Vitamin E and selenium supplementation and risk of prostate cancer in the Vitamins and lifestyle (VITAL) study cohort

Novel Insights into the Role of the Antioxidants in Prostate Pathology

To date, it is known that antioxidants protect cells from damage caused by oxidative stress and associated with pathological conditions. Several studies have established that inflammation is a state that anticipates the neoplastic transformation of the prostate. Although many experimental and clinical data have indicated the efficacy of antioxidants in preventing this form of cancer, the discrepant results, especially from recent large-scale randomized clinical trials, make it difficult to establish a real role for antioxidants in prostate tumor. Despite these concerns, clinical efficacy and safety data show that some antioxidants still hold promise for prostate cancer chemoprevention. Although more studies are needed, in this review, we briefly describe the most common antioxidants that have shown benefits in preclinical and clinical settings, focusing our attention on synthesizing the advances made so far in prostate cancer chemoprevention using antioxidants as interesting molecules for the challenges of future therapies.

Vitamin E Intake and Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Vitamin E is a group of antioxidative tocopherols and tocotrienols that play a potential role in chemoprevention. Studies investigating the association between vitamin E and prostate cancer risk have been conflicting. We identified observational and interventional studies examining the association between vitamin E intake and prostate cancer risk from PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. A random-effects model was used to perform a meta-analysis and estimate relative risks (RRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of prostate cancer risk according to vitamin E intake. Subgroup analyses were conducted by study design, sample size, study population characteristics, geographical region, and dose of vitamin E intake. The association between dietary (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.92-1.02) and supplemental (RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.94-1.04) vitamin E intake on prostate cancer risk was non-significant. In subgroup analyses, supplemental vitamin E was significantly associated with reduced prostate cancer risk in studies in Europe (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.69-0.97). Overall, this meta-analysis demonstrates little evidence for a beneficial effect of vitamin E intake on prostate cancer risk but suggests that there may be some conditions in which supplements could confer a protective effect on prostate cancer risk.

Role of vitamin E in the treatment of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a severe form of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), can progress to cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and hepatic failure/liver transplantation. Indeed, NASH will soon be the leading cause of HCC and liver transplantation. Lifestyle intervention represents the cornerstone of NASH treatment, but it is difficult to sustain. However, no pharmacotherapies for NASH have been approved. Oxidative stress has been implicated as one of the key factors in the pathogenesis of NASH. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses have confirmed that vitamin E reduces transaminase activities and may resolve NASH histopathology without improving hepatic fibrosis. However, vitamin E is not recommended for the treatment of NASH in diabetes, NAFLD without liver biopsy, NASH cirrhosis, or cryptogenic cirrhosis. Nevertheless, vitamin E supplementation may improve clinical outcomes in patients with NASH and bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis. Further studies are warranted to confirm such effects of vitamin E and that it would reduce overall mortality/morbidity without increasing the incidence of cardiovascular events. Future clinical trials of the use of vitamin E in combination with other anti-fibrotic agents may demonstrate an additive or synergistic therapeutic effect. Vitamin E is the first-line pharmacotherapy for NASH, according to the consensus of global academic societies.

Table olives and health: a review

Table olives, a product of olive tree (Olea europaea L.), is an important fermented product of the Mediterranean Diet. Agronomical factors, particularly the cultivar, the ripening stage and the processing method employed are the main factors influencing the nutritional and non-nutritional composition of table olives and their organoleptic properties. The important nutritional value of this product is due to its richness in monounsaturated fat (MUFA), mainly oleic acid, fibre and vitamin E together with the presence of several phytochemicals. Among these, hydroxytyrosol (HT) is the major phenolic compound present in all types of table olives. There is a scarcity of in vitro, in vivo and human studies of table olives. This review focused comprehensively on the nutrients and bioactive compound content as well as the health benefits assigned to table olives. The possible health benefits associated with their consumption are thought to be primarily related to effects of MUFA on cardiovascular health, the antioxidant (AO) capacity of vitamin E and its role in protecting the body from oxidative damage and the anti-inflammatory and AO activities of HT. The influence of multiple factors on composition of the end product and the potential innovation in the production of table olives through the reduction of its final salt content was also discussed.

Diet and Lifestyle in Prostate Cancer

A variety of diet and lifestyle factors have been studied with respect to prostate cancer risk in large, prospective cohort studies. In spite of this work, and in contrast to other common cancers, few modifiable risk factors have been firmly established as playing a role in prostate cancer. There are several possible explanations for the lack of well-established risk factors. First, prostate cancer has among the highest heritability of all common cancers; second, early life exposures may play an important role in risk, rather than mid- and later-life exposures assessed in most epidemiological studies. Finally, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening plays a critical role in prostate cancer detection and incidence rates, which has important implications for epidemiological studies.Among modifiable risk factors, smoking and obesity are consistently associated with higher risk specifically of advanced prostate cancer. There is also considerable evidence for a positive association between dairy intake and overall prostate cancer risk, and an inverse association between cooked tomato/lycopene intake and risk of advanced disease. Several other dietary factors consistently associated with risk in observational studies, including selenium and vitamin E, have been cast into doubt by results from clinical trials. Results for other well-studied dietary factors, including fat intake, red meat, fish, vitamin D, soy and phytoestrogens are mixed.In practical terms, men concerned with prostate cancer risk should be encouraged to stop smoking, be as physically active as possible, and achieve or maintain a healthy weight. These recommendations also have the advantage of having a positive impact on risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and other chronic diseases. Reducing dairy intake while increasing consumption of fish and tomato products is also reasonable advice.

Does dietary intake of selenium protect against cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based prospective studies

Current evidence on selenium and its effects on cancer is conflicting. This study aimed at assessing the association between dietary intake of selenium and incidence of cancers by performing systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based prospective studies. We systematically searched for articles in Medline (Ovid), Embase, Web of Science (Thomson Reuters), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database and VIP Chinese Scientific Journals. Analysis was performed in Stata version 14.2. Of the 2,564 articles obtained from the databases, 39 met our inclusion criteria, 37 were included in the final analysis. Selenium at recommended daily allowance levels of ≥55 μg/day decreased the risk of cancer [relative risk (RR) = 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-0.98]. A protective effect was found in men at levels ≥55 μg/day (RR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.94-0.99). Extra selenium intake from supplements was protective at levels ≥55 μg/day (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.97). There was an inverse relationship (p value = 0.020) between selenium intake and overall cancer risk after adjusting for age, body mass index, and smoking but there was no evidence of nonlinear relationship (p value = 0.261). The findings in this study suggest that selenium is protective against cancer however the effects vary with different cancers.

The association between Selenium and Prostate Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

Evidence of relationship between selenium and prostate cancer has been inconsistent. The present meta-analysis was conducted to determine relationship between selenium and prostate cancer.

Methods:

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA). We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EBSCO and Google scholar search engines and the reference lists of the retrieved papers for relevant data, without any limitation regarding language or time until 2016. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated using Q test and I² Index. Finally, a random effects model was used for combining results using STATA software version 11.1. P<0.05 was considered significant.

Results:

Thirty-eight studies including 36,419 cases and 105,293 controls were included in the final analysis. The pooled relative risk (RR) of relation between selenium and prostate cancer was 0.86 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]:0.78-0.94). Sub-group analyses based on case-control, cohort, and RCT studies gave values of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-1.00), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.52-1.14) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74-1.09), respectively. RRs based on serum, plasma and nail samples were 0.69 (95% CI: 0.51-0.95), 0.85 (95% CI: 0.61-1.17), 0.66 (95% CI: 0.41-1.05), respectively. According to 10 studies, investigated the relation between advanced prostate cancer and selenium in which the RR was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.52-0.87).

