whether the products of these reactions are evident in inflammation remains to be clearly shown. Grisham and colleagues (6) have indicated that activated neutrophils do accelerate nitrosamine formation commensurate with iNOS expression. Interestingly, nitrosamine formation can be attenuated by antioxidants [vitamin C or 5-aminosacylic acid (5-ASA), neither of which directly interacts with NO itself (see ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-INFLAMMATORY AGENTS)]. Antioxidants interfere with the reactivity of nitrogen oxides that are nitrosating species, and this may explain their therapeutic benefit. However, nitrosation is not necessarily a prelude to dysfunction and cell death. Indeed, Fiorucci and colleagues (4) have recently described that a NO-donating nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug class can prevent gastric injury and can prevent the apoptosis induced by inflammatory signals like tumor necrosis factor-alpha because of an interference of caspase activity that involves nitrosation of a critical thiol group. Nitrosothiols should not be regarded as mere reservoirs of NO+, to be released at a later date, but should be regarded as a means of modifying function. The outcome of nitrosation is a viable area of future research and drug development.

The redox form of NO appears to be a critical determinant of the cellular response to NO. In general, NO+ is generally regarded as being protective, but N2O3, a potent nitrosating agent, can be highly toxic. The nitroxyl, NO-, the one-electron reduction product of NO, is highly reactive and toxic (25). Conversion of nitroxyl to NO by ferricyanide can prevent DNA damage and apoptosis, highlighting the critical influence that the redox state has on the biological consequences of NO synthesis.


    PEROXYNITRITE
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

Peroxynitrite is the product of NO and superoxide (O-2), a reaction that is extremely rapid and approaches diffusion-limited kinetics. Because of the intense reactivity of peroxynitrite, it is ephemeral and difficult to measure in vivo. Whereas peroxynitrite can induce cell damage (1, 20) and apoptosis (12, 21, 22) in vitro, its role in vivo is less clear. There are issues surrounding the requirement of stoichiometric relationships of NO and superoxide for this reaction and their reactivity of the substrates with the end-product (24). The standard index of peroxynitrite formation in vivo is the formation of nitrated tyrosine residues. The formation of nitrotyrosine has been observed in numerous states of chronic inflammation (12, 16, 17). We noted that the administration of NOS inhibitors prevents the increase in nitrotyrosine formation with inflammation (16), which was critical because NO cannot directly nitrate any substrate. Nitration involves the addition of nitronium (NO+2), a reaction that is possible for peroxynitrite but not NO ·. There are other pathways to nitrotyrosine formation in inflammation (3); therefore, we still need to use this index with caution. Nevertheless, it is an important clue that higher oxides of nitrogen are being formed in inflammation via NO but with different reactivities.


    ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-INFLAMMATORY AGENTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

If NO is an important mediator of tissue injury in inflammation, then therapies that are effective in treating these disorders should modify NO levels or reactivity. Certainly glucocorticoids are the best example of this type of strategy; glucocorticoids prevent the expression of iNOS by inhibiting the activity of nuclear factor-kappa B. Are there other anti-inflammatory strategies that operate through NO or nitrogen oxides? Misoprostal, the PGE analog, does not, but the best candidates may be antioxidants because of the free radical nature of NO. The first line of therapy for gut inflammation is 5-ASA (mesalamine). Although mesalamine has been found to possess a myriad of actions that may account for its anti-inflammatory properties, most of these occur at high concentrations. The precise mechanism of action is unknown. We tested whether mesalamine directly reacts with NO or with peroxynitrite (21). We noted that this antioxidant had no effect on NO levels but was a potent inhibitor of peroxynitrite toxicity. This was due, in part, to a direct consumption of peroxynitrite by mesalamine as well as indirect mechanisms. Mesalamine was able to attenuate peroxynitrite-induced apoptosis when administered 30 min after peroxynitrite administration. Peroxynitrite has a half-life of <1 s in physiological pH, indicating that mesalamine can negate the cellular sequelae of peroxynitrite that lead to apoptosis.

