Skip to main content
PMC home page
Physiological Reports logoLink to Physiological Reports
. 2021 Mar 9;9(5):e14796. doi: 10.14814/phy2.14796

Between two storms, vasoactive peptides or bradykinin underlie severity of COVID‐19?

Vardan T Karamyan 1,✉
PMCID: PMC7941673  PMID: 33687143

Abstract

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), continues to be a world‐wide pandemic with overwhelming socioeconomic impact. Since inflammation is one of the major causes of COVID‐19 complications, the associated molecular mechanisms have been the focus of many studies to better understand this disease and develop improved treatments for patients contracting SARS‐CoV‐2. Among these, strong emphasis has been placed on pro‐inflammatory cytokines, associating severity of COVID‐19 with so‐called “cytokine storm.” More recently, peptide bradykinin, its dysregulated signaling or “bradykinin storm,” has emerged as a primary mechanism to explain COVID‐19‐related complications. Unfortunately, this important development may not fully capture the main molecular players that underlie the disease severity. To this end, in this focused review, several lines of evidence are provided to suggest that in addition to bradykinin, two closely related vasoactive peptides, substance P and neurotensin, are also likely to drive microvascular permeability and inflammation, and be responsible for development of COVID‐19 pathology. Furthermore, based on published experimental observations, it is postulated that in addition to ACE and neprilysin, peptidase neurolysin (Nln) is also likely to contribute to accumulation of bradykinin, substance P and neurotensin, and progression of the disease. In conclusion, it is proposed that “vasoactive peptide storm” may underlie severity of COVID‐19 and that simultaneous inhibition of all three peptidergic systems could be therapeutically more advantageous rather than modulation of any single mechanism alone.

Keywords: cytokine, inflammation, neurolysin, neurotensin, substance P, vascular permeability

1. INTRODUCTION

The COVID‐19 world‐wide pandemic continues to have devastating socioeconomic impact with limited therapeutic options. As for any disease, in case of COVID‐19 too, detailed understanding of pathogenic mechanisms is critical for development of new therapies. Hence, it is natural that researchers around the world have used various approaches to explore and understand the COVID‐19 morbidity (Sparks et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020). Among these, arguably most notable are studies focusing on inflammatory mechanisms, pro‐inflammatory cytokines, and “cytokine storm,” since they are fundamentally associated with progression of the disease and mortality of COVID‐19 patients (Mahmudpour et al., 2020; Rossi et al., 2020).

By now, it is well‐recognized that the entry of SARS‐CoV‐2 to the host cell is mediated by peptidase ACE2 (angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (Hoffmann et al., 2020)), which is an important member of the renin‐angiotensin system (RAS) primarily responsible for conversion of angiotensin II into angiotensin‐(1‐7) (Karamyan & Speth, 2007a; Xia & Lazartigues, 2010). This link between SARS‐CoV‐2 and ACE2 has led to many experimental and clinical studies to explore the potential alteration of the RAS function in this disease, extend understanding of the pathology and guide the use of RAS‐modulating drugs in COVID‐19 patients (Sparks et al., 2020; Speth, 2020). Notably, a smaller number of investigators have recognized the intricate association of another peptidergic system, that is, bradykinin or kallikrein‐kinin system, with the RAS within the context of COVID‐19 (Ghahestani et al., 2020; Roche & Roche, 2020; van de Veerdonk et al., 2020). Since angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE), which converts angiotensin I into angiotensin II (Karamyan & Speth, 2007a; Moraes et al., 2017; Speth & Karamyan, 2008), is also central in degradation of bradykinin (Byrd et al., 2006; Israili & Hall, 1992), alteration of the RAS function in COVID‐19 could also mean changed activity of the bradykinin system. This was timely recognized by several groups of investigators early during the pandemic (Roche & Roche, 2020; van de Veerdonk et al., 2020) and most recently was confirmed by a preliminary gene expression analysis study focusing on detailed evaluation of the RAS members, bradykinin and associated systems in samples from COVID‐19 and control patients (Garvin et al., 2020). This is a critical development, because bradykinin is a potent inflammatory mediator that has been associated with a number of pathophysiological conditions including angioedema (Patel & Pongracic, 2019), vasculitis (Karpman & Kahn, 2009), asthma (Ricciardolo et al., 2018), autoimmunity (Dutra, 2017), acute brain injury and neuroinflammation (Albert‐Weissenberger et al., 2013).

Both the original proposals about the potential involvement of the bradykinin system in COVID‐19 pathology (Roche & Roche, 2020; van de Veerdonk et al., 2020) and the recent gene expression analysis study conducted by Garvin and colleagues (Garvin et al., 2020) did an elegant job in explaining the close association of bradykinin with the RAS and linking it to many of the COVID‐19 outcomes. The proposed “bradykinin storm” hypothesis by Garvin and colleagues (Garvin et al., 2020) is an intriguing and welcome development in deciphering the pathogenic mechanisms of COVID‐19. Unfortunately, the presented picture may not be complete, since these investigators did not account for two other major peptidergic systems, substance P and neurotensin, which are also inactivated by ACE and are potent mediators of microvascular permeability, edema formation and inflammation—mechanisms that are in the core of the “bradykinin storm” hypothesis. The need to take into consideration involvement of substance P and neurotensin is further emphasized by Garvin et al. data suggesting downregulation of another peptidase neprilysin in COVID‐19 patients, since this enzyme also, similar to ACE, inactivates bradykinin, substance P and neurotensin. Therefore, in this focused review manuscript the most relevant published studies are summarized to provide evidence about the potential involvement of substance P and neurotensin, in addition to bradykinin, in pathogenic mechanisms of COVID‐19. Furthermore, a case is made that another peptidase known as neurolysin (Nln) is also likely to be affected in this disorder. Based on this, it is proposed that perhaps “vasoactive peptide storm” rather than “bradykinin storm” underlies many of the COVID‐19 outcomes. Lastly, potential therapeutic avenues that could be used to modulate the “vasoactive peptide storm” are discussed.

Since the investigative teams proposing involvement of the bradykinin system in COVID‐19 pathology (Garvin et al., 2020; Roche & Roche, 2020; van de Veerdonk et al., 2020) did a credible job in detailing the basics of the bradykinin and RAS systems, these will not be the primary focus of the present manuscript. Likewise, the readers are advised to refer to several excellent reviews covering the general function and role of the substance P and neurotensin systems in physiological and pathophysiological conditions (Datar et al., 2004; Kleczkowska & Lipkowski, 2013; Mustain et al., 2011; Onaga, 2014).