Conclusions:

This meta-analysis indicated that selenium most probably has a protective role against development of prostate cancer and its progression to advanced stages. Therefore, selenium supplementation can be proposed for prevention of prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer chemoprevention by natural agents: Clinical evidence and potential implications

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in American men. Due to its long latency period, PCa is considered as an ideal cancer type for chemopreventive interventions. Chemopreventive agents include various natural or synthetic agents that prevent or delay cancer development, progression and/or recurrence. Pre-clinical studies suggest that many natural products and dietary agents have chemopreventive properties. However, a limited number of these agents have been tested in clinical trials, with varying success. In this review, we have discussed the available clinical studies regarding the efficacy of natural chemopreventive agents against PCa, including tea polyphenols, selenium, soy proteins, vitamins and resveratrol. We have also provided a discussion on the clinical challenges and opportunities for the potential use of chemopreventive agents against PCa. Based on available literature, it appears that the variable outcomes of the chemopreventive clinical studies necessitate a need for additional studies with more rigorous designs and methodical interpretations in order to measure the potential of the natural agents against PCa.

Selenium for preventing cancer

BACKGROUND

This review is the third update of the Cochrane review "Selenium for preventing cancer". Selenium is a naturally occurring element with both nutritional and toxicological properties. Higher selenium exposure and selenium supplements have been suggested to protect against several types of cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To gather and present evidence needed to address two research questions:1. What is the aetiological relationship between selenium exposure and cancer risk in humans?2. Describe the efficacy of selenium supplementation for cancer prevention in humans.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE (Ovid, 2013 to January 2017, week 4), and Embase (2013 to 2017, week 6), as well as searches of clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal observational studies that enrolled adult participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed random-effects (RE) meta-analyses when two or more RCTs were available for a specific outcome. We conducted RE meta-analyses when five or more observational studies were available for a specific outcome. We assessed risk of bias in RCTs and in observational studies using Cochrane's risk assessment tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. We considered in the primary analysis data pooled from RCTs with low risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 83 studies in this updated review: two additional RCTs (10 in total) and a few additional trial reports for previously included studies. RCTs involved 27,232 participants allocated to either selenium supplements or placebo. For analyses of RCTs with low risk of bias, the summary risk ratio (RR) for any cancer incidence was 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.10; 3 studies, 19,475 participants; high-certainty evidence). The RR for estimated cancer mortality was 1.02 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.30; 1 study, 17,444 participants). For the most frequently investigated site-specific cancers, investigators provided little evidence of any effect of selenium supplementation. Two RCTs with 19,009 participants indicated that colorectal cancer was unaffected by selenium administration (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.43), as were non-melanoma skin cancer (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.30 to 4.42; 2 studies, 2027 participants), lung cancer (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.50; 2 studies, 19,009 participants), breast cancer (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.44 to 9.55; 1 study, 802 participants), bladder cancer (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.52; 2 studies, 19,009 participants), and prostate cancer (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.14; 4 studies, 18,942 participants). Certainty of the evidence was high for all of these cancer sites, except for breast cancer, which was of moderate certainty owing to imprecision, and non-melanoma skin cancer, which we judged as moderate certainty owing to high heterogeneity. RCTs with low risk of bias suggested increased melanoma risk.Results for most outcomes were similar when we included all RCTs in the meta-analysis, regardless of risk of bias. Selenium supplementation did not reduce overall cancer incidence (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.14; 5 studies, 21,860 participants) nor mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.32; 2 studies, 18,698 participants). Summary RRs for site-specific cancers showed limited changes compared with estimates from high-quality studies alone, except for liver cancer, for which results were reversed.In the largest trial, the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Trial, selenium supplementation increased risks of alopecia and dermatitis, and for participants with highest background selenium status, supplementation also increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer. RCTs showed a slightly increased risk of type 2 diabetes associated with supplementation. A hypothesis generated by the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer Trial - that individuals with low blood selenium levels could reduce their risk of cancer (particularly prostate cancer) by increasing selenium intake - has not been confirmed. As RCT participants have been overwhelmingly male (88%), we could not assess the potential influence of sex or gender.We included 15 additional observational cohort studies (70 in total; over 2,360,000 participants). We found that lower cancer incidence (summary odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.93; 7 studies, 76,239 participants) and lower cancer mortality (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.97; 7 studies, 183,863 participants) were associated with the highest category of selenium exposure compared with the lowest. Cancer incidence was lower in men (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.14, 4 studies, 29,365 men) than in women (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.77, 2 studies, 18,244 women). Data show a decrease in risk of site-specific cancers for stomach, colorectal, lung, breast, bladder, and prostate cancers. However, these studies have major weaknesses due to study design, exposure misclassification, and potential unmeasured confounding due to lifestyle or nutritional factors covarying with selenium exposure beyond those taken into account in multi-variable analyses. In addition, no evidence of a dose-response relation between selenium status and cancer risk emerged. Certainty of evidence was very low for each outcome. Some studies suggested that genetic factors might modify the relation between selenium and cancer risk - an issue that merits further investigation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Well-designed and well-conducted RCTs have shown no beneficial effect of selenium supplements in reducing cancer risk (high certainty of evidence). Some RCTs have raised concerns by reporting a higher incidence of high-grade prostate cancer and type 2 diabetes in participants with selenium supplementation. No clear evidence of an influence of baseline participant selenium status on outcomes has emerged in these studies.Observational longitudinal studies have shown an inverse association between selenium exposure and risk of some cancer types, but null and direct relations have also been reported, and no systematic pattern suggesting dose-response relations has emerged. These studies suffer from limitations inherent to the observational design, including exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding.Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that increasing selenium intake through diet or supplementation prevents cancer in humans. However, more research is needed to assess whether selenium may modify the risk of cancer in individuals with a specific genetic background or nutritional status, and to investigate possible differential effects of various forms of selenium.

Selenium-binding protein 1 is down-regulated in malignant melanoma

Selenium-binding protein 1 (SELENBP1) expression is reduced in various epithelial cancer entities compared to corresponding normal tissue and has already been described as a tumor suppressor involved in the regulation of cell proliferation, senescence, migration and apoptosis. We identified SELENBP1 to be down-regulated in cutaneous melanoma, a malignant cancer of pigment-producing melanocytes in the skin, which leads to the assumption that SELENBP1 also functions as tumor suppressor in the skin, as shown by others e.g. for prostate or lung carcinoma.

However, in vitro analyses indicate that SELENBP1 re-expression in human melanoma cell lines has no impact on cell proliferation, migration or tube formation of the tumor cells themselves when compared to control-transfected cells. Interestingly, supernatant taken from melanoma cell lines transfected with a SELENBP1 re-expression plasmid led to suppression of vessel formation of HMEC cells. Furthermore, SELENBP1 re-expression alters the sensitivity of melanoma cells for Vemurafenib treatment.

The data also hint to a functional interaction of SELENBP1 with GPX1 (Glutathione peroxidase 1). Low SELENBP1 mRNA levels correlate inversely with GPX1 expression in melanoma. The re-expression of SELENBP1 combined with down-regulation of GPX1 expression led to reduction of the proliferation of melanoma cells. In summary, SELENBP1 influences the tumor microenvironment and SELENBP1 action is functionally influenced by GPX1.

