4.7 Article

Fatigue and herpesvirus latency in women newly diagnosed with breast cancer

Journal

BRAIN BEHAVIOR AND IMMUNITY
Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages 394-400

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2011.09.014

Keywords

Cancer survivorship; Quality of life; Cytomegalovirus; Sickness behaviors; Inflammation

Funding

  1. NIH [CA131029, CA126857, DE014320, UL1RR025755, CA016058]
  2. S. Robert Davis endowment
  3. Kathryn & Gilbert Mitchell endowment
  4. American Cancer Society [PF-11-007-01-CPPB]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fatigue is a notable clinical problem in cancer survivors, and understanding its pathophysiology is important. The current study sought to determine biomarkers of fatigue that exist before cancer treatment. Relationships between the expression of latent Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) and fatigue were examined in 158 women newly diagnosed with breast cancer or awaiting a positive diagnostic result. Higher CMV antibody titers, but not EBV antibody titers, were associated with a greater likelihood of being fatigued. Associations between fatigue and higher CMV antibody titers remained after controlling for alcohol use, smoking, comorbidities, depressive symptoms, age, BMI, cancer stage, and sleep problems. More sleep problems and higher levels of depressive symptoms were also associated with a greater likelihood of being fatigued. CMV antibody titers, but not EBV antibody titers, were associated with higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), but CRP was not associated with fatigue. When the cellular immune system is compromised, reactivation of latent herpesviruses may fuel chronic inflammatory responses. Prior work has suggested that fatigue may be related to inflammation and its associated sickness behaviors; accordingly, our findings may be tapping into this same physiological substrate. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available