Prostate cancer and selenium

The role of alternative medicine and complimentary therapies in urologic disease: New horizons

The world of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) encompasses a wide range of practices, treatments, and products that fall outside the realm of conventional (mainstream) medicine. The use of complementary and CAM has become increasingly popular in Western nations. People are turning to CAM for a variety of reasons, including managing chronic diseases, relieving symptoms of various conditions, and improving their overall health and well-being. There's a growing trend of people using and showing interest in complementary and alternative medicine therapies, especially in Western countries. CAM encompasses a wide range of treatments, some offering complete alternatives to conventional medicine, while others aim to complement existing medical approaches. Urologists should stay informed about CAM to guide their patients effectively to treat patients in a modern and personalized way. The aim of review is to analyze the scenario of complimentary and alternative medicine with a specific focus in the urological field.

A Population-Based Survey of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use in Men Recently Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer

Purpose:To determine prevalence and patterns of use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among men recently diagnosed with prostate cancer. Study Design:Men, diagnosed with prostate cancer over a 10-month period in British Columbia, Canada, were randomly selected to obtain a population-based sample. Methods:Surveys, addressing patient demographics, types of CAM therapies, and CAM information resources utilized, reasons for use, and disclosure to physician(s), were mailed to 1108 men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer. A 42% response rate was obtained. Results:Thirty-nine percent of patients used CAM therapies with the most common being herbal supplements (saw palmetto), vitamins (vitamin E), and minerals (selenium). The most common reasons given for choosing to use CAM therapies were to (1) boost the immune system and (2) prevent recurrence. The majority of men (58%) had told their physician(s) about their CAM use, but few utilized either their family physician (15%) or their oncologist (7%) as sources of CAM information. CAM users most commonly consulted friends or family (39%) or the Internet (19%) for information about CAM. CAM users were more likely than nonusers to delay (9%) or decline (4%) conventional treatment. Respondents who had never used CAM had typically never thought about it or did not have enough information about the treatments. Conclusions:More than one third of recently diagnosed prostate cancer patients utilize some form of CAM therapy, and the majority disclose their use to their physician(s). However, they tend to rely on anecdotal information for their CAM decision making. Dissemination of reliable CAM information is one key to helping men navigate this difficult arena.

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.

Selenium and prostate cancer prevention: insights from the selenium and vitamin E cancer prevention trial (SELECT)

The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) was conducted to assess the efficacy of selenium and vitamin E alone, and in combination, on the incidence of prostate cancer. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial design clinical trial found that neither selenium nor vitamin E reduced the incidence of prostate cancer after seven years and that vitamin E was associated with a 17% increased risk of prostate cancer compared to placebo. The null result was surprising given the strong preclinical and clinical evidence suggesting chemopreventive activity of selenium. Potential explanations for the null findings include the agent formulation and dose, the characteristics of the cohort, and the study design. It is likely that only specific subpopulations may benefit from selenium supplementation; therefore, future studies should consider the baseline selenium status of the participants, age of the cohort, and genotype of specific selenoproteins, among other characteristics, in order to determine the activity of selenium in cancer prevention.

Mass fractions of 52 trace elements and zinc/trace element content ratios in intact human prostates investigated by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

