SELECT: the next prostate cancer prevention trial. Selenum and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial

The efficacy of natural bioactive compounds against prostate cancer: Molecular targets and synergistic activities

Globally, prostate cancer (PCa) is regarded as a challenging health issue, and the number of PCa patients continues to rise despite the availability of effective treatments in recent decades. The current therapy with chemotherapeutic drugs has been largely ineffective due to multidrug resistance and the conventional treatment has restricted drug accessibility to malignant tissues, necessitating a higher dosage resulting in increased cytotoxicity. Plant-derived bioactive compounds have recently attracted a great deal of attention in the field of PCa treatment due to their potent effects on several molecular targets and synergistic effects with anti-PCa drugs. This review emphasizes the molecular mechanism of phytochemicals on PCa cells, the synergistic effects of compound-drug interactions, and stem cell targeting for PCa treatment. Some potential compounds, such as curcumin, phenethyl-isothiocyanate, fisetin, baicalein, berberine, lutein, and many others, exert an anti-PCa effect via inhibiting proliferation, metastasis, cell cycle progression, and normal apoptosis pathways. In addition, multiple studies have demonstrated that the isolated natural compounds: d-limonene, paeonol, lanreotide, artesunate, and bicalutamide have potential synergistic effects. Further, a significant number of natural compounds effectively target PCa stem cells. However, further high-quality studies are needed to firmly establish the clinical efficacy of these phytochemicals against PCa.

Distinct Roles of SELENOF in Different Human Cancers

SELENOF, previously known as SEP15, is a selenoprotein that contains selenium in the form of the amino acid selenocysteine. Like other selenoproteins, the role for SELENOF in carcinogenesis has been investigated due to its altered expression compared to the corresponding normal tissue, its molecular function, and the association of genetic variations in the SELENOF gene to cancer risk or outcome. This review summarizes SELENOF’s discovery, structure, cellular localization, and expression. SELENOF belongs to a new family of thioredoxin-like proteins. Published data summarized here indicate a likely role for SELENOF in redox protein quality control, and in the regulation of lipids, glucose, and energy metabolism. Current evidence indicates that loss of SELENOF contributes to the development of prostate and breast cancer, while its loss may be protective against colon cancer. Additional investigation into SELENOF’s molecular mechanisms and its impact on cancer is warranted.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Investigation of Selenium Supplementation in Women at Elevated Risk for Breast Cancer: Lessons for Re-Emergent Interest in Selenium and Cancer

Damage to cellular macromolecules such as DNA and lipid, induced via reactive oxygen species, and indicators of cell proliferation potential such as insulin-like growth factor (IGF) metabolic status are intermediate biomarkers of breast cancer risk. Based on reports that selenium status can affect these markers, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind experiment was conducted to investigate the potential of selenium supplementation to modulate breast cancer risk. Using a placebo tablet or a tablet containing 200 μg selenium provided as high-selenium yeast daily for one year, concentrations of the biomarkers in blood or urine were assessed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of intervention. The selenium intervention used in this study is presumed to mediate its effect via the induction of glutathione peroxidase activity and the consequential impact of the active form of this protein on oxidative damage. We found no evidence to support this hypothesis or to indicate that systemic IGF metabolic status was affected. Critical knowledge gaps must be addressed for the resurgence of interest in selenium and cancer to garner clinical relevance. Those knowledge gaps include the identification of a specific, high-affinity selenium metabolite and the cellular target(s) to which it binds, and the demonstration that the cellular determinant that the selenium metabolite binds plays a critical role in the initiation, promotion, or progression of a specific type of cancer.

The role of nutritional interventions in prostate cancer: A review

The high prevalence rate in conjunction with the long latency period made prostate cancer (PCa) an attractive and reasonable candidate for preventive measures. So far, several dietary and nutritional interventions have been implemented and studied with the aim of preventing the development or delaying the progression of PCa. Calorie restriction accompanied by weight loss has been shown to be associated with decreased likelihood of aggressive PCa. Supplements have played a major role in nutritional interventions. While genistein and lycopene seemed promising as preventive agents, minerals such as zinc and selenium were shown to be devoid of protective effects. The role of vitamins has been widely studied, with special emphasis on vitamins with antioxidant properties. Data related to Vitamin A and Vitamin C were rather controversial and positive effects were of insignificant magnitude. Vitamin E was associated with a decreased risk of PCa in high-risk groups like smokers. However, when it comes to Vitamin D, the serum levels might affect the risk of PCa. While deficiency of this vitamin was associated with increased risk, high serum levels imposed the risk of aggressive disease. Despite the seemingly promising effects of dietary measures on PCa, no firm recommendation could be made due to the limitations of the studies and evidence. However, the majority of these advices could be followed by the patients with the intent of living a healthy lifestyle.

Natural Compounds in Prostate Cancer Prevention and Treatment: Mechanisms of Action and Molecular Targets

Prostate cancer (PCa) represents a major cause of cancer mortality among men in developed countries. Patients with recurrent disease initially respond to androgen-deprivation therapy, but the tumor eventually progresses into castration-resistant PCa; in this condition, tumor cells acquire the ability to escape cell death and develop resistance to current therapies. Thus, new therapeutic approaches for PCa management are urgently needed. In this setting, natural products have been extensively studied for their anti-PCa activities, such as tumor growth suppression, cell death induction, and inhibition of metastasis and angiogenesis. Additionally, numerous studies have shown that phytochemicals can specifically target the androgen receptor (AR) signaling, as well as the PCa stem cells (PCSCs). Interestingly, many clinical trials have been conducted to test the efficacy of nutraceuticals in human subjects, and they have partially confirmed the promising results obtained in vitro and in preclinical models. This article summarizes the anti-cancer mechanisms and therapeutic potentials of different natural compounds in the context of PCa prevention and treatment.

Interaction of NKX3.1 and SELENOP genotype with prostate cancer recurrence

BACKGROUND

NKX3.1 is a tumor suppressor frequently lost in prostate cancer. Previous studies by others indicated that the risks associated with reduced NKX3.1 levels can be enhanced by anti-oxidant supplementation. Selenium is an essential component of several proteins with anti-oxidant functions and lower levels of selenium have been associated with greater risk of prostate cancer. In contrast, participants of the select prostate cancer prevention trial were at increased risk of prostate cancer when supplemented with selenium when their baseline selenium levels were high.

METHODS

In order to investigate whether there was an interaction between a functional polymorphism in NKX3.1 that results in less protein and selenium status with prostate cancer grade or outcome, plasma selenium levels and the genotypes of NKX3.1 and the selenium carrier protein SELENOP were determined from a cohort of men who underwent radical protatectomy.

