4.6 Review

Role of natural products in breast cancer related symptomology: Targeting chronic inflammation

期刊

SEMINARS IN CANCER BIOLOGY
卷 80, 期 -, 页码 370-378

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2020.08.011

关键词

PTSD-like symptoms; Inflammation; Breast cancer; Natural products; Psychological stress

类别

资金

  1. UT Health San Antonio Mays Cancer Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Breast cancer is a common cancer in women, and advancements in treatment have increased the number of surviving patients. However, the stress experienced by patients during diagnosis and treatment can affect their quality of life and disease outcome. This stress is often compared to post-traumatic stress disorder and may be related to chronic inflammation. Certain natural products in the diet may help alleviate symptoms and inflammation.
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. There have been many advancements in the treatment of breast cancer leading to an increased population of patients living with this disease. Accumulating evidence suggests that cancer diagnosis and aftermath experienced stress could not only affect the quality of life of cancer patients, but it could also influence their disease outcome. The magnitude of stress experienced by breast cancer patients is often compared to the post-traumatic stress disorder-like symptoms suggested to be mediated by the chronic inflammation including NF-kappa B, AKt, p53 and other inflammatory pathways. Here, we describe the symptomology of PTSD-like symptoms in breast cancer patients and argue that they may in fact be caused by or maintained through aspects of chronic inflammation mediated by the pro-inflammatory markers. Evidence exists that natural products that might attenuate or lessen the effects of chronic inflammation abound in the diet. We summarize some possible agents that might abate the genesis of symptoms experienced by breast cancer patients while mitigating the effect of inflammation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据