Contents of 52 trace elements in intact prostate of 64 apparently healthy 13-60-year-old men (mean age 36.5 years) were investigated by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Mean values (M ± SΕΜ) for mass fraction (in milligrams per kilogram, on dry-weight basis) of trace elements were as follows: Ag 0.041 ± 0.005, Al 36 ± 4, Au 0.0039 ± 0.0007, B 0.97 ± 0.13, Be 0.00099 ± 0.00006, Bi 0.021 ± 0.008, Br 29 ± 3, Cd 0.78 ± 0.09, Ce 0.028 ± 0.004, Co 0.035 ± 0.003, Cs 0.034 ± 0.003, Dy 0.0031 ± 0.0005, Er 0.0018 ± 0.0004, Gd 0.0030 ± 0.0005, Hg 0.046 ± 0.006, Ho 0.00056 ± 0.00008, La 0.074 ± 0.015, Li 0.040 ± 0.004, Mn 1.53 ± 0.09, Mo 0.30 ± 0.03, Nb 0.0051 ± 0.0009, Nd 0.013 ± 0.002, Ni 4.3 ± 0.7, Pb 1.8 ± 0.4, Pr 0.0033 ± 0.0004, Rb 15.9 ± 0.6, Sb 0.040 ± 0.005, Se 0.73 ± 0.03, Sm 0.0027 ± 0.0004, Sn 0.25 ± 0.05, Tb 0.00043 ± 0.00009, Th 0.0024 ± 0.0005, Tl 0.0014 ± 0.0001, Tm 0.00030 ± 0.00006, U 0.0049 ± 0.0014, Y 0.019 ± 0.003, Yb 0.0015 ± 0.0002, Zn 782 ± 97, and Zr 0.044 ± 0.009, respectively. The upper limit of mean contents of As, Cr, Eu, Ga, Hf, Ir, Lu, Pd, Pt, Re, Ta, and Ti were the following: As ≤ 0.018, Cr ≤ 0.64, Eu ≤ 0.0006, Ga ≤ 0.08, Hf ≤ 0.02, Ir ≤ 0.0004, Lu ≤ 0.00028, Pd ≤ 0.007, Pt ≤ 0.0009, Re ≤ 0.0015, Ta ≤ 0.005, and Ti ≤ 2.6. In all prostate samples, the content of Te was under detection limit (<0.003). Additionally, ratios of the Zn content to other trace element contents as well as correlations between Zn and trace elements were calculated. Our data indicate that the human prostate accumulates such trace elements as Al, Au, B, Br, Cd, Cr, Ga, Li, Mn, Ni, Pb, U, and Zn. No special relationship between Zn and other trace elements was found.

Selenium and its' role in the maintenance of genomic stability

Selenium (Se) is an essential micronutrient for humans, acting as a component of the unusual amino acids, selenocysteine (Se-Cys) and selenomethionine (Se-Met). Where Se levels are low, the cell cannot synthesise selenoproteins, although some selenoproteins and some tissues are prioritised over others. Characterised functions of known selenoproteins, include selenium transport (selenoprotein P), antioxidant/redox properties (glutathione peroxidases (GPxs), thioredoxin reductases and selenoprotein P) and anti-inflammatory properties (selenoprotein S and GPx4). Various forms of Se are consumed as part of a normal diet, or as a dietary supplement. Supplementation of tissue culture media, animal or human diets with moderate levels of certain Se compounds may protect against the formation of DNA adducts, DNA or chromosome breakage, and chromosome gain or loss. Protective effects have also been shown on mitochondrial DNA, and on telomere length and function. Some of the effects of Se compounds on gene expression may relate to modulation of DNA methylation or inhibition of histone deacetylation. Despite a large number of positive effects of selenium and selenoproteins in various model systems, there have now been some human clinical trials that have shown adverse effects of Se supplementation, according to various endpoints. Too much Se is as harmful as too little, with animal models showing a "U"-shaped efficacy curve. Current recommended daily allowances differ among countries, but are generally based on the amount of Se necessary to saturate GPx enzymes. However, increasing evidence suggests that other enzymes may be more important than GPx for Se action, that optimal levels may depend upon the form of Se being ingested, and vary according to genotype. New paradigms, possibly involving nutrigenomic tools, will be necessary to optimise the forms and levels of Se desirable for maximum protection of genomic stability in all humans.

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.

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.

