Chemoprevention of colorectal tumors: role of lactulose and of other agents

Effects of chemopreventive agents on the incidence of recurrent colorectal adenomas: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Protective effects of several chemopreventive agents (CPAs) against colorectal adenomas have been well documented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there is uncertainty regarding which agents are the most effective.

Methods

We searched for RCTs published up until September 2016. Retrieved trials were evaluated using risk of bias. We performed both pairwise analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs to compare the effects of CPAs on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas (primary outcome). Using NMA, we ranked CPAs based on efficacy.

Results

We identified 20 eligible RCTs enrolling 12,625 participants with a history of colorectal cancer or adenomas who were randomly assigned to receive either a placebo or one of 12 interventions. NMA using all trials demonstrated that celecoxib 800 mg/day (relative risk [RR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45–0.83), celecoxib 400 mg/day (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55–0.87), low-dose aspirin (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59–0.96) and calcium (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.96) were significantly associated with a reduction in the recurrence of any adenomas. NMA results were consistent with those from pairwise meta-analysis. The evidence indicated a high (celecoxib), moderate (low-dose aspirin) and low (calcium) Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) quality. NMA ranking showed that celecoxib 800 mg/day and celecoxib 400 mg/day were the best CPAs, followed by low-dose aspirin and calcium. Considering advanced adenoma recurrence, only celecoxib 800 mg/day and celecoxib 400 mg/day were demonstrated to have a protective effect (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.27–0.52 vs RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.38–0.60, respectively).

Conclusion

The available evidence from NMA suggests that celecoxib is more effective in reducing the risk of recurrence of colorectal adenomas, followed by low-dose aspirin and calcium. Since cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (eg, celecoxib) are associated with important cardiovascular events and gastrointestinal harms, more attention is warranted toward CPAs with a favorable benefit-to-risk ratio, such as low-dose aspirin and calcium.

Dietary supplement use and colorectal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies

Use of dietary supplements is rising in countries where colorectal cancer is prevalent. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies on dietary supplement use and colorectal cancer risk. We identified relevant studies in Medline, Embase and Cochrane up to January 2013. Original and peer-reviewed papers on dietary supplement use and colorectal cancer, colon cancer, or rectal cancer incidence were included. "Use-no use"(U-NU), "highest-lowest"(H-L) and "dose-response"(DR) meta-analyses were performed. Random-effects models were used to estimate summary estimates. In total, 24 papers were included in the meta-analyses. We observed inverse associations for colorectal cancer risk and multivitamin (U-NU: RR = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87,0.97) and calcium supplements (U-NU: RR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.79,0.95; H-L: RR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.70,0.92; DR: for an increase of 100 mg/day, RR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.94,0.99). Inconsistent associations were found for colon cancer risk and supplemental vitamin A and vitamin C, and for colorectal cancer risk and supplemental vitamin D, vitamin E, garlic and folic acid. Meta-analyses of observational studies suggest a beneficial role for multivitamins and calcium supplements on colorectal cancer risk, while the association with other supplements and colorectal cancer risk is inconsistent. Residual confounding of lifestyle factors might be present. Before recommendations can be made, an extensive assessment of dietary supplement use and a better understanding of underlying mechanisms is needed.

Pharmacological and dietary prevention for colorectal cancer

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality. People at higher risk are those individuals with a family history of CRC and familial adenomatous polyposis. Prevention and screening are two milestones for this disease. The aim of this study is to evaluate the chemopreventive role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including aspirin and cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors, some micronutrients (folic acid, calcium, selenium, antioxidants) and probiotics.

Discussion

The studies on aspiring reported promising results, but it is debatable whether aspirin should be used as chemoprevention, because of its side effects and because of poor efficacy evident in subjects at high risk. Similar results were reported for other non-aspirin NSAIDs, such as sulindac and celecoxib, which the potential adverse effects limit their use. Selenium role in prevention of various types of cancer as well as in colon adenomas are often inconclusive or controversial. Several studies suggested that calcium may have a possible chemopreventive effect on colon adenomas and CRC, although contrasting results are reported for the latter. A recent meta-analysis including 13 randomized trial suggested that folic acid supplementation had not a chemiopreventive action on CRC. Several studies investigated the association between antioxidants, administered alone or in combination, and CRC risk, both among general and at risk population, but only few of them supported statistically significant results.