Organoids model distinct Vitamin E effects at different stages of prostate cancer evolution

Vitamin E increased prostate cancer risk in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) through unknown mechanisms while Selenium showed no efficacy. We determined the effects of the SELECT supplements on benign (primary), premalignant ( RWPE-1) and malignant (LNCaP) prostate epithelial organoids. While the supplements decreased proliferation and induced cell death in cancer organoids, they had no effect on the benign organoids. In contrast, Vitamin E enhanced cell proliferation and survival in the premalignant organoids in a manner that recapitulated the SELECT results. Indeed, while Vitamin E induced a pro-proliferative gene expression signature, Selenium alone or combined with Vitamin E produced an anti-proliferative signature. The premalignant organoids also displayed significant downregulation of glucose transporter and glycolytic gene expression pointing to metabolic alterations. Detached RWPE-1 cells had low ATP levels due to diminished glucose uptake and glycolysis which was rescued by Vitamin E through the activation of fatty acid oxidation (FAO). FAO inhibition abrogated the ATP rescue, diminished survival of the inner matrix detached cells, restoring the normal hollow lumen morphology in Vitamin E treated organoids. Organoid models therefore clarify the paradoxical findings from SELECT and demonstrate that Vitamin E promotes tumorigenesis in the early stages of prostate cancer evolution.

Survivorship, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Many cancer survivors experience menopausal symptoms, including female survivors taking aromatase inhibitors or with a history of oophorectomy or chemotherapy, and male survivors who received or are receiving androgen-ablative therapies. Sexual dysfunction is also common in cancer survivors. Sexual dysfunction and menopause-related symptoms can increase distress and have a significant negative impact on quality of life. This portion of the NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship provide recommendations for screening, evaluation, and treatment of sexual dysfunction and menopausal symptoms to help healthcare professionals who work with survivors of adult-onset cancer in the posttreatment period.

Vitamins, metabolomics, and prostate cancer

PURPOSE

How micronutrients might influence risk of developing adenocarcinoma of the prostate has been the focus of a large body of research (especially regarding vitamins E, A, and D). Metabolomic profiling has the potential to discover molecular species relevant to prostate cancer etiology, early detection, and prevention, and may help elucidate the biologic mechanisms through which vitamins influence prostate cancer risk.

METHODS

Prostate cancer risk data related to vitamins E, A, and D and metabolomic profiling from clinical, cohort, and nested case-control studies, along with randomized controlled trials, are examined and summarized, along with recent metabolomic data of the vitamin phenotypes.

RESULTS

Higher vitamin E serologic status is associated with lower prostate cancer risk, and vitamin E genetic variant data support this. By contrast, controlled vitamin E supplementation trials have had mixed results based on differing designs and dosages. Beta-carotene supplementation (in smokers) and higher circulating retinol and 25-hydroxy-vitamin D concentrations appear related to elevated prostate cancer risk. Our prospective metabolomic profiling of fasting serum collected 1-20 years prior to clinical diagnoses found reduced lipid and energy/TCA cycle metabolites, including inositol-1-phosphate, lysolipids, alpha-ketoglutarate, and citrate, significantly associated with lower risk of aggressive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Several active leads exist regarding the role of micronutrients and metabolites in prostate cancer carcinogenesis and risk. How vitamins D and A may adversely impact risk, and whether low-dose vitamin E supplementation remains a viable preventive approach, require further study.

Astaxanthin Inhibits PC-3 Xenograft Prostate Tumor Growth in Nude Mice

Prostate cancer (PCa), the most common malignancy in men, is a major cause of cancer deaths. A better understanding of the mechanisms that drive tumor initiation and progression may identify actionable targets to improve treatment of this patient group. As a dietary carotenoid, astaxanthin has been demonstrated to exert beneficial effects against inflammation, cardiovascular disease, oxidative damage, or different cancer sites. This study used intragastric administration of astaxanthin to detect its role on tumor proliferation, apoptosis, microRNA (miRNA) overexpression, and microbacteria composition change by establishing androgen-independent PCa cell PC-3 xenograft nude mice. Nude mice were inoculated with androgen-independent prostate cancer PC-3 cells subcutaneously. The intervention was started when tumors reached 0.5–0.6 cm in diameter. Mice were intragastrically administered 100 mg/kg astaxanthin (HA), 25 mg/kg astaxanthin (LA), or olive oil (TC). The results showed that 100 mg/kg astaxanthin significantly inhibited tumor growth compared to the TC group, with an inhibitory rate of 41.7%. A decrease of Ki67 and proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) as well as an increase of cleaved caspase-3 were observed in HA-treated tumors, along with increasing apoptotic cells, obtained by TUNEL assay. The HA significantly elevated the levels of tumor suppressors miR-375 and miR-487b in tumor tissues and the amount of Lactobacillus sp. and Lachnospiraceae in mice stools, while there was no significant difference between LA and TC groups. These results provide a promising regimen to enhance the therapeutic effect in a dietary supplement manner.

Total antioxidant intake and prostate cancer in the Cancer of the Prostate in Sweden (CAPS) study. A case control study

Background

The total intake of dietary antioxidants may reduce prostate cancer risk but available data are sparse and the possible role of supplements unclear. We investigated the potential association between total and dietary antioxidant intake and prostate cancer in a Swedish population.

Methods

We used FFQ data from 1499 cases and 1112 controls in the population based case–control study Cancer of the Prostate in Sweden (CAPS). The ferric reducing antioxidant potential (FRAP) assay was used to assess the total antioxidant capacity (TAC) of diet and supplements. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for the risk of prostate cancer across quintiles of antioxidant intake from all foods, from fruit and vegetables only, and from dietary supplements using unconditional logistic regression.

Results

Coffee comprised 62 % of the dietary antioxidant intake, tea 4 %, berries 4 %, chocolate 2 %, and boiled potatoes 2 %. In total 19 % and 13 % of the population took multivitamins and supplemental Vitamin C respectively, on a regular basis. Antioxidant intake from all foods and from fruits and vegetables separately measured by the FRAP assay was not associated with prostate cancer risk. For antioxidant intake from supplements we found a positive association with total, advanced, localized, high grade and low grade prostate cancer in those above median supplemental TAC intake of users compared to non-users (Adjusted ORs for total prostate cancer: 1.37, 95 % CI 1.08–1.73, advanced: 1.51, 95 % CI 1.11–2.06, localized: 1.36. 95 % CI 1.06–1.76, high grade 1.60, 95 % CI 1.06–2.40, low grade 1.36, 95 % CI 1.03–1.81). A high intake of coffee (≥6 cups/day) was associated with a possible risk reduction of fatal and significantly with reduced risk for high grade prostate cancer, adjusted OR: 0.45 (95 % CI: 0.22–0.90), whereas a high intake of chocolate was positively associated with risk of total, advanced, localized and low grade disease (adjusted OR for total: 1.43, 95 % CI 1.12–1.82, advanced: 1.40, 95 % CI 1.01–1.96, localized: 1.43, 95 % CI 1.08–1.88, low-grade: 1.41, 95 % CI 1.03–1.93).

Conclusions

Total antioxidant intake from diet was not associated with prostate cancer risk. Supplement use may be associated with greater risk of disease.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2486-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Lessons learned from cancer prevention studies with nutrients and non-nutritive dietary constituents

Epidemiological studies have observed the association between dietary patterns and the risk of certain types of cancer. Extensive studies have been conducted on the cancer preventive activities of constituents from food and beverages. While laboratory research has shown impressive and promising results, such promising cancer preventive activities have not been demonstrated in many human intervention trials. This article analyzes the major differences between these different types of studies and the limitations of these studies. Animal and cell line studies usually use optimal conditions in order to demonstrate the hypothesized effects, sometimes without considering the human relevance. On the other hand, some clinical trials were designed without a good understanding of the biochemical and pharmacological properties of the agents used. Lessons learned from these studies will be illustrated using vitamin E, β-carotene and selenium as examples for nutrients, and green tea polyphenols as an example for non-nutritive dietary constituents. From the lessons learned, we believe that more interdisciplinary collaboration and integration of laboratory and human studies would effectively advance the field of cancer prevention.