Oral selenium supplementation has no effect on prostate-specific antigen velocity in men undergoing active surveillance for localized prostate cancer

The Nutritional Prevention of Cancer trial showed a 52% lower incidence of prostate cancer in men supplemented with selenium. As a result, our study was designed to assess whether selenium supplementation attenuates the progression of prostate cancer. A phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted in men with localized nonmetastatic prostate cancer who had elected to forgo active treatment and be followed by active surveillance. A total of 140 men were randomized to placebo (n = 46), 200 microg/d (n = 47), or 800 microg/d (n = 47) selenium p.o. (as selenized yeast) and followed every 3 months for up to 5 years. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) velocity was used as a marker of prostate cancer progression and was estimated using mixed-effects regression. Adjusting for age, body mass index, baseline selenium, smoking, baseline PSA, race, PSA method, and Gleason score, PSA velocities for the 200 microg/d and 800 microg/d treatment groups were not statistically significantly different from placebo (P = 0.32 and P = 0.61, respectively). In the highest quartile of baseline selenium, men supplemented with 800 microg selenium showed statistically significantly higher PSA velocity as compared with placebo (P = 0.018). Selenium supplementation did not show a protective effect on PSA velocity in subjects with localized prostate cancer. On the contrary, supplementation with high-dose selenium was observed to be a risk factor for increased PSA velocity in men with high baseline plasma selenium concentrations.

Autophagy inhibition through PI3K/Akt increases apoptosis by sodium selenite in NB4 cells

Selenium possesses the chemotherapeutic feature by inducing apoptosis in cancer cell with trivial side effects on normal cells. However, the mechanism in which is not clearly understood. Emerging evidence indicates the overlaps between the autophagy and the apoptosis. In this study, we have investigated the role of autophagy in selenium-induced apoptosis in NB4 cells. We find that autophagy is suppressed in NB4 cells treated by sodium selenite, as measured by electron microscope, acridine orange staining and western blot. Moreover, selenite combined with autophagy inhibitor contributes to the up-regulation of apoptosis, while the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway is down- regulated. Consistently, when the inhibitor of PI3K was applied, the autophagic level significantly decreased. In summary, sodium selenite increases NB4 cell apoptosis by autophagy inhibition through PI3K/Akt, and the inhibition of autophagy contributes to the up-regulation of apoptosis. [BMB reports 2009; 42(9): 599-604].

Prostate cancer prevention: past, present, and future

Prostate cancer is the most common male malignancy and the second or third leading cause of cancer death among men in the West. The descriptive epidemiology of prostate cancer suggests that it is a preventable disease. Prevention has the theoretical advantage of not only saving lives, but also reduce the morbidity of radical prostate cancer therapy. This article reviews the past, present, and future of prostate cancer prevention. In particular, the evidence and scientific data of a variety of prevention strategies are reviewed. Strategies reviewed include dietary fat reduction and supplementation with vitamins D and E, and selenium. Dietary intake of soy, green tea, and tomato-rich products (lycopene) are also reviewed. Data regarding pharmacological intervention with cyclo-oxygenease inhibitors, antiestrogens, and in particular 5-alpha reductase inhibitors are reviewed. The results of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial including the controversy surrounding higher-grade cancers among men randomized to finasteride are also summarized. Finally, a variety of trial designs as well as a roster of current phase 2 trials are presented. Probably no cancer is being investigated more thoroughly in the context of prevention as prostate cancer in 2007. Definitive answers to pivotal phase 3 trials will be available in the coming 2 to 7 years.

Finasteride decreases the risk of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

PURPOSE

High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is likely a premalignant lesion of the prostate. Decreasing the frequency of high grade PIN may decrease the risk of prostate cancer. In the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial we evaluated the impact of finasteride on the risk of a needle biopsy diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial was a randomized, placebo controlled clinical trial that enrolled 18,882 men without evidence of prostate cancer, prostate specific antigen less than 3.0 ng/ml and normal digital rectal examination, and randomized them to 5 mg finasteride daily or placebo. Subjects were followed for 7 years with biopsy recommended for prostate specific antigen greater than 4.0 ng/ml, adjusted in the finasteride group to achieve an equal number of biopsy recommendations or for abnormal digital rectal examination. All cancer-free subjects were recommended to undergo biopsy after 7 years on study. We evaluated the diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia with or without concomitant prostate cancer in these 2 study groups.

