Back

Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel preserves skeletal and cardiac mass and function in a murine model of pancreatic cancer cachexia

Narasimhan, A.; Jengelley, D.; Huot, J.; Umberger, T.; Doud, E.; Mosley, A. L.; Wang, M.; Zhong, X.; Counts, B.; Rupert, J.; Young, A.; Bonetto, A.; Horan, D.; Robling, A. G.; Fishel, M.; Kelley, M.; Koniaris, L.; Zimmers, T.

2023-04-18 cancer biology
10.1101/2023.04.15.536434 bioRxiv
Show abstract

More than 85% of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) suffer from cachexia, a debilitating syndrome characterized by the loss of muscle and fat and remains an unmet medical need. While chemotherapy remains an effective treatment option, it can also induce weight and muscle loss in patients with cancer. Gemcitabine combined with nab paclitaxel (GnP) is a first line treatment option for patients with PDAC but GnPs effect on cachexia has not been comprehensively investigated. We interrogated the effects of GnP in a murine model of pancreatic cancer cachexia. Mice were orthotopically implanted with the cachexia inducing pancreatic cell line (KPC) and were administered GnP or vehicle. The controls underwent sham surgery. We defined GnP effects on cachexia and tumor burden by evaluating muscle and cardiac mass and function, fat mass, bone morphometry, and hematology measurements. We completed RNA sequencing and deep proteome profiling in skeletal and cardiac muscle. KPC+GnP reduced tumor burden over 50% and increased survival compared to KPC. KPC vehicle group had more than 15% muscle mass loss and decreased left ventricular mass, this was not present in KPC+GnP when compared to controls. RNA Seq and deep proteomics analyses suggested that muscle and cardiac dysfunction pathways activated in KPC group were either reversed or decreased in KPC+GnP. In all, our data suggests that GnP protects against muscle and cardiac wasting in an experimental model of PDAC cachexia. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=98 SRC="FIGDIR/small/536434v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (33K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1d394f7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1d8fdaforg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@f709d4org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@a668e0_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG O_FLOATNOGraphical AbstractC_FLOATNO C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
39.9%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 8%
7.3%
3
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 25%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
4
Aging
75 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.3%
5
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.1%
6
Disease Models & Mechanisms
119 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.1%
7
Journal of Translational Medicine
57 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
8
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
9
Cell Death & Disease
126 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
10
Neoplasia
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
11
The FASEB Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
12
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
13
JCI Insight
277 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.0%
14
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 56%
0.9%
15
Skeletal Muscle
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
16
Cells
249 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%
17
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.6%
18
Journal of Proteome Research
234 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
19
Molecular Cancer Research
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
20
Frontiers in Physiology
106 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
21
The American Journal of Pathology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
22
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.6%