BACKGROUND: Low serum selenium concentration has been associated with increased risk of prostate cancer. A possible mechanism is through the antioxidant activity of selenoenzymes. However, the effect of selenium intake on selenoenzymes at target tissues is not well established. Hence, we investigated the correlation between serum and prostate tissue selenium concentrations and prostate tissue activity of glutathione peroxidase (GPX), a major selenoenzyme with antioxidant properties. METHODS: In an ongoing study investigating gene expression in prostate tissue, we measured serum selenium concentration in 98 men using atomic absorption spectrometry. Of these men, we selected 12 men with the highest and 12 men with the lowest serum selenium concentrations and measured selenium concentration and GPX activity in fresh frozen prostate tissue using the cyclic neutron activation analysis and a direct spectrophotometric procedure, respectively. RESULTS: The mean serum selenium concentrations among low and high selenium groups were 123.7 +/- 5.9 and 196.7 +/- 16.6 microg/L (P < 0.0001), respectively. The corresponding mean prostate tissue selenium concentrations were 1.39 +/- 0.28 and 1.65 +/- 0.42 microg/g (P = 0.08), resulting in a positive correlation between serum and prostate tissue selenium concentrations (r = 0.56, P = 0.02). The mean prostate tissue GPX activity was non-significantly greater in the low serum selenium group (32.2 +/- 8.4 U/g protein) than in the high serum selenium group (29.6 +/- 5.9 U/g protein) (P = 0.39) and it was not correlated with serum or prostate tissue selenium concentrations (r = -0.22, P = -0.37 for serum and r = -0.33, P = 0.18 for prostate tissue). CONCLUSION: Serum and prostate tissue selenium concentrations were moderately correlated. In this population with relatively high selenium concentration, neither prostate tissue nor serum selenium concentrations were associated with prostate tissue GPX activity.
BACKGROUND: Low serum selenium concentration has been associated with increased risk of prostate cancer. A possible mechanism is through the antioxidant activity of selenoenzymes. However, the effect of selenium intake on selenoenzymes at target tissues is not well established. Hence, we investigated the correlation between serum and prostate tissue selenium concentrations and prostate tissue activity of glutathione peroxidase (GPX), a major selenoenzyme with antioxidant properties. METHODS: In an ongoing study investigating gene expression in prostate tissue, we measured serum selenium concentration in 98 men using atomic absorption spectrometry. Of these men, we selected 12 men with the highest and 12 men with the lowest serum selenium concentrations and measured selenium concentration and GPX activity in fresh frozen prostate tissue using the cyclic neutron activation analysis and a direct spectrophotometric procedure, respectively. RESULTS: The mean serum selenium concentrations among low and high selenium groups were 123.7 +/- 5.9 and 196.7 +/- 16.6 microg/L (P < 0.0001), respectively. The corresponding mean prostate tissue selenium concentrations were 1.39 +/- 0.28 and 1.65 +/- 0.42 microg/g (P = 0.08), resulting in a positive correlation between serum and prostate tissue selenium concentrations (r = 0.56, P = 0.02). The mean prostate tissue GPX activity was non-significantly greater in the low serum selenium group (32.2 +/- 8.4 U/g protein) than in the high serum selenium group (29.6 +/- 5.9 U/g protein) (P = 0.39) and it was not correlated with serum or prostate tissue selenium concentrations (r = -0.22, P = -0.37 for serum and r = -0.33, P = 0.18 for prostate tissue). CONCLUSION: Serum and prostate tissue selenium concentrations were moderately correlated. In this population with relatively high selenium concentration, neither prostate tissue nor serum selenium concentrations were associated with prostate tissue GPX activity.
Authors: Ulrike Peters; Charles B Foster; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Arthur Schatzkin; Douglas Reding; Gerald L Andriole; E David Crawford; Stefan Sturup; Stephen J Chanock; Richard B Hayes Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Anita L Sabichi; J Jack Lee; Robert J Taylor; Ian M Thompson; Brian J Miles; Catherine M Tangen; Lori M Minasian; Louis L Pisters; John R Caton; Joseph W Basler; Seth P Lerner; David G Menter; James R Marshall; E David Crawford; Scott M Lippman Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-04-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: K Yoshizawa; W C Willett; S J Morris; M J Stampfer; D Spiegelman; E B Rimm; E Giovannucci Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1998-08-19 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: P Knekt; A Aromaa; J Maatela; G Alfthan; R K Aaran; M Hakama; T Hakulinen; R Peto; L Teppo Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1990-05-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Gitte Ravn-Haren; Susanne Bügel; Britta N Krath; Tien Hoac; Jan Stagsted; Karina Jørgensen; June R Bresson; Erik H Larsen; Lars O Dragsted Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2007-09-21 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Anita Jerome-Morais; Margaret E Wright; Rui Liu; Wancai Yang; Matthew I Jackson; Gerald F Combs; Alan M Diamond Journal: Prostate Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Yumie Takata; Alan R Kristal; Irena B King; Xiaoling Song; Alan M Diamond; Charles B Foster; Carolyn M Hutter; Li Hsu; David J Duggan; Robert D Langer; Helen Petrovitch; James M Shikany; Thomas L Vaughan; Johanna W Lampe; Ross L Prentice; Ulrike Peters Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Michele DI Stasio; Maria Grazia Volpe; Giovanni Colonna; Melissa Nazzaro; Miriam Polimeno; Stefania Scala; Giuseppe Castello; Susan Costantini Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2011-08-09 Impact factor: 2.967