RESULTS

The number of men evaluable for high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia was 4,568 in the finasteride group and 4,886 in the placebo group. High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia alone was diagnosed in 276 men (6.0%) in the finasteride group vs 347 (7.1%) in the placebo group (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99, p=0.04). High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia accompanied by prostate cancer was diagnosed in 144 men (3.2%) in the finasteride group vs 223 (4.6%) in the placebo group (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.85, p=0.0004). Finasteride significantly decreased the overall risk of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (alone and with cancer) from 570 cases (11.7%) in the placebo group to 420 (9.2%) in the finasteride group (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.89, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Finasteride significantly decreased the risk of high grade PIN. This observation may explain how finasteride decreased prostate cancer in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, supporting the notion that high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a premalignant lesion of the prostate, and it provides new information relevant to the consideration of finasteride for prostate cancer prevention.

Selenium: From cancer prevention to DNA damage

Selenium (Se) is a dietary essential trace element with important biological roles. Accumulating evidence indicates that Se compounds possess anticancer properties. Se is specifically incorporated into proteins in the form of selenocysteine and non-specifically incorporated as selenomethionine in place of methionine. The effects of Se compounds on cells are strictly compositional and concentration-dependent. At supranutritional dietary levels, Se can prevent the development of many types of cancer. At higher concentrations, Se compounds can be either cytotoxic or possibly carcinogenic. The cytotoxicity of Se is suggested to be associated with oxidative stress. Accordingly, sodium selenite, an inorganic Se compound, was reported to induce DNA damage, particularly DNA strand breaks and base damage. In this review we summarize the various activities of Se compounds and focus on their relation to DNA damage and repair. We discuss the use of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for identification of the genes involved in Se toxicity and resistance.

Hemolysate thioredoxin reductase and glutathione peroxidase activities correlate with serum selenium in a group of New Zealand men at high prostate cancer risk

The study provides data relating serum selenium concentration to activities of 2 key selenoenzymes, hemolysate thioredoxin reductase (TR) and glutathione peroxidase (GPx), measured by spectrophotometry, in a group of men at high risk for prostate cancer. This trial enrolled 43 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen but negative biopsy for prostate cancer. Such individuals have a high risk of developing prostate cancer in the succeeding 5 y. In the men with baseline serum selenium concentrations ranging from 0.74-1.62 micromol/L (59-128 microg/L), hemolysate TR (r = 0.359, P < 0.05) and GPx (r = 0.341, P < 0.05) activities increased with increasing serum selenium. Furthermore, after a run-in period of 1 mo, men participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled selenium supplementation trial for 6 mo and received a placebo, or 200 or 400 microg of Se per day, in the form of a seleno yeast. This study is a subsidiary of an ongoing Phase III cancer chemoprevention trial and, as such, randomization groups have not yet been revealed. After 6 mo of being on trial and with an estimated 66% of the group being supplemented with seleno yeast, the TR activity of the group increased by 80% relative to baseline. In contrast, 6 mo of selenium supplementation did not affect GPx activity. This study presents, to our knowledge for the first time, both measurements of human hemolysate TR activity and its relation to serum selenium.

Complementary and alternative medicine in urology

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) includes various practices, measures and products which are not presently considered to be a part of conventional (mainstream) medicine. Herbal products, vitamins, minerals and amino acids are increasingly popular as dietary supplements for the treatment, improvement and prophylaxis of urological diseases, and to improve general health and well-being. As these products are freely available without prescription, conventional healthcare providers are often unaware that their patients are using CAM. It is essential to know that some herbal supplements may act in the same way as chemical drugs, and that they originate 'from nature' does not mean that they are safe and/or with no potential harmful effects and/or toxicity. Eventual interactions with conventional medications and contamination with prescription drugs and metals have been reported. The active components of many phytotherapeutic preparations and their mechanism(s) of action are still being determined and evaluated. There is scientific evidence for the effectiveness of some CAM treatments, but for most there are important key questions yet to be answered through basic research and well-designed studies according to established guidelines. Because of the increasing popularity and use of CAM, conventional healthcare providers, including urologists, should not ignore it, and be well informed about the benefits and potential risks of dietary supplements, so that they can advise their patients about this developing field. Whenever necessary and possible, lifestyle and behavioural changes should be recommended before using CAM, and eventually be supplemented by CAM as a second step.

