Purpose of This PDQ Summary
Summary of Evidence

Benefits from Finasteride Chemoprevention Harms from Finasteride Chemoprevention Benefits and Harms of Other Prevention Interventions

Significance

Incidence and Mortality

Risk Factors for Prostate Cancer Development

Age Family History Hormones Race Dietary Fat Dairy and Calcium Intake Multivitamin Use Folate Cadmium Exposure Dioxin Exposure

Opportunities for Prevention

Hormonal Prevention Dietary Prevention With Fruit, Vegetables, and a Low-Fat Diet Chemoprevention         Chemoprevention with lycopene

Get More Information From NCI
Changes To This Summary (07/27/2009)
Questions or Comments About This Summary
More Information

Purpose of This PDQ Summary

This PDQ cancer information summary for health professionals provides comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based information about prostate cancer prevention. This summary is reviewed regularly and updated as necessary by the PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board ¹.

Information about the following is included in this summary:

• Prostate cancer incidence and mortality statistics and information about prostate cancer risk factors.
• Interventions for prostate cancer prevention.
• Benefits and harms of interventions to prevent prostate cancer.

This summary is intended as a resource to inform clinicians and other health professionals about the currently available information on prostate cancer prevention. The PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board uses a formal evidence ranking system ² in reporting the evidence of benefit and potential harms associated with specific interventions. It does not provide formal guidelines or recommendations for making health care decisions. Information in this summary should not be used as a basis for reimbursement determinations.

This summary is also available in a patient version ³, which is written in less technical language.

Summary of Evidence

Note: Separate PDQ summaries on Prostate Cancer Screening ⁴, Prostate Cancer Treatment ⁵, and Levels of Evidence for Cancer Screening and Prevention Studies ² are also available.

Based on solid evidence, chemoprevention with finasteride reduces the incidence of prostate cancer, but the evidence is inadequate to determine whether chemoprevention with finasteride reduces mortality from prostate cancer.

Description of the Evidence

• Study Design: Evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials.
• Internal Validity: Good for the outcome of incidence, poor for the outcome of mortality.
• Consistency: Not applicable.
• Direction and Magnitude of Effect: Absolute reduction in incidence for more than 7 years was 6% (24.4% with placebo and 18.4% with finasteride); relative risk reduction for incidence was 24.8% (95% confidence interval, 18.6%–30.6%). There was no difference in the number of men dying from prostate cancer in the two groups, though the number of deaths was small.
• External Validity: Fair, because of small numbers of African American and Hispanic men.

Men in the finasteride group had statistically significantly more erectile dysfunction, loss of libido, and gynecomastia than men in the placebo group. Men in the finasteride group had a statistically significant incidence of high-grade (Gleason sum 8–10) cancers during the study.[1] Whether this was a histological artifact or not is uncertain.

Description of the Evidence

• Study Design: Evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials.
• Internal Validity: A randomized controlled trial of finasteride for the prevention of prostate cancer used an interview (rather than a patient-completed questionnaire) to examine erectile dysfunction and libido during treatment (rather than both before and during treatment).
• Consistency: Good (evidence other than the randomized controlled trial supports these effects).
• Direction and Magnitude of Effect: Statistically significant increases in the following outcomes were observed in the finasteride group (an additional 9% of men in the finasteride group discontinued therapy at least temporarily because of one of these side effects):
  • Percentage in finasteride group versus percentage in placebo group:
    • Reduced volume of ejaculate (60.4% vs. 47.3%).
    • Erectile dysfunction (67.4% vs. 61.5%).
    • Loss of libido (65.4% vs. 59.6%).
    • Gynecomastia (4.5% vs. 2.8%).
• External Validity: Fair, because of small numbers of African American and Hispanic men.

There is inadequate evidence to determine whether the prevention strategies of dietary change (i.e., reducing dietary fat or increasing fruits and vegetables) or lycopene supplementation are effective in reducing prostate cancer incidence or mortality.

The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial ⁶ was a large randomized placebo-controlled trial of vitamin E and selenium. It failed to demonstrate that these drugs reduce prostate cancer period prevalence.[2]

Description of the Evidence

• Study Design for Vitamin E and Selenium: Evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials, in this case secondary endpoints from randomized trials.
• Study Designs for the Other Interventions: Evidence obtained from cohort or case-control studies. Evidence obtained from ecologic and descriptive studies (e.g., international patterns studies, time series).
• Internal Validity: Fair.
• Consistency: Poor.
• Direction and Magnitude of Effect: Uncertain.
• External Validity: Fair.

