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.
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 seleniumyeast 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.
Authors: Farin Kamangar; You-Lin Qiao; Binbing Yu; Xiu-Di Sun; Christian C Abnet; Jin-Hu Fan; Steven D Mark; Ping Zhao; Sanford M Dawsey; Philip R Taylor Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: James R Marshall; Wael Sakr; David Wood; Donna Berry; Catherine Tangen; Felicia Parker; Ian Thompson; Scott M Lippman; Ronald Lieberman; David Alberts; David Jarrard; Charles Coltman; Peter Greenwald; Lori Minasian; E David Crawford Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Haojie Li; Philip W Kantoff; Edward Giovannucci; Michael F Leitzmann; J Michael Gaziano; Meir J Stampfer; Jing Ma Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Lori C Sakoda; Barry I Graubard; Alison A Evans; W Thomas London; Wen-Yao Lin; Fu-Min Shen; Katherine A McGlynn Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2005-07-01 Impact factor: 7.396
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: G W Comstock; A J Alberg; H Y Huang; K Wu; A E Burke; S C Hoffman; E P Norkus; M Gross; R G Cutler; J S Morris; V L Spate; K J Helzlsouer Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Marian L Neuhouser; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller; Cynthia Thomson; Aaron Aragaki; Garnet L Anderson; JoAnn E Manson; Ruth E Patterson; Thomas E Rohan; Linda van Horn; James M Shikany; Asha Thomas; Andrea LaCroix; Ross L Prentice Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-02-09
Authors: Carrie A Thompson; Thomas M Habermann; Alice H Wang; Robert A Vierkant; Aaron R Folsom; Julie A Ross; James R Cerhan Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2010-02-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Marco Vinceti; Gabriele Dennert; Catherine M Crespi; Marcel Zwahlen; Maree Brinkman; Maurice P A Zeegers; Markus Horneber; Roberto D'Amico; Cinzia Del Giovane Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-03-30
Authors: Danyell S Wilson; Virna Dapic; Dawood H Sultan; Euna M August; B Lee Green; Richard Roetzheim; Brian Rivers Journal: Health Promot Pract Date: 2013-02-21
Authors: Alan R Kristal; Amy K Darke; J Steven Morris; Catherine M Tangen; Phyllis J Goodman; Ian M Thompson; Frank L Meyskens; Gary E Goodman; Lori M Minasian; Howard L Parnes; Scott M Lippman; Eric A Klein Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-02-22 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Merrill J Christensen; Trevor E Quiner; Heather L Nakken; Edwin D Lephart; Dennis L Eggett; Paul M Urie Journal: Prostate Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Anatoly Samoylenko; Jubayer Al Hossain; Daniela Mennerich; Sakari Kellokumpu; Jukka Kalervo Hiltunen; Thomas Kietzmann Journal: Antioxid Redox Signal Date: 2013-04-15 Impact factor: 8.401