Antioxidants Abrogate Alpha-Tocopherylquinone-Mediated Down-Regulation of the Androgen Receptor in Androgen-Responsive Prostate Cancer Cells

Tocopherylquinone (TQ), the oxidation product of alpha-tocopherol (AT), is a bioactive molecule with distinct properties from AT. In this study, AT and TQ are investigated for their comparative effects on growth and androgenic activity in prostate cancer cells. TQ potently inhibited the growth of androgen-responsive prostate cancer cell lines (e.g., LAPC4 and LNCaP cells), whereas the growth of androgen-independent prostate cancer cells (e.g., DU145 cells) was not affected by TQ. Due to the growth inhibitory effects induced by TQ on androgen-responsive cells, the anti-androgenic properties of TQ were examined. TQ inhibited the androgen-induced activation of an androgen-responsive reporter and inhibited the release of prostate specific antigen from LNCaP cells. TQ pretreatment was also found to inhibit AR activation as measured using the Multifunctional Androgen Receptor Screening assay. Furthermore, TQ decreased androgen-responsive gene expression, including TM4SF1, KLK2, and PSA over 5-fold, whereas AT did not affect the expression of androgen-responsive genes. Of importance, the antiandrogenic effects of TQ on prostate cancer cells were found to result from androgen receptor protein down-regulation produced by TQ that was not observed with AT treatment. Moreover, none of the androgenic endpoints assessed were affected by AT. The down-regulation of androgen receptor protein by TQ was abrogated by co-treatment with antioxidants. Overall, the biological actions of TQ were found to be distinct from AT, where TQ was found to be a potent inhibitor of cell growth and androgenic activity in androgen-responsive prostate cancer cells.

Selenium Exposure and Cancer Risk: an Updated Meta-analysis and Meta-regression

The objective of this study was to investigate the associations between selenium exposure and cancer risk. We identified 69 studies and applied meta-analysis, meta-regression and dose-response analysis to obtain available evidence. The results indicated that high selenium exposure had a protective effect on cancer risk (pooled OR = 0.78; 95%CI: 0.73-0.83). The results of linear and nonlinear dose-response analysis indicated that high serum/plasma selenium and toenail selenium had the efficacy on cancer prevention. However, we did not find a protective efficacy of selenium supplement. High selenium exposure may have different effects on specific types of cancer. It decreased the risk of breast cancer, lung cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, and prostate cancer, but it was not associated with colorectal cancer, bladder cancer, and skin cancer.

Manipulating miRNA Expression: A Novel Approach for Colon Cancer Prevention and Chemotherapy

Small non-coding RNA has been implicated in the control of various cellular processes such as proliferation, apoptosis, and differentiation. About 50% of the miRNA genes are positioned in cancer-associated genomic regions. Several studies have shown that miRNA expression is deregulated in cancer and modulating their expression has reversed the cancer phenotype. Therefore, mechanisms to modulate microRNA (miRNA) activity have provided a novel opportunity for cancer prevention and therapy. In addition, a common cause for development of colorectal cancers is environmental and lifestyle factors. One such factor, diet has been shown to modulate miRNA expression in colorectal cancer patients. In this chapter, we will summarize the work demonstrating that miRNAs are novel promising drug targets for cancer chemoprevention and therapy. Improved delivery, increased stability and enhanced regulation of off-target effects will overcome the current challenges of this exciting approach in the field of cancer prevention and therapy.

The use of dietary supplements to alleviate androgen deprivation therapy side effects during prostate cancer treatment

Prostate cancer (PCa), the most commonly diagnosed cancer and second leading cause of male cancer death in Western societies, is typically androgen-dependent, a characteristic that underlies the rationale of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Approximately 90% of patients initially respond to ADT strategies, however many experience side effects including hot flashes, cardiotoxicity, metabolic and musculoskeletal alterations. This review summarizes pre-clinical and clinical studies investigating the ability of dietary supplements to alleviate adverse effects arising from ADT. In particular, we focus on herbal compounds, phytoestrogens, selenium (Se), fatty acids (FA), calcium, and Vitamins D and E. Indeed, there is some evidence that calcium and Vitamin D can prevent the development of osteoporosis during ADT. On the other hand, caution should be taken with the antioxidants Se and Vitamin E until the basis underlying their respective association with type 2 diabetes mellitus and PCa tumor development has been clarified. However, many other promising supplements have not yet been subjected large-scale clinical trials making it difficult to assess their efficacy. Given the demographic trend of increased PCa diagnoses and dependence on ADT as a major therapeutic strategy, further studies are required to objectively evaluate these supplements as adjuvant for PCa patients receiving ADT.

Selenium for preventing cancer

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of the first Cochrane publication on selenium for preventing cancer (Dennert 2011).Selenium is a metalloid with both nutritional and toxicological properties. Higher selenium exposure and selenium supplements have been suggested to protect against several types of cancers.

OBJECTIVES

Two research questions were addressed in this review: What is the evidence for:1. an aetiological relation between selenium exposure and cancer risk in humans? and2. the efficacy of selenium supplementation for cancer prevention in humans?

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1966 to February 2013 week 1), EMBASE (1980 to 2013 week 6), CancerLit (February 2004) and CCMed (February 2011). As MEDLINE now includes the journals indexed in CancerLit, no further searches were conducted in this database after 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included prospective observational studies (cohort studies including sub-cohort controlled studies and nested case-control studies) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with healthy adult participants (18 years of age and older).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For observational studies, we conducted random effects meta-analyses when five or more studies were retrieved for a specific outcome. For RCTs, we performed random effects meta-analyses when two or more studies were available. The risk of bias in observational studies was assessed using forms adapted from the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort and case-control studies; the criteria specified in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were used to evaluate the risk of bias in RCTs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 55 prospective observational studies (including more than 1,100,000 participants) and eight RCTs (with a total of 44,743 participants). For the observational studies, we found lower cancer incidence (summary odds ratio (OR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.91, N = 8) and cancer mortality (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.93, N = 6) associated with higher selenium exposure. Gender-specific subgroup analysis provided no clear evidence of different effects in men and women (P value 0.47), although cancer incidence was lower in men (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.05, N = 6) than in women (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.77, N = 2). The most pronounced decreases in risk of site-specific cancers were seen for stomach, bladder and prostate cancers. However, these findings have limitations due to study design, quality and heterogeneity that complicate interpretation of the summary statistics. Some studies suggested that genetic factors may modify the relation between selenium and cancer risk-a hypothesis that deserves further investigation.In RCTs, we found no clear evidence that selenium supplementation reduced the risk of any cancer (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.17, two studies, N = 4765) or cancer-related mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.32, two studies, N = 18,698), and this finding was confirmed when the analysis was restricted to studies with low risk of bias. The effect on prostate cancer was imprecise (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.14, four studies, N = 19,110), and when the analysis was limited to trials with low risk of bias, the interventions showed no effect (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.14, three studies, N = 18,183). The risk of non-melanoma skin cancer was increased (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17, three studies, N = 1900). Results of two trials-the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer Trial (NPCT) and the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Trial (SELECT)-also raised concerns about possible increased risk of type 2 diabetes, alopecia and dermatitis due to selenium supplements. An early hypothesis generated by NPCT that individuals with the lowest blood selenium levels at baseline could reduce their risk of cancer, particularly of prostate cancer, by increasing selenium intake has not been confirmed by subsequent trials. As the RCT participants were overwhelmingly male (94%), gender differences could not be systematically assessed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although an inverse association between selenium exposure and the risk of some types of cancer was found in some observational studies, this cannot be taken as evidence of a causal relation, and these results should be interpreted with caution. These studies have many limitations, including issues with assessment of exposure to selenium and to its various chemical forms, heterogeneity, confounding and other biases. Conflicting results including inverse, null and direct associations have been reported for some cancer types.RCTs assessing the effects of selenium supplementation on cancer risk have yielded inconsistent results, although the most recent studies, characterised by a low risk of bias, found no beneficial effect on cancer risk, more specifically on risk of prostate cancer, as well as little evidence of any influence of baseline selenium status. Rather, some trials suggest harmful effects of selenium exposure. To date, no convincing evidence suggests that selenium supplements can prevent cancer in humans.