We have extended this concept to a number of other studies that addressed the interactions of antioxidants with NO vs. peroxynitrite. Uniformly, antioxidants reduce peroxynitrite levels and cellular toxicity (21, 22). However, antioxidants do not affect NO levels. An exception is vitamin C. Although ascorbate does not directly interact with NO (determined in the absence of oxygen), in the presence of oxygen, vitamin C was consumed. However, NO levels were not lowered; rather, the decline with time (due to its reaction with oxygen) was attenuated (unpublished results). In other words, compared with the normal consumption of NO by O2, ascorbic acid raised NO levels while still reacting with a product of this reaction. A schematic representation of the potential interactions is depicted in Fig. 1. We propose that, although NO does not interact with ascorbate, higher nitrogen oxides, e.g., NO2 and N2O3, will react. The relative increase in NO levels in the presence of ascorbate reflects the recycling of N2O3 into NO or the elimination of NO2 as a substrate to form N2O3. This concurs with studies by Grisham et al. (6), who demonstrated that ascorbic acid negated the formation of nitrosamines from endogenous NO.

Antioxidants are consumed in inflammation (13), and the utility of antioxidants as therapeutic agents in these conditions is well appreciated. The failure of antioxidants to lower NO levels suggests that other factors are involved in the tissue damage and its attenuation by vitamin C and that NO itself is not the cause of cell injury. Similarly, because antioxidants uniformly negate peroxynitrite levels and toxicity and interact with the higher oxides of nitrogen generated by the reaction of NO and O2, it is far more likely that the deleterious effects of NO in inflammation are due to the conversion of NO to other nitrogen oxides. These should be amenable to therapeutic intervention. In a long-term clinical study performed in patients with Helicobacter pylori gastritis, we noted that administration of ascorbic acid reduced the degree of nitrotyrosine staining in mucosal biopsies and reduced epithelial apoptosis (12). This effect was seen without clearance of the underlying infection or a significant alteration of iNOS expression. In other words, the production of NO in mucosal inflammation was unaffected but ascorbic acid attenuated an index for nitrogen oxide (peroxynitrite) formation and cell death, suggesting a causal link distal to NO itself. Whether therapies that target nitrogen oxides but yet do not lower NO levels per se facilitate the expression of the underlying anti-inflammatory actions of NO concomitant with an elimination of toxic reactions is unknown.


    SUMMARY
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

There is ample evidence that tissue injury in inflammation is promoted by nitrogen oxides and in some cases may be a link between chronic inflammation and cancer. NO production is elevated following the expression of iNOS, and inhibitors of iNOS confer protection in chronic inflammation. However, the mere expression of iNOS and increased NO levels are insufficient explanations for this role reversal from basal conditions in which NO is protective. In pregnancy, during which iNOS is expressed without compromised function, we learn that the expression of iNOS for a sustained period is not associated with tissue injury. Antioxidants do not interact with NO, a result indicative of the poor reactivity of NO despite its classification as a radical. Antioxidants will protect tissue from the injurious effects of other nitrogen oxides, peroxynitrite, nitrogen dioxide, and N2O3. These higher oxides of nitrogen are the likely chemical mediators of tissue injury in inflammation. We need to move on from the concept that NO · is "good" at low concentrations and "bad" at high concentrations. Perhaps a more reasonable concept is that the biological consequences of NO are dictated by its metabolic fate; in other words, the form of nitrogen oxide(s) determines biological outcomes. A better understanding of the chemical pathways and localization of NO oxidation can lead to new therapeutic approaches in the treatment of inflammation and cancer, ones that are directed and less likely to be associated with side effects.


    FOOTNOTES

* Third in a series of invited articles on Nitric Oxide.

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: M. J. S. Miller, Dept. of Pediatrics, MC-88, Albany Medical College, 47 New Scotland Ave., Albany, NY 12208 (E-mail: mark_miller{at}ccgateway.amc.edu).


    REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
INDUCIBLE NITRIC OXIDE SYNTHASE...
THE PREGNANCY EXCEPTION
OXIDATION OF NO TO...
PEROXYNITRITE
ANTIOXIDANTS AS ANTI-...
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

1.   Beckman, J. S., T. W. Beckman, J. Chen, P. A. Marshall, and B. A. Freeman. Apparent hydroxyl radical production by peroxynitrite: implications for endothelial injury from nitric oxide and superoxide. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87: 1620-1624, 1990[Abstract].

2.   Bustamante, S. A., Y. Pang, S. Romero, M. R. Pierce, C. A. Voelker, J. H. Thompson, M. Sandoval, X. Liu, and M. J. S. Miller. Inducible nitric oxide synthase and the regulation of central vessels caliber in the fetal rat. Circulation 94: 1948-1953, 1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].

3.   Eiserich, J. P., C. E. Cross, A. D. Jones, B. Halliwell, and A. van der Vliet. Formation of nitrating and chlorinating species by reaction of nitrite with hypochlorous acid. A novel mechanism for nitric oxide-mediated protein modification. J. Biol. Chem. 271: 19199-19208, 1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].

4.   Fiorucci, S., L. Santucci, B. Federici, E. Antonelli, E. Distrutti, O. Morelli, G. Di Renzo, G. Coata, G. Cirino, P. Del Soldato, and A. Morelli. TNF-alpha processing enzyme inhibitors prevent aspirin-indued TNF-alpha release and protect against gastric mucosal injury in rats. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 12: 1139-1153, 1998[Medline].

5.   Grisham, M. B., R. D. Specian, and T. E. Zimmerman. Effects of nitric oxide synthase inhibition on the pathophysiology observed in a model of chronic granulomatous colitis. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 271: 1114-1121, 1994[Abstract].

6.   Grisham, M. B., K. Ware, H. E. Gilleland, Jr., J. B. Gilleland, C. L. Abell, and T. Yamada. Neutrophil-mediated nitrosamine formation: role of nitric oxide in rats. Gastroenterology 104: 1260-1266, 1992.

7.   Kubes, P., and J. L. Wallace. Nitric oxide as a mediator of gastrointestinal injury?---say it ain't so. Mediators Inflammation 4: 397-405, 1995.

8.   Lancaster, J. R., Jr. Simulation of the diffusion and reaction of endogenously produced nitric oxide. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91: 8137-8141, 1994[Abstract].

9.   Lazlo, F., B. J. R. Whittle, and S. Moncada. Time-dependent enhancement or inhibition of endotoxin-induced vascular injury in rat intestine by nitric oxide synthase inhibitors. Br. J. Pharmacol. 111: 1309-1315, 1994[Abstract].

10.   Liu, X., M. J. S. Miller, M. S. Joshi, D. D. Thomas, and J. R. Lancaster, Jr. Accelerated reaction of nitric oxide with O2 within the hydrophobic interior of biological membranes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95: 2175-2179, 1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].

11.   Liu, X., M. J. S. Miller, M. Joshi, H. Sadowska-Krowicka, D. A. Clark, and J. R. Lancaster, Jr. Diffusion-limited reaction of free nitric oxide with erythrocytes. J. Biol. Chem. 273: 18709-18713, 1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].

12.   Mannick, E. E., L. E. Bravo, G. Zarama, J. L. Realpe, X-J. Zhang, B. Ruiz, E. T. H. Fontham, R. Mera, M. J. S. Miller, and P. Correa. Inducible nitric oxide synthase, nitrotyrosine, and apoptosis in Helicobacter pylori gastritis: effect of antibiotics and antioxidants. Cancer Res. 56: 3238-3243, 1996[Abstract].

13.   McKenzie, S. J., M. S. Baker, G. D. Buffinton, and W. F. Doe. Evidence of oxidant-induced injury to epithelial cells during inflammatory bowel disease. J. Clin. Invest. 98: 136-141, 1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].

14.   Miller, M. J. S., and M. B. Grisham. Nitric oxide as a mediator of inflammation?---you had better believe it. Mediators Inflammation 4: 387-396, 1995.