RESULTS

NKX3.1 and SELENOP genotypes were associated with a more aggressive prostate tumor grade at the time of prostatectomy, but there were no significant interactions of NKX3.1 genotype with either selenium status or SELENOP genotype. There was also a significant association between NKX3.1 genotype and prostate cancer recurrence, however this association was modified by SELENOP genotype, but not with plasma selenium levels.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate that the impact of selenium status on prostate cancer may be influenced by factors other than the amount of selenium in circulation.

Selenomethionine and Methioninase: Selenium Free Radical Anticancer Activity

Colloidal selenium, was first used to treat cancer as early as 1911 in both humans and mice. Selenium was identified as the toxic component in forage plants of sheep, cattle, and horses in the 1930s. The animal toxicity of selenium compounds was determined to be from the metabolism by animals of the elevated concentrations of Se-methylselenocysteine and selenomethionine in plants. The metabolism of both Se-methylselenocysteine and selenomethionine by animals gives rise to the metabolite, methylselenide (CH₃Se-), which if in sufficient concentration oxidizes thiols and generates superoxide and other reactive oxygen species. Cancer cells that may overly express methionine gamma-lyase, or beta-lyase (methioninase), by induced viral genomic expression, are susceptible to free radical-induced apoptosis from selenomethionine or Se-methylselenocysteine supplementation.

Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Ten electronic databases, including Medline, INVOLVE Evidence Library, and clinical trial registries.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Experimental and observational studies quantitatively evaluating the impact of a PPI intervention, compared with no intervention or non-PPI intervention(s), on participant enrolment and/or retention rates in a clinical trial or trials. PPI interventions could include additional non-PPI components inseparable from the PPI (for example, other stakeholder involvement).

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data on enrolment and retention rates, as well as on the context and characteristics of PPI intervention, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine the average effect of PPI interventions on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: main analysis including randomised studies only, secondary analysis adding non-randomised studies, and several exploratory subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

26 studies were included in the review; 19 were eligible for enrolment meta-analysis and five for retention meta-analysis. Various PPI interventions were identified with different degrees of involvement, different numbers and types of people involved, and input at different stages of the trial process. On average, PPI interventions modestly but significantly increased the odds of participant enrolment in the main analysis (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval and prediction interval 1.01 to 1.34). Non-PPI components of interventions may have contributed to this effect. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the involvement of people with lived experience of the condition under study was significantly associated with improved enrolment (odds ratio 3.14 v 1.07; P=0.02). The findings for retention were inconclusive owing to the paucity of eligible studies (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 4.14), for main analysis).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings add weight to the case for PPI in clinical trials by indicating that it is likely to improve enrolment of participants, especially if it includes people with lived experience of the health condition under study. Further research is needed to assess which types of PPI work best in particular contexts, the cost effectiveness of PPI, the impact of PPI at earlier stages of trial design, and the impact of PPI interventions specifically targeting retention.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42016043808.

Redox regulation of protein kinase C by selenometabolites and selenoprotein thioredoxin reductase limits cancer prevention by selenium

The cancer-preventive mechanism of selenium should address the way low concentrations of selenometabolites react with cellular targets without being diffused from the sites of generation, the way selenium selectively kills tumor cells, and the intriguing U-shaped curve that is seen with dietary supplementation of selenium and cancer prevention. Protein kinase C (PKC), a receptor for tumor promoters, is well suited for this mechanism. Due to the catalytic redox cycle, low concentrations of methylselenol, a postulated active metabolite of selenium, react with the tumor-promoting lipid hydroperoxide bound to PKC to form methylseleninic acid (MSA), which selectively reacts with thiol residues present within the vicinity of the PKC catalytic domain to inactivate it. Given that lipid hydroperoxide levels are high in promoting cells, PKC inactivation selectively leads to death in these cells. A biphasic effect of MSA in inducing cell death was observed in certain prostate cancer cell lines; lower concentrations of MSA induced cell death, while higher concentrations failed to do so. Lower concentrations of selenium inactivate more sensitive antiapoptotic isoenzymes of PKC (ε and α), sparing less sensitive proapoptotic isoenzymes (PKCδ and PKCζ). Higher concentrations of selenium also inactivate proapoptotic isoenzymes and consequently make tumor cells resistant to apoptosis. Due to a high-affinity binding of thioredoxin to the PKC catalytic domain, this thiol oxidation is explicitly reversed by thioredoxin reductase (TXNRD), a selenoprotein. Therefore, overexpression of TXNRD in advanced tumor cells could make them resistant to selenium-induced death. Conceivably, this mechanism, at least in part, explains why selenium prevents cancer only in certain cases.

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.

Imbalance in Protein Thiol Redox Regulation and Cancer-Preventive Efficacy of Selenium

Although several experimental studies showed cancer-preventive efficacy of supplemental dietary selenium, human clinical trials questioned this efficacy. Identifying its molecular targets and mechanism is important in understanding this discrepancy. Methylselenol, the active metabolite of selenium, reacts with lipid hydroperoxides bound to protein kinase C (PKC) and is oxidized to methylseleninic acid (MSA). This locally generated MSA selectively inactivates PKC by oxidizing its critical cysteine sulfhydryls. The peroxidatic redox cycle occurring in this process may explain how extremely low concentrations of selenium catalytically modify specific membrane-bound proteins compartmentally separated from glutathione and selectively induce cytotoxicity in promoting cells. Mammalian thioredoxin reductase (TR) is itself a selenoenzyme with a catalytic selenocysteine residue. Together with thioredoxin (Trx), it catalyzes reduction of selenite and selenocystine by NADPH generating selenide which in the presence of oxygen redox cycles producing reactive oxygen species. Trx binds with high affinity to PKC and reverses PKC inactivation. Therefore, established tumor cells overexpressing TR and Trx may escape the cancer-preventive actions of selenium. This suggests that in some cases, certain selenoproteins may counteract selenometabolite actions. Lower concentrations of selenium readily inactivate antiapoptotic PKC isoenzymes e and a which have a cluster of vicinal thiols, thereby inducing apoptosis. Higher concentrations of selenium also inactivate proapoptotic enzymes such as proteolytically activated PKCd fragment, holo-PKCz, caspase-3, and c-Jun N-terminal kinase, which all have a limited number of critical cysteine residues and make tumor cells resistant to selenium-induced apoptosis. This may explain the intriguing U-shaped curve that is seen with dietary selenium intake and the extent of cancer prevention.