Oxidative balance score and risk for incident prostate cancer in a prospective U.S. cohort study

PURPOSE

Oxidative stress is defined as an imbalance between pro-oxidants and antioxidants. Previous research found that a single comprehensive oxidative balance score (OBS) that includes individual pro- and anti-oxidant exposures may be associated with various conditions (including prostate cancer) in the absence of associations with the individual factors. We investigated an OBS-incident prostate cancer association among 43,325 men in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort.

METHODS

From 1999-2007, 3386 incident cases were identified. Twenty different components, used in two ways (unweighted or weighted based on literature reviews), were incorporated into the OBS, and the resulting scores were then expressed as three types of variables (continuous, quartiles, or six equal intervals). Multivariable-adjusted rate ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

We hypothesized that the OBS would be inversely associated with prostate cancer risk; however, the rate ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing the highest with the lowest OBS categories ranged from 1.17 (1.04-1.32) to 1.39 (0.90-2.15) for all cases, 1.14 (0.87-1.50) to 1.59 (0.57-4.40) for aggressive disease (American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III/IV or Gleason score 8-10), and 0.91 (0.62-1.35) to 1.02 (1.02-1.04) for nonaggressive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings are not consistent with the hypothesis that oxidative balance-related exposures collectively affect risk for prostate cancer.

The failure of cancer chemoprevention

Chemoprevention is proposed as a clinical analogue of population prevention, aimed at reducing likelihood of disease progression, not across the population, but in identified high-risk individuals and not by behavioral or lifestyle modification, but by the use of pharmaceutical agents. Cardiovascular chemoprevention is successful via control of hyperlipidemias and hypertension. However, chemoprevention of cancer is an almost universal failure: not only are some results null; even more frequently, there is an excess of disease, including disease that the agents were chosen specifically to reduce. A brief introduction is followed by the evidence for a wide variety of agents and their largely deleterious, sometimes null, and in one case, largely beneficial, consequences as possible chemopreventives. The agents include (i) those that are food derived and their synthetic analogues: β-carotene, folic acid, retinol and retinoids, vitamin E, multivitamin supplements, vitamin C, calcium and selenium and (ii) agents targeted at metabolic and hormonal pathways: statins, estrogen and antagonists, 5α-reductase inhibitors. There are two agents for which there is good evidence of benefit when the strategy is focused on those at defined high risk but where wider application is much more problematic: aspirin and tamoxifen. The major problems with cancer chemoprevention are presented. This is followed by a hypothesis to explain the failure of cancer chemoprevention as an enterprise, arguing that the central tenets that underpin it are flawed and showing why, far from doing good, cancer chemoprevention causes harm.

Baseline selenium status and effects of selenium and vitamin e supplementation on prostate cancer risk

BACKGROUND

The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial found no effect of selenium supplementation on prostate cancer (PCa) risk but a 17% increased risk from vitamin E supplementation. This case-cohort study investigates effects of selenium and vitamin E supplementation conditional upon baseline selenium status.

METHODS

There were 1739 total and 489 high-grade (Gleason 7-10) PCa cases and 3117 men in the randomly selected cohort. Proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effects of supplementation within quintiles of baseline toenail selenium. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios, and all statistical tests are two-sided.

RESULTS

Toenail selenium, in the absence of supplementation, was not associated with PCa risk. Selenium supplementation (combined selenium only and selenium + vitamin E arms) had no effect among men with low selenium status (<60th percentile of toenail selenium) but increased the risk of high-grade PCa among men with higher selenium status by 91% (P = .007). Vitamin E supplementation (alone) had no effect among men with high selenium status (≥40th percentile of toenail selenium) but increased the risks of total, low-grade, and high-grade PCa among men with lower selenium status (63%, P = .02; 46%, P = .09; 111%, P = .008, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Selenium supplementation did not benefit men with low selenium status but increased the risk of high-grade PCa among men with high selenium status. Vitamin E increased the risk of PCa among men with low selenium status. Men should avoid selenium or vitamin E supplementation at doses that exceed recommended dietary intakes.

Micronutrient intake and risk of prostate cancer in a cohort of middle-aged, Danish men

PURPOSE

Micronutrients may protect against prostate cancer. However, few studies have had high-quality assessment of both dietary and supplemental consumption of micronutrients, rendering possible different source-specific effects difficult to discern. This study evaluates associations between intake of vitamin C, E, folate, and beta-carotene and prostate cancer risk, focusing on possible different effects of dietary, supplemental, or total intake and on potential effect modification by alcohol intake and BMI.

METHODS

Danish prospective cohort study of 26,856 men aged 50-64 years with questionnaire-based information on diet, supplements, and lifestyle. Hazard ratios (HRs) for prostate cancer associated with micronutrient intake were calculated using Cox proportional hazard analyses.

RESULTS

During follow-up (1993-2010), 1,571 prostate cancer cases were identified. Supplemental folic acid was inversely associated with prostate cancer risk, notably on a continuous scale [HR 0.88 (95 % CI 0.79-0.98) per 100 μg increase/day]. The risk reduction was largely confined to non-aggressive tumors [HR 0.71 (0.55-0.93) per 100 μg increase/day]. No influence on prostate cancer risk was observed for dietary folate or for the other studied micronutrients, regardless of source. We found no significant effect modification by alcohol intake and BMI in relation to any micronutrient.

CONCLUSION

Our study may indicate an inverse association between folic acid and prostate cancer; however, the inverse association was confined to supplemental folic acid and non-aggressive prostate cancer and may thus be a chance finding. Further studies are warranted to evaluate our findings.

Serum α-tocopherol and γ-tocopherol concentrations and prostate cancer risk in the PLCO Screening Trial: a nested case-control study

BACKGROUND

Vitamin E compounds exhibit prostate cancer preventive properties experimentally, but serologic investigations of tocopherols, and randomized controlled trials of supplementation in particular, have been inconsistent. Many studies suggest protective effects among smokers and for aggressive prostate cancer, however.

METHODS

We conducted a nested case-control study of serum α-tocopherol and γ-tocopherol and prostate cancer risk in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial, with 680 prostate cancer cases and 824 frequency-matched controls. Multivariate-adjusted, conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for tocopherol quintiles.