Cancer de la prostate. Épidémiologie. Facteurs de risques. Anatomopathologie

Prostate cancer (prostate adenocarcinoma) has become an important concern in terms of public health these past fifteen years; recent French epidemiological data revealed 10,104 deaths due to this disease in 2000. The two main factors involved are the serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA), routinely used since late 1980's and which allows early diagnosis (before symptom onset), and the lengthened duration of life. Such cancer is rare before the age of 50, but its frequency increases with age, making it the most frequent type of cancer in French men. Although the aetiology of this disease is unknown, the ethnic origin, and a familial history of prostate or breast cancer are known risk factors. Predisposing genes to such hereditary types remain to be identified. Other genetic factors (polymorphisms), combined with environmental factors such as nutrition, have been incriminated, which is likely to explain the geographical variations of this affection. At the molecular level, the mechanisms involved in the tumoral initiation and progression remain unclear. Various genetic alterations have been identified among the genome of cancerous cells, at various stages of the affection: intraepithelial neoplasia, localized, locally advanced, metastatic or hormone refractory stage -, hormonal escape). However, the precise sequence and nature of the complex molecular events remain to be determined prior to their routine utilisation in the determination of subjects at risk, or as prognostic factors, and even as therapeutic targets. The anatomopathology is a key for the diagnosis. Intraepithelial neoplasia is the pre-cancerous lesion observed in most adenocarcinomas; these are localized in the peripheral part of the prostate gland in 70% of the cases. Gleason's classification is the current gold standard for the determination of tumoral aggressiveness and categorisation of the adenocarcinomas which are basically heterogeneous (coexistence of tumors cells with different degrees of differenciation in the same tumor). This anatomopathological classification allows distinguishing the tumours in terms of potential progressiveness and prognosis, and hence, to orientate the therapeutic strategy in case of localised or locally advanced prostate cancer.

Selenium and selenomethionine levels in prostate cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Selenium (Se) and selenomethionine (Se-Met) have been identified as potential chemopreventive agents of prostate cancer. Using an assay for the speciation (separation and identification) and quantification of selenoamino acids, Se-Met was profiled in serum and prostate tissue from prostate cancer patients. Total Se was measured also.

METHODS

Serum and prostate tissue samples were analyzed using high performance liquid chromatography ion channel plasma-mass spectrometry (HPLC ICP-MS). Samples were provided by 25 subjects undergoing radical prostatectomy for the treatment of prostate cancer.

RESULTS

The mean serum Se-Met concentration was 59.4 +/- 19.5 ng/ml. Mean total serum Se levels were 133.8 +/- 29.2 ng/ml. Total Se levels in paired samples from the transitional and peripheral zones of the prostate were also compared. Total mean Se levels in peripheral zone tissue was higher than in transitional zone tissue (0.432 +/- 0.212 microg/g versus 0.293 +/- 0.172 microg/g, P = 0.01). Se-Met was detected in the majority of prostate tissues.

CONCLUSION

This group of prostate cancer patients had total Se levels in serum and in prostate tissue in a range expected for normal Se intake. There was a significantly higher total Se level found in peripheral versus transitional zone tissues. This is the first time that Se-Met has been detected in prostate tissue.

Herbs or natural products that decrease cancer growth part one of a four-part series

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To provide evidence-based research information about 31 herbs and natural products that have shown potential in early research to decrease cancer growth or as adjuncts with cancer treatment.

DATA SOURCES

Names of herbs and natural products with potential to decrease cancer growth have been selected from listings in the Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database and Lawrence Review of Natural Products-Monograph System. Information about these herbs has been found in evidence-based studies cited in references.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In preliminary studies, 31 herbs and natural products appear to have potential for cancer treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary evidence may be useful to healthcare professionals and patients with cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

The information in this article is designed to provide quick access for healthcare professionals working in clinical oncology. Oncology nurses who have this information can become resources for patients and other healthcare professionals.

