Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40159295›Full record

ReviewExperimental physiology2025

Muscle wasting in cancer cachexia: Mechanisms and the role of exercise.

Zoe P Libramento, Louisa Tichy, Traci L Parry

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Zoe P LibramentoDepartment of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA.
Louisa TichyDepartment of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA.
Traci L ParryDepartment of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2957-4537

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer cachexia (CC) is a multifactorial disease marked by a severe and progressive loss of lean muscle mass and characterized further by inflammation and a negative energy/protein balance, ultimately leading to muscle atrophy and loss of muscle tissue. As a result, patients experiencing cachexia have reduced muscle function and thus less independence and a lower quality of life. CC progresses through stages of increasing severity: pre-cachexia, cachexia and refractory cachexia. Two proposed underlying mechanisms that drive cancer-induced muscle wasting are the autophagy-lysosome and ubiquitin-proteasome systems. An increase in autophagic flux and proteolytic activity leads to atrophy of both cardiac and skeletal muscle, ultimately mediated by tumour or immune-secreted inflammatory cytokines. These pathways occur at a basal level to maintain cellular homeostasis; therefore, it is the overactivation of the pathways that leads to muscle atrophy. Recent evidence demonstrates the ability of aerobic and resistance training to restore these pathways to their basal levels. The mechanism is not yet understood, and more research is needed to determine exactly how exercise influences each pathway. However, exercise has great promise as a therapeutic strategy for CC because of the evidence for it preserving muscle mass and function, and attenuating protein degradative pathways. The extent to which exercise affects the ubiquitin-proteasome and autophagy-lysosome systems is determined by the frequency, intensity and duration of the exercise protocol. As such, an ideal exercise prescription is lacking for individuals with CC.

Indexed as

atrophycancer cachexiaexercise

Identifiers

PMID40159295
PMCPMC13394742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.