RESULTS

Serum α-tocopherol and γ-tocopherol were inversely correlated (r = -0.24, p<0.0001). Higher serum α-tocopherol was associated with significantly lower prostate cancer risk (OR for the highest vs. lowest quintile = 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.92, p-trend 0.05). By contrast, risk was non-significantly elevated among men with higher γ-tocopherol concentrations (OR for the highest vs. lowest quintile = 1.35, 95% CI 0.92-1.97, p-trend 0.41). The inverse association between prostate cancer and α-tocopherol was restricted to current and recently former smokers, but was only slightly stronger for aggressive disease. By contrast, the increased risk for higher γ-tocopherol was more pronounced for less aggressive cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate higher α-tocopherol status is associated with decreased risk of developing prostate cancer, particularly among smokers. Although two recent controlled trials did not substantiate an earlier finding of lower prostate cancer incidence and mortality in response to supplementation with a relatively low dose of α-tocopherol, higher α-tocopherol status may be beneficial with respect to prostate cancer risk among smokers. Determining what stage of prostate cancer development is impacted by vitamin E, the underlying mechanisms, and how smoking modifies the association, is needed for a more complete understanding of the vitamin E-prostate cancer relation.

Lifestyle and dietary factors in the prevention of lethal prostate cancer

The prevention of lethal prostate cancer is a critical public health challenge that would improve health and reduce suffering from this disease. In this review, we discuss the evidence surrounding specific lifestyle and dietary factors in the prevention of lethal prostate cancer. We present a summary of evidence for the following selected behavioral risk factors: obesity and weight change, physical activity, smoking, antioxidant intake, vitamin D and calcium, and coffee intake.

Selenium and human health

Selenium is incorporated into selenoproteins that have a wide range of pleiotropic effects, ranging from antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects to the production of active thyroid hormone. In the past 10 years, the discovery of disease-associated polymorphisms in selenoprotein genes has drawn attention to the relevance of selenoproteins to health. Low selenium status has been associated with increased risk of mortality, poor immune function, and cognitive decline. Higher selenium status or selenium supplementation has antiviral effects, is essential for successful male and female reproduction, and reduces the risk of autoimmune thyroid disease. Prospective studies have generally shown some benefit of higher selenium status on the risk of prostate, lung, colorectal, and bladder cancers, but findings from trials have been mixed, which probably emphasises the fact that supplementation will confer benefit only if intake of a nutrient is inadequate. Supplementation of people who already have adequate intake with additional selenium might increase their risk of type-2 diabetes. The crucial factor that needs to be emphasised with regard to the health effects of selenium is the inextricable U-shaped link with status; whereas additional selenium intake may benefit people with low status, those with adequate-to-high status might be affected adversely and should not take selenium supplements.

Genetic variation in myeloperoxidase modifies the association of serum α-tocopherol with aggressive prostate cancer among current smokers

We investigated associations of serum α- and γ-tocopherols and their effect modification by polymorphisms in oxidative stress regulatory enzymes in relation to prostate cancer risk. In a nested case-control study in the Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial, prerandomized serum α- and γ-tocopherol were assayed among 684 men with incident prostate cancer [375 nonaggressive and 284 aggressive cancer (stage III/IV or Gleason score ≥7)] and 1441 controls. Manganese superoxide dismutase Ala-16Val (rs4880), glutathione peroxidase 1 Pro200Leu (rs1050450), catalase -262 C > T (rs1001179), and myeloperoxidase (MPO) G-463A (rs2333227) were genotyped. A multivariate-adjusted inverse association of serum α-tocopherol with total prostate cancer risk was observed in current smokers (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.40-0.96, 4th vs. 1st quartiles). High (≥median) compared to low serum concentrations of α- and γ-tocopherol were inversely associated with aggressive prostate cancer in current smokers (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.32-0.78 and OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.43-0.95, respectively). The association was stronger among those with MPO G/A+A/A genotypes. Among current smokers with low serum α-tocopherol concentrations, MPO G/A+A/A, the genotypes downregulating oxidative stress, were associated with an increased risk for aggressive prostate cancer (OR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.22-3.46). Conversely, current smokers with these genotypes who had high α-tocopherol concentrations had a reduced risk for aggressive prostate cancer (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.15-0.80; P-interaction = 0.001). In conclusion, among current smokers, both high serum α- and γ-tocopherol concentrations were associated with reduced risks of aggressive prostate cancer. The α-tocopherol-associated risks are modified by polymorphism in MPO G-463A.

Serum selenium, genetic variation in selenoenzymes, and risk of colorectal cancer: primary analysis from the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Selenium may prevent colorectal cancer. However, several previous studies are small and few investigated the association between selenium and colorectal cancer among women whose selenium metabolism may differ from men. Furthermore, genetic variants in selenoenzymes may be associated with colorectal cancer risk.

METHODS

This nested case-control study investigated whether serum selenium concentration and genetic variants in five selenoenzymes (glutathione peroxidase 1-4 and selenoprotein P) were associated with colorectal cancer risk in 804 colorectal cancer cases and 805 matched controls from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Observational Study. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the WHI result with previous studies including 12 observational studies and two clinical trials on selenium.

RESULTS

Within the WHI, selenium concentrations were relatively high (mean = 135.6 μg/L) and were not associated with colorectal cancer risk (P(trend) = 0.10); the adjusted OR comparing the fifth with first quintile was 1.26 (95% CI, 0.91-1.73). Moreover, genetic variants in selenoenzymes were not significantly associated with colorectal cancer risk. Consistent with the finding in WHI, our meta-analysis showed no association between selenium and colorectal tumor risk in women (OR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18) comparing the highest quantile with the lowest); however, in men, there was a significant inverse association (OR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.82) (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Consistent with previous studies, we observed no protective effect of selenium on colorectal cancer among women.

IMPACT

Our analyses suggest that a population with relatively high selenium concentrations, especially women, would not benefit from increasing selenium intake.

Use of vitamin supplements and risk of total cancer and cardiovascular disease among the Japanese general population: a population-based survey

Background

Despite the popular use of vitamin supplements and several prospective cohort studies investigating their effect on cancer incidence and cardiovascular disease (CVD), scientific data supporting their benefits remain controversial. Inconsistent results may be partly explained by the fact that use of supplements is an inconsistent behavior in individuals. We examined whether vitamin supplement use patterns affect cancer and CVD risk in a population-based cohort study in Japan.

Methods

A total of 28,903 men and 33,726 women in the Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study cohort, who answered questions about vitamin supplement use in the first survey from 1990-1994 and the second survey from 1995-1998, were categorized into four groups (never use, past use, recent use, and consistent use) and followed to the end of 2006 for cancer and 2005 for CVD. Sex-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were used to describe the relative risks of cancer and CVD associated with vitamin supplement use.

Results

During follow-up, 4501 cancer and 1858 CVD cases were identified. Multivariate adjusted analysis revealed no association of any pattern of vitamin supplement use with the risk of cancer and CVD in men. In women, consistent use was associated with lower risk of CVD (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.89), whereas past (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02-1.33) and recent use (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01-1.52) were associated with higher risk of cancer.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first prospective cohort study to examine simultaneously the associations between vitamin supplement use patterns and risk of cancer and CVD. This prospective cohort study demonstrated that vitamin supplement use has little effect on the risk of cancer or CVD in men. In women, however, consistent vitamin supplement use might reduce the risk of CVD. Elevated risk of cancer associated with past and recent use of vitamin supplements in women may be partly explained by preexisting diseases or unhealthy background, but we could not totally control for this in our study.

Association of serum α-tocopherol with sex steroid hormones and interactions with smoking: implications for prostate cancer risk

BACKGROUND

Vitamin E may protect against prostate cancer, possibly only in smokers and, we hypothesize, through altered sex steroid hormones. A controlled trial in smokers showed that sex hormone levels were inversely associated with baseline serum α-tocopherol and decreased in response to vitamin E supplementation. The vitamin E-hormone relation is understudied in non-smokers.