References

1. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al.: The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 349 (3): 215-24, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
2. Lippman SM, Klein EA, Goodman PJ, et al.: Effect of selenium and vitamin E on risk of prostate cancer and other cancers: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT). JAMA 301 (1): 39-51, 2009.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   

Significance

Incidence and Mortality

Carcinoma of the prostate is the most common tumor in men in the United States, with an estimated 192,280 new cases and 27,360 deaths expected in 2009.[1] A wide range of estimates of the impact of the disease are notable. The disease is histologically evident in as many as 34% of men in their fifth decade and in up to 70% of men aged 80 years and older.[2,3] Prostate cancer will be diagnosed in almost one-fifth of U.S. men during their lifetime, yet only 3% of men will be expected to die of the disease.[4] The estimated reduction in life expectancy of men who die of prostate cancer is approximately 9 years.[5]

The extraordinarily high rate of clinically occult prostate cancer in the general population compared with the 20-fold lower likelihood of death from the disease indicates that many of these cancers have low biologic risk. Concordant with this observation are the many series of patients with prostate cancer managed by surveillance alone with relatively good survival rates at 5 and 10 years of follow-up.[6] Data demonstrate, however, that with prolonged 10-year follow-up of moderately differentiated (which constitute the majority of tumors detected [7]) and poorly differentiated tumors, there is a substantial risk of disease progression and death from prostate cancer.[8]

Because of marked variability in tumor differentiation from one microscopic field to another, many pathologists will report the range of differentiation among the malignant cells that are present in a biopsy using the Gleason grading system. This grading system includes five histologic patterns distinguished by the glandular architecture of the cancer. The architectural patterns are identified and assigned a grade from 1 to 5 with 1 being the most differentiated and 5 being the least differentiated. The sum of the grades of the predominant and next most prevalent will range from 2 (well-differentiated tumors) to 10 (undifferentiated tumors).[9,10] Systematic changes to the histological interpretation of biopsy specimens by anatomical pathologists have occurred during the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening era (i.e., since about 1985) in the United States.[11] This phenomenon, sometimes called “grade inflation,” is the apparent increase in the distribution of high-grade tumors in the population over time but in the absence of a true biological or clinical change. It is possibly the result of an increasing tendency for pathologists to read tumor grade as more aggressive, resulting in a higher preponderance to treat these cancers aggressively.[12]

Treatment options available for prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiation therapy, brachytherapy, cryotherapy, androgen deprivation with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs and/or antiandrogens, intermittent androgen deprivation, cytotoxic agents, and surveillance. Of all the means of management, only radical prostatectomy has been found to be superior to surveillance in men with localized prostate cancer in terms of reduced rates of metastases (relative hazard = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41–0.96) and disease specific (relative hazard = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.27–0.91) and overall mortalities.[13] However, the relative efficacy of radical prostatectomy to the other forms of treatment has not been adequately addressed.[14] Confounding issues in the treatment of prostate cancer include side effects with treatment, inability to predict the natural history of a given cancer, patient comorbidity that may affect an individual’s likelihood of surviving long enough to be at risk for disease morbidity and mortality, and an increasing body of evidence suggesting that careful PSA monitoring following treatment may indicate a substantial fraction of treatment failures.[15]

Because of considerable uncertainty regarding the efficacy of treatment and the difficulty with selecting patients for whom there is a known risk of disease progression, opinion in the medical community is divided regarding screening for carcinoma of the prostate. While both digital rectal examination and PSA screening have demonstrated reasonable performance characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value) for the early detection of prostate cancer, the lack of evidence that screening and treatment affects ultimate population morbidity or mortality has led many organizations to eschew screening.

The tremendous impact of prostate cancer on the U.S. population and the financial burden of the disease for both patients and society have led to an increased interest in primary disease prevention.

References

1. American Cancer Society.: Cancer Facts and Figures 2009. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society, 2009. Also available online ⁷. Last accessed September 8, 2009. 
   
   
2. Sakr WA, Haas GP, Cassin BF, et al.: The frequency of carcinoma and intraepithelial neoplasia of the prostate in young male patients. J Urol 150 (2 Pt 1): 379-85, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
3. Hølund B: Latent prostatic cancer in a consecutive autopsy series. Scand J Urol Nephrol 14 (1): 29-35, 1980.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
4. Ries LAG, Harkins D, Krapcho M, et al.: SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2003. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute, 2006. Also available online ⁸. Last accessed May 26, 2009. 
   
   
5. Horm JW, Sondik EJ: Person-years of life lost due to cancer in the United States, 1970 and 1984. Am J Public Health 79 (11): 1490-3, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
6. Whitmore WF Jr, Warner JA, Thompson IM Jr: Expectant management of localized prostatic cancer. Cancer 67 (4): 1091-6, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
7. Orozco R, O'Dowd G, Kunnel B, et al.: Observations on pathology trends in 62,537 prostate biopsies obtained from urology private practices in the United States. Urology 51 (2): 186-95, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
8. D'Amico AV, Moul J, Carroll PR, et al.: Cancer-specific mortality after surgery or radiation for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer managed during the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol 21 (11): 2163-72, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
9. Gleason DF, Mellinger GT: Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging. J Urol 111 (1): 58-64, 1974.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
10. Gleason DF: Histologic grading and clinical staging of prostatic carcinoma. In: Tannenbaum M: Urologic Pathology: The Prostate. Philadelphia, Pa: Lea and Febiger, 1977, pp 171-197. 
    