Conclusion

The results of this literature review showed an unclear role in CRC prevention of both pharmacological and dietary intervention. Despite several options are available to prevent colon cancer, it is challenging to identify a correct strategy to prevent CRC through pharmacological and dietary intervention due to the long latency of cancer promotion and development. Since some of the drugs investigated may have uncertain individual effects, it can be suggested to potentiate such effects by adding them together.

Antioxidant vitamins and chemoprevention

Free radicals play an important role in human carcinogenesis and the mechanism of their counteraction by antioxidant vitamins has been reviewed. It seems more likely that these vitamins work in concert rather than acting singly. Currently available data are compatible with the notion that these vitamins act as chemopreventives against some important cancers, e.g. carotenoids for lung cancer, ascorbic acid for salivary gland cancer, tocopherols for head and neck cancers etc. Thus, a greater consumption of fruits and vegetables should be encouraged as they are the natural sources of these chemopreventive, antioxidants along with other protective factors packaged by nature. However, much work still remains to be done to establish the role of antioxidant vitamins in carcinogenesis.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

Animal and physiological research as well as observational studies suggest that antioxidant supplements may improve survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of antioxidant supplements on mortality in primary or secondary prevention randomised clinical trials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2005), EMBASE (1985 to October 2005), and the Science Citation Index Expanded (1945 to October 2005). We scanned bibliographies of relevant publications and wrote to 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. Included participants were either healthy (primary prevention trials) or had any disease (secondary prevention trials).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors extracted data. Trials with adequate randomisation, blinding, and follow-up were classified as having a low risk of bias. Random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed. Random-effects meta-regression analyses were performed to assess sources of intertrial heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-seven randomised trials with 232,550 participants were included. Forty-seven trials including 180,938 participants had low risk of bias. Twenty-one trials included 164,439 healthy participants. Forty-six trials included 68111 participants with various diseases (gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, neurological, ocular, dermatological, rheumatoid, renal, endocrinological, or unspecified). Overall, the antioxidant supplements had no significant effect on mortality in a random-effects meta-analysis (relative risk [RR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99 to 1.06), but significantly increased mortality in a fixed-effect model (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06). In meta-regression analysis, the risk of bias and type of antioxidant supplement were the only significant predictors of intertrial heterogeneity. In the trials with a low risk of bias, the antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.08). When the different antioxidants were assessed separately, analyses including trials with a low risk of bias and excluding selenium trials found significantly increased mortality by vitamin A (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.24), beta-carotene (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11), and vitamin E (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.07), but no significant detrimental effect of vitamin C (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20). Low-bias risk trials on selenium found no significant effect on mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.09).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to support antioxidant supplements for primary or secondary prevention. Vitamin A, beta-carotene, and vitamin E may increase mortality. Future randomised trials could evaluate the potential effects of vitamin C and selenium for primary and secondary prevention. Such trials should be closely monitored for potential harmful effects. Antioxidant supplements need to be considered medicinal products and should undergo sufficient evaluation before marketing.

Nutritional interventions and outcome in patients with cancer or preinvasive lesions: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dietary modifications and supplements are used widely by patients with cancer and preinvasive lesions as an adjunct to standard treatment. Given the widespread use of nutritional modifications and supplements by such patients and concerns about the lack of benefit and possible harm, we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to examine the effect of nutritional interventions on patients with cancer or preinvasive lesions.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases and reference lists to locate all eligible trials and analyzed trial quality. Outcome measures were all-cause and cancer mortality, disease-free survival, cancer recurrence, second primary cancer, recurrence of a preinvasive lesion, or progression to cancer. Results of individual trials were combined by use of random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 59 eligible trials, 25 in patients with cancer and 34 in patients with preinvasive lesions, respectively. Trial quality was generally low; only three trials (two of cancer and one of preinvasive lesions) had adequate methods for generating the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, and masking both outcome assessors and participants. The combined odds ratio (OR) for the effect of a healthy diet-given alone or with dietary supplements, weight loss, or exercise-on all-cause mortality was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.46 to 1.77). There was no evidence of an association between the use of antioxidant (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.15) or retinol (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.83 to 1.13) supplements and all-cause mortality. Meta-analyses of all other outcomes did not show clear evidence of benefit or harm.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of most nutritional interventions cannot be reliably estimated because of the limited number of trials, many of which were of low quality. There is no evidence that dietary modification by cancer patients improves survival and benefits disease prognosis.

