ArticlePloS one2025
Belt-type electrical muscle stimulation preserves muscle fiber size but does not improve muscle function in a rat model of cancer cachexia.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation to Combat Muscle Atrophy During Spaceflight: A Narrative Review of Mechanisms and Potential Applications.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer cachexia causes severe muscle wasting, and current treatments remain limited. Belt-type electrical muscle stimulation (bEMS) has emerged as a passive rehabilitation tool capable of activating multiple lower limb muscles simultaneously. We investigated whether bEMS prevents muscle wasting and improves functional outcomes in rats with cancer cachexia. Cancer cachexia was induced in male Sprague-Dawley rats by intraperitoneal injection of AH130 Yoshida hepatoma cells. Acute and chronic effects of bEMS were tested. Muscle protein synthesis was evaluated using the SUnSET method, and muscle fiber cross-sectional area (CSA) and ankle torque were measured after chronic stimulation. bEMS increased puromycin-labeled protein levels on day 3 post-injection (~1.5-2.0 fold; p < 0.05). After 10 days, bEMS mitigated reductions in muscle CSA in the gastrocnemius and tibialis anterior compared to the cachexia group. However, muscle strength (ankle torque) was not significantly improved. bEMS preserved muscle fiber size in cancer cachexia but failed to restore muscle function. These findings suggest bEMS may serve as a supportive strategy against muscle atrophy in cachectic conditions.
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.