    
11. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, et al.: Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (17): 1248-53, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
12. Thompson IM, Canby-Hagino E, Lucia MS: Stage migration and grade inflation in prostate cancer: Will Rogers meets Garrison Keillor. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (17): 1236-7, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
13. Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, et al.: A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 347 (11): 781-9, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
14. Middleton RG, Thompson IM, Austenfeld MS, et al.: Prostate Cancer Clinical Guidelines Panel Summary report on the management of clinically localized prostate cancer. The American Urological Association. J Urol 154 (6): 2144-8, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
15. Moul JW: Prostate specific antigen only progression of prostate cancer. J Urol 163 (6): 1632-42, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    

Risk Factors for Prostate Cancer Development

Age

Prostate cancer incidence increases dramatically with increasing age. Although it is a very unusual disease in men younger than 50 years, rates increase exponentially thereafter. The registration rate by age cohort in England and Wales increased from eight per thousand population in men aged 50 to 56 years to 68 per thousand in men aged 60 to 64 years, 260 per thousand in men aged 70 to 74 years, and peaked at 406 per thousand in men aged 75 to 79 years.[1] In this same population, the death rate per thousand in 1992 in cohorts of men aged 50 to 54 years, 60 to 64 years, and 70 to 74 years was 4, 37, and 166, respectively.[1] At all ages, incidence of prostate cancer in blacks exceeds those of whites.[2]

Approximately 15% of men with a diagnosis of prostate cancer will be found to have a first-degree male relative (e.g., brother, father) with prostate cancer, compared with approximately 8% of the U.S. population.[3] Approximately 9% of all prostate cancers may result from heritable susceptibility genes.[4] Several authors have completed segregation analyses, and though a single, rare autosomal gene has been suggested to cause cancer in some of these families, the burden of evidence suggests that the inheritance is considerably more complex.[5-7]

The development of the prostate is dependent upon the secretion of dihydrotestosterone (DHT) by the fetal testis. Testosterone causes normal virilization of the Wolffian duct structures and internal genitalia and is acted upon by the enzyme 5 alpha-reductase (5AR) to form DHT. DHT has a 4-fold to 50-fold greater affinity for the androgen receptor than testosterone, and it is DHT that leads to normal prostatic development. Children born with abnormal 5AR (due to a change in a single base pair in exon 5 of the normal type II 5AR gene), are born with ambiguous genitalia (variously described as hypospadias with a blind-ending vagina to a small phallus) but masculinize at puberty because of the surge of testosterone production at that time. Clinical, imaging, and histologic studies of kindreds born with 5AR deficiency have demonstrated a small, pancake-appearing prostate with an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and no evidence of prostatic epithelium.[8] Long-term follow-up demonstrates that neither benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) nor prostate cancer develop.

Other evidence suggesting that the degree of cumulative exposure of the prostate to androgens is related to an increased risk of prostate cancer includes the following:

1. Neither BPH nor prostate cancer have been reported in men castrated prior to puberty.[9]
2. Androgen deprivation in almost all forms leads to involution of the prostate, a fall in PSA levels, apoptosis of prostate cancer and epithelial cells, and a clinical response in prostate cancer patients.[10,11]

Ecological studies have found a correlation between serum levels of testosterone, especially DHT, and overall risk of prostate cancer among African American, white, and Japanese males.[12-14] However, evidence from prospective studies of the association between serum concentrations of sex hormones, including androgens and estrogens, does not support a direct link.[15] A collaborative analysis of 18 prospective studies, pooling prediagnostic measures on 3,886 men with incident prostate cancer and 6,438 control subjects, found no association between the risk of prostate cancer and serum concentrations of testosterone, calculated-free testosterone, dihydrotestosterone sulfate, androstenedione, androstanediol glucuronide, estradiol, or calculated-free estradiol.[15] A caution for interpreting the data is the unknown degree of correlation between serum levels and prostate tissue level. Androstanediol glucuronide may most closely reflect intraprostatic androgen activity and this measure was not associated with the risk of prostate cancer. This lack of association affirms that risk stratification cannot be made on serum hormone concentrations.

The risk of developing and dying from prostate cancer is dramatically higher among blacks, is of intermediate levels among whites, and is lowest among native Japanese. [16,17] Conflicting data have been published regarding the etiology of these outcomes, but some evidence is available that access to health care may play a role in disease outcomes.[18]

An interesting observation is that although the incidence of latent (occult, histologically evident) prostate cancer is similar throughout the world, clinical prostate cancer varies from country to country by as much as 20-fold.[19] Previous ecologic studies have demonstrated a direct relationship between a country’s prostate cancer-specific mortality rate and average total calories from fat consumed by the country’s population.[20,21] Studies of immigrants from Japan have demonstrated that native Japanese have the lowest risk of clinical prostate cancer, first generation Japanese-Americans have an intermediate risk, and subsequent generations have a risk comparable to the U.S. population.[22,23] Animal models of explanted human prostate cancer have demonstrated decreased tumor growth rates in animals who are fed a low-fat diet.[24,25] Evidence from many case-control studies has found an association between dietary fat and prostate cancer risk,[26-28] though studies have not uniformly reached this conclusion.[29-31] In a review of published studies of the relationship between dietary fat and prostate cancer risk, among descriptive studies, approximately half found an increased risk with increased dietary fat and half found no association.[32] Among case-control studies, about half of the studies found an increased risk with increasing dietary fat, animal fat, and saturated and monounsaturated fat intake while approximately half found no association. Only in studies of polyunsaturated fat intake were three studies reported of a significant negative association between prostate cancer and fat intake. Fat of animal origin seems to be associated with the highest risk.[18,33] In a series of 384 patients with prostate cancer, the risk of cancer progression to an advanced stage was greater in men with a high fat intake.[34] The announcement in 1996 that cancer mortality rates had fallen in the United States prompted the suggestion that this may be caused by decreases in dietary fat intake over the same time period.[35,36]

