Effects of oral meal feeding on whole body protein breakdown and protein synthesis in cachectic pancreatic cancer patients

• Published in: Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle Vol. 6; no. 3; pp. 212 - 221
• Main Authors: Dijk, David P.J., Poll, Marcel C.G., Moses, Alastair G.W., Preston, Thomas, Olde Damink, Steven W.M., Rensen, Sander S., Deutz, Nicolaas E.P., Soeters, Peter B., Ross, James A., Fearon, Kenneth C.H., Dejong, Cornelis H.C.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Germany John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.09.2015; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
• Subjects: Amino acids; Anabolic resistance; Anorexia; Authorship; Body composition; Cancer cachexia; Chromatography; Ethics; Laboratories; Metabolism; Nitrogen; Nutrition; Original; Pancreatic cancer; Protein breakdown; Protein synthesis; Proteins; Sample size; Sarcopenia; Studies; United Kingdom > UK; United States > US; Netherlands; Protein breakdown; Cancer cachexia; Nutrition; Anabolic resistance; Protein synthesis; Pancreatic cancer
• ISSN: 2190-5991; 2190-6009
• DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12029

Background Pancreatic cancer is often accompanied by cachexia, a syndrome of severe weight loss and muscle wasting. A suboptimal response to nutritional support may further aggravate cachexia, yet the influence of nutrition on protein kinetics in cachectic patients is poorly understood. Methods Eight cachectic pancreatic cancer patients and seven control patients received a primed continuous intravenous infusion of l‐[ring‐2H5]phenylalanine and l‐[3,3‐2H2]tyrosine for 8 h and ingested sips of water with l‐[1‐13C]phenylalanine every 30 min. After 4 h, oral feeding was started. Whole body protein breakdown, protein synthesis, and net protein balance were calculated. Results are given as median with interquartile range. Results Baseline protein breakdown and protein synthesis were higher in cachectic patients compared with the controls (breakdown: 67.1 (48.1–79.6) vs. 45.8 (42.6–46.3) µmol/kg lean body mass/h, P = 0.049; and synthesis: 63.0 (44.3–75.6) vs. 41.8 (37.6–42.5) µmol/kg lean body mass/h, P = 0.021). During feeding, protein breakdown decreased significantly to 45.5 (26.9–51.1) µmol/kg lean body mass/h (P = 0.012) in the cachexia group and to 33.7 (17.4–37.1) µmol/kg lean body mass/h (P = 0.018) in the control group. Protein synthesis was not affected by feeding in cachectic patients: 58.4 (46.5–76.1) µmol/kg lean body mass/h, but was stimulated in controls: 47.9 (41.8–56.7) µmol/kg lean body mass/h (P = 0.018). Both groups showed a comparable positive net protein balance during feeding: cachexia: 19.7 (13.1–23.7) and control: 16.3 (13.6–25.4) µmol/kg lean body mass/h (P = 0.908). Conclusion Cachectic pancreatic cancer patients have a higher basal protein turnover. Both cachectic patients and controls show a comparable protein anabolism during feeding, albeit through a different pattern of protein kinetics. In cachectic patients, this is primarily related to reduced protein breakdown, whereas in controls, both protein breakdown and protein synthesis alterations are involved.