Literature DB >> 21683786

Clinical trials of antioxidants as cancer prevention agents: past, present, and future.

Michael Goodman1, Roberd M Bostick, Omer Kucuk, Dean P Jones.   

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to summarize the most important human clinical trials of antioxidants as cancer prevention agents conducted to date, provide an overview of currently ongoing studies, and discuss future steps needed to advance research in this field. To date there have been several large (at least 7000 participants) trials testing the efficacy of antioxidant supplements in preventing cancer. The specific agents (diet-derived direct antioxidants and essential components of antioxidant enzymes) tested in those trials included β-carotene, vitamin E, vitamin C, selenium, retinol, zinc, riboflavin, and molybdenum. None of the completed trials produced convincing evidence to justify the use of traditional antioxidant-related vitamins or minerals for cancer prevention. Our search of ongoing trials identified six projects at various stages of completion. Five of those six trials use selenium as the intervention of interest delivered either alone or in combination with other agents. The lack of success to date can be explained by a variety of factors that need to be considered in the next generation research. These factors include lack of good biological rationale for selecting specific agents of interest; limited number of agents tested to date; use of pharmacological, rather than dietary, doses; and insufficient duration of intervention and follow-up. The latter consideration underscores the need for alternative endpoints that are associated with increased risk of neoplasia (i.e., biomarkers of risk), but are detectable prior to tumor occurrence. Although dietary antioxidants are a large and diverse group of compounds, only a small proportion of candidate agents have been tested. In summary, the strategy of focusing on large high-budget studies using cancer incidence as the endpoint and testing a relatively limited number of antioxidant agents has been largely unsuccessful. This lack of success in previous trials should not preclude us from seeking novel ways of preventing cancer by modulating oxidative balance. On the contrary, the well demonstrated mechanistic link between excessive oxidative stress and carcinogenesis underscores the need for new studies. It appears that future large-scale projects should be preceded by smaller, shorter, less expensive biomarker-based studies that can serve as a link from mechanistic and observational research to human cancer prevention trials. These relatively inexpensive studies would provide human experimental evidence for the likely efficacy, optimum dose, and long-term safety of the intervention of interest that would then guide the design of safe, more definitive large-scale trials.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21683786     DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2011.05.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Free Radic Biol Med        ISSN: 0891-5849            Impact factor:   7.376


  78 in total

1.  Cellular polarity in aging: role of redox regulation and nutrition.

Authors:  Helena Soares; H Susana Marinho; Carla Real; Fernando Antunes
Journal:  Genes Nutr       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 5.523

Review 2.  The cysteine proteome.

Authors:  Young-Mi Go; Joshua D Chandler; Dean P Jones
Journal:  Free Radic Biol Med       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 7.376

Review 3.  The Warburg Effect and Mass Spectrometry-based Proteomic Analysis.

Authors:  Weidong Zhou; Lance A Liotta; Emanuel F Petricoin
Journal:  Cancer Genomics Proteomics       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.069

4.  The antioxidant paradox: less paradoxical now?

Authors:  Barry Halliwell
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  Analysis of redox and apoptotic effects of anthracyclines to delineate a cardioprotective strategy.

Authors:  Joy Marie Fulbright; Daniela E Egas-Bejar; Winston W Huh; Joya Chandra
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 3.333

6.  Oxidative balance score and oxidative stress biomarkers in a study of Whites, African Americans, and African immigrants.

Authors:  Sindhu Lakkur; Roberd M Bostick; Douglas Roblin; Murugi Ndirangu; Ike Okosun; Francis Annor; Suzanne Judd; W Dana Flanders; Victoria L Stevens; Michael Goodman
Journal:  Biomarkers       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 7.  Oxidative Stress in Cancer.

Authors:  John D Hayes; Albena T Dinkova-Kostova; Kenneth D Tew
Journal:  Cancer Cell       Date:  2020-07-09       Impact factor: 31.743

Review 8.  Mitochondrial ROS in cancer: initiators, amplifiers or an Achilles' heel?

Authors:  Simran S Sabharwal; Paul T Schumacker
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 9.  Nutritional countermeasures targeting reactive oxygen species in cancer: from mechanisms to biomarkers and clinical evidence.

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

10.  Hereditary ovarian cancer and two-compartment tumor metabolism: epithelial loss of BRCA1 induces hydrogen peroxide production, driving oxidative stress and NFκB activation in the tumor stroma.

Authors:  Ubaldo E Martinez-Outschoorn; Renee M Balliet; Zhao Lin; Diana Whitaker-Menezes; Anthony Howell; Federica Sotgia; Michael P Lisanti
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 4.534

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.