The explanation for this possible association between prostate cancer and dietary fat is unknown. Several hypotheses have been advanced, including:

1. Dietary fat may increase serum androgen levels, thereby increasing prostate cancer risk. This hypothesis is supported by observations from South Africa and the United States that changes in dietary fat intake change urinary and serum levels of androgens.[37,38]
2. Certain types of fatty acids or their metabolites may initiate or promote prostate carcinoma development. The evidence for this hypothesis is conflicting, but one study suggests that linoleic acid (omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid) may stimulate prostate cancer cells, while omega-3 fatty acids inhibit cell growth.[39]
3. An observation made in an animal model is that male offspring of pregnant rats who are fed a high-fat diet will develop prostate cancer at a higher rate than animals who are fed a low-fat diet.[40] This observation may explain some of the variations in prostate cancer incidence and mortality among ethnic groups; an observation has been made that first trimester androgen levels in pregnant blacks are higher than those in whites.[41]

In a meta-analysis of ten cohort studies (eight from the United States and two from Europe), it was concluded that men with the highest intake of dairy products (relative risk [RR] = 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.22; P = .04) and calcium (RR = 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09–1.77; P = .18) were more likely to develop prostate cancer than men with the lowest intake. The pooled RRs of advanced prostate cancer were 1.33 (95% CI, 1.00–1.78; P = .055) for the highest versus lowest intake categories of dairy products and 1.46 (95% CI, 0.65–3.25; P > .2) for the highest versus lowest intake categories of calcium. High intake of dairy products and calcium may be associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer although the increase may be small.[42]

Regular multivitamin use has not been associated with the risk of early or localized prostate cancer.[43]

The Aspirin/Folate Polyp Prevention Study, a placebo-controlled randomized trial of aspirin and folic acid supplementation for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas, was conducted between July 6, 1994, and December 31, 2006. In a secondary analysis, the authors addressed the effect of folic acid supplementation on the risk of prostate cancer. Participants were followed for up to 10.8 (median = 7.0, interquartile range = 6.0–7.8) years and asked periodically to report all illnesses and hospitalizations.[44] Supplementation with 1 mg of folic acid was associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer. However, dietary and plasma levels among nonmultivitamin users were inversely associated with risk. These findings highlight the potentially complex role of folate in prostate carcinogenesis.[44,45]

Cadmium exposure is occupationally associated with nickel-cadmium batteries and cadmium recovery plant smelters and is associated with cigarette smoke.[46] The earliest studies of this agent documented an apparent association, but better-designed studies have failed to note an association.[47,48]

Dioxin (2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin or TCDD) is a contaminant of an herbicide used in Vietnam. This agent is similar to many components of herbicides used in farming. A review of the linkage between dioxin and prostate cancer risk by the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine Committee to Review the Health Effects in Vietnam Veterans of Exposure to Herbicides, found only two articles on prostate cancer with sufficient numbers of cases and follow-up to allow analysis.[49,50] The analysis of all available data suggests that the association between dioxin exposure and prostate cancer is not conclusive.[51]

References

1. Epidemiological aspects. In: Kirby RS, Christmas TJ, Brawer MK: Prostate Cancer. London, England: Mosby, 1996, pp 23-32. 
   
   
2. Cancer incidence in the United States (SEER) age-specific rates. In: Harras A, Edwards BK, Blot WJ, eds.: Cancer Rates and Risks. 4th ed. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute, 1996, pp 22. 
   
   
3. Steinberg GD, Carter BS, Beaty TH, et al.: Family history and the risk of prostate cancer. Prostate 17 (4): 337-47, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
4. Grönberg H, Isaacs SD, Smith JR, et al.: Characteristics of prostate cancer in families potentially linked to the hereditary prostate cancer 1 (HPC1) locus. JAMA 278 (15): 1251-5, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
5. Carter BS, Steinberg GD, Beaty TH, et al.: Familial risk factors for prostate cancer. Cancer Surv 11: 5-13, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
6. Schaid DJ, McDonnell SK, Blute ML, et al.: Evidence for autosomal dominant inheritance of prostate cancer. Am J Hum Genet 62 (6): 1425-38, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
7. Bauer JJ, Srivastava S, Connelly RR, et al.: Significance of familial history of prostate cancer to traditional prognostic variables, genetic biomarkers, and recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Urology 51 (6): 970-6, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
8. Imperato-McGinley J, Gautier T, Zirinsky K, et al.: Prostate visualization studies in males homozygous and heterozygous for 5 alpha-reductase deficiency. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 75 (4): 1022-6, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
9. Isaacs JT: Hormonal balance and the risk of prostatic cancer. J Cell Biochem Suppl 16H: 107-8, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
10. Peters CA, Walsh PC: The effect of nafarelin acetate, a luteinizing-hormone-releasing hormone agonist, on benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 317 (10): 599-604, 1987.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
11. Kyprianou N, Isaacs JT: Expression of transforming growth factor-beta in the rat ventral prostate during castration-induced programmed cell death. Mol Endocrinol 3 (10): 1515-22, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
12. Ellis L, Nyborg H: Racial/ethnic variations in male testosterone levels: a probable contributor to group differences in health. Steroids 57 (2): 72-5, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
13. Ross RK, Bernstein L, Lobo RA, et al.: 5-alpha-reductase activity and risk of prostate cancer among Japanese and US white and black males. Lancet 339 (8798): 887-9, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
14. Wu AH, Whittemore AS, Kolonel LN, et al.: Serum androgens and sex hormone-binding globulins in relation to lifestyle factors in older African-American, white, and Asian men in the United States and Canada. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 4 (7): 735-41, 1995 Oct-Nov.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
15. Roddam AW, Allen NE, Appleby P, et al.: Endogenous sex hormones and prostate cancer: a collaborative analysis of 18 prospective studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 100 (3): 170-83, 2008.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
16. Ries LAG, Eisner MP, Kosary CL, et al., eds.: SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2002. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute, 2005. Also available online ⁹. Last accessed October 7, 2009. 
    
