| Literature DB >> 30982861 |
Maria H Traka1, Antonietta Melchini1, Jack Coode-Bate1,2, Omar Al Kadhi1,2, Shikha Saha1, Marianne Defernez1, Perla Troncoso-Rey1, Helen Kibblewhite1, Carmel M O'Neill1, Federico Bernuzzi1, Laura Mythen1, Jackie Hughes1, Paul W Needs1, Jack R Dainty3, George M Savva1, Robert D Mills2, Richard Y Ball4, Colin S Cooper3, Richard F Mithen1,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological evidence suggests that consumption of cruciferous vegetables is associated with reduced risk of prostate cancer progression, largely attributed to the biological activity of glucosinolate degradation products, such as sulforaphane derived from glucoraphanin. Because there are few therapeutic interventions for men on active surveillance for prostate cancer to reduce the risk of cancer progression, dietary approaches are an appealing option for patients.Entities:
Keywords: RNA sequencing; SMCSO; active surveillance; broccoli; cancer prevention; dietary intervention; prostate biopsy; sulforaphane; transcriptome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30982861 PMCID: PMC6462431 DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqz012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Clin Nutr ISSN: 0002-9165 Impact factor: 7.045
FIGURE 1Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flow diagram of patients on surveillance receiving 1 of the 3 dietary interventions over 12 mo and the schedule of biopsies and analyses. PSA, prostate-specific antigen; TPB, trans perineal biopsy.
Patient characteristics[1]
| Soup X (control; low GR) | Soup Y (intermediate GR) | Soup Z (high GR) | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 15 | 17 | 16 |
|
| 9 | 10 | 12 |
| Age,[ | 68 ± 5 | 66 ± 6 | 66 ± 6 |
| BMI,[ | 26.7 ± 3.1 | 27.6 ± 3.4 | 27.7 ± 2.2 |
| Days from initial diagnosis[ | 309 ± 232 | 312 ± 356 | 327 ± 292 |
| At diagnosis | |||
| PSA, µg/L[ | 7.7 (5.9–7.9) | 6.8 (5.6–8.6) | 7 (5.0–9.3) |
| Gleason score,[ | |||
| 3 + 3 | 10 | 10 | 9 |
| 3 + 4 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| 4 + 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| At 0 mo | |||
| PSA, µg/L[ | 7.9 (5.9–12.0) | 7.6 (4.9–9.4) | 5.8 (4.4–8.7) |
| PSA density[ | 0.10 (0.08–0.18) | 0.13 (0.09–0.18) | 0.10 (0.08–0.16) |
| Gleason score | |||
| 3 + 3 | 5 | 7 | 1 |
| 3 + 4 | 7 | 5 | 10 |
| 4 + 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Undetected | 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Core ratio[ | 7.9 (3.0–14.3) | 3.7 (0–9.4) | 11.6 (0–16.1) |
| At 12 mo | |||
| PSA, µg/L[ | 9.4 (6.6–10.4) | 7.3 (6.9–10.4) | 7.5 (5.6–9.3) |
| PSA density[ | 0.13 (0.10–0.02) | 0.12 (0.08–0.17) | 0.11 (0.08–0.14) |
| Gleason score | |||
| 3 + 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 |
| 3 + 4 | 9 | 4 | 10 |
| 4 + 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| 4 + 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Undetected | 3 | 7 | 1 |
| Core ratio[ | 7.7 (4.2–21.7) | 4.4 (0–16.6) | 13 (6.4–17.5) |
1GR, glucoraphanin; GSTM1, Glutathione S-transferase M1; PSA, prostate specific antigen.
2Nonsignificant difference (i.e., all P values >0.5) between diets as determined by ANOVA adjusted by Tukey's multiple correction test. Data shown are mean ± SD.
3Nonsignificant difference (i.e., all P values >0.2) between diets as determined from the Kruskal–Wallis test adjusted by Dunn's multiple correction test. Data shown are median (IQR).
4PSA at diagnosis missing for 3 patients on Diet X, 1 on Diet Y, and 1 on Diet Z.
5Gleason score at diagnosis missing for 1 patient on Diet Z.
FIGURE 2Multidimensional scaling plot of the ESCAPE cohort prostate biopsies (ESC) alongside publicly available (GSE80609) BPH and CaP samples. BPH, benign prostatic hyperplasia; CaP, primary prostate cancer; ESCAPE, Effect of Sulforaphane on prostate CAncer PrEvention; FC, fold change.
