4.6 Review

Thrombosis and cachexia in cancer: Two partners in crime?

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2023.103989

关键词

Neoplasms; Venous thromboembolism; Cachexia; Inflammation; Hormones; Metabolism; Patient monitoring

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Among cancer patients, thrombosis and cachexia are major causes of morbidity and mortality. Little is known about their possible relationship. Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) and cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) seem to share several risk factors. Inflammation and metabolic/endocrine derangement may be the missing link between CAT, CAC, and cancer. Many specific pro-inflammatory cytokines, immune cells, and hormones are implicated in both thrombosis and cachexia, suggesting potential therapeutic targets. Further epidemiological studies are needed to explore this potential relationship and better manage cancer patients.
Among cancer patients, thrombosis and cachexia are major causes of morbidity and mortality. Although the two may occur together, little is known about their possible relationship. Thus, a literature review was conducted by screening the databases PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, Medline and Web of Science. To summarize, cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) and cancer-associated cachexia (CAC) seem to share several patient-, tumour- and treatmentrelated risk factors. Inflammation alongside metabolic and endocrine derangement is the potential missing link between CAT, CAC and cancer. Many key players, including specific pro-inflammatory cytokines, immune cells and hormones, appear to be implicated in both thrombosis and cachexia, representing attractive predictive markers and potential therapeutic targets. Altogether, the current evidence suggests a link between CAT and CAC, however, epidemiological studies are required to explore this potential relationship. Given the high incidence and negative impact of both diseases, further studies are needed for the better management of cancer patients.

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