    
17. Bunker CH, Patrick AL, Konety BR, et al.: High prevalence of screening-detected prostate cancer among Afro-Caribbeans: the Tobago Prostate Cancer Survey. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 11 (8): 726-9, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
18. Optenberg SA, Thompson IM, Friedrichs P, et al.: Race, treatment, and long-term survival from prostate cancer in an equal-access medical care delivery system. JAMA 274 (20): 1599-605, 1995 Nov 22-29.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
19. Wynder EL, Mabuchi K, Whitmore WF Jr: Epidemiology of cancer of the prostate. Cancer 28 (2): 344-60, 1971.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
20. Armstrong B, Doll R: Environmental factors and cancer incidence and mortality in different countries, with special reference to dietary practices. Int J Cancer 15 (4): 617-31, 1975.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
21. Rose DP, Connolly JM: Dietary fat, fatty acids and prostate cancer. Lipids 27 (10): 798-803, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
22. Haenszel W, Kurihara M: Studies of Japanese migrants. I. Mortality from cancer and other diseases among Japanese in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 40 (1): 43-68, 1968.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
23. Shimizu H, Ross RK, Bernstein L, et al.: Cancers of the prostate and breast among Japanese and white immigrants in Los Angeles County. Br J Cancer 63 (6): 963-6, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
24. Wang Y, Corr JG, Thaler HT, et al.: Decreased growth of established human prostate LNCaP tumors in nude mice fed a low-fat diet. J Natl Cancer Inst 87 (19): 1456-62, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
25. Connolly JM, Coleman M, Rose DP: Effects of dietary fatty acids on DU145 human prostate cancer cell growth in athymic nude mice. Nutr Cancer 29 (2): 114-9, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
26. Ross RK, Shimizu H, Paganini-Hill A, et al.: Case-control studies of prostate cancer in blacks and whites in southern California. J Natl Cancer Inst 78 (5): 869-74, 1987.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
27. Kolonel LN, Yoshizawa CN, Hankin JH: Diet and prostatic cancer: a case-control study in Hawaii. Am J Epidemiol 127 (5): 999-1012, 1988.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
28. Whittemore AS, Kolonel LN, Wu AH, et al.: Prostate cancer in relation to diet, physical activity, and body size in blacks, whites, and Asians in the United States and Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 87 (9): 652-61, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
29. Giovannucci E: Epidemiologic characteristics of prostate cancer. Cancer 75 (Suppl 7): 1766-1777, 1995. 
    
    
30. Mettlin C, Selenskas S, Natarajan N, et al.: Beta-carotene and animal fats and their relationship to prostate cancer risk. A case-control study. Cancer 64 (3): 605-12, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
31. Severson RK, Nomura AM, Grove JS, et al.: A prospective study of demographics, diet, and prostate cancer among men of Japanese ancestry in Hawaii. Cancer Res 49 (7): 1857-60, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
32. Zhou JR, Blackburn GL: Bridging animal and human studies: what are the missing segments in dietary fat and prostate cancer? Am J Clin Nutr 66 (6 Suppl): 1572S-1580S, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
33. Rose DP, Boyar AP, Wynder EL: International comparisons of mortality rates for cancer of the breast, ovary, prostate, and colon, and per capita food consumption. Cancer 58 (11): 2363-71, 1986.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
34. Bairati I, Meyer F, Fradet Y, et al.: Dietary fat and advanced prostate cancer. J Urol 159 (4): 1271-5, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
35. Cole P, Rodu B: Declining cancer mortality in the United States. Cancer 78 (10): 2045-8, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
36. Wynder EL, Cohen LA: Correlating nutrition to recent cancer mortality statistics. J Natl Cancer Inst 89 (4): 324, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
37. Hill P, Wynder EL, Garbaczewski L, et al.: Diet and urinary steroids in black and white North American men and black South African men. Cancer Res 39 (12): 5101-5, 1979.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
38. Hämäläinen E, Adlercreutz H, Puska P, et al.: Diet and serum sex hormones in healthy men. J Steroid Biochem 20 (1): 459-64, 1984.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
39. Rose DP, Connolly JM: Effects of fatty acids and eicosanoid synthesis inhibitors on the growth of two human prostate cancer cell lines. Prostate 18 (3): 243-54, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
40. Kondo Y, Homma Y, Aso Y, et al.: Promotional effect of two-generation exposure to a high-fat diet on prostate carcinogenesis in ACI/Seg rats. Cancer Res 54 (23): 6129-32, 1994.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
41. Henderson BE, Bernstein L, Ross RK, et al.: The early in utero oestrogen and testosterone environment of blacks and whites: potential effects on male offspring. Br J Cancer 57 (2): 216-8, 1988.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
42. Gao X, LaValley MP, Tucker KL: Prospective studies of dairy product and calcium intakes and prostate cancer risk: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 97 (23): 1768-77, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
43. Lawson KA, Wright ME, Subar A, et al.: Multivitamin use and risk of prostate cancer in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 99 (10): 754-64, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
44. Figueiredo JC, Grau MV, Haile RW, et al.: Folic acid and risk of prostate cancer: results from a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 101 (6): 432-5, 2009.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
45. Kristal AR, Lippman SM: Nutritional prevention of cancer: new directions for an increasingly complex challenge. J Natl Cancer Inst 101 (6): 363-5, 2009.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
46. Pienta KJ: Epidemiology and etiology of prostate cancer. In: Raghavan D, Scher HI, Leibel SA, eds.: Principles and Practice of Genitourinary Oncology. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1997, pp 379-385. 
    
