U.S. Army Captain Michael Kelvington, commander of the Battle company, 1-508 Parachute Infantry battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, bows next to remains of Gulam Dostager, a member of Afghan Local Police who was killed in the blast of an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) during the joint Tor Janda (Black Flag in Pashtu) operation, in Zahri district of Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan May 25, 2012.  REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov  (AFGHANISTAN - Tags: MILITARY CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Members of the U.S. Navy Blue Angels fly over the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan as part of the 25th annual Fleet Week celebration in New York, May 23, 2012.  REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz (UNITED STATES - Tags: MILITARY ANNIVERSARY TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Fleet Week

The U.S. Navy takes Manhattan for a week.  Slideshow 

Photo

The SpaceX mission

A privately owned unmanned rocket blasts off on a mission to be the first commercial flight to the International Space Station.  Slideshow 

Supplements don't prevent prostate cancer: study

Related Topics

NEW YORK | Thu May 5, 2011 10:24am EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A new study deflates hopes that certain nutritional supplements could stave off prostate cancer, the second most common cancer in men.

Canadian researchers found that vitamin E, selenium and soy, taken daily for three years, provided no benefit to men who were at a higher risk of developing the disease.

The findings come three years after a larger study of men, who were at no increased risk of prostate cancer, also found no benefit of selenium or vitamin E supplementation (see Reuters Health report, October 28, 2008).

Initially, there had been high hopes for these supplements, said Dr. Neil Fleshner, who worked on the new research and heads the urology department at the University Health Network in Toronto.

Surveys of people who consumed high levels of vitamin E, selenium, or soy through their diets or by supplements found a decreased risk of developing prostate cancer, and experiments in laboratory animals also showed a benefit.

Vitamin E and selenium are both antioxidants that are present in foods.

In this study, the researchers randomly assigned 303 men to take either a combination of the supplements or a non-nutritive powder that resembled the supplements every day for three years.

The combination included 40 g of soy (about 1/3 of a cup), 800 U of vitamin E (about 35 times the recommended dietary levels), and 0.2 milligrams of selenium (four times the recommended dietary amount).

All the men had signs of pre-cancerous cells, which put them at a higher risk for developing prostate cancer.

When Fleshner and his colleagues compared the number of cases of cancer in each group, the results were nearly identical. Twenty-six out of every 100 men developed prostate cancer after three years, regardless of whether they took the supplement or the whey-based placebo powder.

"To our chagrin, there was no benefit," Fleshner told Reuters Health.

The current research differed from previous work in that it included soy. Fleshner said rates of prostate cancer are much lower in China and Japan, where people consume soy in large amounts, than in the United States or Canada.

The results don't rule out that soy might be beneficial to those who eat it frequently for decades, but three years of extra soy don't appear to help prevent prostate cancer.

The Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute funded the study, and the supplements were provided by a company that manufactures them.

"I think that in the absence of more compelling scientific data for vitamin E and selenium, that we should move on," Dr. Eric Klein, chair of the Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute at the Cleveland Clinic, who headed the 2008 study, told Reuters Health.

Prostate cancer is diagnosed in 156 out of every 10,000 men in the United States each year. But some of the tumors may never become deadly and there is debate over the best way to treat them.

Fleshner agreed with Klein, who was not involved in the new study, in that there are enough data now to warrant abandoning research on vitamin E, selenium and soy and their potential benefits to preventing prostate cancer.

"We need to look at new strategies and novel nutritional agents," Fleshner said.

SOURCE: bit.ly/jVMG1a Journal of Clinical Oncology, online May 2, 2011.

(This story was corrected in paragraph 8 to change selenium dose to 0.2 milligrams)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
carlvincent wrote:
So say that no supplement of any kind benefits those who are at risk of or already have prostate cancer is presumptuous at best. The original article posted on 5/4 mentioned that the three supplements used in the study were from one and the same manufacturer. It is not known whether this manufacturer also sells in the US or any other country. We also don’t know the quality and grade of the supplements used. As professionals know, vitamins come in many different variations, not just quality, but also whether they have been derived from their natural origins or whether they are completely natural in the form used in the study.

It is unfortunate that news media would continue to put legitimate and ethical manufacturers of supplements that have been clinically proven to work in a bad light when choosing language such as this article appears to do. Also, Why didn’t the study analyze the chemical composition of soy used in Japan vs. the soy used in the study?

Finally, why subject study subjects to three years of agony when trans-resveratrol could do a much more effective job?

May 05, 2011 2:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
may12002 wrote:
A misleading headline. Too bad they didn’t test the supplement iodine, I think their results would have been different. Why are medical researchers so far behind what all the health nuts of the world already know?

May 05, 2011 2:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.