↓ Skip to main content

Why do antioxidants fail to provide clinical benefit?

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2000
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Why do antioxidants fail to provide clinical benefit?
Published in
Trials, August 2000
DOI 10.1186/cvm-1-1-038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ascan Warnholtz, Thomas Münzel

Abstract

The results of recent randomized trials to test the influence of antioxidants on coronary-event rates and prognosis in patients with coronary-artery disease were disappointing. In none of these studies did the use of vitamin E improve prognosis. In contrast, treatment of coronary-artery disease with angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduced coronary-event rates and improved prognosis. ACE inhibition prevents the formation of angiotensin II, which has been shown to be a potent stimulus of superoxide-producing enzymes in atherosclerosis. The findings suggest that inhibition of superoxide production at enzymatic levels, rather than symptomatic superoxide scavenging, may be the better choice of treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Professor 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 18%