Inhibition of platelet aggregation by carbon monoxide-releasing molecules (CO-RMs): comparison with NO donors

Carbon monoxide (CO) and CO-releasing molecules (CO-RMs) inhibit platelet aggregation in vitro. Herein, we compare the anti-platelet action of CORM-3, which releases CO rapidly (t½ 1 min), and CORM-A1, which slowly releases CO (t½ = 21 min). The anti-platelet effects of NO donors with various kinetics of NO release were studied for comparison. The effects of CO-RMs and NO donors were analyzed in washed human platelets (WP), platelets rich plasma (PRP), or whole blood (WB) using aggregometry technique. CORM-3 and CORM-A1 inhibited platelet aggregation in human PRP, WP, or WB, in a concentration-dependent manner. In all three preparations, CORM-A1 was more potent than CORM-3. Inhibition of platelets aggregation by CORM-A1 was not significantly affected by a guanylate cyclase inhibitor (ODQ) and a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor, sildenafil. In contrast, inhibition of platelet aggregation by NO donors was more potent with a fast NO releaser (DEA-NO, t½ = 2 min) than slow NO releasers such as PAPA-NO (t½ = 15 min) or other slow NO donors. Predictably, the anti-platelet effect of DEA-NO and other NO donors was reversed by ODQ while potentiated by sildenafil. In contrast to NO donors which inhibit platelets proportionally to the kinetics of NO released via activation of soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC), the slow CO-releaser CORM-A1 is a superior anti-platelet agent as compared to CORM-3 which releases CO instantly. The anti-platelet action of CO-RMs does not involve sGC activation. Importantly, CORM-A1 or its derivatives representing the class of slow CO releasers display promising pharmacological profile as anti-platelet agents

An Attempt to Understand Kidney's Protein Handling Function by Comparing Plasma and Urine Proteomes

With the help of proteomics technology, the human plasma and urine proteomes, which closely represent the protein compositions of the input and output of the kidney, respectively, have been profiled in much greater detail by different research teams. Many datasets have been accumulated to form “reference profiles” of the plasma and urine proteomes. Comparing these two proteomes may help us understand the protein handling aspect of kidney function in a way, however, which has been unavailable until the recent advances in proteomics technology.After removing secreted proteins downstream of the kidney, 2611 proteins in plasma and 1522 in urine were identified with high confidence and compared based on available proteomic data to generate three subproteomes, the plasma-only subproteome, the plasma-and-urine subproteome, and the urine-only subproteome, and they correspond to three groups of proteins that are handled in three different ways by the kidney. The available experimental molecular weights of the proteins in the three subproteomes were collected and analyzed. Since the functions of the overrepresented proteins in the plasma-and-urine subproteome are probably the major functions that can be routinely regulated by excretion from the kidney in physiological conditions, Gene Ontology term enrichment in the plasma-and-urine subproteome versus the whole plasma proteome was analyzed. Protease activity, calcium and growth factor binding proteins, and coagulation and immune response-related proteins were found to be enriched.The comparison method described in this paper provides an illustration of a new approach for studying organ functions with a proteomics methodology. Because of its distinctive input (plasma) and output (urine), it is reasonable to predict that the kidney will be the first organ whose functions are further elucidated by proteomic methods in the near future. It can also be anticipated that there will be more applications for proteomics in organ function research