4.7 Article

Intramyocellular lipid droplets increase with progression of cachexia in cancer patients

Journal

JOURNAL OF CACHEXIA SARCOPENIA AND MUSCLE
Volume 2, Issue 2, Pages 111-117

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1007/s13539-011-0030-x

Keywords

Intramyocellular; Lipid; Cachexia; Cancer

Funding

  1. Cancer Research UK [C1128/A7309]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Intramyocellular lipids are an important source of fuel for mitochondrial fat oxidation and play an important role in intramuscular lipid homeostasis. We hypothesised that due to the phenotype associated with cancer cachexia, there would exist an association between increasing weight loss and the number/size of intramyocellular lipid droplets. Methods Nineteen cancer patients and 6 controls undergoing surgery were recruited. A rectus abdominis biopsy was performed and processed for transmission electronmicroscopy (TEM). The number of intramyocellular lipid droplets and lipid droplet diameter were calculated from the TEM images. CT scans, performed as part of patients' routine care, were analysed to determine amount of adipose (intermuscular, visceral and subcutaneous) and muscle tissue. Results Compared with controls, cancer patients had increased numbers of lipid droplets (mean (SD) 1.8 (1.9) vs. 6.4 (9.1) per x2,650 field, respectively, p=0.036). Mean (SD) lipid droplet diameter was also higher in cancer patients compared with controls (0.42 (0.13) vs. 0.24 (0.21) mu m, p=0.015). Mean lipid droplet count correlated positively with the severity of weight loss (R=0.51, p=0.025) and negatively with CT-derived measures of intermuscular fat (R=-0.53, p=0.022) and visceral fat (R=-0.51, p=0.029). Conclusions This study suggests that the number and size of intramyocellular lipid droplets is increased in the presence of cancer and increases further with weight loss/loss of adipose mass in other body compartments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available