2. ACE AND NEPRILYSIN IN DEGRADATION OF BRADYKININ, SUBSTANCE P, AND NEUROTENSIN

Among the most recognized examples of adverse side effects afforded by ACE inhibitors are cough (experienced by 5–20% of patients) and angioedema (experienced by 0.1–0.5% of patients), both of which are associated with elevated levels of bradykinin and substance P in patients taking these drugs (Byrd et al., 2006; Israili & Hall, 1992). This is because, in addition to conversion of angiotensin I to angiotensin II, ACE also inactivates bradykinin and substance P. Notably, a recent gene expression analysis by Garvin and colleagues has documented downregulation of ACE (Speth, 2020) in COVID‐19 patients (Garvin et al., 2020) suggesting that not only bradykinin but also the levels of substance P could be elevated. This idea is further supported by substantially decreased expression of peptidase neprilysin, otherwise known as neutral endopeptidase in the same COVID‐19 patient samples (Garvin et al., 2020), since this peptidase also degrades and inactivates bradykinin and substance P (Scholzen & Luger, 2004; Skidgel & Erdos, 2004). Importantly, this is the main reason that development of a dual ACE/neprilysin inhibitor omapatrilat was halted, because the use of this drug was associated with considerably higher incidence of angioedema in patients with cardiovascular disorders (Campbell, 2018; Sulpizio et al., 2005).

Within the context of bradykinin and substance P, and their pro‐inflammatory actions, it is important to recognize that that another bioactive peptide neurotensin is also degraded by ACE and neprilysin (Kanellopoulos et al., 2020; Skidgel & Erdos, 2004). However, the clinical significance of elevated neurotensin levels in response to inhibition of ACE or neprilysin has not been systematically studied.

3. MICROVASCULAR PERMEABILITY INDUCED BY BRADYKININ, SUBSTANCE P, AND NEUROTENSIN

The role of bradykinin in inducing microvascular permeability was well described by all three investigative teams linking this peptide to the pathogenic mechanisms of COVID‐19 (Garvin et al., 2020; Roche & Roche, 2020; van de Veerdonk et al., 2020). Nevertheless, there is a large body of literature indicating that substance P and neurotensin also facilitate microvascular hyperpermeability. For example, numerous experimental studies documented the ability of substance P and neurotensin to induce microvascular permeability, during intraarterial/‐venous administration, in different vascular beds including skin and mucosal tissues (Gyorfi et al., 1995; Inoue et al., 1996), gastrointestinal tract (Figini et al., 1997; Harper et al., 1984), lungs (Gitter et al., 1995; Rioux et al., 1983), and dura mater (Dux & Messlinger, 2001; Ghabriel et al., 1999). Substance P and neurotensin exert these effects primarily through their respective NK‐1 (neurokinin‐1 receptor) and NTR1 (neurotensin receptor 1) receptors; however, involvement of other receptor subtypes is also possible. Notably, analogous to bradykinin, a number of endogenous modulators and signaling molecules, released from endothelial or other cells, have been described to play a role in substance P and neurotensin‐induced microvascular hyperpermeability, including but not limited to histamine, prostaglandins, nitric oxide, and VEGF (Carraway et al., 1982; Johnson et al., 2016; Katsanos et al., 2008; Osadchii, 2015; Shaik‐Dasthagirisaheb et al., 2013). Our recent study carried out in human, induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)‐derived brain microvascular endothelial cells (i.e., in vitro model of blood–brain barrier, BBB) adds to these observations by documenting increased BBB permeability in response to substance P, neurotensin, and bradykinin (Al‐Ahmad et al., 2021). Importantly, combination of these peptides at sub‐effective concentrations also resulted in increased BBB permeability in this study indicating that substance P, neurotensin, and bradykinin can potentiate each other's effects at conditions when all three peptides are available concurrently.

It is noteworthy, that the enhanced microvascular permeability induced by these peptides is directly linked to formation of edema in pathophysiological conditions (Castagliuolo et al., 1999; Donelan et al., 2006). Among these, perhaps best‐documented are ACE inhibitor‐induced angioedema (Byrd et al., 2006; Campbell, 2018) and pathogenic BBB opening and edema formation during acute neurodegenerative disorders such as stroke and traumatic brain injury (Donkin et al., 2009; Groger et al., 2005; Jayaraman et al., 2020; Sorby‐Adams et al., 2019; Trabold et al., 2010).

4. INFLAMMATION POTENTIATED BY BRADYKININ, SUBSTANCE P, AND NEUROTENSIN

As discussed earlier for bradykinin (Garvin et al., 2020; Roche & Roche, 2020; van de Veerdonk et al., 2020), both substance P and neurotensin are also well‐known for their pro‐inflammatory actions. Many of these effects are linked to the ability of substance P and neurotensin to stimulate release of pro‐inflammatory cytokines, matrix metalloproteases, and other mediators from various cell types, including immune and mast cells (Alysandratos et al., 2012; Coll et al., 2020; Donelan et al., 2006; Miller et al., 1995; Theoharides et al., 1998; Xiao et al., 2018; Yano et al., 1989). Additionally, enhanced expression of cell adhesion molecules, including CD44, in response to substance P and neurotensin has been documented in different cells (Meyer‐Siegler & Vera, 2005; Robbins et al., 1995; Shahrokhi et al., 2010). Similar to microvascular permeability, these effects are mainly mediated through NK‐1 and NTR1 receptors, however there is experimental evidence suggesting the potential involvement of other receptors (e.g., MRGPRX2 for substance P and NTR3/sortilin for neurotensin) in transducing some of these effects (Green et al., 2019; Patel et al., 2016). It is important to note that these effects of substance P and bradykinin are often associated with formation of edema and pain sensation (classic symptoms of inflammation), and have been observed in both peripheral tissues and the CNS (Katsanos et al., 2008; O'Connor et al., 2004; Saiyasit et al., 2020; Sorby‐Adams et al., 2017; St‐Gelais et al., 2006; Suvas, 2017).

