MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Chemotherapy Drugs Induce Cachexia and Alter Muscle Protein Metabolism

2022· article· en· W4225399126 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen de Mora

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsBrampton Civic HospitalYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCachexiaWastingMedicineChemotherapyInternal medicineWeight lossGastrocnemius muscleRegimenEndocrinologyCancerGastroenterologySkeletal muscleObesity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemotherapy is the main regimen to treat neoplastic tumours. Maintenance of muscle mass during treatment is associated with greater patient prognosis and reduces toxicity and severe side effects. However, chemotherapy induces cachexia, a wasting disorder characterized by muscle weakness and a loss of muscle mass. Although cancer, a disease treated with chemotherapy, is often diagnosed in older individuals, studies investigating chemotherapy‐induced cachexia are done exclusively in young animals at an age equivalent to a 20‐year‐old human. Therefore, studies investigating the effects of chemotherapy‐induced cachexia at an age range relevant to humans is needed. The objective of this study is to compare the severity and mechanisms of chemotherapy‐induced cachexia in 3‐month‐old adult (equivalent to a 20‐year‐old human) and 18‐month‐old (equivalent to a 56‐year‐old human) mice. Three‐month‐old adult CD2F1 male mice were treated with either folfiri (50mg/kg 5‐fluorouracil (5FU), 90mg/kg Leucovorin and 24mg/kg CPT11) (drug) or vehicle (10% DMSO in saline) for 6‐weeks. Male mice aged to 18‐months will undergo similar treatments. Adult mice treated with the drug cocktail exhibited significant body weight loss (~10%, n=4, p=0.0117) with no differences in food intake. Decreases in body weight were associated with a loss of muscle mass in the gastrocnemius (~25%, n=4, p=0.006), quadriceps (~30%, n=4, p=0.019) and tibialis anterior (~40%, n=4, p<0.0001). Insulin tolerance tests at weeks 3 and 6 of treatment were also performed and glucose levels were found to be non‐significantly higher in drug‐treated mice. Signalling factors related to the mammalian/mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), protein synthesis, autophagy and the ubiquitin proteasome system will be measured. Key enzymes responsible for the breakdown of the branched chain amino acids (BCAAs), mainly branched‐chain alpha‐ketoacid dehydrogenase complex (BCKD) and branched‐chain amino acid transferase 2 (BCAT2) will also be measured in the skeletal muscle. Along this line, in cell culture, we have previously shown decreased (~20%) activity of the BCKD enzyme, corresponding with decreased amino acid concentrations of leucine (~40%), isoleucine (~60%), valine (~50%), alanine (~30%), arginine (~60%), phenylalanine (50%), serine (50%) and glutamate (50%) in chemotherapy‐treated myotubes. We also observed decreased (~65%) expression of amino acid transporters sodium‐coupled neutral amino acid transporter 1 (SNAT1) and large neutral amino acid transporter 1 (LAT1). Timepoint analysis showed SNAT1 expression to be decreased prior to decreases in BCKD activity, signifying that alterations in BCAA metabolism may be a result of decreased levels of BCAAs and amino acids in chemotherapy‐treated myotubes. Therefore, these findings stemmed our interest in how the BCAAs, and their metabolites are affected in‐vivo following chemotherapy treatment. Findings from this study will help to elucidate whether unique signatures of cachexia are experienced in older mice. Better understanding of the mechanisms underlying muscle mass regulation following chemotherapy treatment may help combat cachexia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→