Association of genetic variations of selenoprotein genes, plasma selenium levels, and prostate cancer aggressiveness at diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Genetic variations in some of the selenoprotein genes, alone or together with an individual's selenium status, may influence risk or progression of prostate cancer. We investigated the impact of genetic variants of selenoproteins on plasma selenium levels and cancer aggressiveness at diagnosis in men with localized prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

The study cohort comprised 722 patients seen at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute who had localized/locally advanced PCa (i.e., stage T3 or less, N0, and M0) from 1994 to 2001. Fifty-five tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from six selenoprotein genes (TXNRD1, TXNRD2, SEP15, GPX3, SELENBP1, and SEPP1) were analyzed. Logistic regression is used to examine associations of genotypes and plasma selenium levels with risk of aggressive disease, defined as D'Amico intermediate/high risk categories. Step down permutation was applied to adjust for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Three hundred and forty-eight patients (48%) had aggressive disease at diagnosis. Two SNPs were associated with cancer aggressiveness at diagnosis (unadjusted P = 0.017 and 0.018, respectively). The odds ratio for aggressive disease in patients carrying TXNRD2 rs1005873-AG/GG genotypes or SELENBP1 rs10788804-AG/AA genotypes was 1.54 (95% CI = 1.08, 2.20) and 1.45 (95% CI = 1.07, 1.98), respectively, compared to TXNRD2 rs1005873-AA or SELENBP1 rs10788804-GG carriers. Four SNPs in TXNRD2 (rs1005873, rs13054371, rs3788310, and rs9606174) and the rs230820 in SEPP1 were associated with plasma selenium levels (unadjusted P < 0.05). Permutation adjusted P-values were not statistically significant for all these comparisons at the cut-off point of 0.05.

CONCLUSION

We identified polymorphisms in selenoproteins that may influence the plasma selenium levels and may be associated with the risk of presenting with aggressive PCa in men with localized or locally advanced PCa. These results should be validated in other independent datasets.

Importance of selenium and selenoprotein for brain function: From antioxidant protection to neuronal signalling

Multiple biological functions of selenium manifest themselves mainly via 25 selenoproteins that have selenocysteine at their active centre. Selenium is vital for the brain and seems to participate in the pathology of disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and epilepsy. Since selenium was shown to be involved in diverse functions of the central nervous system, such as motor performance, coordination, memory and cognition, a possible role of selenium and selenoproteins in brain signalling pathways may be assumed. The aim of the present review is to analyse possible relations between selenium and neurotransmission. Selenoproteins seem to be of special importance in the development and functioning of GABAergic (GABA, γ-aminobutyric acid) parvalbumin positive interneurons of the cerebral cortex and hippocampus. Dopamine pathway might be also selenium dependent as selenium shows neuroprotection in the nigrostriatal pathway and also exerts toxicity towards dopaminergic neurons under higher concentrations. Recent findings also point to acetylcholine neurotransmission involvement. The role of selenium and selenoproteins in neurotransmission might not only be limited to their antioxidant properties but also to inflammation, influencing protein phosphorylation and ion channels, alteration of calcium homeostasis and brain cholesterol metabolism. Moreover, a direct signalling function was proposed for selenoprotein P through interaction with post-synaptic apoliprotein E receptors 2 (ApoER2).

Candidate SNP associations of optimism and resilience in older adults: exploratory study of 935 community-dwelling adults

OBJECTIVE

Optimism and resilience promote health and well-being in older adults, and previous reports suggest that these traits are heritable. We examined the association of selected single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with optimism and resilience in older adults.

DESIGN

Candidate gene association study that was a follow-on at the University of California, San Diego, sites of two NIH-funded multi-site longitudinal investigations: Women's Health Initiative (WHI) and SELenium and vitamin E Cancer prevention Trial (SELECT).

PARTICIPANTS

426 women from WHI older than age 50 years, and 509 men older than age 55 years (age 50 years for African American men) from SELECT.

MEASUREMENTS

65 candidate gene SNPs that were judged by consensus, based on a literature review, as being related to predisposition to optimism and resilience, and 31 ancestry informative marker SNPs, genotyped from blood-based DNA samples and self-report scales for trait optimism, resilience, and depressive symptoms.

RESULTS

Using a Bonferroni threshold for significant association (p = 0.00089), there were no significant associations for individual SNPs with optimism or resilience in single-locus analyses. Exploratory multi-locus polygenic analyses with p <0.05 showed an association of optimism with SNPs in MAOA, IL10, and FGG genes, and an association of resilience with a SNP in MAOA gene.

CONCLUSIONS

Correcting for Type I errors, there were no significant associations of optimism and resilience with specific gene SNPs in single-locus analyses. Positive psychological traits are likely to be genetically complex, with many loci having small effects contributing to phenotypic variation. Our exploratory multi-locus polygenic analyses suggest that larger sample sizes and complementary approaches involving methods such as sequence-based association studies, copy number variation analyses, and pathway-based analyses could be useful for better understanding the genetic basis of these positive psychological traits.

A functional variant in NKX3.1 associated with prostate cancer risk in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT)

NKX3.1 is an androgen-regulated prostate tumor suppressor protein. We previously found that antioxidant administration (N-acetylcysteine) in the Nkx3.1 knockout mouse model promoted prostate epithelial proliferation, suggesting that NKX3.1 activity modifies the effect of antioxidant administration on prostate carcinogenesis. Interestingly, administration of the antioxidant vitamin E significantly increased prostate cancer risk in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT), suggesting that our animal experiments may be relevant to humans. To determine whether NKX3.1 played a role in increased human prostate cancer risk associated with antioxidant administration in SELECT, we investigated the joint risk of antioxidant administration and NKX3.1 genotypes previously found to be associated with decreased NKX3.1 mRNA expression (rs11781886) or DNA-binding activity in vitro (rs2228013) in the SELECT biomarker case-cohort substudy (1,866 cases; 3,135 non-cases). Multivariable COX regression models were developed to determine the joint association of NKX3.1 genotypes with administration of vitamin E, selenium, or the combination, compared with placebo. The CC genotype at rs11781886 combined with selenium administration was associated with increased overall prostate cancer risk [HR, 1.676; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.011-2.777; P = 0.045] and low-grade prostate cancer risk (HR, 1.811; 95% CI, 1.016-3.228; P = 0.0441). Similarly, the rs11781886 minor allele (CC+CT) combined with vitamin E administration was significantly associated with increased prostate cancer risk (HR, 1.450; 95% CI, 1.117-1.882; P = 0.0052). Our results indicate that variation in NKX3.1 expression combined with selenium or vitamin E treatment modifies the risk of prostate cancer. Genetic background may modulate the effects of antioxidant supplementation thought to act as chemoprevention agents.

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.

