Supplement use among men with prostate cancer

Wiygul, Jeremy; Evans, Brian; Peterson, Bercedis L.; Polascik, Thomas J.; Walther, Philip; Robertson, Cary N.; Albala, David; Demark‐Wahnefried, Wendy

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2005.01.035

Cited by 37 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, only 17 of these studies focused exclusively on men with prostate cancer. 22,24,28,29,34,36,37,39,40,50,51,54,56,[58][59][60]62 The remaining studies collected data from broader study populations and reported the prevalence of CAM use for subgroups including men with prostate cancer. 23,[25][26][27][30][31][32][33]35,38,[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49]52,53,55,57,61,63 The characteristics of all 42 included studies are summarised in Table 2 …”

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sollner et al 55 report the lowest prevalence rate (8%), but this is based on a very small sample size (n ¼ 12). Three of the four studies reporting prevalence rates above 60% focused on the use of dietary or nutritional supplements, 45,54,60 which are a broad class of therapies some of which (e.g. multivitamins) might now be considered conventional self-care rather than CAM.…”

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we focus on the five CAM modalities reported most frequently across studies (see Figure 2). In all, 11 studies reported prevalence of saw palmetto use among 6525 men; 22,24,28,34,36,51,54,56,[58][59][60] this ranged from 1.9 60 to 24.5%. 54 In all, 11 studies reported prevalence of selenium use among 7109 men; 22,24,28,36,50,51,54,56,[58][59][60] this ranged from 4.1 28 to 26.6%.…”

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In all, 11 studies reported prevalence of saw palmetto use among 6525 men; 22,24,28,34,36,51,54,56,[58][59][60] this ranged from 1.9 60 to 24.5%. 54 In all, 11 studies reported prevalence of selenium use among 7109 men; 22,24,28,36,50,51,54,56,[58][59][60] this ranged from 4.1 28 to 26.6%. 54 In all, 11 studies reported the prevalence of herbal medicine and supplement use among 5274 men; 24,29,[34][35][36][37]39,40,45,60,62 this ranged from 1.2 35 to 21.7%.…”

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…54 In all, 11 studies reported prevalence of selenium use among 7109 men; 22,24,28,36,50,51,54,56,[58][59][60] this ranged from 4.1 28 to 26.6%. 54 In all, 11 studies reported the prevalence of herbal medicine and supplement use among 5274 men; 24,29,[34][35][36][37]39,40,45,60,62 this ranged from 1.2 35 to 21.7%. 37 In all, 9 studies reported on use of vitamins among 1734 men; 29,34,35,37,40,54,56,59,62 this ranged from 3.6 62 to 79.3%.…”

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Complementary medicine use by men with prostate cancer: a systematic review of prevalence studies

Bishop

Rea

Lewith

et al. 2010

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Men with prostate cancer are reported as commonly using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) but surveys have not recently been subjected to a rigorous systematic review incorporating quality assessment. Six electronic databases were searched using pre-defined terms. Detailed information was extracted systematically from each relevant article. Study reporting quality was assessed using a quality assessment tool, which demonstrated acceptable inter-rater reliability and produces a percentage score. In all, 42 studies are reviewed. All were published in English between 1999 and 2009; 60% were conducted in the United States. The reporting quality was mixed (median score ¼ 66%, range 23-94%). Significant heterogeneity precluded formal meta-analysis. In all, 39 studies covering 11 736 men reported overall prevalence of CAM use; this ranged from 8 to 90% (median ¼ 30%). In all, 10 studies reported prevalence of CAM use specifically for cancer care; this ranged from 8 to 50% (median ¼ 30%). Some evidence suggested CAM use is more common in men with higher education/incomes and more severe disease. The prevalence of CAM use among men with prostate cancer varies greatly across studies. Future studies should use standardised and validated data collection techniques to reduce bias and enhance comparability.

show abstract

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prevalence Of Cam Usementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Complementary medicine use by men with prostate cancer: a systematic review of prevalence studies

Bishop

Rea

Lewith

et al. 2010

Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Resveratrol worsens survival in SCID mice with prostate cancer xenografts in a cell‐line specific manner, through paradoxical effects on oncogenic pathways

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Resveratrol increases lifespan and decreases the risk of many cancers. We hypothesized resveratrol will slow the growth of human prostate cancer xenografts. METHODS SCID mice were fed Western diet (40% fat, 44% carbohydrate, 16% protein by kcal). One week later, human prostate cancer cells, either LAPC-4 (151 mice) or LNCaP (94 mice) were injected subcutaneously. Three weeks after injection, LAPC-4 mice were randomized to Western diet (control group), Western diet plus resveratrol 50 mg/kg/day, or Western diet plus resveratrol 100 mg/kg/day. The LNCaP mice were randomized to Western diet or Western diet plus resveratrol 50 mg/kg/day. Mice were sacrificed when tumors reached 1,000 mm3. Survival differences among groups were assessed using Cox proportional hazards. Serum insulin and IGF axis were assessed using ELISAs. Gene expression was analyzed using Affymetrix gene arrays. RESULTS Compared to control in the LAPC-4 study, resveratrol was associated with decreased survival (50 mg/kg/day—HR 1.53, P = 0.04; 100 mg/kg/day—HR 1.22, P = 0.32). In the LNCaP study, resveratrol did not change survival (HR 0.77, P = 0.22). In combined analysis of both resveratrol 50 mg/kg/day groups, IGF-1 was decreased (P = 0.05) and IGFBP-2 was increased (P = 0.01). Resveratrol induced different patterns of gene expression changes in each xenograft model, with upregulation of oncogenic pathways E2F3 and beta-catenin in LAPC-4 tumors. CONCLUSION Resveratrol was associated with significantly worse survival with LAPC-4 tumors, but unchanged survival with LNCaP. Based on these preliminary data that resveratrol may be harmful, caution should be advised in using resveratrol for patients until further studies can be conducted.

show abstract

Dietary Supplements and Cancer Risk: Epidemiologic Research and Recommendations

Neuhouser

Rock

2009

Preventive Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supplement use among men with prostate cancer

Cited by 37 publications

References 20 publications

Complementary medicine use by men with prostate cancer: a systematic review of prevalence studies

Complementary medicine use by men with prostate cancer: a systematic review of prevalence studies

Resveratrol worsens survival in SCID mice with prostate cancer xenografts in a cell‐line specific manner, through paradoxical effects on oncogenic pathways

Dietary Supplements and Cancer Risk: Epidemiologic Research and Recommendations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About