    
47. García Sánchez A, Antona JF, Urrutia M: Geochemical prospection of cadmium in a high incidence area of prostate cancer, Sierra de Gata, Salamanca, Spain. Sci Total Environ 116 (3): 243-51, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
48. Boffetta P: Methodological aspects of the epidemiological association between cadmium and cancer in humans. In: Nordberg GF, Herber RF, Alessio L, eds.: Cadmium in the Human Environment: Toxicity and Carcinogenicity. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1992, pp 425-434. 
    
    
49. Fingerhut MA, Halperin WE, Marlow DA, et al.: Cancer mortality in workers exposed to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. N Engl J Med 324 (4): 212-8, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
50. Bertazzi PA, Zocchetti C, Pesatori AC, et al.: Ten-year mortality study of the population involved in the Seveso incident in 1976. Am J Epidemiol 129 (6): 1187-200, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
51. Committee to Review the Health Effects in Vietnam Veterans of Exposure to Herbicides.: Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 1996. In: Washington DC, National Academy Press, 1996. 
    
    

Opportunities for Prevention

Hormonal Prevention

The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial, a large randomized placebo-controlled trial of finasteride (an inhibitor of alpha-reductase), was performed in 18,882 men aged 55 years or older. At 7 years, the incidence of prostate cancer was 18.4% in the finasteride group versus 24.4% in the placebo group, a relative risk reduction of 24.8% (95% confidence interval, 18.6%–30.6%; P < .001). The finasteride group had more patients with Gleason grade 7 to 10, but the clinical significance of Gleason scoring is uncertain in conditions of androgen deprivation.[1] High-grade cancers were noted in 6.4% of finasteride patients, compared with 5.1% of men receiving a placebo. The increase in high-grade tumors was seen within 1 year of finasteride exposure and did not increase over time.[2]

Finasteride decreases the risk of prostate cancer but may also alter the detection of disease through effects on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and decreased prostate volume (24%), creating a detection bias.[3] In men receiving finasteride, varying adjustment factors may be needed to determine whether PSA is in the normal range.[4] There may be an artifactual histological effect of finasteride on Gleason scoring.

It is possible that finasteride induced the development of high-grade epithelial neoplasia, but this has not been demonstrated.[3] With a finasteride-induced development of high-grade prostate cancer, a gradual and progressive increase in the number of high-grade tumors would have been expected for more than 7 years, compared with placebo; however, this was not the case. The increase in high-grade tumors was seen within 1 year of finasteride exposure and did not increase over time.[2]

Agents that are used for hormonal therapy of existing prostate cancers would be unsuitable for prostate cancer chemoprevention because of the cost and wide variety of side effects including sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis, and vasomotor symptoms (hot flushes).[5] Newer antiandrogens may play a role as preventive agents in the future.[6]

Results from studies of the association between dietary intake of fruits and vegetables and risk of prostate cancer are not consistent. A study evaluated 1,619 prostate cancer cases and 1,618 controls in a multicenter, multiethnic population. The study found that intake of legumes and yellow-orange and cruciferous vegetables was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer.[7]

The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition examined the association between fruit and vegetable intake and subsequent prostate cancer. After an average follow-up of 4.8 years, 1,104 men developed prostate cancer among the 130,544 male participants. No statistically significant associations were observed for fruit intake, vegetable intake, cruciferous vegetable intake, or the intake of fruits and vegetables combined.[8]

One study of dietary intervention over a 4-year period with reduced fat and increased consumption of fruit, vegetables, and fiber had no impact on serum PSA levels.[9] It is unknown whether dietary modification through the use of a low-fat, plant-based diet will reduce prostate cancer risk. While this outcome is unknown, multiple additional benefits may be gleaned by such a diet, to include a lower risk of hyperlipidemia, better control of blood pressure, and a lower risk of cardiovascular disease—all of which may merit adoption of such a diet.