The strategies to control prostate cancer by chemoprevention approaches

Prostate cancer (PCA) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in men in the United States with growing worldwide incidence. Despite intensive investment in improving early detection, PCA often escapes timely detection and mortality remains high; this malignancy being the second highest cancer-associated mortality in American men. Collectively, health care costs of PCA results in an immense financial burden that is only expected to grow. Additionally, even in cases of successful treatment, PCA is associated with long-term and pervasive effects on patients. A proactive alternative to treat PCA is to prevent its occurrence and progression prior to symptomatic malignancy. This may serve to address the issue of burgeoning healthcare costs and increasing number of sufferers. One potential regimen in service of this alternative is PCA chemoprevention. Here, chemical compounds with cancer preventive efficacy are identified on the basis of their potential in a host of categories: their historical medicinal use, correlation with reduced risk in population studies, non-toxicity, their unique chemical properties, or their role in biological systems. PCA chemopreventive agents are drawn from multiple broad classes of chemicals, themselves further subdivided based on source or potential effect, with most derived from natural products. Many such compounds have shown efficacy, varying from inhibiting deregulated PCA cell signaling, proliferation, epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT), invasion, metastasis, tumor growth and angiogenesis and inducing apoptosis. Overall, these chemopreventive agents show great promise in PCA pre-clinical models, though additional work remains to be done in effectively translating these findings into clinical use.

Therapeutic applications of herbal medicines for cancer patients

Medicinal herbs and their derivative phytocompounds are being increasingly recognized as useful complementary treatments for cancer. A large volume of clinical studies have reported the beneficial effects of herbal medicines on the survival, immune modulation, and quality of life (QOL) of cancer patients, when these herbal medicines are used in combination with conventional therapeutics. Here, we briefly review some examples of clinical studies that investigated the use of herbal medicines for various cancers and the development of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this emerging research area. In addition, we also report recent studies on the biochemical and cellular mechanisms of herbal medicines in specific tumor microenvironments and the potential application of specific phytochemicals in cell-based cancer vaccine systems. This review should provide useful technological support for evidence-based application of herbal medicines in cancer therapy.

The antioxidant N-acetylcysteine prevents HIF-1 stabilization under hypoxia in vitro but does not affect tumorigenesis in multiple breast cancer models in vivo

Intratumoral hypoxia is a poor prognostic factor associated with reduced disease-free survival in many cancer types, including breast cancer. Hypoxia encourages tumor cell proliferation, stimulates angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis, and promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition and metastasis. Tumor cells respond to a hypoxic state by stabilizing the Hif-1α subunit of the Hypoxia-Inducible Factor (HIF) transcription factor to promote expression of various tumor- and metastasis-promoting hypoxic response genes. The antioxidant N-acetylcysteine (NAC) was recently shown to prevent Hif-1α stabilization under hypoxia, and has been identified as a potential alternative method to target the hypoxic response in tumors. We utilized three orthotopic syngeneic murine models of breast cancer, the PyMT, EO771 and 4T1.2 models, to investigate the ability of NAC to modulate the hypoxic response in vitro and in vivo. While NAC prevented Hif-1α stabilization under hypoxia in vitro and increased levels of glutathione in the blood of mice in vivo, this did not translate to a difference in tumor growth or the hypoxic state of the tumor compared to untreated control mice. In addition, NAC treatment actually increased metastatic burden in an experimental metastasis model. This work raises questions regarding the validity of NAC as an anti-tumorigenic agent in breast cancer, and highlights the need to further investigate its properties in vivo in different cancer models.

Antioxidant treatment promotes prostate epithelial proliferation in Nkx3.1 mutant mice

Discordant results in preclinical and clinical trials have raised questions over the effectiveness of antioxidants in prostate cancer chemoprevention. Results from the large-scale Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) showed that antioxidants failed to prevent, and in some cases promoted, prostate cancer formation in men without a history of the disease. One possible explanation for these alarming results is the notion that the effects of antioxidant treatment on the prostate are modified by specific, intrinsic genetic risk factors, causing some men to respond negatively to antioxidant treatment. Loss of expression of the homeobox transcription factor NKX3.1 in the prostate is frequently associated with human prostate cancer. Nkx3.1 mutant mice display prostatic hyperplasia and dysplasia and are used as a model of the early stages of prostate cancer initiation. While the mechanisms by which Nkx3.1 loss promotes prostate tumorigenicity are not completely understood, published data have suggested that elevated reactive oxygen species (ROS) associated with Nkx3.1 loss may be a causative factor. Here we have tested this hypothesis by treating Nkx3.1 mutant mice with the antioxidant N-acetylcysteine (NAC) for 13 weeks post-weaning. Surprisingly, while NAC treatment decreased ROS levels in Nkx3.1 mutant mouse prostates, it failed to reduce prostatic epithelial hyperplasia/dysplasia. Rather, NAC treatment increased epithelial cell proliferation and promoted the expression of a pro-proliferative gene signature. These results show that ROS do not promote proliferation in the Nkx3.1-null prostate, but instead inhibit proliferation, suggesting that antioxidant treatment may encourage prostate epithelial cell proliferation early in prostate tumorigenesis. Our findings provide new insight that may help explain the increased prostate cancer risk observed with vitamin E treatment in the SELECT trial and emphasize the need for preclinical studies using accurate models of cancer.

Antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in healthy participants and patients with various diseases

BACKGROUND

Our systematic review has demonstrated that antioxidant supplements may increase mortality. We have now updated this review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science to February 2011. We scanned bibliographies of relevant publications and asked pharmaceutical companies for additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all primary and secondary prevention randomised clinical trials on antioxidant supplements (beta-carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium) versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors extracted data. Random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses were conducted. Risk of bias was considered in order to minimise the risk of systematic errors. Trial sequential analyses were conducted to minimise the risk of random errors. Random-effects model meta-regression analyses were performed to assess sources of intertrial heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-eight randomised trials with 296,707 participants were included. Fifty-six trials including 244,056 participants had low risk of bias. Twenty-six trials included 215,900 healthy participants. Fifty-two trials included 80,807 participants with various diseases in a stable phase. The mean age was 63 years (range 18 to 103 years). The mean proportion of women was 46%. Of the 78 trials, 46 used the parallel-group design, 30 the factorial design, and 2 the cross-over design. All antioxidants were administered orally, either alone or in combination with vitamins, minerals, or other interventions. The duration of supplementation varied from 28 days to 12 years (mean duration 3 years; median duration 2 years). Overall, the antioxidant supplements had no significant effect on mortality in a random-effects model meta-analysis (21,484 dead/183,749 (11.7%) versus 11,479 dead/112,958 (10.2%); 78 trials, relative risk (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.05) but significantly increased mortality in a fixed-effect model (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05). Heterogeneity was low with an I(2)- of 12%. In meta-regression analysis, the risk of bias and type of antioxidant supplement were the only significant predictors of intertrial heterogeneity. Meta-regression analysis did not find a significant difference in the estimated intervention effect in the primary prevention and the secondary prevention trials. In the 56 trials with a low risk of bias, the antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality (18,833 dead/146,320 (12.9%) versus 10,320 dead/97,736 (10.6%); RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.07). This effect was confirmed by trial sequential analysis. Excluding factorial trials with potential confounding showed that 38 trials with low risk of bias demonstrated a significant increase in mortality (2822 dead/26,903 (10.5%) versus 2473 dead/26,052 (9.5%); RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.15). In trials with low risk of bias, beta-carotene (13,202 dead/96,003 (13.8%) versus 8556 dead/77,003 (11.1%); 26 trials, RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09) and vitamin E (11,689 dead/97,523 (12.0%) versus 7561 dead/73,721 (10.3%); 46 trials, RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.05) significantly increased mortality, whereas vitamin A (3444 dead/24,596 (14.0%) versus 2249 dead/16,548 (13.6%); 12 trials, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.18), vitamin C (3637 dead/36,659 (9.9%) versus 2717 dead/29,283 (9.3%); 29 trials, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.07), and selenium (2670 dead/39,779 (6.7%) versus 1468 dead/22,961 (6.4%); 17 trials, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) did not significantly affect mortality. In univariate meta-regression analysis, the dose of vitamin A was significantly associated with increased mortality (RR 1.0006, 95% CI 1.0002 to 1.001, P = 0.002).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to support antioxidant supplements for primary or secondary prevention. Beta-carotene and vitamin E seem to increase mortality, and so may higher doses of vitamin A. Antioxidant supplements need to be considered as medicinal products and should undergo sufficient evaluation before marketing.