Meta-analysis: antioxidant supplements for primary and secondary prevention of colorectal adenoma

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer may be prevented by reducing the development of adenomatous polyps.

AIM

To assess the benefits and harms of antioxidant supplements in preventing colorectal adenoma.

METHODS

Using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology we reviewed all randomized clinical trials comparing antioxidant supplements with placebo or no intervention. We searched electronic databases and the reference lists until October 2005. Outcome measures were development of colorectal adenoma adverse events. We analysed dichotomous outcomes with fixed- and random-effects model meta-analyses and calculated the relative risk with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

We identified eight randomized trials (17 620 participants). Neither fixed-effect (relative risk: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.81-1.1) nor random-effect model meta-analyses (0.82, 0.60-1.1) showed statistically significant effects of supplementation with beta-carotene, vitamins A, C, E and selenium alone or in combination. Antioxidant supplements seemed to increase the development of colorectal adenoma in three low-bias risk trials (1.2, 0.99-1.4) and significantly decrease its development in five high-bias risk trials (0.59, 0.47-0.74). The estimates difference is significant (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the intervention groups regarding adverse events, including mortality (0.82, 0.47-1.4).

CONCLUSION

We found no convincing evidence that antioxidant supplements have significant beneficial effect on primary or secondary prevention of colorectal adenoma.

Antioxidant supplements for prevention of gastrointestinal cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Oxidative stress can cause cancer. Our aim was to establish whether antioxidant supplements reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer and mortality.

METHODS

With the Cochrane Collaboration methodology, we reviewed all randomised trials comparing antioxidant supplements with placebo for prevention of gastrointestinal cancers. We searched electronic databases and reference lists (February, 2003). Outcome measures were incidence of gastrointestinal cancers, overall mortality, and adverse effects. Outcomes were analysed with fixed-effect and random-effects model meta-analyses and were reported as relative risk with 95% CIs.

FINDINGS

We identified 14 randomised trials (n=170,525). Trial quality was generally high. Heterogeneity of results was low to moderate. Neither the fixed-effect (relative risk 0.96, 95% CI 0.88-1.04) nor random-effects meta-analyses (0.90, 0.77-1.05) showed significant effects of supplementation with beta-carotene, vitamins A, C, E, and selenium (alone or in combination) versus placebo on oesophageal, gastric, colorectal, pancreatic, and liver cancer incidences. In seven high-quality trials (n=131727), the fixed-effect model showed that antioxidant significantly increased mortality (1.06, 1.02-1.10), unlike the random-effects meta-analysis (1.06, 0.98-1.15). Low-quality trials showed no significant effect of antioxidant supplementation on mortality. The difference between the mortality estimates in high-quality and low-quality trials was significant (Z=2.10, p=0.04 by test of interaction). beta-carotene and vitamin A (1.29, 1.14-1.45) and beta-carotene and vitamin E (1.10, 1.01-1.20) significantly increased mortality, whereas beta-carotene alone only tended to increase mortality (1.05, 0.99-1.11). In four trials (three with unclear or inadequate methodology), selenium showed significant beneficial effect on the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer.

INTERPRETATION

We could not find evidence that antioxidant supplements can prevent gastrointestinal cancers; on the contrary, they seem to increase overall mortality. The potential preventive effect of selenium should be studied in adequate randomised trials.