Several agents, including alpha-tocopherol, selenium, lycopene, difluoromethylornithine,[10-14] vitamin D,[15-17] and isoflavonoids,[18,19] have shown potential in either clinical or laboratory studies for chemoprevention of prostate cancer. Based mainly on clinical trial results, alpha-tocopherol, selenium, and lycopene are receiving the greatest public health interest and are highlighted in the chemoprevention discussions below.

Evidence exists that a diet with a high intake of fruits and vegetables is associated with a lower risk of cancer. Which, if any, micronutrients may account for this reduction is unknown. One group of nutrients often postulated as having chemoprevention properties is the carotenoids. Lycopene is the predominant circulating carotenoid in Americans and has a number of potential activities, including an antioxidant effect.[20] It is encountered in a number of vegetables, most notably tomatoes, and is best absorbed if these products are cooked and in the presence of dietary fats or oils.

The earliest studies of the association of lycopene and prostate cancer risk were generally negative before 1995 with only one study of 180 case-control patients showing a reduced risk.[21-24] In 1995, an analysis of the Physicians’ Health Study found a one-third reduction in prostate cancer risk in the group of men with the highest consumption of tomato products when compared with the group with the lowest level of consumption, which was attributed to the lycopene content of these vegetables.[25] This large analysis prompted several subsequent studies, the results of which were mixed.[26,27] A review of the published data concluded that the evidence is weak that lycopene is associated with a reduced risk because previous studies were not controlled for total vegetable intake (i.e., separating the effect of tomatoes from vegetables), dietary intake instruments are poorly able to quantify lycopene intake, and other potential biases.[28] Specific dietary supplementation with lycopene remains to be demonstrated to reduce prostate cancer risk.

References

1. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al.: The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 349 (3): 215-24, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
2. Thompson IM, Klein EA, Lippman SM, et al.: Prevention of prostate cancer with finasteride: US/European perspective. Eur Urol 44 (6): 650-5, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
3. Andriole G, Bostwick D, Civantos F, et al.: The effects of 5alpha-reductase inhibitors on the natural history, detection and grading of prostate cancer: current state of knowledge. J Urol 174 (6): 2098-104, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
4. Etzioni RD, Howlader N, Shaw PA, et al.: Long-term effects of finasteride on prostate specific antigen levels: results from the prostate cancer prevention trial. J Urol 174 (3): 877-81, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
5. Thompson I, Feigl P, Coltman C: Chemoprevention of prostate cancer with finasteride. Important Adv Oncol : 57-76, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
6. Nelson PS, Gleason TP, Brawer MK: Chemoprevention for prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur Urol 30 (2): 269-78, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
7. Kolonel LN, Hankin JH, Whittemore AS, et al.: Vegetables, fruits, legumes and prostate cancer: a multiethnic case-control study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9 (8): 795-804, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
8. Key TJ, Allen N, Appleby P, et al.: Fruits and vegetables and prostate cancer: no association among 1104 cases in a prospective study of 130544 men in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Int J Cancer 109 (1): 119-24, 2004 Mar10.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
9. Shike M, Latkany L, Riedel E, et al.: Lack of effect of a low-fat, high-fruit, -vegetable, and -fiber diet on serum prostate-specific antigen of men without prostate cancer: results from a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 20 (17): 3592-8, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]
   
   
10. Heby O: Role of polyamines in the control of cell proliferation and differentiation. Differentiation 19 (1): 1-20, 1981.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
11. Danzin C, Jung MJ, Grove J, et al.: Effect of alpha-difluoromethylornithine, an enzyme-activated irreversible inhibitor of ornithine decarboxylase, on polyamine levels in rat tissues. Life Sci 24 (6): 519-24, 1979.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
12. Metcalf BW, Bey P, Danzin C, et al.: Catalytic irreversible inhibition of mammalian ornithine decarboxylase (E.C. 4.1.1.17) by substrate and product analogues. J Am Chem Soc 100(8): 2551-2553, 1978. 
    
    
13. Heston WD, Kadmon D, Lazan DW, et al.: Copenhagen rat prostatic tumor ornithine decarboxylase activity (ODC) and the effect of the ODC inhibitor alpha-difluoromethylornithine. Prostate 3 (4): 383-9, 1982.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
14. Abeloff MD, Slavik M, Luk GD, et al.: Phase I trial and pharmacokinetic studies of alpha-difluoromethylornithine--an inhibitor of polyamine biosynthesis. J Clin Oncol 2 (2): 124-30, 1984.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
15. Schwartz GG, Hulka BS: Is vitamin D deficiency a risk factor for prostate cancer? (Hypothesis). Anticancer Res 10 (5A): 1307-11, 1990 Sep-Oct.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
16. Eisman JA, Barkla DH, Tutton PJ: Suppression of in vivo growth of human cancer solid tumor xenografts by 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3. Cancer Res 47 (1): 21-5, 1987.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
17. Chida K, Hashiba H, Fukushima M, et al.: Inhibition of tumor promotion in mouse skin by 1 alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3. Cancer Res 45 (11 Pt 1): 5426-30, 1985.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
18. Adlercreutz H, Markkanen H, Watanabe S: Plasma concentrations of phyto-oestrogens in Japanese men. Lancet 342 (8881): 1209-10, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
19. Peterson G, Barnes S: Genistein and biochanin A inhibit the growth of human prostate cancer cells but not epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine autophosphorylation. Prostate 22 (4): 335-45, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
20. Gerster H: The potential role of lycopene for human health. J Am Coll Nutr 16 (2): 109-26, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
21. Hsing AW, Comstock GW, Abbey H, et al.: Serologic precursors of cancer. Retinol, carotenoids, and tocopherol and risk of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 82 (11): 941-6, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
22. Mills PK, Beeson WL, Phillips RL, et al.: Cohort study of diet, lifestyle, and prostate cancer in Adventist men. Cancer 64 (3): 598-604, 1989.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
23. Schuman LM, Mandel JS, Radke A, et al.: Some selected features of the epidemiology of prostatic cancer: Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota case-control study, 1976-1979. [Abstract] Trends in Cancer Incidence: Causes and Practical Implications (Proceedings of a Symposium Held in Oslo, Norway, Aug. 6-7, 1980) pp 345-354. 
    