Lycopene for the prevention of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is a common cause of death in developed countries, yet the benefits of screening for prostate cancer still remain controversial. A prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test result greater than 4 ng/mL (nanograms/millilitre) has commonly been used as the cut-off level for seeking further tests to diagnose the presence (or absence) of prostate cancer. An increase in PSA levels may not necessarily be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer, as PSA levels may also be increased in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatitis. Despite the uncertainty of the net benefit of early detection and treatment, safe and effective methods to prevent prostate cancer are of value. Consumers, seeking greater involvement in their healthcare, are increasingly turning to lifestyle modification and complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) to maintain their health and prevent disease. Lycopene is a member of the carotenoid family, which is found abundantly in tomatoes, tomato-based products, strawberries, and watermelon. It has been hypothesised that lycopene is a strong antioxidant, which may lower the risk of cancer (including prostate cancer) in people who have diets rich in lycopene.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether lycopene reduces the incidence of prostate cancer and prostate cancer-specific mortality. Secondary objectives include changes in PSA levels, prostate symptoms and the nature of adverse events associated with lycopene use.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted across MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. No language or other limitations were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of lycopene for the prevention of prostate cancer were eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A search of electronic databases, performed in August 2011, identified 64 citations. All articles were selected for full-text review. From these citations, three studies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Handsearching did not provide any additional studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Three RCTs, with a total of 154 participants were included in this review. None of the studies reported data on prostate cancer mortality. All of the included studies differed with respect to design, participants included and allocation of lycopene. This clinical heterogeneity limits the value on the pooled estimated of the meta-analyses. The methodological quality of two of the three included studies was assessed as posing a 'high' risk of bias. Meta-analysis indicated no statistical difference in PSA levels between men randomised to receive lycopene and the comparison group (MD (mean difference) -0.34, 95% CI (confidence interval) -2.01, 1.32). Only one study reported incidence of prostate cancer (10% in the lycopene group versus 30% in control group). The level of lycopene was also not statistically different in men randomised to receive lycopene and the comparison group (MD 0.39 µg/mL (micrograms/millilitre), 95% CI -0.19, 0.98). No other meta-analyses were possible since other outcomes assessed only had one study contributing data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given that only three RCTs were included in this systematic review, and the high risk of bias in two of the three studies, there is insufficient evidence to either support, or refute, the use of lycopene for the prevention of prostate cancer. Similarly, there is no robust evidence from RCTs to identify the impact of lycopene consumption upon the incidence of prostate cancer, prostate symptoms, PSA levels or adverse events.

Phase III trial of selenium to prevent prostate cancer in men with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia: SWOG S9917

The threat of prostate cancer and the significant and often negative impact of its treatment underscore the importance of prevention. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) has been identified as a potential premalignant lesion marking an increased risk of prostate cancer and substantial evidence suggests that men with HGPIN are in need of prostate cancer prevention. In vitro, in vivo, epidemiologic, and clinical trial evidence that selenium supplementation protects against prostate cancer motivated the study we report here: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of selenium 200 (μg/d) as selenomethionine in men with HGPIN. The primary endpoint was progression of HGPIN to prostate cancer over a 3-year period. This National Cancer Institute Intergroup trial was coordinated by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG). Of 619 enrolled patients, 423 randomized men with HGPIN (212 selenium and 211 placebo) were eligible (by central pathology review) and included in the primary analysis. Three-year cancer rates were 36.6% (placebo) versus 35.6% (selenium; P = 0.73, adjusted). The majority of patients who developed cancer on trial (70.8%, selenium and 75.5%, placebo) had a Gleason score of 6 or less than 6; there were no differences in Gleason scores between the two arms. Subset analyses included the finding of a nonsignificantly reduced prostate cancer risk (relative risk = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.40-1.69) in selenium versus placebo patients in the lowest quartile of baseline plasma selenium level (<106 ng/mL). Overall, and in all other subsets defined by baseline blood selenium levels, selenium supplementation had no effect on prostate cancer risk. The 36% prostate cancer rate in men with HGPIN indicates the association of this lesion with an elevated prostate cancer risk. Future study in this setting should focus on selenium-deficient populations and selenium pharmacogenetics.

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.

Nutrigenetics, nutrigenomics, and selenium

Selenium (Se) is an important micronutrient that, as a component of selenoproteins, influences oxidative and inflammatory processes. Its’ levels vary considerably, with different ethnic and geographic population groups showing varied conditions, ranging from frank Se deficiencies to toxic effects. An optimum Se level is essential for the maintenance of homeostasis, and this optimum may vary according to life stage, general state of health, and genotype. Nutrigenetic studies of different Se levels, in the presence of genetic variants in selenoproteins, suggest that an effective dietary Se intake for one individual may be very different from that for others. However, we are just starting to learn the significance of various genes in selenoprotein pathways, functional variants in these, and how to combine such data from genes into pathways, alongside dietary intake or serum levels of Se. Advances in systems biology, genetics, and genomics technologies, including genetic/genomic, epigenetic/epigenomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic information, start to make it feasible to assess a comprehensive spectrum of the biological activity of Se. Such nutrigenomic approaches may prove very sensitive biomarkers of optimal Se status at the individual or population level. The premature cessation of a major human Se intervention trial has led to considerable controversy as to the value of Se supplementation at the population level. New websites provide convenient links to current information on methodologies available for nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics. These new technologies will increasingly become an essential tool in optimizing the level of Se and other micronutrients for optimal health, in individuals and in population groups. However, definitive proof of such effects will require very large collaborative studies, international agreement on study design, and innovative approaches to data analysis.

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.

Mixed tocotrienols inhibit prostate carcinogenesis in TRAMP mice

The biological activities of tocotrienols are receiving increasing attention. Herein, we report the efficacy of a mixed-tocotrienol diet against prostate tumorigenesis in the transgenic adenocarcinoma mouse prostate (TRAMP) mouse model. Male TRAMP mice, 8 wk old, were fed 0.1%, 0.3%, or 1% mixed tocotrienols in AIN-76A diet up to 24 wk old. Likewise, a positive control group consisting of male TRAMP mice and a negative control group consisting of wild-type nontransgenic mice were fed regular AIN-76A diet up to 24 wk old. Our results show that mixed-tocotrienol-fed groups had a lower incidence of tumor formation along with a significant reduction in the average wet weight of genitourinary apparatus. Furthermore, mixed tocotrienols significantly reduced the levels of high-grade neoplastic lesions as compared to the positive controls. This decrease in levels of high-grade neoplastic lesions was found to be associated with increased expression of proapoptotic proteins BAD (Bcl(2) antagonist of cell death) and cleaved caspase-3 and cell cycle regulatory proteins cyclin dependent kinase inhibitors p21 and p27. In contrast, the expression of cyclins A and E were found to be decreased in mixed-tocotrienol groups. Taken together, our results show that by modulating cell cycle regulatory proteins and increasing expression of proapoptotic proteins, mixed tocotrienols suppress prostate tumorigenesis in the TRAMP mice.

Protective effects of selenium against DNA adduct formation in Inuit environmentally exposed to PCBs

Dietary habits that expose populations to potential toxicants as well as protective agents simultaneously are a realistic scenario where a meaningful assessment of the interactions and net benefit or damage can be made. A group of Inuit from Salluit, Northern Canada are exposed to high levels of PCBs and selenium, both present in the Inuit traditional foods such as blubber from sea mammals and fatty fish. Blood samples were collected from 83 Inuit, 22-70 years old. Blood selenium and PCB levels were determined previously and ranged from 227 to 2069µg/L and 1.7 to 143µg/L, respectively. DNA isolated from white blood cells were analyzed by modified (32)P-postlabeling adductomics technology that detects a multitude of highly polar to lipophilic adducts. The levels of 8-oxodG adducts ranged from 470 to 7400 adducts/10(9) nucleotides. Other as yet unidentified polar adducts showed a 30 to 800-fold inter-individual variability. Adduct levels were negatively associated with PCB and selenium levels. The subjects were classified into high and low ratio groups, with respect to selenium/PCB. In the high ratio group, the coefficient of selenium is significantly negatively correlated with 8-oxodG (r = -0.38, p = 0.014) and total adducts (r = -0.41, p = 0.009) while there was no correlation within the low selenium/PCB group. This study suggests that increasing selenium has mitigating effect in reducing DNA adducts and therefore, possible negative effects of PCB were not seen. A protective effect of selenium is highlighted.

Prospective evaluation of two recruitment strategies for a randomized controlled cancer prevention trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate two recruitment strategies used during the full-scale randomized, placebo-controlled Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) at one clinical center.

BACKGROUND

Recruitment of participants to cancer prevention trials is challenging and costly and more efficient methods are needed.

METHODS

SELECT participants were males ≥60 years old who were solicited with two recruitment strategies. In the control strategy, potential participants, identified through purchased mailing lists, were sent a SELECT invitation letter. In the 'spouse' strategy, letters were sent to married postmenopausal women already participating in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) at our clinical center asking them to provide an enclosed SELECT invitation letter (identical to the one in the control strategy) to the 'man in her life'. Our hypothesis was that SELECT recruitment of men would be enhanced by this indirect mailing to their spouses already participating in a similar program.

RESULTS

In the control strategy, 183,315 invitation letters were mailed to 60,000 men; cumulative response was 2.16%; 600 men ultimately enrolled in SELECT (15.1% of respondents) for a mailing recruitment cost of $259 per participant. In the spouse strategy, 800 women participating in WHI clinical studies had husbands; of the 2214 invitation letters mailed to this group of women, cumulative response was 2.75%; 34 men ultimately enrolled in SELECT (55.7% of respondents) for a mailing recruitment cost of $59 per participant.

LIMITATION

Process information on how invitation letters were handled in the spouse strategy was not collected.

CONCLUSION

A direct mail recruitment strategy was successful in recruiting men to a cancer prevention trial. A recruitment strategy involving indirect mailing to married women participating in a similar research program in the same center did not increase initial response substantially, but a higher proportion of respondents ultimately entered the prevention trial.

Chemopreventive mechanisms of α-keto acid metabolites of naturally occurring organoselenium compounds

Previous studies on the chemopreventive mechanisms of dietary selenium have focused on its incorporation into antioxidative selenoproteins, such as glutathione peroxidase and thioredoxin reductase. Several studies, however, have revealed that dietary selenium in the form of L-selenomethionine and the 21st amino acid, selenocysteine, also have intrinsic anti-cancer properties. Biochemical mechanisms previously investigated to contribute to their anticancer effects involve β- and γ-lyase reactions. Some pyridoxal 5'-phosphate (PLP)-containing enzymes can catalyze a β-lyase reaction with Se-methyl-L-selenocysteine (MSC) generating pyruvate and ammonia. Other PLP-enzymes can catalyze a γ-lyase reaction with L-selenomethionine (SM) generating α-ketobutyrate and ammonia. In both cases, a purported third product is methylselenol (CH(3)SeH). Although not directly quantifiable, as a result of its extreme hydrophobicity and high vapor pressure, CH(3)SeH has been indirectly observed to act through the alteration of protein-sulfhydryl moieties on redox-responsive signal and transcription factors, thereby maintaining a non-proliferative intracellular environment. We have considered the possibility that α-keto acid analogues of MSC (i.e., methylselenopyruvate; MSP) and SM (i.e., α-keto-γ-methylselenobutyrate; KMSB), generated via a transamination and/or L-amino acid oxidase reaction may also be chemoprotective. Indeed, these compounds were shown to increase the level of histone-H3 acetylation in human prostate and colon cancer cells. MSP and KMSB structurally resemble butyrate, an inhibitor of several histone deacetylases. Thus, the seleno α-keto acid metabolites of MSC and SM, along with CH(3)SeH derived from β- and γ-lyase reactions, may be potential direct-acting metabolites of organoselenium that lead to de-repression of silenced tumor suppressor proteins and/or regulation of genes and signaling molecules.

Unveiling the molecular mechanisms behind selenium-related diseases through knockout mouse studies

Selenium (Se), in the form of the 21st amino acid selenocysteine, is an integral part of selenoproteins and essential for mammals. While a large number of health claims for Se has been proposed in a diverse set of diseases, little is known about the precise molecular mechanisms and the physiological roles of selenoproteins. With the recent and rigorous application of reverse genetics in the mouse, great strides have been made to address this on a more molecular level. In this review, we focus on results obtained from the application of mouse molecular genetics in mouse physiology and discuss these insights into the physiological actions of selenoproteins in light of evidence from human genetics.