Similar to microvascular permeability and edema formation, the role of substance P and bradykinin in neurogenic inflammation and worsening of disease outcomes has been demonstrated in experimental models of stroke and traumatic brain injury (Albert‐Weissenberger et al., 2013; Corrigan et al., 2016). It should be noted, that evidence on direct involvement of neurotensin in neurogenic inflammation in acute brain injury setting is more limited, however one study linked the increased levels of neurotensin as well as substance P and bradykinin in ischemic brain tissue with aggravated stroke outcomes (Jayaraman et al., 2020). Furthermore, findings of several clinical studies support these preclinical observations by documenting that the severity of stroke and traumatic brain injury, and subsequent mortality, is associated with elevated levels of bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin (Januzzi et al., 2016; Kunz et al., 2013; Lorente et al., 2016; Nicoli et al., 2020; Zacest et al., 2010).

5. NLN IN DEGRADATION OF BRADYKININ, SUBSTANCE P, AND NEUROTENSIN

Nln (EC 3.4.24.16) is a zinc endopeptidase from the same family of metallopeptidases (M3 family) as ACE, ACE2 and neprilysin (Checler & Ferro, 2018; Dauch et al., 1995), and is best known for hydrolysis of several extracellular bioactive peptides including bradykinin, neurotensin and substance P (Checler et al., 1995; Shrimpton et al., 2002; Wangler et al., 2012, 2016). Experimental studies have documented altered expression of Nln in several disease conditions including stroke (Checler, 2014; Rashid et al., 2010, 2014), and suggested its cerebroprotective function via inactivation of bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin, and formation of angiotensin‐(1‐7) and enkephalins (Jayaraman et al., 2020; Karamyan, 2019). In a stroke setting, pharmacological inhibition of Nln after ischemia was accompanied by aggravated outcomes (brain infarction, edema formation, BBB impairment, and neuroinflammation) and elevated levels of all three peptides, whereas viral vector‐driven upregulation of Nln before stroke was associated with cerebroprotection and decreased levels of bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin (Jayaraman et al., 2020; Karamyan, 2021).

It is noteworthy, that within the context of the RAS, the role of Nln in conversion of angiotensin I to angiotensin‐(1‐7) is not well recognized (Karamyan & Speth, 2007a; Wangler et al., 2016). This is despite experimental data pointing out to ~5‐fold higher affinity of angiotensin I for Nln versus ACE, Ki values 5.35 µM versus 25.88 µM (Rioli et al., 2003), and ~2‐fold higher catalytic efficiency (kcat/Km value) of angiotensin I hydrolysis by Nln versus ACE–3.0 x 105 M−1 s−1 versus 1.8 × 105 M−1 s−1 (Rice et al., 2004; Rodd & Hersh, 1995). However, hydrolysis of angiotensin II by Nln is debatable, because some studies support inactivation of this peptide (cleavage of Tyr4‐Ile5 bond) by Nln (Dahms & Mentlein, 1992; Rioli et al., 2003), while others do not (Barelli et al., 1993; Vincent et al., 1996).

In regard to potential relevance to COVID‐19, Nln is the only other peptidase, in addition to ACE and neprilysin that has been linked to both inactivation of these three vasoactive peptides (bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin) and microvascular permeability, edema formation, neuroinflammation, and stroke. Since altered expression of Nln has been documented in several disease conditions including stroke (Rashid et al., 2014), Alzheimer's disease (Teixeira et al., 2018), Parkinson's disease (Plum et al., 2020), and certain cancers (Mirali et al., 2020), it is plausible to suggest that expression of Nln is likely to be changed in COVID‐19 patients. Given that Garvin and colleagues (Garvin et al., 2020) have documented decreased expression of ACE and neprilysin in COVID‐19 patients, and expected elevated levels of bradykinin (i.e. inefficient degradation of the peptide), then it is likely that the expression of Nln is also decreased in these patients (otherwise, it could efficiently inactivate bradykinin).

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The original hypotheses proposed by van de Veerdonk et al. (van de Veerdonk et al., 2020) and Roche and Roche (Roche & Roche, 2020), and subsequent preliminary experimental confirmation and proposed mechanistic model by Garvin and colleagues (Garvin et al., 2020) placing bradykinin, that is, “bradykinin storm” hypothesis, in the center of COVID‐19 pathology is scientifically intriguing and important for better understanding of this complex disease. Based on their new gene expression analysis data, Garvin and colleagues (Garvin et al., 2020) elegantly link the decreased expression of ACE to potential elevation of bradykinin levels and subsequently, to many of COVID‐19 outcomes. Furthermore, the observed upregulation of bradykinin receptors and enzymes involved in its generation support the case for these hypotheses. Unfortunately, the presented picture may not be complete, since these investigators did not account for two other major peptidergic systems, substance P and neurotensin, which are also inactivated by ACE and neprilysin (both downregulated in COVID‐19 patients). Both peptides are well‐recognized to be potent mediators of microvascular permeability, edema formation and inflammation—mechanisms that are in the core of the “bradykinin storm” hypothesis. Furthermore, it is likely that another key peptidase, Nln is also affected in COVID‐19 patients, since it is the only other enzyme that inactivates all three peptides (bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin) and has been associated with stroke, brain edema formation, increased brain microvascular permeability and neurogenic inflammation (part of COVID‐19‐associated outcomes). The case for Nln is perhaps more strengthened by lack of strong evidence that angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are better tolerated in COVID‐19 patients than ACE inhibitors (these drugs would further lower activity of ACE and hence result in increased levels of bradykinin) (Sparks et al., 2020; Speth, 2020). Moreover combined use of a neprilysin inhibitor with an ARB (sacubitril/valsartan) in COVID‐19 patients is currently being investigated (Acanfora et al., 2020), although an opposing hypothesis (i.e., protective function of neprilysin) has also been suggested for COVID‐19 therapy (Mohammed El Tabaa & Mohammed El Tabaa, 2020).

