| Literature DB >> 21861927 |
Fábio S Lira1, Alex S Yamashita, Jose C Rosa, Fábio L Tavares, Erico Caperuto, Luiz C Carnevali, Gustavo D Pimentel, Ronaldo Vt Santos, Miguel L Batista, Alessandro Laviano, Filippo Rossi-Fanelli, Marília Seelaender.
Abstract
AIM: We tested the effects of a cancer cachexia-anorexia sydrome upon the balance of anti and pro-inflammatory cytokines in the hypothalamus of sedentary or trained tumour-bearing (Walker-256 carcinosarcoma) rats.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21861927 PMCID: PMC3257200 DOI: 10.1186/1743-7075-8-60
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) ISSN: 1743-7075 Impact factor: 4.169
Food intake during 14 days of tumour and leptin levels after 8 weeks of training
| Food intake (pre-tumour) | Food intake | Food intake | Cumulative food intake | Leptin (ng/mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23.68 ± 2.23 | 23.01 ± 1.80 | 22.52 ± 1.87 | 314.8 ± 24.2 | 0.58 ± 0.13 | |
| 22.65 ± 0.68 | 18.55 ± 0.57* | 17.76 ± 0.80* | 254.1 ± 8.8* | 0.29 ± 0.06* | |
| 0.21 ± 0.02* | |||||
| 20.79 ± 1.44 | 19.10 ± 0.98* | 15.35 ± 0.70* | 241.1 ± 9.3* | 0.57 ± 0.09 | |
| 19.30 ± 1.95 | 18.99 ± 1.06 | 16.93 ± 1.35 | 257.1 ± 15.5 | 0.37 ± 0.06 | |
| 0.16 ± 0.009# |
Results are expressed as mean value ± SEM. SC: sedentary control (n = 7), ST: sedentary tumour-bearing (n = 7), SPF: sedentary pair-fed (n = 7), EC: trained control (n = 6), ET: trained tumour-bearing (n = 6), EPF: trained pair-fed (n = 6). *p < 0.01 vs. sedentary control; #p < 0.001 vs. sedentary pair-fed.
Leptin mRNA and protein expression in the RPAT and MEAT rats
| RPAT | MEAT | |
|---|---|---|
| Gene expression (U.A) | ||
| EC | 0.46 ± 0.12 | 0.64 ± 0.11 |
| ET | 0.76 ± 0.04 | 0.36 ± 0.06 |
| EPF | 1.06 ± 0.20 | 0.52 ± 0.15 |
| EC | 1.45 ± 0.15@ | 0.250 ± 0.05 |
| ET | 1.18 ± 0.36@# | 0.141 ± 0.009# |
| EPF | 0.95 ± 0.040 | 0.174 ± 0.03 |
Results are expressed as mean value ± SEM. SC: sedentary control (n = 7), ST: sedentary tumour-bearing (n = 7), SPF: sedentary pair-fed (n = 7), EC: trained control (n = 6), ET: trained tumour-bearing (n = 6), EPF: trained pair-fed (n = 6). *p < 0.01 vs. sedentary control; #p < 0.001 vs. sedentary pair-fed. *p < 0.001 significantly different from control values.
# p < 0.001 significantly different from sedentary tumour values.
@ p < 0.001 significantly different from exercise pair-fed values.
Figure 1Hypothalamic cytokine levels and it respective gene expression interleukin 1β (IL-1β), tumour necrose factor alpha (TNF-α), and interleukin 10 (IL-10) in rats. Results are expressed as mean value ± SEM. SC: sedentary control (n = 7), ST: sedentary tumour-bearing (n = 7), SPF: sedentary pair-fed (n = 7), EC: trained control (n = 6), ET: trained tumour-bearing (n = 6), EPF: trained pair-fed (n = 6). *p < 0.01 vs. sedentary control; #p < 0.01 vs. sedentary tumour-bearing; &p < 0.01 vs. trained control; $p < 0.01 vs. trained tumour-bearing.
Figure 2The effect of exercise training on tumour weight in cancer-induced anorexia rats. Results are expressed as mean value ± SEM.ST: sedentary tumour-bearing (n = 7) and ET: trained tumour-bearing (n = 6). *p < 0.01 vs. sedentary tumour-bearing.