ReviewJournal of cellular and molecular medicine2019
Muscle wasting: A review of exercise, classical and non-classical RAS axes.
Review in Journal of cellular and molecular medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in vascular endothelial cell-mediated regulation of satellite cell repair and regeneration.Inflammation and regeneration · 2025Review
- Therapeutic Efficacy of HPβ-CD-Angiotensin-(1-7) Oral Formulation in Muscle Injury Recovery in Rat.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2025Article
- Renin angiotensin system-induced muscle wasting: putative mechanisms and implications for clinicians.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2025Review
- BIO101 stimulates myoblast differentiation and improves muscle function in adult and old mice.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2024Article
- Skeletal Muscle and COVID-19: The Potential Involvement of Bioactive Sphingolipids.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- CCAAT/Enhancer-Binding Proteins in Fibrosis: Complex Roles Beyond Conventional Understanding.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2022Review
- Rewinding sarcopenia: a narrative review on the renin-angiotensin system.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2021Review
- ACE2, angiotensin 1-7 and skeletal muscle: review in the era of COVID-19.Clinical science (London, England : 1979) · 2020Review
- SARS-CoV-2/Renin-Angiotensin System: Deciphering the Clues for a Couple with Potentially Harmful Effects on Skeletal Muscle.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Muscle wasting: A review of exercise, classical and non-classical RAS axes.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review identifies how the classical/non-classical renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and exercise influence muscle wasting. The classical RAS axis enhances muscle loss through the interaction with NADPH oxidase (NOX), ubiquitin proteasome system (UPS), protein synthesis and fibrosis pathways. The mainstream hypothesis identifies reactive oxygen species (ROS) as the key pathway in muscle, this review recognizes alternative pathways that lead to an increase in muscle wasting through the classical RAS axis. In addition, pathways in which the non-classical RAS axis and exercise inhibit the classical RAS axis are also explored. The non-classical RAS axis and exercise have a significant negative impact on ROS production and protein synthesis. The non-classical RAS axis has been identified in this review to directly affect protein synthesis pathways not by altering the pre-existing intracellular ROS level, further supporting the idea that muscle wasting caused by the classical RAS system is not entirely due to ROS production. Exercise has been identified to modify the RAS axes making it a therapeutic option.
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.