METHODS

Serum sex steroid hormones and α-tocopherol were measured for 1,457 men in NHANES III. Multivariable-adjusted geometric mean hormone concentrations by α-tocopherol quintile were estimated.

RESULTS

We observed lower mean testosterone, estradiol, and SHBG concentrations with increasing serum α-tocopherol (Q1 = 5.5 and Q5 = 4.6 ng/ml, p-trend = 0.0007; Q1 = 37.8 and Q5 = 33.1 pg/ml, p-trend = 0.02; Q1 = 38.8 and Q5 = 30.6 pg/ml, p-trend = 0.05, respectively). Interactions between serum α-tocopherol and exposure to cigarette smoke for total testosterone, total estradiol, and SHBG were found with the inverse relation observed only among smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this nationally representative, cross-sectional study indicate an inverse association between serum α-tocopherol and circulating testosterone, estradiol, and SHBG, but only in men who smoked. Our findings support vitamin E selectively influencing sex hormones in smokers and afford possible mechanisms through which vitamin E may impact prostate cancer risk.

The effect of supplemental vitamins and minerals on the development of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vitamin supplementation is used for many purposes with mainly alleged benefits. One of these is the use of various vitamins for the prevention of prostate cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on this topic. Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Database were searched; as well, we hand searched the references in key articles. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case-control studies were included. The review assessed the effect of supplemental vitamins on the risk of prostate cancer and on disease severity and death in men with prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were included in the final assessment. Individually, a few of these studies showed a relationship between the ingestion of supplemental vitamins or minerals and the incidence or severity of prostate cancer, especially in smokers. However, neither the use of multivitamin supplementation nor the use of individual vitamin/mineral supplementation affected the overall occurrence of prostate cancer or the occurrence of advanced/metastatic prostate cancer or death from prostate cancer when the results of the studies were combined in a meta-analysis. We also conducted several sensitivity analyses by running meta-analysis using just the higher quality studies and just the RCTs. There were still no associations found.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no convincing evidence that the use of supplemental multivitamins or any specific vitamin affects the occurrence or severity of prostate cancer. There was high heterogeneity among the studies so it is possible that unidentified subgroups may benefit or be harmed by the use of vitamins.

Selenium for preventing cancer

BACKGROUND

Selenium is a trace element essential to humans. Higher selenium exposure and selenium supplements have been suggested to protect against several types of cancers.

OBJECTIVES

Two research questions were addressed in this review: What is the evidence for1. an aetiological relationship between selenium exposure and cancer risk in women and men?2. the efficacy of selenium supplementation for cancer prevention in women and men?

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched electronic databases and bibliographies of reviews and included publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included prospective observational studies to answer research question (a) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to answer research question (b).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted random effects meta-analyses of epidemiological data when five or more studies were retrieved for a specific outcome. We made a narrative summary of data from RCTs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 prospective observational studies and six RCTs. In epidemiologic data, we found a reduced cancer incidence (summary odds ratio (OR) 0.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.91) and mortality (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.83) with higher selenium exposure. Cancer risk was more pronouncedly reduced in men (incidence: OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.05) than in women (incidence: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.77). These findings have potential limitations due to study design, quality and heterogeneity of the data, which complicated the interpretation of the summary statistics.The RCTs found no protective efficacy of selenium yeast supplementation against non-melanoma skin cancer or L-selenomethionine supplementation against prostate cancer. Study results for the prevention of liver cancer with selenium supplements were inconsistent and studies had an unclear risk of bias. The results of the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer Trial (NPCT) and SELECT raised concerns about possible harmful effects of selenium supplements.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No reliable conclusions can be drawn regarding a causal relationship between low selenium exposure and an increased risk of cancer. Despite evidence for an inverse association between selenium exposure and the risk of some types of cancer, these results should be interpreted with care due to the potential limiting factors of heterogeneity and influences of unknown biases, confounding and effect modification.The effect of selenium supplementation from RCTs yielded inconsistent results. To date, there is no convincing evidence that selenium supplements can prevent cancer in men, women or children.

Chemoprevention of prostate cancer with nutrients and supplements

As the adult population is increasing, prostate cancer (PCa) will become a considerable health problem in the next millennium. This has raised public interest in potential chemoprevention of this disease. As PCa is extremely common and generally slow to progress it is regarded as an ideal candidate for chemoprevention. At present, the 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors finasteride and dutasteride have been identified as preventive agents. This review describes whether selenium, alpha-tocopherol, isoflavones, lycopene green tea polyphenols, calcium, and resveratrol may be useful for decreasing the risk of PCa in men. Although encouraging results are present, some studies show negative results. Differences in study design, sample size, dose administered, and/or concentrations achieved in the body may be the reason for these inconsistencies. Today, chemopreventive agents may be appropriate for high-risk patients like those with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and other high-risk groups such as patients with elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) and negative biopsy, rapid PSA velocity, and with a family history of PCa. Although larger randomized controlled studies are needed and epidemiologic evidence should be placed in a clinical context, physicians must be aware of these preventive opportunities in PCa care. Combinations of chemopreventive agents should be carefully investigated because mechanisms of action may be additive or synergistic.

A nutrient approach to prostate cancer prevention: The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT)

The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) randomized 35,533 healthy men, >55 yr old (>50 yr if African American), with normal digital rectal exams and prostate specific antigens <4 ng/ml to 1) 200 μg/day l-selenomethionine, 2) 400 IU/day all-rac-alpha-tocopheryl acetate (vitamin E), 3) both supplements, or 4) placebo for 7 to 12 yr. The hypotheses underlying SELECT, that selenium and vitamin E individually and together decrease prostate cancer incidence, derived from epidemiologic and laboratory evidence and significant secondary endpoints in the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer (selenium) and Alpha-Tocopherol Beta-Carotene (vitamin E) trials. In SELECT, prostate cancer incidence did not differ among the 4 arms: hazard ratios [99% confidence intervals (CIs)] for prostate cancer were 1.13 (99% CI = 0.95-1.35, P = 0.06; n = 473) for vitamin E, 1.04 (99% CI = 0.87-1.24, P = 0.62; n = 432) for selenium, and 1.05 (99% CI = 0.88-1.25, P = 0.52; n = 437) for selenium + vitamin E vs. 1.00 (n = 416) for placebo. Statistically nonsignificant increased risks of prostate cancer with vitamin E alone [relative risk (RR) = 1.13, P = 0.06) and newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes mellitus with selenium alone (RR = 1.07, P = 0.16) were observed. SELECT data show that neither selenium nor vitamin E, alone or together, in the doses and formulations used, prevented prostate cancer in this heterogeneous population of healthy men.

Selenium and vitamin E for prostate cancer: post-SELECT (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial) status

Various formulations of selenium and vitamin E, both essential human dietary components, have been shown to possess a therapeutic and preventive effect against prostate cancer. Fortuitous results of clinical trials also implied a risk-reduction effect of selenium and vitamin E supplements. The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT), using oral selenium and vitamin E supplementation in disease-free volunteers, was designed to test a prostate cancer chemoprevention hypothesis. SELECT was terminated early because of both safety concerns and negative data for the formulations and doses given. Here, we review and discuss the studies done before and since the inception of SELECT, as well as the parameters of the trial itself. We believe that there is a lack of appropriate in vivo preclinical studies on selenium and vitamin E despite many promising in vitro studies on these agents. It seems that the most effective doses and formulations of these agents for prostate cancer chemoprevention have yet to be tested. Also, improved understanding of selenium and vitamin E biology may facilitate the discovery of these doses and formulations.