Additional studies, including extended analysis of the gene expression data from Garvin et al. study (Garvin et al., 2020), could shed light on whether substance P and neurotensin (including their precursors and receptors) and peptidase Nln might also be affected and hence be part of the mechanisms explaining the pathology of COVID‐19. This is critical since bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin may potentiate each other's effects throughout the body similar to their effect on permeability of BBB (Al‐Ahmad et al., 2021). Notably, while interpreting gene expression data (Garvin et al., 2020), it is critical to recognize that neither the expression levels of the target proteins (precursors, enzymes, receptors), nor activity of these enzymes are being evaluated. For example, it is expected that SARS‐CoV‐2, similar to its counterpart SARS‐CoV (Kuba et al., 2005), downregulates ACE2 during internalization to the host cell. However, gene expression data in COVID‐19 patient samples indicates upregulation (199‐fold) of this peptidase (Garvin et al., 2020). Evaluation of ACE2 protein expression and enzymatic activity could clarify this question, since downregulated ACE2 would lead to accumulation of des‐Arg9‐bradykinin, endogenous bradykinin B1 receptor agonist, (Guy et al., 2003) and be beneficial for the proposed “bradykinin storm” hypothesis. Importantly, ACE2 does not hydrolyze bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin (Guy et al., 2003; Vickers et al., 2002), and hence changes in its expression levels would not directly alter availability of these peptides. Furthermore, measurement of peptide levels following proper sampling procedures (Basu et al., 2015; Karamyan et al., 2009; Karamyan & Speth, 2007b) is important for complete delineation of the proposed mechanisms. Such inclusive approach should allow to better understand the potential interactions of these peptidergic systems with the RAS in COVID‐19 patients, and enhance our understanding of viable therapeutic interventions as well as their possible adverse side effects. Whether ACE polymorphism and similar unrecognized features of neprilysin and Nln may play a role in these mechanisms is also important to consider. Lastly, it is critical to recognize that bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin can be metabolized by other enzymes (e.g., thimet oligopeptidase, prolyl endopeptidase, dipeptidyl peptidase‐4), and that ACE, neprilysin and Nln process some other bioactive peptides.

In summary, based on the above‐discussed evidence, it is likely that not just bradykinin but also substance P and neurotensin are responsible for many of COVID‐19 outcomes. If proved by additional data analyses and new studies, it could mean that “vasoactive peptide storm,” that is, bradykinin, substance P, and neurotensin together, are the major drivers of increased microvascular permeability and inflammation‐induced complications of COVID‐19 pathology. Confirmation of this “vasoactive peptide storm” hypothesis could mean that simultaneous inhibition of all three peptidergic systems would be therapeutically more advantageous rather than modulation of any single mechanism alone. In this regard, the therapeutic potential of recombinant neurolysin (Karamyan, 2021; Wangler et al., 2016) and neprilysin (Mohammed El Tabaa & Mohammed El Tabaa, 2020; Walker et al., 2013), or small molecule activators of these peptidases may be considered (Karamyan, 2019; Kuruppu et al., 2016) while carefully evaluating their systemic effects.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

VTK is the senior inventor on a patent (PCT/US2019/048702), filed by Texas Tech University Systems, focusing on discovery of small molecule activators of Nln.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION

VTK conceived and wrote the paper.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The ongoing research on peptidase Nln in author's laboratory is supported by a research grant from the NIH (1R01NS106879). I apologize to colleagues whose studies could not be cited because of the limited scope of this manuscript.

Karamyan VT. Between two storms, vasoactive peptides or bradykinin underlie severity of COVID‐19?. Physiol Rep. 2021;9:e14796. 10.14814/phy2.14796