Inhibition of chronic ulcerative colitis-associated colorectal adenocarcinoma development in a murine model by N-acetylcysteine

Long-term ulcerative colitis (UC) patients are at increased risk for developing colorectal cancer. In order to develop strategies for preventing UC-associated carcinogenesis, we studied the effect of the antioxidant N-acetylcysteine (NAC) on UC-associated cancer development in a mouse model. Female C57BL/6J mice were subjected to long-term administration of dextran sulfate sodium (DSS) in the drinking fluid and 2-fold iron-enriched AIN76A diet, with or without NAC. In the DSS-plus-2-fold iron positive control group, gross tumor incidence was 88.5% (23/26 mice) after 12 DSS cycles (1 DSS cycle = 7 day DSS treatment period followed by 10 day recovery period). The tumor multiplicity was 2.1 +/- 0.2 tumors/tumor-bearing mouse, and the tumor volume was 0.054 +/- 0.019 cm3. With 0.2% NAC administration, tumor incidence was significantly reduced (68%, 17/25 mice; P < 0.05), as was the tumor multiplicity (1.5 +/- 0.1 tumors/tumor-bearing mouse; P < 0.05). The tumor volume was lower (0.014 +/- 0.004 cm3), but not significantly decreased. The proliferation index was significantly decreased in non-cancerous epithelia (48.5 +/- 6.0% vs 32.0 +/- 3.7%; P < 0.05), but not in tumor cells. NAC significantly induced apoptosis in both non-cancerous epithelia and colorectal adenocarcinoma. The number of cells immunostained-positive for nitrotyrosine was markedly decreased in the non-cancerous mucosa of NAC-treated mice (102.4 +/-16.6 positive cells/mm2 mucosa vs 53.6 +/- 14.9 cells/mm2; P < 0.05). In addition, the number of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS)-positive inflammatory cells in the non-cancerous mucosa of the distal colon was markedly decreased by NAC. This study indicates that the antioxidant NAC has the potential to serve as a preventive agent for UC-associated colorectal cancer, possibly via inhibition of cellular proliferation and nitrosative stress-caused cellular damage.

Primary prevention of colorectal cancer: diet and drugs

Primary prevention of colonic adenomas and cancer through dietary interventions or chemoprevention has great appeal. This article discusses primary prevention goals and promising nutritional or chemopreventive strategies. There is substantial observational evidence that diets high in total calories and fat and or low in fruits and vegetables or total fiber as well as low levels of physical activity are related to the risk of colonic neoplasia. Similar observational data indicate that diets high in specific nutrients such as antioxidant vitamins or calcium may be protective. The article describes some of the newer chemopreventive agents and reviews the data linking diet and lifestyle to colorectal cancer risk, focusing on interventions that have also been studied in prospective clinical trials. Finally the evidence supporting the role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the chemoprevention of CRC is reviewed and the status of several other promising newer agents that are entering human trials is summarized.

Prevention and chemoprevention of colorectal neoplasms

Main purpose of the review is to analyse the impact of the current approaches for colorectal cancer prevention, including chemoprevention. Available evidence does not support the contention that a more appropriate diet can be of great help in the prevention of these neoplasms, either because the scientific evidence is poor and highly controversial, or because changes in diet are difficult to implement, at least in many Western countries. Similarly, a preventive approach based on the modification of lifestyle remains improbable, either in the short --or in the long period of time. Secondary prevention--i.e., the systematic removal of adenomatous polyps--can hardly be applied in the general population, with the exception of individuals at risk because members of families with Adenomatosis coli or Lynch syndrome, or affected by inflammatory bowel diseases. Finally, chemoprevention (i.e., the attempt to prevent tumour development through the administration of drugs or natural compounds that interfere with various phases of carcinogenesis) is still in its infancy Though attractive, this approach requires well-designed studies which should be carried out for years before being evaluated and interpreted; so far most of these investigations gave inconsistent or controversial results. In conclusion, both primary and secondary prevention of colorectal malignancies appear difficult to apply in the general population, and chemoprevention is still at the beginning of a (presumably] long story. The final impression is that notwithstanding the remarkable advancements made in the last two decades in colorectal cancer research, the practical application of these new concepts remains difficult.

