Study record

Mechanisms of protection of retinal pigment epithelial cells from oxidant injury by humanin and other mitochondrial-derived peptides: Implications for age-related macular degeneration

Sreekumar PG, Kannan R · Redox Biol · 2020

ReviewRelated mitochondrial peptideEvidence tier R
PubMed 32768357doi:10.1016/j.redox.2020.101663Full text (PMC)Compare with another study

What this study reported

Reviewed reported effects of humanin, its analogues, SHLP2 and MOTS-c in oxidatively stressed human retinal pigment epithelial cells, covering signalling, mitochondrial function and senescence. MOTS-c is covered as a secondary peptide alongside humanin, which is the review's main subject.

Limitations

Narrative review weighted towards humanin; the MOTS-c evidence summarised comes mainly from cultured retinal pigment epithelial cells.

Study record

Annotated fields for this study
Study modelReview
Substance studiedRelated mitochondrial peptideThe paper is mainly about another mitochondrial-derived peptide, such as humanin.
SpeciesNot reported
System studiedNarrative review of humanin, SHLP2 and MOTS-c in oxidatively stressed human retinal pigment epithelium
PopulationNot reported
DesignNarrative review
Sample size as reportedNot reported
Control groupNot reported
Route (data field only)Not reported
Endpoints measuredmitochondrial biogenesis; bioenergetics; autophagy; cellular senescence
Pathways measuredOxidative stress · Autophagy / mitophagy · SIRT1 / PGC-1α / biogenesis
Research areasAging · Mitochondrial biology
Evidence tierR — Review (context, not evidence)
Publication typesJournal Article, Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review

Appraisal

Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.

Relevance to MOTS-c
Peripheral
Model applicability
n/a
Sample size
n/a
Controls
n/a
Outcome validity
n/a
Support for its own conclusion
Moderate

Provenance

  • Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
  • Annotated from the published abstract.
  • Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
  • Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.