Serum Vitamin D is Not Helpful for Predicting Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness Compared with the Prostate Health Index

Discordant Health Implications and Molecular Mechanisms of Vitamin D in Clinical and Preclinical Studies of Prostate Cancer: A Critical Appraisal of the Literature Data

Clinical and preclinical studies have provided conflicting data on the postulated beneficial effects of vitamin D in patients with prostate cancer. In this opinion piece, we discuss reasons for discrepancies between preclinical and clinical vitamin D studies. Different criteria have been used as evidence for the key roles of vitamin D. Clinical studies report integrative cancer outcome criteria such as incidence and mortality in relation to vitamin D status over time. In contrast, preclinical vitamin D studies report molecular and cellular changes resulting from treatment with the biologically active vitamin D metabolite, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (calcitriol) in tissues. However, these reported changes in preclinical in vitro studies are often the result of treatment with biologically irrelevant high calcitriol concentrations. In typical experiments, the used calcitriol concentrations exceed the calcitriol concentrations in normal and malignant prostate tissue by 100 to 1000 times. This raises reasonable concerns regarding the postulated biological effects and mechanisms of these preclinical vitamin D approaches in relation to clinical relevance. This is not restricted to prostate cancer, as detailed data regarding the tissue-specific concentrations of vitamin D metabolites are currently lacking. The application of unnaturally high concentrations of calcitriol in preclinical studies appears to be a major reason why the results of preclinical in vitro studies hardly match up with outcomes of vitamin D-related clinical studies. Regarding future studies addressing these concerns, we suggest establishing reference ranges of tissue-specific vitamin D metabolites within various cancer entities, carrying out model studies on human cancer cells and patient-derived organoids with biologically relevant calcitriol concentrations, and lastly improving the design of vitamin D clinical trials where results from preclinical studies guide the protocols and endpoints within these trials.

Vitamin D Metabolites in Nonmetastatic High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients with and without Zoledronic Acid Treatment after Prostatectomy

Simple Summary

Recent research on prostate cancer and vitamin D is controversial. We measured three vitamin D₃ metabolites in 32 selected prostate cancer patients after surgery at four time points over four years. Within a large European study, half of the patients were prophylactically treated with zoledronic acid (ZA); the others received a placebo. After the study start, all the patients daily took calcium and vitamin D₃. The development of metastasis was not affected by ZA treatment. While two vitamin D metabolites had higher values after the study’s start, with constant follow-up values, the 1,25(OH)₂-vitamin D₃ concentrations remained unchanged. The latter form was the only metabolite that was higher in the patients with metastasis as compared to those without bone metastasis. This result is surprising. However, it is too premature to discuss possible prognostic value yet. Our results should be confirmed in larger cohorts.

Abstract

There are limited and discrepant data on prostate cancer (PCa) and vitamin D. We investigated changes in three vitamin D₃ metabolites in PCa patients after prostatectomy with zoledronic acid (ZA) treatment regarding their metastasis statuses over four years. In 32 patients from the ZEUS trial, 25(OH)D₃, 24,25(OH)₂D₃, and 1,25(OH)₂D₃ were measured with liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry at four time points. All the patients received daily calcium and vitamin D₃. Bone metastases were detected in 7 of the 17 ZA-treated patients and in 5 of the 15 controls (without ZA), without differences between the groups (p = 0.725). While 25(OH)D₃ and 24,25(OH)₂D₃ increased significantly after the study’s start, with following constant values, the 1,25(OH)₂D₃ concentrations remained unchanged. ZA treatment did not change the levels of the three metabolites. 25(OH)D₃ and 24,25(OH)₂D₃ were not associated with the development of bone metastases. In contrast, 1,25(OH)₂D₃ was also higher in patients with bone metastasis before the study’s start. Thus, in high-risk PCa patients after prostatectomy, 25(OH)D₃, 24,25(OH)₂D₃, and 1,25(OH)₂D₃ were not affected by supportive ZA treatment or by the development of metastasis over four years, with the exception of 1,25(OH)₂D₃, which was constantly higher in metastatic patients. There might be potential prognostic value if the results can be confirmed.

Comparison of PHI and PHI Density for Prostate Cancer Detection in a Large Retrospective Caucasian Cohort

BACKGROUND

Beyond prostate-specific antigen (PSA), other biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa) detection are available and need to be evaluated for clinical routine.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the Prostate Health Index (PHI) density (PHID) in comparison with PHI in a large Caucasian group >1,000 men.

METHODS

PHID values were used from available patient data with PSA, free PSA, and [-2]pro-PSA and prostate volume from 3 former surveys from 2002 to 2014. Those 1,446 patients from a single-center cohort included 701 men with PCa and 745 with no PCa. All patients received initial or repeat biopsies. The diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparing area under the ROC curves (AUCs), precision-recall approach, and decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

PHID medians differed almost 2-fold between PCa (1.12) and no PCa (0.62) in comparison to PHI (48.6 vs. 33; p always <0.0001). However, PHID and PHI were equal regarding the AUC (0.737 vs. 0.749; p = 0.226), and the curves of the precision-recall analysis also overlapped in the sensitivity range between 70 and 100%. DCA had a maximum net benefit of only ∼5% for PHID versus PHI between 45 and 55% threshold probability. Contrary, in the 689 men with a prostate volume ≤40 cm3, PHI (AUC 0.732) showed a significant larger AUC than PHID (AUC 0.69, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on DCA, PHID had only a small advantage in comparison with PHI alone, while ROC analysis and precision-recall analysis showed similar results. In smaller prostates, PHI even outperformed PHID. The increment for PHID in this large Caucasian cohort is too small to justify a routine clinical use.