Diet, anthropometric measures and prostate cancer risk: a review of prospective cohort and intervention studies

We reviewed 37 prospective cohort and four intervention studies on potential dietary risk factors for prostate cancer, published between 1966 and September 2003. Some studies were limited by small size, crude measurement of dietary exposure and limited control for confounders. Intervention and prospective cohort studies support a protective role against prostate cancer for selenium, and possibly for vitamin E, pulses and tomatoes/lycopene. Overall consumption of meat, eggs, vegetables, fruit, coffee, tea, carotenoids and vitamins A, C and D was not consistently related to prostate cancer risk. Intervention studies also indicate that supplementation with beta-carotene does not lower prostate cancer risk, except possibly in men with low beta-carotene status at baseline. For specific types of meat, alcoholic drinks, dairy products, fat and anthropometric measures, most cohort studies suggest either an increased risk or no relation with prostate cancer. For calcium, two cohort studies suggest an increased risk at very high calcium intakes (>2000 mg/day). In conclusion, prospective studies are consistent with a protective role for selenium, and possibly vitamin E, pulses and tomatoes/lycopene, in the aetiology of prostate cancer. Studies are inconclusive on the role of meat, dairy products, fat, vegetables, fruits, alcohol and anthropometric measures, whereas a very high calcium intake appears to be positively associated with prostate cancer risk.

Chemoprevention of prostate cancer with selenium: an update on current clinical trials and preclinical findings

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men in the United States. The etiological factors that give rise to prostate cancer are not known. Therefore, it is not possible to develop primary intervention strategies to remove the causative agents from the environment. However, secondary intervention strategies with selenium (Se) compounds and other agents represent a viable option to reduce the morbidity and mortality of prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss ongoing clinical trials. In addition, we discuss preclinical mechanistic studies that provide insights into the biochemical and molecular basis for the anti-carcinogenic activity of both inorganic and organic forms of Se.

Atmospheric metal deposition in a moss data correlation study with mortality and disease in the Netherlands

The present paper addresses the correlations between moss metal concentrations and epidemiological data on health and mortality rates in The Netherlands. Attention was given to both total and fractionated metal concentrations in the moss tissues, the latter by factor-analytical (mathematical) approaches, and to both grouped and specific diseases. Better than 95% probability correlations were found both for total moss elements and mortality due to specific diseases and for fractionated moss elements and mortality rates summed for grouped diseases. Overall, the presented data suggest that correlation studies between biomonitoring data on metal air pollution and (epidemiological) health data may prove valuable in turning attention to specific metal-health issues and in directing further study into possible dose-response mechanisms in air-associated metal epidemiology.

Follow-up of conservatively managed prostate cancer: watchful waiting and primary hormonal therapy

Many men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer choose not to undergo curative treatment, including patients who cannot be helped by local curative therapies (especially those with metastatic disease) and patients with clinically localized disease who opt for expectant management or noncurative treatments such as androgen ablation. This article reviews the selection of patients for these noncurative approaches, strategies for clinical monitoring, the choices of intervention therapies upon progression, and when to start these therapies.

Prostate Cancer Prevention: What Do We Know Now, and When Will We Know More?

Prostate cancer prevention is now one of the most aggressively investigated areas of urologic oncology, with > 30,000 men currently participating in clinical trials in the United States alone. The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial will complete end-of-study prostate biopsies in May 2004, and the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial is rapidly reaching its accrual goal 1-2 years ahead of schedule. These 2 studies will give definitive answers regarding 3 of the most important potential preventive interventions: finasteride, vitamin E, and selenium. Many phase II and biomarker-modulation studies are also ongoing, testing a host of other interventions. It is hoped that, within a short period of time, the clinician will be provided with strategies to reduce the risk of the disease.