Number of genes changed over time with the different diets[1]
| Soup X ( | Soup Y ( | Soup Z ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FDR-adjusted | |||
| <0.05 | 7 (4↑, 3↓) | 0 | 0 |
| <0.1 | 96 (58↑, 38↓) | 0 | 0 |
|
| |||
| <0.001 | 154 (82↑, 72↓) | 26 (20↑, 6↓) | 12 (8↑, 4↓) |
| <0.01 | 980 (520↑, 460↓) | 331 (224↑, 107↓) | 83 (46↑, 37↓) |
| <0.05 | 2796 (1460↑, 1336↓) | 1359 (783↑, 576↓) | 502 (277↑, 225↓) |
1FDR, false discovery rate; GR, glucoraphanin. ↑ indicate increase in gene expression. ↓ indicate decrease in gene expression.
2Paired t tests, adjusted for multiple testing correction by Benjamini–Hochberg.
3Student's paired t tests, unadjusted for multiple testing correction.
GSEA of paired changes over time for the control arm (soup X, low GR) and the experimental arms (soup Y, intermediate GR; soup Z, high GR)[1]
| Soup X (control; low GR) | Soup Y (intermediate GR) | Soup Z (high GR) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSigDb pathway | SIZE | NES | FDR | NES | FDR | NES | FDR |
| TNFA signaling via NFKB | 167 | 2.65[ | 0 [ | 2.89 [ | 0 [ | −1.33 | 0.121 |
| Epithelial–mesenchymal transition | 176 | 2.70 [ | 0 [ | 2.30 [ | 0 [ | −1.03 | 0.558 |
| Hypoxia | 164 | 1.95 [ | 0 [ | 1.88 [ | 0 [ | −0.97 | 0.655 |
| Inflammatory response | 152 | 1.95 [ | 0 [ | 2.36 [ | 0 [ | 0.95 | 1 |
| TGF β signaling | 46 | 2.03 [ | 0 [ | 1.58 [ | 0.007 [ | 0.82 | 1 |
| Protein secretion | 91 | −1.99 [ | 0 [ | −1.56 [ | 0.012 [ | −1.36 | 0.095 |
| Androgen response | 93 | −2.13 [ | 0 [ | −1.62 [ | 0.014 [ | −1.45 | 0.055 |
| Myogenesis | 173 | 2.01 [ | 0 [ | 1.51 [ | 0.018 [ | −2.30 [ | 0 [ |
| UV response DN | 133 | 2.11 [ | 0 [ | 1.29 | 0.090 | −0.77 | 0.953 |
| Angiogenesis | 30 | 1.89 [ | 0.001 [ | 2.06 [ | 0 [ | −1.61 [ | 0.016 [ |
| IL2 STAT5 signaling | 154 | 1.84 [ | 0.001 [ | 2.21 [ | 0 [ | −1.25 | 0.191 |
| Coagulation | 89 | 1.76 [ | 0.001 [ | 2.08 [ | 0 [ | −0.85 | 0.924 |
| Interferon-γ response | 162 | 1.81 [ | 0.001 [ | 2.47 [ | 0 [ | 0.77 | 0.931 |
| KRAS signaling UP | 157 | 1.81 [ | 0.001 [ | 1.88 [ | 0 [ | −0.81 | 0.957 |
| Apoptosis | 140 | 1.71 [ | 0.002 [ | 1.99 [ | 0 [ | −1.19 | 0.259 |
| Notch signaling | 29 | 1.68 [ | 0.003 [ | 1.08 | 0.344 | 1.10 | 0.851 |
| Fatty acid metabolism | 127 | −1.76 [ | 0.003 [ | 0.88 | 0.765 | −1.64 [ | 0.016 [ |
| IL6 JAK STAT3 signaling | 61 | 1.63 [ | 0.004 [ | 2.13 [ | 0 [ | −0.66 | 0.989 |
| Unfolded protein response | 98 | −1.68 [ | 0.004 [ | 1.49 [ | 0.020 [ | −1.58 [ | 0.018 [ |
| Cholesterol homeostasis | 63 | −1.72 [ | 0.004 [ | 0.73 | 0.956 | −1.43 | 0.062 |
| Apical junction | 163 | 1.60 [ | 0.005 [ | 2.04 [ | 0 [ | −1.23 | 0.206 |
| Peroxisome | 82 | −1.63 [ | 0.008 [ | 0.99 | 0.504 | −1.02 | 0.567 |
| Complement | 144 | 1.44 [ | 0.025 [ | 1.96 [ | 0 [ | 0.97 | 1 |
| Mitotic spindle | 171 | 1.44 [ | 0.025 [ | 1.23 | 0.150 | 1.24 | 0.482 |
| P53 pathway | 171 | 1.41 [ | 0.033 [ | 2.05 [ | 0 [ | −0.97 | 0.665 |
| Allograft rejection | 146 | 1.39 [ | 0.035 [ | 2.13 [ | 0 [ | 1.28 | 0.697 |
| MYC targets V1 | 178 | −1.44 | 0.051 | 1.48 [ | 0.021 [ | −2.11 [ | 0 [ |
| MTORC1 signaling | 179 | −1.42 | 0.054 | 1.35 | 0.066 | −1.50 [ | 0.039 [ |
| Interferon-α response | 81 | 1.27 | 0.091 | 2.00 [ | 0 | −0.78 | 0.974 |
