ArticleLipids2012
Fish oil supplementation reduces cachexia and tumor growth while improving renal function in tumor-bearing rats.
Article in Lipids, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nutritional Interventions in Cancer Cachexia: Evidence and Perspectives From Experimental Models.Frontiers in nutrition · 2020Review
- Fish oil administration mediates apoptosis of Walker 256 tumor cells by modulation of p53, Bcl-2, caspase-7 and caspase-3 protein expression.Lipids in health and disease · 2015Article
- Influence of cancer cachexia on drug liver metabolism and renal elimination in rats.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of the present work was to study the renal function of healthy and tumor-bearing rats chronically supplemented with fish oil (FO), a source of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Weanling male rats were divided in two groups, one control (C) and another orally supplemented for 70 days with FO (1 g/kg body weight). After this time, half the animals of each group were injected in the right flank with a suspension of Walker 256 tumor cells (W and WFO). The W group had less proteinemia reflecting cachectic proteolysis, FO reversed this fact. Tumor weight gain was also reduced in WFO. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was not different in FO or W compared to C, but was higher in WFO. Renal plasma flow (RPF) was higher in the FO supplemented groups. The W group had lower plasma osmolality than the C group, but FO supplementation resulted in normalization of this parameter. Fractional sodium excretion (FE(Na+)) of FO rats was similar to C. Proximal Na(+) reabsorption, evaluated by lithium clearance, was similar among the groups. Urinary thromboxane B(2) (TXB(2)) excretion was lower in the supplemented groups. The number of macrophages in renal tissue was higher in W compared to C rats, but was lower in WFO rats compared to W rats. In conclusion, FO supplementation resulted in less tumor growth and cachexia, and appeared to be renoprotective, as suggested by higher RPF and GFR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.