Most effective colon cancer chemopreventive agents in rats: a systematic review of aberrant crypt foci and tumor data, ranked by potency

Potential chemopreventive agents for colorectal cancer are assessed in rodents. We speculated that the magnitude of the effect is meaningful and ranked all published agents according to their potency. Data were gathered systematically from 137 articles with the aberrant crypt foci (ACF) end point and from 146 articles with the tumor end point. The potency of each agent to reduce the number of ACF is listed in one table and the potency of each agent to reduce the tumor incidence in another table. Both tables are shown in this review and on a website with sorting abilities (http://www.inra.fr/reseau-nacre/sci-memb/corpet/indexan.html). Potency was estimated as the ratio of the value in control rats to the value in treated rats. From each article, only the most potent agent was kept, except in articles reporting the effect of more than seven agents. Among the 186 agents in the ACF table, the median agent reduced the number of ACF by one-half. The most potent agents to reduce azoxymethane-induced ACF were Pluronic, polyethylene glycol, perilla oil with beta-carotene, and sulindac sulfide. Among the 160 agents in the tumor table, the median agent reduced the tumor incidence in rats by one-half. The most potent agents to reduce the incidence of azoxymethane-induced tumors were celecoxib, a protease inhibitor from soy, difluoromethylornithine with piroxicam, polyethylene glycol, and a thiosulfonate. For the 57 agents present in both tables, a significant correlation (r) was found between the potencies against ACF and tumors (r = 0.45, P < 0.001); without celecoxib, a major outlying point in the correlation, r = 0.68 (P < 0.001, n = 56). In conclusion, this review gathers most known chemopreventive agents, ranks the most promising agents against colon carcinogenesis in rats or mice, and further supports the use of ACF as a surrogate end point for tumors in rats.

Mechanisms of N-acetylcysteine in the prevention of DNA damage and cancer, with special reference to smoking-related end-points

Although smoking cessation is the primary goal for the control of cancer and other smoking-related diseases, chemoprevention provides a complementary approach applicable to high risk individuals such as current smokers and ex-smokers. The thiol N-acetylcysteine (NAC) works per se in the extracellular environment, and is a precursor of intracellular cysteine and glutathione (GSH). Almost 40 years of experience in the prophylaxis and therapy of a variety of clinical conditions, mostly involving GSH depletion and alterations of the redox status, have established the safety of this drug, even at very high doses and for long-term treatments. A number of studies performed since 1984 have indicated that NAC has the potential to prevent cancer and other mutation-related diseases. N-Acetylcysteine has an impressive array of mechanisms and protective effects towards DNA damage and carcinogenesis, which are related to its nucleophilicity, antioxidant activity, modulation of metabolism, effects in mitochondria, decrease of the biologically effective dose of carcinogens, modulation of DNA repair, inhibition of genotoxicity and cell transformation, modulation of gene expression and signal transduction pathways, regulation of cell survival and apoptosis, anti-inflammatory activity, anti-angiogenetic activity, immunological effects, inhibition of progression to malignancy, influence on cell cycle progression, inhibition of pre-neoplastic and neoplastic lesions, inhibition of invasion and metastasis, and protection towards adverse effects of other chemopreventive agents or chemotherapeutical agents. These mechanisms are herein reviewed and commented on with special reference to smoking-related end-points, as evaluated in in vitro test systems, experimental animals and clinical trials. It is important that all protective effects of NAC were observed under a range of conditions produced by a variety of treatments or imbalances of homeostasis. However, our recent data show that, at least in mouse lung, under physiological conditions NAC does not alter per se the expression of multiple genes detected by cDNA array technology. On the whole, there is overwhelming evidence that NAC has the ability to modulate a variety of DNA damage- and cancer-related end-points.

Tolerance to low-digestible carbohydrates: symptomatology and methods

Low-digestible carbohydrates (LDCs) are incompletely or not absorbed in the small bowel and fermented in the colon. They are usually well tolerated but may also have some dose-related undesirable effects due to their natural osmotic potential and/or excessive fermentation: borborygmi, excessive flatus, bloating, abdominal cramps and eventually diarrhoea. There is an important intersubject variability in the tolerance to LDCs because of differences in absorption capacity, motility pattern, colonic response and intestinal sensitivity. There is also a great intrasubject variability, depending on the type of LDC, dosage and type of consumption. Absorption of LDC in the small intestine can be assessed using hydrogen breath test or intubation techniques or analysis of ileostomy effluents. Double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are required to assess the subjective symptoms of intolerance, and the experimental conditions may influence the results.

Chemoprevention of Colorectal Cancer

Goal

After completing this CE program, the participant will understand the basic concepts of chemoprevention and will be able to discuss the currently existing clinical data for the chemoprevention of colorectal cancer.

Objectives

At the completion of this program the participant will be able to: 1. Discuss the complicating factors in performing chemoprevention trials. 2. Describe the dietary modifications to prevent colorectal cancer. 3. Describe the proposed mechanisms of action of agents used in the chemoprevention of colorectal cancer. 4. Discuss, and where appropriate recommend, appropriate agents for use in the chemoprevention of colorectal cancer. 5. Describe the differences between familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC), and spontaneous adenoma formation.

N-acetylcysteine suppression of the proliferative index in the colon of patients with previous adenomatous colonic polyps

This investigation is part of an effort to develop chemoprevention for carcinogenesis of the large bowel. The agent investigated is N-acetylcysteine (NAC). We used as a predictive biomarker, the proliferative index (PI), in a short-term human study. Patients with previous adenomatous colonic polyps are a cohort with increased risk for colon cancer and an increased PI of colonic crypts. They were randomly assigned to an experimental group given 800 mg/day of NAC for 12 weeks or a placebo group. Using proliferative cell nuclear antigen immunostaining, the PI of colonic crypts was measured prior to and after the treatments. The PI of the NAC group was decreased significantly (P < 0.02) while the placebo group showed no difference (P > 0.45). Since this decrease in PI may be an indicator of decreased risk of colon cancer, more extensive studies of the potential of NAC as a chemopreventive agent for colon cancer appear warranted.

Dietary carbohydrates and the colonic microflora

The world of the colonic microflora has lain dormant in recent years, but is coming alive now with the advent of new chemical and molecular technologies for identifying bacteria, and the emergence of the concepts of biofilms, pro- and prebiotics. That bacteria play an essential role in barrier resistance to infection, ulcerative colitis and colorectal cancer is slowly becoming clear. New potential therapeutic avenues using bacteria should soon start to open up. Scientifically we lack an understanding of the mechanisms at work.

Prevention of PC12 cell death by N-acetylcysteine requires activation of the Ras pathway

We have shown that N-acetylcysteine (NAC) promotes survival of sympathetic neurons and pheochromocytoma (PC12) cells in the absence of trophic factors. This action of NAC was not related to its antioxidant properties or ability to increase intracellular glutathione levels but was instead dependent on ongoing transcription and seemed attributable to the action of NAC as a reducing agent. Here, we investigate the mechanism by which NAC promotes neuronal survival. We show that NAC activates the Ras-extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) pathway in PC12 cells. Ras activation by NAC seems necessary for survival in that it is unable to sustain serum-deprived PC12 MM17-26 cells constitutively expressing a dominant-negative form of Ras. Promotion of PC12 cell survival by NAC is totally blocked by PD98059, an inhibitor of the ERK-activating MAP kinase/ERK kinase, suggesting a required role for ERK activation in the NAC mechanism. In contrast, LY294002 and wortmannin, inhibitors of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) that partially block NGF-promoted PC12 cell survival, have no effect on prevention of death by NAC. We hypothesized previously that the ability of NAC to promote survival correlates with its antiproliferative properties. However, although NAC does not protect PC12 MM17-26 cells from loss of trophic support, it does inhibit their capacity to synthesize DNA. Thus, the antiproliferative effect of NAC does not require Ras activation, and inhibition of DNA synthesis is insufficient to mediate NAC-promoted survival. These findings highlight the role of Ras-ERK activation in the mechanism by which NAC prevents neuronal death after loss of trophic support.