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.

Defining the Optimal Selenium Dose for Prostate Cancer Risk Reduction: Insights from the U-Shaped Relationship between Selenium Status, DNA Damage, and Apoptosis

Our work in dogs has revealed a U-shaped dose response between selenium status and prostatic DNA damage that remarkably parallels the relationship between dietary selenium and prostate cancer risk in men, suggesting that more selenium is not necessarily better. Herein, we extend this canine work to show that the selenium dose that minimizes prostatic DNA damage also maximizes apoptosis-a cancer-suppressing death switch used by prostatic epithelial cells. These provocative findings suggest a new line of thinking about how selenium can reduce cancer risk. Mid-range selenium status (.67-.92 ppm in toenails) favors a process we call "homeostatic housecleaning"-an upregulated apoptosis that preferentially purges damaged prostatic cells. Also, the U-shaped relationship provides valuable insight into stratifying individuals as selenium-responsive or selenium-refractory, based upon the likelihood of reducing their cancer risk by additional selenium. By studying elderly dogs, the only non-human animal model of spontaneous prostate cancer, we have established a robust experimental approach bridging the gap between laboratory and human studies that can help to define the optimal doses of cancer preventives for large-scale human trials. Moreover, our observations bring much needed clarity to the null results of the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) and set a new research priority: testing whether men with low, suboptimal selenium levels less than 0.8 ppm in toenails can achieve cancer risk reduction through daily supplementation.

Reduced expression of tocopherol-associated protein (TAP/Sec14L2) in human breast cancer

We show that TAP/Sec14L2 had a high expression in normal/benign breast, prostate, and liver tissues as compared to lung, colon, and kidney. Its expression was downregulated in breast cancer cell lines shown by quantitative-PCR. Further, 57% of 141 human invasive breast carcinomas had no or markedly reduced TAP/Sec14L2 expression by immunohistochemical staining, and the rate increased to 80% in high grade invasive carcinomas (p < .01). This downregulation of TAP/Sec14L2 was also present in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) associated with invasive carcinomas. These findings raise the possibility that TAP/Sec14L2 may serve as a tumor suppressor in breast carcinogenesis.

Molecular consequences of genetic variations in the glutathione peroxidase 1 selenoenzyme

Accumulating data have implicated the selenium-containing cytosolic glutathione peroxidase, GPx-1, as a determinant of cancer risk and a mediator of the chemopreventive properties of selenium. Genetic variants of GPx-1 have been shown to be associated with cancer risk for several types of malignancies. To investigate the relationship between GPx-1 enzyme activity and genotype, we measured GPx-1 enzyme activity and protein levels in human lymphocytes as a function of the presence of two common variations: a leucine/proline polymorphism at codon 198 and a variable number of alanine-repeat codons. Differences in GPx activity among these cell lines, as well as in the response to the low-level supplementation of the media with selenium, indicated that factors other than just genotype are significant in determining activity. To restrict the study to genotypic effects, human MCF-7 cells were engineered to exclusively express allelic variants representing a combination of either a codon 198 leucine or proline and either 5 or 7 alanine-repeat codons following transfection of GPx-1 expression constructs. Transfectants were selected and analyzed for GPx-1 enzyme activity and protein levels. GPx-1 with 5 alanines and a leucine at codon 198 showed a significantly higher induction when cells were incubated with selenium and showed a distinct pattern of thermal denaturation as compared with GPx-1 encoded by the other examined alleles. The collective data obtained using both lymphocytes and MCF-7 indicate that both intrinsic and extrinsic factors cooperate to ultimately determine the levels of this enzyme available to protect cells against DNA damage and mutagenesis.

Effects of selenite and genistein on G2/M cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in human prostate cancer cells

Combination of chemopreventive agents with distinct molecular mechanisms is considered to offer a potential for enhancing cancer prevention efficacy while minimizing toxicity. Here we report two chemopreventive agents, selenite and genistein, that have synergistic effects on apoptosis, cell cycle arrest, and associated signaling pathways in p53-expressing LNCaP and p53-null PC3 prostate cancer cells. We show that selenite induced apoptosis only, whereas genistein induced both apoptosis and G2/M cell cycle arrest. Combination of these two agents exhibited enhanced effects, which were slightly greater in LNCaP than PC3 cells. Selenite or genistein alone upregulated protein levels of p53 in LNCaP cells only and p21(waf1) and Bax in both cell lines. Additionally, genistein inhibited AKT phosphorylation. Downregulation of AKT by siRNA caused apoptosis and G2/M cell cycle arrest and masked the effects of genistein. Treatment with insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) elevated levels of total and phosphorylated AKT and suppressed the effects of genistein. Neither downregulation of AKT nor IGF-I treatment altered the cellular effects of selenite. Our study demonstrates that selenium and genistein act via different molecular mechanisms and exhibit enhanced anticancer effects, suggesting that a combination of selenium and genistein may offer better efficacy and reduction of toxicity in prostate cancer prevention.

Plasma selenium, manganese superoxide dismutase, and intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

In vitro, in vivo, and epidemiologic studies support a role for selenium in reducing the risk of prostate cancer. Our group previously demonstrated a strong interaction between plasma selenium and the manganese superoxide dismutase (SOD2) gene and incident prostate cancer risk. We now hypothesized that SOD2 modifies the association between selenium level and risk of aggressive prostate cancer at diagnosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We assessed SOD2 variants and plasma selenium in 489 patients with localized/locally advanced prostate cancer from an ongoing retrospective cohort. Cross-sectional associations with aggressive prostate cancer (ie, stage T2b-3, prostate-specific antigen > 10 ng/mL, or biopsy Gleason score > or = 7) were evaluated using the chi(2) test, Cochran-Armitage test for trend, and estimations of relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

SOD2 genotype alone was not associated with disease aggressiveness, whereas higher versus lower selenium levels were associated with a slightly increased likelihood of presenting with aggressive disease (RR = 1.35; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.84). There was evidence of an interaction between SOD2 and selenium levels such that among men with the AA genotype, higher selenium levels were associated with a reduced risk of presenting with aggressive disease (RR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32 to 1.12), whereas among men with a V allele, higher selenium levels were associated with an increased risk of aggressive disease (for VV or VA men, RR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.61; P for interaction = .007).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that the relationship between circulating selenium levels at diagnosis and prognostic risk of prostate cancer is modified by SOD2 genotype and indicate caution against broad use of selenium supplementation for men with prostate cancer.