PHI density prospectively improves prostate cancer detection

Purpose

To evaluate the Prostate Health Index (PHI) density (PHID) in direct comparison with PHI in a prospective large cohort.

Methods

PHID values were calculated from prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free PSA and [− 2]proPSA and prostate volume. The 1057 patients included 552 men with prostate cancer (PCa) and 505 with no evidence of malignancy (NEM). In detail, 562 patients were biopsied at the Charité Hospital Berlin and 495 patients at the Sana Hospital Offenbach. All patients received systematic or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsies. The diagnostic accuracy was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparing areas under the ROC-curves (AUC). The decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed with the MATLAB Neural Network Toolbox.

Results

PHID provided a significant larger AUC than PHI (0.835 vs. 0.801; p = 0.0013) in our prospective cohort of 1057 men from 2 centers. The DCA had a maximum net benefit of ~ 5% for PHID vs. PHI between 35 and 65% threshold probability. In those 698 men within the WHO-calibrated PSA grey-zone up to 8 ng/ml, PHID was also significantly better than PHI (AUC 0.819 vs. 0.789; p = 0.0219). But PHID was not different from PHI in the detection of significant PCa.

Conclusions

Based on ROC analysis and DCA, PHID had an advantage in comparison with PHI alone to detect any PCa but PHI and PHID performed equal in detecting significant PCa.

Nutraceuticals in prostate cancer therapeutic strategies and their neo-adjuvant use in diverse populations

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy and second leading cause of cancer mortality in American males. Notably, men of African descent in the United States and Caribbean have the highest PCa mortality rates compared to men with European ancestry. Although current therapeutics are quite potent and effective, disease resistance, progression to metastasis, therapy-associated toxicities and efficacy-related issues in diverse populations develop over time. Thus, non-toxic and efficacious therapeutic strategies are needed to address these major obstacles for the clinical treatment and management of PCa. In this regard, preclinical and population-based efficacy studies have shown the potential of natural non-toxic nutraceuticals as potent anti-PCa agents. Accordingly, the implementation of nutraceutical intervention and genetic testing in diverse populations might aid in the development and design of precision medicine strategies to reduce the burden of chemotherapy-associated toxicities, suppress disease resistance, and treat both localized and advanced PCa. Consequently, additional large-scale and inclusive clinical studies are required to fully assess efficacy and therapeutic limitations of these agents in PCa. This review discusses the most current clinical research on selected nutraceutical agents and their efficacy in the context of clinico-pathological outcomes and disease susceptibility in diverse PCa clinical and epidemiological studies.

Circulating vitamin D concentration and risk of prostate cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies

Background

Though many studies have been performed to elucidate the association between circulating vitamin D and prostate cancer, no conclusive result is available. We carried out a dose-response meta-analysis to quantitatively examine the association of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentration with prostate cancer.

Methods

Only prospective studies examining the associations of circulating 25[OH]D concentration with prostate cancer were eligible for the meta-analysis. A random-effect meta-analysis was done first, to calculate the summary relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing the higher concentration with the lower concentration of 25[OH]D. A dose-response meta-analysis using random-effects model was then carried out to evaluate the nonlinearity and calculate the summary RR caused per 10 ng/mL increment.

Results

Nineteen prospective cohort or nested case-control studies were included. Higher 25[OH]D concentration was significantly correlated with elevated risk of prostate cancer (RR =1.15, 95% CI 1.06-1.24). No nonlinear relationship was found between 25[OH]D concentration and risk of prostate cancer (P=0.654). Dose-response meta-analysis showed that the summary RR caused per 10 ng/mL increment in circulating 25[OH]D concentration was 1.04 (95% CI 1.02-1.06). Subgroup analysis also found a modest dose-response relationship. Funnel plot and Egger's test did not detect publication bias.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that highest 25[OH]D concentration is correlated with elevated risk of prostate cancer and a modest dose-response effect exists in this association; however, more studies are needed.

Interactions of the Insulin-Like Growth Factor Axis and Vitamin D in Prostate Cancer Risk in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

Some, but not all, epidemiologic studies report an association between vitamin D and prostate cancer risk. The inconsistent findings might be explained in the context of modification by members of the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis. Data and specimens for this nested case-control study (n = 1695 cases and n = 1682 controls) are from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT). Baseline serum samples were assayed for 25(OH)D, IGF-1, IGF-2, IGFBP-2, IGFBP-3, and the ratio of IGF1:BP3, along with insulin-related markers c-peptide and leptin. The presence of prostate cancer was assessed by prostate biopsy. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for prostate cancer risk. There were no interactions between serum 25(OH)D and IGF analytes in relation to prostate cancer risk when PCPT treatment arms were combined. In the placebo arm, above median serum 25(OH)D levels were associated with increased risk of prostate cancer among men with higher IGF-2 (OR:1.33, 95% CI: 1.00–1.65), with a significant interaction between 25(OH)D and treatment arm (P_interaction = 0.04). Additionally, there was an interaction between treatment arm and serum IGFBP-3 (P_interaction = 0.03). Higher serum 25(OH)D may increase risk of prostate cancer in the presence of higher circulating IGF-2.