REFERENCES

  1. Acanfora, D. , Ciccone, M. M. , Scicchitano, P. , Acanfora, C. , & Casucci, G. (2020). Sacubitril/valsartan in COVID‐19 patients: The need for trials. European Heart Journal. Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, 6(4), 253–254. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Al‐Ahmad, A. J. , Pervaiz, I. , & Karamyan, V. T. (2021). Neurolysin substrates bradykinin, neurotensin and substance P enhance brain microvascular permeability in a human in vitro model. Journal of Neuroendocrinology, 33(2), e12931. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Albert‐Weissenberger, C. , Siren, A. L. , & Kleinschnitz, C. (2013). Ischemic stroke and traumatic brain injury: the role of the kallikrein‐kinin system. Progress in Neurobiology, 101–102, 65–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Alysandratos, K. D. , Asadi, S. , Angelidou, A. , Zhang, B. , Sismanopoulos, N. , Yang, H. , Critchfield, A. , Theoharides, T. C. (2012). Neurotensin and CRH interactions augment human mast cell activation. PLoS One, 7(11), e48934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Barelli, H. , Vincent, J. P. , & Checler, F. (1993). Rat kidney endopeptidase 24.16. Purification, physico‐chemical characteristics and differential specificity towards opiates, tachykinins and neurotensin‐related peptides. European Journal of Biochemistry, 211(1–2), 79–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Basu, U. , Seravalli, J. , Madayiputhiya, N. , Adamec, J. , Case, A. J. , & Zimmerman, M. C. (2015). Rapid metabolism of exogenous angiotensin II by catecholaminergic neuronal cells in culture media. Physiological Reports, 3(2). e12287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Byrd, J. B. , Adam, A. , & Brown, N. J. (2006). Angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor‐associated angioedema. Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America, 26(4), 725–737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Campbell, D. J. (2018). Neprilysin Inhibitors and Bradykinin. Frontiers in Medicine, 5, 257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Carraway, R. , Cochrane, D. E. , Lansman, J. B. , Leeman, S. E. , Paterson, B. M. , & Welch, H. J. (1982). Neurotensin stimulates exocytotic histamine secretion from rat mast cells and elevates plasma histamine levels. Journal of Physiology, 323, 403–414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Castagliuolo, I. , Wang, C. C. , Valenick, L. , Pasha, A. , Nikulasson, S. , Carraway, R. E. & Pothoulakis, C. (1999). Neurotensin is a proinflammatory neuropeptide in colonic inflammation. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 103(6), 843–849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Checler, F. (2014). Experimental stroke: Neurolysin back on stage. Journal of Neurochemistry, 129(1), 1–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Checler, F. , Barelli, H. , Dauch, P. , Dive, V. , Vincent, B. , & Vincent, J. P. (1995). Neurolysin: Purification and assays. Methods in Enzymology, 248, 593–614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Checler, F. , & Ferro, E. S. (2018). Neurolysin: From initial detection to latest advances. Neurochemical Research, 43(11), 2017–2024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Coll, R. C. , Vargas, P. M. , Mariani, M. L. , & Penissi, A. B. (2020). Natural alpha, beta‐unsaturated lactones inhibit neuropeptide‐induced mast cell activation in an in vitro model of neurogenic inflammation. Inflammation Research, 69(10), 1039–1051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Corrigan, F. , Vink, R. , & Turner, R. J. (2016). Inflammation in acute CNS injury: A focus on the role of substance P. British Journal of Pharmacology, 173(4), 703–715. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Dahms, P. , & Mentlein, R. (1992). Purification of the main somatostatin‐degrading proteases from rat and pig brains, their action on other neuropeptides, and their identification as endopeptidases 24.15 and 24.16. European Journal of Biochemistry, 208(1), 145–154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Datar, P. , Srivastava, S. , Coutinho, E. , & Govil, G. (2004). Substance P: Structure, function, and therapeutics. Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry, 4(1), 75–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Dauch, P. , Vincent, J. P. , & Checler, F. (1995). Molecular cloning and expression of rat brain endopeptidase 3.4.24.16. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 270(45), 27266–27271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Donelan, J. , Boucher, W. , Papadopoulou, N. , Lytinas, M. , Papaliodis, D. , Dobner, P. & Theoharides, T. C. (2006). Corticotropin‐releasing hormone induces skin vascular permeability through a neurotensin‐dependent process. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(20), 7759–7764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Donkin, J. J. , Nimmo, A. J. , Cernak, I. , Blumbergs, P. C. , & Vink, R. (2009). Substance P is associated with the development of brain edema and functional deficits after traumatic brain injury. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 29(8), 1388–1398. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dutra, R. C. (2017). Kinin receptors: Key regulators of autoimmunity. Autoimmunity Reviews, 16(2), 192–207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Dux, M. , & Messlinger, K. (2001). Histological demonstration of increased vascular permeability in the Dura mater of the rat. Microscopy Research and Technique, 53(3), 229–231. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Figini, M. , Emanueli, C. , Grady, E. F. , Kirkwood, K. , Payan, D. G. , Ansel, J. , Gerard, C. , Geppetti, P. , & Bunnett, N. (1997). Substance P and bradykinin stimulate plasma extravasation in the mouse gastrointestinal tract and pancreas. American Journal of Physiology, 272(4 Pt 1), G785–G793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Garvin, M. R. , Alvarez, C. , Miller, J. I. , Prates, E. T. , Walker, A. M. , Amos, B. K. , Mast, A. E. , Justice, A. , Aronow, B. & Jacobson, D. (2020). A mechanistic model and therapeutic interventions for COVID‐19 involving a RAS‐mediated bradykinin storm. Elife, 9, e59177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Ghabriel, M. N. , Lu, M. X. , Leigh, C. , Cheung, W. C. , & Allt, G. (1999). Substance P‐induced enhanced permeability of Dura mater microvessels is accompanied by pronounced ultrastructural changes, but is not dependent on the density of endothelial cell anionic sites. Acta Neuropathologica, 97(3), 297–305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Ghahestani, S. M. , Shahab, E. , Karimi, S. , & Madani, M. H. (2020). Methylene blue may have a role in the treatment of COVID‐19. Medical Hypotheses, 144, 110163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Gitter, B. D. , Bruns, R. F. , Howbert, J. J. , Waters, D. C. , Threlkeld, P. G. , Cox, L. M. et al (1995). Pharmacological characterization of LY303870: A novel, potent and selective nonpeptide substance P (neurokinin‐1) receptor antagonist. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 275(2), 737–744. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Green, D. P. , Limjunyawong, N. , Gour, N. , Pundir, P. , & Dong, X. (2019). A mast‐cell‐specific receptor mediates neurogenic inflammation and pain. Neuron, 101(3), 412–20 e3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Groger, M. , Lebesgue, D. , Pruneau, D. , Relton, J. , Kim, S. W. , Nussberger, J. & Plesnila, N. (2005). Release of bradykinin and expression of kinin B2 receptors in the brain: role for cell death and brain edema formation after focal cerebral ischemia in mice. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 25(8), 978–989. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Guy, J. L. , Jackson, R. M. , Acharya, K. R. , Sturrock, E. D. , Hooper, N. M. , & Turner, A. J. (2003). Angiotensin‐converting enzyme‐2 (ACE2): comparative modeling of the active site, specificity requirements, and chloride dependence. Biochemistry, 42(45), 13185–13192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Gyorfi, A. , Fazekas, A. , Irmes, F. , & Rosivall, L. (1995). Effect of substance P administration on vascular permeability in the rat oral mucosa and sublingual gland. Journal of Periodontal Research, 30(3), 181–185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Harper, S. L. , Barrowman, J. A. , Kvietys, P. R. , & Granger, D. N. (1984). Effect of neurotensin on intestinal capillary permeability and blood flow. American Journal of Physiology, 247(2 Pt 1), G161–G166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Hoffmann, M. , Kleine‐Weber, H. , Schroeder, S. , Kruger, N. , Herrler, T. , Erichsen, S. , Schiergens, T. S. , Herrler, G. , Nai‐Huei, W. , Nitsche, A. , Müller, M. A. , Drosten, C. , & Pöhlmann, S. (2020). SARS‐CoV‐2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell, 181(2), 271–280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Inoue, H. , Nagata, N. , & Koshihara, Y. (1996). Involvement of tachykinin receptors in oedema formation and plasma extravasation induced by substance P, neurokinin A, and neurokinin B in mouse ear. Inflammation Research, 45(7), 316–323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Israili, Z. H. , & Hall, W. D. (1992). Cough and angioneurotic edema associated with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. A review of the literature and pathophysiology. Annals of Internal Medicine, 117(3), 234–242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Januzzi, J. L. Jr , Lyass, A. , Liu, Y. , Gaggin, H. , Trebnick, A. , Maisel, A. S. , D'Agostino Sr, R. B. Wang, T. J. , Massaro, J. & Vasan, R. S. (2016). Circulating proneurotensin concentrations and cardiovascular disease events in the community: The Framingham heart study. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, 36(8), 1692–1697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Jayaraman, S. , Al Shoyaib, A. , Kocot, J. , Villalba, H. , Alamri, F. F. , Rashid, M. Wangler, N. J. , Chowdhury, E. A. , German, N. , Arumugam, T. V. , Abbruscato, T. J. , & Karamyan, V. T. (2020). Peptidase neurolysin functions to preserve the brain after ischemic stroke in male mice. Journal of Neurochemistry, 153(1), 120–137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Johnson, M. B. , Young, A. D. , & Marriott, I. (2016). The therapeutic potential of targeting substance P/NK‐1R interactions in inflammatory CNS disorders. Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, 10, 296. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Kanellopoulos, P. , Kaloudi, A. , Jong, M. , Krenning, E. P. , Nock, B. A. , & Maina, T. (2020). Key‐protease inhibition regimens promote tumor targeting of neurotensin radioligands. Pharmaceutics, 12(6), 528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Karamyan, V. T. (2019). Peptidase neurolysin is an endogenous cerebroprotective mechanism in acute neurodegenerative disorders. Medical Hypotheses, 131, 109309. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Karamyan, V. T. (2021). The role of peptidase neurolysin in neuroprotection and neural repair after stroke. Neural Regeneration Research, 16(1), 21–25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Karamyan, V. T. , Gadepalli, R. , Rimoldi, J. M. , & Speth, R. C. (2009). Brain AT1 angiotensin receptor subtype binding: Importance of peptidase inhibition for identification of angiotensin II as its endogenous ligand. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 331(1), 170–177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Karamyan, V. T. , & Speth, R. C. (2007. b). Identification of a novel non‐AT1, non‐AT2 angiotensin binding site in the rat brain. Brain Research, 1143, 83–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Karamyan, V. T. , & Speth, R. C. (2007)a. Enzymatic pathways of the brain renin‐angiotensin system: Unsolved problems and continuing challenges. Regulatory Peptides, 143(1–3), 15–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Karpman, D. , & Kahn, R. (2009). The contact/kinin and complement systems in vasculitis. APMIS Supplementum, 127, 48–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Katsanos, G. S. , Anogianaki, A. , Castellani, M. L. , Ciampoli, C. , De Amicis, D. , Orso, C. et al (2008). Biology of neurotensin: Revisited study. International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology, 21(2), 255–259. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Kleczkowska, P. , & Lipkowski, A. W. (2013). Neurotensin and neurotensin receptors: Characteristic, structure‐activity relationship and pain modulation–a review. European Journal of Pharmacology, 716(1–3), 54–60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Kuba, K. , Imai, Y. , Rao, S. , Gao, H. , Guo, F. , Guan, B. , Huan, Y. , Yang, P. , Zhang, Y. , Deng, W. , Bao, L. , Zhang, B. , Liu, G. , Wang, Z. , Chappell, M. , Liu, Y. , Zheng, D. , Leibbrandt, A. , Wada, T. … Penninger, J. M. (2005). A crucial role of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in SARS coronavirus‐induced lung injury. Nature Medicine, 11(8), 875–879. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Kunz, M. , Nussberger, J. , Holtmannspotter, M. , Bitterling, H. , Plesnila, N. , & Zausinger, S. (2013). Bradykinin in blood and cerebrospinal fluid after acute cerebral lesions: correlations with cerebral edema and intracranial pressure. Journal of Neurotrauma, 30(19), 1638–1644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Kuruppu, S. , Rajapakse, N. W. , Spicer, A. J. , Parkington, H. C. , & Smith, A. I. (2016). Stimulating the activity of amyloid‐beta degrading enzymes: A novel approach for the therapeutic manipulation of amyloid‐beta levels. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 54(3), 891–895. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Lorente, L. , Martin, M. M. , Almeida, T. , Perez‐Cejas, A. , Ramos, L. , Argueso, M. , Riaño‐Ruiz, M. , Solé‐Violán, J. & Hernández, M. (2016). Serum levels of substance P and mortality in patients with a severe acute ischemic stroke. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 17(6). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Mahmudpour, M. , Roozbeh, J. , Keshavarz, M. , Farrokhi, S. , & Nabipour, I. (2020). COVID‐19 cytokine storm: The anger of inflammation. Cytokine, 133, 155151. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Meyer‐Siegler, K. L. , & Vera, P. L. (2005). Substance P induced changes in CD74 and CD44 in the rat bladder. Journal of Urology, 173(2), 615–620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Miller, L. A. , Cochrane, D. E. , Carraway, R. E. , & Feldberg, R. S. (1995). Blockade of mast cell histamine secretion in response to neurotensin by SR 48692, a nonpeptide antagonist of the neurotensin brain receptor. British Journal of Pharmacology, 114(7), 1466–1470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Mirali, S. , Botham, A. , Voisin, V. , Xu, C. , St‐Germain, J. , Sharon, D. , Hoff, F. W. , Qiu, Y. , Hurren, R. , Gronda, M. , Jitkova, Y. , Nachmias, B. , MacLean, N. , Wang, X. , Arruda, A. , Minden, M. D. , Horton, T. M. , Kornblau, S. M. , Chan, S. M. … Schimmer, A. D. (2020). The mitochondrial peptidase, neurolysin, regulates respiratory chain supercomplex formation and is necessary for AML viability. Science Translational Medicine, 12(538), eaaz8264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Mohammed El Tabaa, M. , & Mohammed El Tabaa, M. (2020). Targeting Neprilysin (NEP) pathways: A potential new hope to defeat COVID‐19 ghost. Biochemical Pharmacology, 178, 114057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Moraes, P. L. , Kangussu, L. M. , da Silva, L. G. , Castro, C. H. , Santos, R. A. S. & Ferreira, A. J. (2017). Cardiovascular effects of small peptides of the renin angiotensin system. Physiological Reports, 5(22), e13505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Mustain, W. C. , Rychahou, P. G. , & Evers, B. M. (2011). The role of neurotensin in physiologic and pathologic processes. Current Opinion in Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Obesity, 18(1), 75–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Nicoli, C. D. , Wettersten, N. , Judd, S. E. , Howard, G. , Howard, V. J. , Struck, J. & Cushman, M. (2020). Pro‐neurotensin/neuromedin N and risk of ischemic stroke: The REasons for geographic and racial differences in stroke (REGARDS) study. Vascular Medicine, 25(6), 534–540. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. O'Connor, T. M. , O'Connell, J. , O'Brien, D. I. , Goode, T. , Bredin, C. P. , & Shanahan, F. (2004). The role of substance P in inflammatory disease. Journal of Cellular Physiology, 201(2), 167–180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Onaga, T. (2014). Tachykinin: Recent developments and novel roles in health and disease. Biomolecular Concepts, 5(3), 225–243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Osadchii, O. E. (2015). Emerging role of neurotensin in regulation of the cardiovascular system. European Journal of Pharmacology, 762, 184–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Patel, A. B. , Tsilioni, I. , Leeman, S. E. , & Theoharides, T. C. (2016). Neurotensin stimulates sortilin and mTOR in human microglia inhibitable by methoxyluteolin, a potential therapeutic target for autism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(45), E7049–E7058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Patel, G. , & Pongracic, J. A. (2019). Hereditary and acquired angioedema. Allergy Asthma Proc., 40(6), 441–445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Plum, S. , Eggers, B. , Helling, S. , Stepath, M. , Theiss, C. , Leite, R. E. P. , Riederer, P. , Gerlach, M. , May, C. , & Marcus, K. (2020). Proteomic characterization of synaptosomes from human substantia nigra indicates altered mitochondrial translation in parkinson's disease. Cells, 9(12), 2580. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Rashid, M. , Arumugam, T. V. , & Karamyan, V. T. (2010). Association of the novel non‐AT1, non‐AT2 angiotensin binding site with neuronal cell death. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 335(3), 754–761. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Rashid, M. , Wangler, N. J. , Yang, L. , Shah, K. , Arumugam, T. V. , Abbruscato, T. J. et al (2014). Functional upregulation of endopeptidase neurolysin during post‐acute and early recovery phases of experimental stroke in mouse brain. Journal of Neurochemistry, 129(1), 179–189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Ricciardolo, F. L. M. , Folkerts, G. , Folino, A. , & Mognetti, B. (2018). Bradykinin in asthma: Modulation of airway inflammation and remodelling. European Journal of Pharmacology, 827, 181–188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Rice, G. I. , Thomas, D. A. , Grant, P. J. , Turner, A. J. , & Hooper, N. M. (2004). Evaluation of angiotensin‐converting enzyme (ACE), its homologue ACE2 and neprilysin in angiotensin peptide metabolism. The Biochemical Journal, 383(Pt 1), 45–51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Rioli, V. , Gozzo, F. C. , Heimann, A. S. , Linardi, A. , Krieger, J. E. , Shida, C. S. , Almeida, P. C. , Hyslop, S. , Eberlin, M. N. , & Ferro, E. S. (2003). Novel natural peptide substrates for endopeptidase 24.15, neurolysin, and angiotensin‐converting enzyme. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 278(10), 8547–8555. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Rioux, F. , Kerouac, R. , & St‐Pierre, S. (1983). Peripheral vasodilation and plasma extravasation are part of the mechanism of neurotensin‐induced hypotension in the anesthetized rat. Neuropeptides, 3(5), 355–365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Robbins, R. A. , Nelson, K. J. , Gossman, G. L. , & Rubinstein, I. (1995). Neurotensin stimulates neutrophil adherence to bronchial epithelial cells in vitro. Life Sciences, 56(16), 1353–1359. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Roche, J. A. , & Roche, R. (2020). A hypothesized role for dysregulated bradykinin signaling in COVID‐19 respiratory complications. The FASEB Journal, 34(6), 7265–7269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Rodd, D. , & Hersh, L. B. (1995). Endopeptidase 24.16B. A new variant of endopeptidase 24.16. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 270(17), 10056–10061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Rossi, M. , Piagnerelli, M. , Van Meerhaeghe, A. , & Zouaoui, B. K. (2020). Heme oxygenase‐1 (HO‐1) cytoprotective pathway: A potential treatment strategy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19)‐induced cytokine storm syndrome. Medical Hypotheses, 144, 110242. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Saiyasit, N. , Chunchai, T. , Apaijai, N. , Pratchayasakul, W. , Sripetchwandee, J. , Chattipakorn, N. , Chattipakorn, S. C. (2020). Chronic high‐fat diet consumption induces an alteration in plasma/brain neurotensin signaling, metabolic disturbance, systemic inflammation/oxidative stress, brain apoptosis, and dendritic spine loss. Neuropeptides, 82, 102047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Scholzen, T. E. , & Luger, T. A. (2004). Neutral endopeptidase and angiotensin‐converting enzyme – key enzymes terminating the action of neuroendocrine mediators. Experimental Dermatology, 13(Suppl 4), 22–26. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Shahrokhi, S. , Alimoghaddam, K. , Ebtekar, M. , Pourfathollah, A. A. , Kheirandish, M. , Ardjmand, A. , Ghavamzadeh, A. (2010). Effects of neuropeptide substance P on the expression of adhesion molecules in cord blood hematopoietic stem cells. Annals of Hematology, 89(12), 1197–1205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Shaik‐Dasthagirisaheb, Y. B. , Varvara, G. , Murmura, G. , Saggini, A. , Potalivo, G. , Caraffa, A. Antinolfi, P. , Tetè, S. , Tripodi, D. , Conti, F. , Cianchetti, E. , Toniato, E. , Rosati, M. , Conti, P. , Speranza, L. , Pantalone, A. , Saggini, R. , Theoharides, T. C. , & Pandolfi, F. (2013). Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), mast cells and inflammation. International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology, 26(2), 327–335 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Shrimpton, C. N. , Smith, A. I. , & Lew, R. A. (2002). Soluble metalloendopeptidases and neuroendocrine signaling. Endocrine Reviews, 23(5), 647–664. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Skidgel, R. A. , & Erdos, E. G. (2004). Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) and neprilysin hydrolyze neuropeptides: a brief history, the beginning and follow‐ups to early studies. Peptides, 25(3), 521–525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Sorby‐Adams, A. J. , Leonard, A. V. , Hoving, J. W. , Yassi, N. , Vink, R. , Wells, A. J. , Turner, R. J. (2019). NK1‐r antagonist treatment comparable to decompressive craniectomy in reducing intracranial pressure following stroke. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 13, 681. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Sorby‐Adams, A. J. , Marcoionni, A. M. , Dempsey, E. R. , Woenig, J. A. , & Turner, R. J. (2017). The role of neurogenic inflammation in blood‐brain barrier disruption and development of cerebral oedema following acute central nervous system (CNS) injury. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 18(8), 1788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Sparks, M. A. , South, A. M. , Badley, A. D. , Baker‐Smith, C. M. , Batlle, D. , Bozkurt, B. , Cattaneo, R. , Crowley, S. D. , Dell'Italia, L. J. , Ford, A. L. , Griendling, K. , Gurley, S. B. , Kasner, S. E. , Murray, J. A. , Nath, K. A. , Pfeffer, M. A. , Janani Rangaswami, W. , Taylor, R. & Garovic, V. D. (2020). Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, COVID‐19, and the renin‐angiotensin system: Pressing needs and best research practices. Hypertension, 76(5), 1350–1367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Speth, R. C. (2020). Response to recent commentaries regarding the involvement of angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and renin‐angiotensin system blockers in SARS‐CoV‐2 infections. Drug Development Research, 81(6), 643–646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Speth, R. C. , & Karamyan, V. T. (2008). Brain angiotensin receptors and binding proteins. Naunyn‐Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology, 377(4–6), 283–293. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. St‐Gelais, F. , Jomphe, C. , & Trudeau, L. E. (2006). The role of neurotensin in central nervous system pathophysiology: What is the evidence? Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 31(4), 229–245. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Sulpizio, A. C. , Pullen, M. A. , Edwards, R. M. , Louttit, J. B. , West, R. , & Brooks, D. P. (2005). Mechanism of vasopeptidase inhibitor‐induced plasma extravasation: comparison of omapatrilat and the novel neutral endopeptidase 24.11/angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor GW796406. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 315(3), 1306–1313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Suvas, S. (2017). Role of substance P neuropeptide in inflammation, wound healing, and tissue homeostasis. The Journal of Immunology, 199(5), 1543–1552. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Teixeira, P. F. , Masuyer, G. , Pinho, C. M. , Branca, R. M. M. , Kmiec, B. , Wallin, C. , Wärmländer, S. K. T. S. , Berntsson, R. P. A. , Ankarcrona, M. , Gräslund, A. , Lehtiö, J. , Stenmark, P. , & Glaser, E. (2018). Mechanism of peptide binding and cleavage by the human mitochondrial peptidase neurolysin. Journal of Molecular Biology, 430(3), 348–362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Theoharides, T. C. , Singh, L. K. , Boucher, W. , Pang, X. , Letourneau, R. , Webster, E. & Chrousos, G. (1998). Corticotropin‐releasing hormone induces skin mast cell degranulation and increased vascular permeability, a possible explanation for its proinflammatory effects. Endocrinology, 139(1), 403–413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Trabold, R. , Eros, C. , Zweckberger, K. , Relton, J. , Beck, H. , Nussberger, J. , Müller‐Esterl, W. , Bader, M. , Whalley, E. , & Plesnila, N. (2010). The role of bradykinin B(1) and B(2) receptors for secondary brain damage after traumatic brain injury in mice. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 30(1), 130–139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. van de Veerdonk, F. L. , Netea, M. G. , van Deuren, M. , van der Meer, J. W. , de Mast, Q. , Bruggemann, R. J. , & van der Hoeven, H. (2020). Kallikrein‐kinin blockade in patients with COVID‐19 to prevent acute respiratory distress syndrome. Elife. 9, e57555. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Vickers, C. , Hales, P. , Kaushik, V. , Dick, L. , Gavin, J. , Tang, J. , Godbout, K. , Parsons, T. , Baronas, E. , Hsieh, F. , Acton, S. , Patane, M. , Nichols, A. & Tummino, P. (2002). Hydrolysis of biological peptides by human angiotensin‐converting enzyme‐related carboxypeptidase. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 277(17), 14838–14843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Vincent, B. , Vincent, J. P. , & Checler, F. (1996). Purification and characterization of human endopeptidase 3.4.24.16. Comparison with the porcine counterpart indicates a unique cleavage site on neurotensin. Brain Research, 709(1), 51–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Walker, J. R. , Pacoma, R. , Watson, J. , Ou, W. , Alves, J. , Mason, D. E. , Peters, E. C. , Urbina, H. D. , Welzel, G. , Althage, A. , Liu, B. , Tuntland, T. , Jacobson, L. H. , Harris, J. L. , & Schumacher, A. M. (2013). Enhanced proteolytic clearance of plasma Abeta by peripherally administered neprilysin does not result in reduced levels of brain Abeta in mice. The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 33(6), 2457–2464. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Wang, B. , Lai, J. , Yan, X. , Jin, F. , Yi, B. , An, C. , Li, Y. , & Yao, C. (2020). COVID‐19 clinical trials registered worldwide for drug intervention: An overview and characteristic analysis. Drug Design, Development and Therapy, 14, 5097–5108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Wangler, N. J. , Jayaraman, S. , Zhu, R. , Mechref, Y. , Abbruscato, T. J. , Bickel, U. & Karamyan, V. T. (2016). Preparation and preliminary characterization of recombinant neurolysin for in vivo studies. Journal of Biotechnology, 234, 105–115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Wangler, N. J. , Santos, K. L. , Schadock, I. , Hagen, F. K. , Escher, E. , Bader, M. , Speth, R. C. & Karamyan, V. T. (2012). Identification of Membrane‐bound Variant of Metalloendopeptidase Neurolysin (EC 3.4.24.16) as the Non‐angiotensin Type 1 (Non‐AT1), Non‐AT2 Angiotensin Binding Site. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 287(1), 114–122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  100. Xia, H. , & Lazartigues, E. (2010). Angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2: Central regulator for cardiovascular function. Current Hypertension Reports, 12(3), 170–175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Xiao, P. , Long, X. , Zhang, L. , Ye, Y. , Guo, J. , Liu, P. , Zhang, R. , Ning, J. , Wenwen, Y. , Wei, F. & Jinpu, Y. (2018). Neurotensin/IL‐8 pathway orchestrates local inflammatory response and tumor invasion by inducing M2 polarization of Tumor‐Associated macrophages and epithelial‐mesenchymal transition of hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Oncoimmunology, 7(7), e1440166. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Yano, H. , Wershil, B. K. , Arizono, N. , & Galli, S. J. (1989). Substance P‐induced augmentation of cutaneous vascular permeability and granulocyte infiltration in mice is mast cell dependent. J Clinical Investigation, 84(4), 1276–1286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Zacest, A. C. , Vink, R. , Manavis, J. , Sarvestani, G. T. , & Blumbergs, P. C. (2010). Substance P immunoreactivity increases following human traumatic brain injury. Acta Neurochirurgica Supplement, 106, 211–216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Physiological Reports are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES