Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29230965›Full record

ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2018

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced cachexia by ACVR2B ligand blocking has different effects on heart and skeletal muscle.

Juha J Hulmi, Tuuli A Nissinen, Markus Räsänen, Joni Degerman, Juulia H Lautaoja, Karthik Amudhala Hemanthakumar, Janne T Backman, Olli Ritvos, Mika Silvennoinen, Riikka Kivelä

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Chemotherapy induces tissue NADbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Diversity in chemotherapy-induced cachexia.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. NADNature communications · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Nutritional Sensor REDD1 in Cancer and Inflammation: Friend or Foe?International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Juha J HulmiBiology of Physical Activity, Neuromuscular Research Center, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Tuuli A NissinenBiology of Physical Activity, Neuromuscular Research Center, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Markus RäsänenWihuri Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland and Translational Cancer Biology Program, Research Programs Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Joni DegermanWihuri Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland and Translational Cancer Biology Program, Research Programs Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Juulia H LautaojaBiology of Physical Activity, Neuromuscular Research Center, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Karthik Amudhala HemanthakumarWihuri Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland and Translational Cancer Biology Program, Research Programs Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Janne T BackmanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Olli RitvosDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Mika SilvennoinenBiology of Physical Activity, Neuromuscular Research Center, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Riikka KiveläWihuri Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland and Translational Cancer Biology Program, Research Programs Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
University of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Jyväskylä · FIWihuri Research Institute · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundToxicity of chemotherapy on skeletal muscles and the heart may significantly contribute to cancer cachexia, mortality, and decreased quality of life. Doxorubicin (DOX) is an effective cytostatic agent, which unfortunately has toxic effects on many healthy tissues. Blocking of activin receptor type IIB (ACVR2B) ligands is an often used strategy to prevent skeletal muscle loss, but its effects on the heart are relatively unknown.

methodsThe effects of DOX treatment with or without pre-treatment with soluble ACVR2B-Fc (sACVR2B-Fc) were investigated. The mice were randomly assigned into one of the three groups: (1) vehicle (PBS)-treated controls, (2) DOX-treated mice (DOX), and (3) DOX-treated mice administered with sACVR2B-Fc during the experiment (DOX + sACVR2B-Fc). DOX was administered with a cumulative dose of 24 mg/kg during 2 weeks to investigate cachexia outcome in the heart and skeletal muscle. To understand similarities and differences between skeletal and cardiac muscles in their responses to chemotherapy, the tissues were collected 20 h after a single DOX (15 mg/kg) injection and analysed with genome-wide transcriptomics and mRNA and protein analyses. The combination group was pre-treated with sACVR2B-Fc 48 h before DOX administration. Major findings were also studied in mice receiving only sACVR2B-Fc.

resultsThe DOX treatment induced similar (~10%) wasting in skeletal muscle and the heart. However, transcriptional changes in response to DOX were much greater in skeletal muscle. Pathway analysis and unbiased transcription factor analysis showed that p53-p21-REDD1 is the main common pathway activated by DOX in both skeletal and cardiac muscles. These changes were attenuated by blocking ACVR2B ligands especially in skeletal muscle. Tceal7 (3-fold to 5-fold increase), transferrin receptor (1.5-fold increase), and Ccl21 (0.6-fold to 0.9-fold decrease) were identified as novel genes responsive to blocking ACVR2B ligands. Overall, at the transcriptome level, ACVR2B ligand blocking had only minor influence in the heart while it had marked effects in skeletal muscle. The same was also true for the effects on tissue wasting. This may be explained in part by about 18-fold higher gene expression of myostatin in skeletal muscle compared with the heart.

conclusionsCardiac and skeletal muscles display similar atrophy after DOX treatment, but the mechanisms for this may differ between the tissues. The present results suggest that p53-p21-REDD1 signalling is the main common DOX-activated pathway in these tissues and that blocking activin receptor ligands attenuates this response, especially in skeletal muscle supporting the overall stronger effects of this treatment in skeletal muscles.

Indexed as

Activin Receptors, Type IIAnimalsAntibiotics, AntineoplasticCachexiaDoxorubicinHeartHumansLigandsMaleMiceMuscle, SkeletalQuality of LifeActivin Receptors, Type IIactivin receptor type II-BAntibiotics, AntineoplasticDoxorubicinLigandsActivinsCcl21DoxorubicinMyostatinp53Transcriptome

Identifiers

PMID29230965
PMCPMC5879968
OpenAlexW2773511078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.