Diet, supplement use, and prostate cancer risk: results from the prostate cancer prevention trial

The authors examined nutritional risk factors for prostate cancer among 9,559 participants in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (United States and Canada, 1994-2003). The presence or absence of cancer was determined by prostate biopsy, which was recommended during the trial because of an elevated prostate-specific antigen level or an abnormal digital rectal examination and was offered to all men at the trial's end. Nutrient intake was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire and a structured supplement-use questionnaire. Cancer was detected in 1,703 men; 127 cancers were high-grade (Gleason score 8-10). There were no associations of any nutrient or supplement with prostate cancer risk overall. Risk of high-grade cancer was associated with high intake of polyunsaturated fats (quartile 4 vs. quartile 1: odds ratio = 2.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.33, 4.38). Dietary calcium was positively associated with low-grade cancer but inversely associated with high-grade cancer (for quartile 4 vs. quartile 1, odds ratios were 1.27 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.57) and 0.43 (95% CI: 0.21, 0.89), respectively). Neither dietary nor supplemental intakes of nutrients often suggested for prostate cancer prevention, including lycopene, long-chain n-3 fatty acids, vitamin D, vitamin E, and selenium, were significantly associated with cancer risk. High intake of n-6 fatty acids, through their effects on inflammation and oxidative stress, may increase prostate cancer risk.

Diet and prostate cancer risk with specific focus on dairy products and dietary calcium: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Despite the prevalence of prostate cancer worldwide, only a few risk factors have been well-established. The role of diet, especially of dairy products, in the etiology of prostate cancer is still controversial.

METHODS

This study assessed the association of dietary components, particularly dairy products and dietary calcium, on prostate cancer risk in a case-control study of 197 cases and an equal number of individually matched controls recruited in Montreal, Canada. A semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire was administered in which the usual consumption frequency and amounts consumed of more than 200 food items were recorded.

RESULTS

We found a twofold increased risk of prostate cancer associated with an increased intake of dairy products {Odds Ratio (OR) = 2.19; 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) 1.22-3.94}. A significant trend of decreasing prostate cancer risk with higher intake was found for legumes, nuts, finfish/shellfish and for alpha-tocopherol after adjustment for calcium intake. Milk was the only dairy product significantly associated with prostate cancer risk, with OR = 2.27; 95% CI (1.25-4.09) for the highest versus lowest quartiles of consumption. Calcium, the main micronutrient contained in dairy products, showed only a borderline association with prostate cancer risk (P = 0.09), with slightly higher risk for higher calcium intake. In conclusion, this study supports the hypothesis that dairy products, especially milk, are involved in the etiology of prostate cancer. However, the mechanisms by which the various nutrients in dairy products and total diet may interact to influence this risk remain unknown.

Null activity of selenium and vitamin e as cancer chemopreventive agents in the rat prostate

To evaluate the potential efficacy of selenium and vitamin E as inhibitors of prostate carcinogenesis, four chemoprevention studies using a common protocol were done in a rat model of androgen-dependent prostate cancer. After stimulation of prostate epithelial cell proliferation by a sequential regimen of cyproterone acetate followed by testosterone propionate, male Wistar-Unilever rats received a single i.v. injection of N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU) followed by chronic androgen stimulation via subcutaneous implantation of testosterone pellets. At 1 week post-MNU, groups of carcinogen-treated rats (39-44/group) were fed either a basal diet or a basal diet supplemented with l-selenomethionine (3 or 1.5 mg/kg diet; study 1), dl-alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E, 4,000 or 2,000 mg/kg diet; study 2), l-selenomethionine + vitamin E (3 + 2,000 mg/kg diet or 3 + 500 mg/kg diet; study 3), or selenized yeast (target selenium levels of 9 or 3 mg/kg diet; study 4). Each chemoprevention study was terminated at 13 months post-MNU, and prostate cancer incidence was determined by histopathologic evaluation. No statistically significant reductions in prostate cancer incidence were identified in any group receiving dietary supplementation with selenium and/or vitamin E. These data do not support the hypotheses that selenium and vitamin E are potent cancer chemopreventive agents in the prostate, and when considered with the recent clinical data reported in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT), show the predictive nature of this animal model for human prostate cancer chemoprevention.

Selenomethionine and alpha-tocopherol do not inhibit prostate carcinogenesis in the testosterone plus estradiol-treated NBL rat model

Previous studies with selenium and/or vitamin E in prostate carcinogenesis animal models have been negative, but these models may not involve oxidative stress mechanisms. In this study, we examined the potential of selenomethionine and alpha-tocopherol to modulate prostate cancer development in the testosterone plus estradiol-treated NBL rat, a model that does involve sex hormone-induced oxidative stress mechanisms and prostatic inflammation. One week following the implantation with hormone-filled Silastic implants, rats were fed diets containing l-selenomethionine (1.5 or 3.0 mg/kg), DL-alpha-tocopherol acetate (2,000 or 4,000 mg/kg), or a natural ingredient control diet (NIH-07). The development of prostate carcinomas was not affected by dietary treatment with either agent. Food intake, body weight, and mortality were also not affected. The high dose of selenomethionine reduced the severity of epithelial dysplasia in the lateral prostate that was not associated with inflammation, and alpha-tocopherol reduced in a dose-related fashion the incidence of marked inflammation and marked epithelial dysplasia in the lateral prostate, regardless of whether these lesions were associated with inflammation. alpha-Tocopherol significantly increased the incidence of adenocarcinomas of the mammary glands at both dietary concentrations. Collectively, our findings suggest that selenomethionine and alpha-tocopherol supplementation does not prevent prostate cancer in rats fed diets with nutritionally adequate levels of selenium and vitamin E. Importantly, the results of the current animal studies and those reported previously were fully predictive of the outcome of the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial.

Dietary vitamins E and C and prostate cancer risk

BACKGROUND

The epidemiologic evidence on dietary vitamins E and C and prostate cancer is controversial. Therefore, a case-control study was carried out to investigate the role of dietary intake of vitamins E and C in the etiology of prostate cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cases were 1 294 men with incident, histologically confirmed prostate cancer, admitted to the major teaching and general hospitals of five Italian areas between 1991 and 2002. Controls were 1 451 men admitted for acute, non-neoplastic conditions to the same hospitals. Information on dietary habits and nutrient intake was elicited using a validated food frequency questionnaire including 78 food groups and recipes. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for increasing levels of vitamin intake were estimated after allowance for total energy intake and other confounding factors.

RESULTS

Vitamin E showed a significant inverse association with prostate cancer (OR = 0.78 for the highest versus the lowest tertile of intake, 95% CI: 0.58-0.96; p-value for trend = 0.02), whereas for vitamin C the inverse association was of borderline statistical significance (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.65-1.08). Results were consistent in strata of age, body mass index, and family history of prostate cancer.

DISCUSSION

The present study shows an inverse association between dietary intake of vitamins E and prostate cancer incidence. This finding is likely to reflect the influence of diet itself since supplementation or food fortification with vitamins is rare in the Italian population.

Reduction in the risk of prostate cancer: future directions after the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

The landmark Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) generated interest in the potential health benefits and cost of reducing prostate cancer risk--specifically, the potential role of 5alpha-reductase inhibitors. However, the PCPT raised several unanswered questions, including the cause and significance of the increased incidence of high-grade tumors associated with finasteride. In the present study, we review the PCPT findings and unanswered questions, next steps in this field, and ongoing prostate cancer prevention trials addressing these unanswered questions. Particular emphasis is placed on the design of the second large-scale trial of a 5alpha-reductase inhibitor, the REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) trial.