4.2 Review

Anorexia-cachexia syndrome in pancreatic cancer: Recent advances and new pharmacological approach

Journal

ADVANCES IN MEDICAL SCIENCES
Volume 59, Issue 1, Pages 1-6

Publisher

MEDICAL UNIV BIALYSTOK
DOI: 10.1016/j.advms.2013.11.001

Keywords

Anorexia; Cachexia; Pancreatic adenocarcinoma; Megestrol; Thalidomide; Corticosteroids

Ask authors/readers for more resources

About 80% of all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients suffer from a wasting syndrome referred to as the ``cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome'' (CACS) characterized by abnormally low weight, weakness and loss of skeletal muscle mass with or without loss of body fat, which directly impacts overall survival, quality of life, and physical activity. The aim of this review was to examine recent findings about CACS' pathophysiology and to describe the current pharmacological approaches. In recent years many efforts were made to improve our knowledge of CACS; currently we know that cachexia arises from a complex and multifactorial interaction between various mechanisms including inflammation, anorexia/ malnutrition, alterations of protein and lipid metabolism; consequently its management requires multidisciplinary and multipharmacological approach that should address the different causes underlying this clinical event. On these premises, several drugs have been proposed starting from the first pharmacological treatment based on progestational agents or corticosteroids; most of them are in the preclinical phase, but some have already reached the clinical experimentation stage. In conclusion, to date, there is no standard effective treatment and further studies are needed to unravel the basic mechanisms underlying CACS and to develop newer therapeutic strategies with the hope to improve the quality of life of pancreatic cancer patients. (C) 2014 Medical University of Bialystok. Published by Elsevier Urban & Partner Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available