The effects of high-intensity interval training and saffron aqueous extract supplementation on alterations of body weight and apoptotic indices in skeletal muscle of 4T1 breast cancer-bearing mice with cachexia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise training and antioxidant supplementation may improve unintentional weight loss and programmed cell death associated with cancer cachexia. The aim of this study was to examine the alterations of body weight and apoptotic indices in skeletal muscle of 4T1 breast cancer-bearing mice with cachexia following 4 weeks of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and saffron aqueous extract (SAE) supplementation. Female BALB/c mice following induction of breast cancer were divided into (i) controls, (ii) HIIT, (iii) SAE, (iv) HIIT+SAE, and (v) sham groups. Mice were euthanized and gastrocnemius muscle was collected after intervention. The control group elicited a significant weight reduction during third and fourth weeks of tumor injection, while other treatments such as HIIT and SAE, but not HIIT+SAE, showed that they counteracted this adverse event. Furthermore, HIIT and SAE treatments (not HIIT+SAE) demonstrated reduced caspase-3 and Bax levels compared with the control group. The level of Bcl-2 was elevated following both HIIT and SAE treatments compared with the control group. Finally, the ratio of Bcl-2 to Bax was significantly higher in both HIIT and SAE groups, but was lower in HIIT+SAE group compared with sham group. It is likely that either HIIT or SAE intervention alone (not HIIT+SAE) represents a readily applicable approach in the regulation of muscle wasting and apoptosis in cancer cachexia. Novelty HIIT is associated with a reduced risk of cancer-related muscle wasting. SAE enhances the improvement of muscle loss and apoptotic indices. Combination of HIIT and SAE does not improve cancer-related loss of muscle mass and mediate apoptotic activation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".