| Estrogen response early | 167 | 1.19 | 0.159 | 1.99 [ | 0 | −1.24 | 0.202 |
| DNA repair | 117 | −1.26 | 0.187 | 1.40 [ | 0.044 [ | −1.13 | 0.355 |
| Hedgehog signaling | 30 | 1.11 | 0.260 | 1.66 [ | 0.003 [ | −0.95 | 0.651 |
| UV response UP | 128 | 1.10 | 0.266 | 1.73 [ | 0.001 [ | −1.71 [ | 0.009 [ |
| Reactive oxygen species | 42 | −1.14 | 0.302 | 1.32 | 0.077 | −1.63 [ | 0.014 [ |
| MYC targets V2 | 51 | −1.14 | 0.323 | 1.82 [ | 0 [ | −1.71 [ | 0.011 [ |
| Xenobiotic metabolism | 139 | −1.09 | 0.356 | 1.48 [ | 0.020 [ | −1.65 [ | 0.016 [ |
| Oxidative phosphorylation | 174 | −1.08 | 0.366 | 0.79 | 0.907 | −2.16 [ | 0 [ |
| Estrogen response late | 162 | −1.01 | 0.505 | 1.88 [ | 0 [ | −1.28 | 0.163 |
| Adipogenesis | 164 | −0.93 | 0.736 | 1.10 | 0.328 | −1.86 [ | 0.002[ |
| E2F targets | 147 | −0.86 | 0.828 | 1.42 [ | 0.036 [ | 0.93 | 1 |
1FDR, false discovery rate [as described in (22)]; E2F, E2 Factor; GR, glucoraphanin; GSEA, gene set enrichment analysis; IL6, interleukin 6; JAK, Janus Kinase; KRAS, V-Ki-Ras2 Kirsten Rat Sarcoma 2 Viral Oncogene Homolog; MSigDb, Molecular Signature Database; MTORC1, mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1; MYC, myelocytomatosis; NES, normalized enrichment score; NFKB, nuclear factor kappa B1; STAT, signal transducer and activator of transcription; TGF, transforming growth factor; TNFA, tumor necrosis factor a; UV, ultra violet. SIZE refers to the numbers of genes in the pathway. UV response DN refers to genes that are down regulated by UV radiation. UV response UP refers to genes that are up regulated by UV radiation.
2GSEA by GSEA software version 3.0 on all genes ranked by the significance of fold change (see Methods section for details; http://software.broadinstitute.org/gsea).
3Only pathways significant at FDR-adjusted P < 0.05 in ≥1 of the 3 diets are shown.
FIGURE 3Volcano plots of differentially expressed genes over time. Highlighted are the genes that are significantly upregulated or downregulated over time in each dietary arm, colored in red or blue, respectively. Even at a low statistical threshold we do not observe any changes in gene expression with the high-glucoraphanin soup (Soup Z) (false discovery rate–adjusted P value <0.5, paired t tests adjusted by Benjamini–Hochberg for multiple testing correction). adjP refers to a probability value that has been adjusted for multiple testing with the use of Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate method.
FIGURE 4Analysis of dietary components. (A) Correlation matrix of the change in blood and histological markers over 12 mo, and the baseline concentrations of cruciferous vegetables and sulfur-metabolites. (B) Correlation matrix of the change in blood and histological markers over 12 mo, and the mean concentrations of cruciferous vegetables and sulfur-metabolites over the same period. Color denotes the direction of the Pearson correlation and dot size denotes the significance; only significant correlations (P < 0.05) are shown; numbers denote the Pearson correlation. ITC, isothiocyanate; PSA, prostate specific antigen; SMCSO, S-methyl cysteine sulfoxide. adjWHO grade refers to a WHO grade that has been adjusted to be no lower than that recorded from a previous biopsy, as described in materials and methods.