4.6 Review

Molecular mechanisms involved in muscle wasting in cancer and ageing:: cachexia versus sarcopenia

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocel.2004.10.003

关键词

cancer cachexia; mediators; muscle wasting; metabolic changes; cytokines; ageing; sarcopenia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present review is to summarize and evaluate the different mechanisms and catabolic mediators involved in cancer cachexia and ageing sarcopenia since they may represent targets for future promising clinical investigations. Cancer cachexia is a syndrome characterized by a marked weight loss, anorexia, asthenia and anemia. In fact, many patients who die with advanced cancer suffer from cachexia. The degree of cachexia is inversely correlated with the survival time of the patient and it always implies a poor prognosis. Unfortunately, at the clinical level, cachexia is not treated until the patient suffers from a considerable weight loss and wasting. At this point, the cachectic syndrome is almost irreversible. The cachectic state is often associated with the presence and growth of the tumour and leads to a malnutrition status due to the induction of anorexia. In recent years, age-related diseases and disabilities have become of major health interest and importance. This holds particularly for muscle wasting, also known as sarcopenia, that decreases the quality of life of the geriatric population, increasing morbidity and decreasing life expectancy. The cachectic factors (associated with both depletion of fat stores and muscular tissue) can be divided into two categories: of tumour origin and humoural factors. In conclusion, more research should be devoted to the understanding of muscle wasting mediators, both in cancer and ageing, in particular the identification of common mediators may prove as a good therapeutic strategies for both prevention and treatment of wasting both in disease and during healthy ageing. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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