15.   Miller, M. J. S., H. Sadowska-Krowicka, S. Chotinaruemol, J. L. Kakkis, and D. A. Clark. Amelioration of chronic ileitis by nitric oxide synthase inhibition. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 264: 11-16, 1993[Abstract].

16.   Miller, M. J. S., J. H. Thompson, X.-J. Zhang, H. Sadowska-Krowicka, J. L. Kakkis, U. K. Munshi, M. Sandoval, J. E. Rossi, S. Eloby-Childress, J. S. Beckman, Y. Z. Ye, C. P. Roddi, P. T. Manning, M. G. Currie, and D. A. Clark. Role of inducible nitric oxide synthase expression and peroxynitrite formation in guinea pig ileitis. Gastroenterology 109: 1475-1483, 1995[Medline].

17.   Miller, M. J. S., C. A. Voelker, S. M. Olister, J. H. Thompson, X.-J. Zhang, D. Rivera, S. Eloby-Childress, X. Liu, D. A. Clark, and M. R. Pierce. Fetal growth retardation in rats may result from apoptosis: role of peroxynitrite. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 21: 619-629, 1996[Medline].

18.   Myatt, L., R. B. Rosenfield, A. L. Eis, D. E. Brockman, I. Greer, and F. Lyall. Nitrotyrosine residues in placenta. Evidence for peroxynitrite formation. Hypertension 28: 488-493, 1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].

19.   Rairigh, R. L., T. D. Le Cras, D. D. Ivy, J. P. Kinsella, G. Richter, M. P. Horan, I. D. Fan, and S. H. Abman. Role of inducible nitric oxide synthase in regulation of pulmonary vascular tone in the late gestation ovine fetus. J. Clin. Invest. 101: 15-21, 1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].

20.   Rubbo, H., R. Radi, M. Trujillo, R. Telleri, B. Kalyanaraman, S. Barnes, M. Kirk, and B. A. Freeman. Nitric oxide regulation of superoxide and peroxynitrite-dependent lipid peroxidation. Formation of novel nitrogen-containing oxidized lipid derivatives. J. Biol. Chem. 269: 26066-26075, 1994[Abstract/Free Full Text].

21.   Sandoval, M., X. Liu, D. A. Clark, and M. J. S. Miller. Peroxynitrite induced-apoptosis in human epithelial cells is attenuated by mesalamine. Gastroenterology 113: 1480-1488, 1997[Medline].

22.   Sandoval, M., X.-J. Zhang, X. Liu, E. E. Mannick, D. A. Clark, and M. J. S. Miller. Peroxynitrite-induced apoptosis in T84 and RAW 264.7 cells: attenuation by L-ascorbic acid. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 22: 489-495, 1997[Medline].

23.   Vaughn, M. W., L. Kou, and J. L. Liao. Effective diffusion distance of nitric oxide in the microcirculation. Am. J. Physiol. 274 (Heart Circ. Physiol. 43): H1705-H1714, 1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].

24.   Wink, D. A., J. A. Cook, S. Y. Kim, Y. Vodovotz, R. Pacelli, M. C. Krishna, A. Russo, J. B. Mitchell, D. Jourd'heil, A. M. Miles, and M. B. Grisham. Superoxide modulates the oxidation and nitrosation of thiols by nitric oxide-derived reactive intermediates. Chemical aspects involved in the balance between oxidative and nitrosative stress. J. Biol. Chem. 272: 11147-11151, 1997[Abstract/Free Full Text].

25.   Wink, D. A., M. Feelisch, J. Fukoto, D. Chistodoulou, D. Jourd'heil, M. B. Grisham, Y. Vodovotz, J. A. Cook, M. Krishna, W. G. DeGraff, S. Kim, J. Gamson, and J. B. Mitchell. The cytotoxicity of nitroxyl: possible implications for the pathophysiological role of NO. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 351: 66-74, 1998[Medline].


Am J Physiol Gastroint Liver Physiol 276(4):G795-G799
0002-9513/99 $5.00 Copyright © 1999 the American Physiological Society