Hierarchical regulation of selenoprotein expression and sex-specific effects of selenium

The expression of selenoproteins is controlled on each one of the textbook steps of protein biosynthesis, i.e., during gene transcription, RNA processing, translation and posttranslational events as well as via control of the stability of the involved intermediates and final products. Selenoproteins are unique in their dependence on the trace element Se which they incorporate as the 21st proteinogenic amino acid, selenocysteine. Higher mammals have developed unique pathways to enable a fine-tuned expression of all their different selenoproteins according to developmental stage, actual needs, and current availability of the trace element. Tightly controlled and dynamic expression patterns of selenoproteins are present in different tissues. Interestingly, these patterns display some differences in male and female individuals, and can be grossly modified during disease, e.g. in cancer, inflammation or neurodegeneration. Likewise, important health issues related to the selenium status show unexpected sexual dimorphisms. Some detailed molecular insights have recently been gained on how the hierarchical Se distribution among the different tissues is achieved, how the selenoprotein biosynthesis machinery discriminates among the individual selenoprotein transcripts and how impaired selenoprotein biosynthesis machinery becomes phenotypically evident in humans. This review tries to summarize these fascinating findings and highlights some interesting and surprising sex-specific differences.

Selenium and the prevention of prostate and colorectal cancer

Prostate and colorectal cancers are among the most common cancers and identifying modifiable risk factors are important steps to reduce the burden of these severe diseases. Results from several but mostly small observational studies as well as the secondary analysis of an intervention trial provide support for a chemopreventive effect of selenium on prostate and colorectal cancers. Results suggest effect modification by gender and smoking, but this interpretation is limited by the statistical power of previous studies. Several cancer preventive mechanisms have been described and it is likely that selenium acts through multiple pathways. In particular, the anti-oxidative and anti-inflammatory effects mediated through activity of selenoenzymes are discussed, given the relevance of oxidative stress and inflammation in these cancers. Genetic variation in selenoenzymes may modify the potential chemopreventive effect of selenium and need to be further investigated. Additional large observational studies using biomarkers of selenium intake and intervention trials, such as the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial, will be important to further evaluate the potential chemopreventive effect of selenium. Furthermore, characterization of functional effects of polymorphisms in selenoenzymes is needed.

Prostate cancer chemoprevention: update of the prostate cancer prevention trial findings and implications for clinical practice

This article updates the findings of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) based on recent publications and reviews of the PCPT. New evidence shows that finasteride reduces the overall risk of prostate cancer by 30% and reduces the risk of clinically significant prostate cancer, including high-grade tumors. For tumors with Gleason scores of < or = 6, men in the finasteride arm had a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 34% (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.80; P < or = 0.0001); tumors with Gleason scores of > or = 7 had an RRR of 27% (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.96; P = 0.02). The effect of finasteride on sexual function appears to be minimal as men on finasteride had an average 3.21 point increase on the 100 point Sexual Activity Scale compared with men on placebo. With an excellent safety profile and minimal side effects, men aged 55 years or older should be informed of the opportunity to reduce their risk of prostate cancer with finasteride.

Do we make optimal use of the potential of cancer prevention?

Three decades of intensive experimental and clinical research on cancer prevention have yielded an impressive body of scientific knowledge about cancer epidemiology, causation, and preventative measures. Despite our increased understanding in these critical areas, this knowledge is not being translated adequately into initiatives that will impact public health. The recent release of the World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research report on diet and lifestyle strategies for cancer prevention--grounded in an evidence-based, systematic review of the published literature--is a strong acknowledgment of the benefits of a lifestyle approach to reduce cancer risk. The report also emphasizes the need to increase basic nutritional science research to make optimal use of the knowledge gained in the past three decades. Medical approaches--represented by chemoprevention clinical trials--also have become more focused based on results from basic science leads. The expansion of preclinical chemoprevention studies and greater attention to "first-in-human" prevention trials that safely shorten the timeline for new drug development are needed. The development of a prevention focus for what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration calls "exploratory investigational new drug studies" and what investigators at the National Cancer Institute are calling "phase 0" clinical trials will contribute to the decision-making involved in designing larger cancer prevention clinical trials. Past achievements in phase III prevention clinical trials--such as the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial, and the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene--have provided early successes as evidence of the potential for public benefit to be derived from this research. Nevertheless, the application of these findings to clinical practice and the design of future prevention trials remains a challenge. Current strategies include the refinement of risk assessment models for several major cancers. Additional initiatives, based on emerging basic and clinical research, involve the development of potential biomarkers for cancer risk and early detection by the National Cancer Institute's Early Detection Research Network. Although a recent progress report indicates that biomarkers of cancer susceptibility and exposure have been identified, continued work is needed to validate such markers for clinical use. Using this information optimally for prevention through lifestyle changes or medical interventions will demand commitments from public and private research institutions. Another area of emerging research is the development of a systems biology approach to cancer prevention. This will demand the creation of multidisciplinary teams of researchers from biological sciences, informatics and engineering scientists, and researchers from many fields not generally focused on disease prevention. To facilitate this and other new approaches, and to make effective use of information and strategies for cancer prevention, intensive training efforts must be implemented to develop the next generation of basic and clinical scientists--and physician researchers--capable of working in a cross- and multidisciplinary research environment. Training current researchers in new approaches will add efficiency to their combined research experiences.

Locally generated methylseleninic acid induces specific inactivation of protein kinase C isoenzymes: relevance to selenium-induced apoptosis in prostate cancer cells

In this study, we show that methylselenol, a selenometabolite implicated in cancer prevention, did not directly inactivate protein kinase C (PKC). Nonetheless, its oxidation product, methylseleninic acid (MSA), inactivated PKC at low micromolar concentrations through a redox modification of vicinal cysteine sulfhydryls in the catalytic domain of PKC. This modification of PKC that occurred in both isolated form and in intact cells was reversed by a reductase system involving thioredoxin reductase, a selenoprotein. PKC isoenzymes exhibited variable sensitivity to MSA with Ca(2+)-dependent PKC isoenzymes (alpha, beta, and gamma) being the most susceptible, followed by isoenzymes delta and epsilon. Other enzymes tested were inactivated only with severalfold higher concentrations of MSA than those required for PKC inactivation. This specificity for PKC was further enhanced when MSA was generated within close proximity to PKC through a reaction of methylselenol with PKC-bound lipid peroxides in the membrane. The MSA-methylselenol redox cycle resulted in the catalytic oxidation of sulfhydryls even with nanomolar concentrations of selenium. MSA inhibited cell growth and induced apoptosis in DU145 prostate cancer cells at a concentration that was higher than that needed to inhibit purified PKC alpha but in a range comparable with that required for the inhibition of PKC epsilon. This MSA-induced growth inhibition and apoptosis decreased with a conditional overexpression of PKC epsilon and increased with its knock-out by small interfering RNA. Conceivably, when MSA is generated within the vicinity of PKC, it specifically inactivates PKC isoenzymes, particularly the promitogenic and prosurvival epsilon isoenzyme, and this inactivation causes growth inhibition and apoptosis.