    
24. Le Marchand L, Hankin JH, Kolonel LN, et al.: Vegetable and fruit consumption in relation to prostate cancer risk in Hawaii: a reevaluation of the effect of dietary beta-carotene. Am J Epidemiol 133 (3): 215-9, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
25. Giovannucci E, Ascherio A, Rimm EB, et al.: Intake of carotenoids and retinol in relation to risk of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 87 (23): 1767-76, 1995.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
26. Jain MG, Hislop GT, Howe GR, et al.: Plant foods, antioxidants, and prostate cancer risk: findings from case-control studies in Canada. Nutr Cancer 34 (2): 173-84, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
27. Key TJ, Silcocks PB, Davey GK, et al.: A case-control study of diet and prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 76 (5): 678-87, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    
28. Kristal AR, Cohen JH: Invited commentary: tomatoes, lycopene, and prostate cancer. How strong is the evidence? Am J Epidemiol 151 (2): 124-7; discussion 128-30, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]
    
    

Get More Information From NCI

Call 1-800-4-CANCER

For more information, U.S. residents may call the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237) Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. A trained Cancer Information Specialist is available to answer your questions.

Chat online

The NCI's LiveHelp® ¹⁰ online chat service provides Internet users with the ability to chat online with an Information Specialist. The service is available from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday. Information Specialists can help Internet users find information on NCI Web sites and answer questions about cancer.

Write to us

For more information from the NCI, please write to this address:

NCI Public Inquiries Office

Suite 3036A

6116 Executive Boulevard, MSC8322

Bethesda, MD 20892-8322

Search the NCI Web site

The NCI Web site ¹¹ provides online access to information on cancer, clinical trials, and other Web sites and organizations that offer support and resources for cancer patients and their families. For a quick search, use the search box in the upper right corner of each Web page. The results for a wide range of search terms will include a list of "Best Bets," editorially chosen Web pages that are most closely related to the search term entered.

There are also many other places to get materials and information about cancer treatment and services. Hospitals in your area may have information about local and regional agencies that have information on finances, getting to and from treatment, receiving care at home, and dealing with problems related to cancer treatment.

Find Publications

The NCI has booklets and other materials for patients, health professionals, and the public. These publications discuss types of cancer, methods of cancer treatment, coping with cancer, and clinical trials. Some publications provide information on tests for cancer, cancer causes and prevention, cancer statistics, and NCI research activities. NCI materials on these and other topics may be ordered online or printed directly from the NCI Publications Locator ¹². These materials can also be ordered by telephone from the Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).

Changes To This Summary (07/27/2009)

The PDQ cancer information summaries are reviewed regularly and updated as new information becomes available. This section describes the latest changes made to this summary as of the date above.

Summary of Evidence ¹³

Added text ¹⁴ about the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial, which failed to demonstrate that vitamin E and selenium reduce prostate cancer period prevalence (cited Lippman et al. as reference 2).

Significance ¹⁵

Updated incidence and mortality estimates ¹⁶ for 2009 (cited American Cancer Society as reference 1).

Risk Factors for Prostate Cancer Development ¹⁷

Added text ¹⁸ about the Aspirin/Folate Polyp Prevention Study, a placebo-controlled randomized trial of aspirin and folic acid supplementation for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas (cited Figueiredo et al. as reference 44 and Kristal et al. as reference 45).

Questions or Comments About This Summary

If you have questions or comments about this summary, please send them to Cancer.gov through the Web site’s Contact Form ¹⁹. We can respond only to email messages written in English.

More Information

About PDQ

• PDQ® - NCI's Comprehensive Cancer Database ²⁰.

  Full description of the NCI PDQ database.

Additional PDQ Summaries

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Adult Treatment ²¹

  Treatment options for adult cancers.

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Pediatric Treatment ²²

  Treatment options for childhood cancers.

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Supportive and Palliative Care ²³

  Side effects of cancer treatment, management of cancer-related complications and pain, and psychosocial concerns.

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Screening/Detection (Testing for Cancer) ²⁴

  Tests or procedures that detect specific types of cancer.

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Prevention ²⁵

  Risk factors and methods to increase chances of preventing specific types of cancer.

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Genetics ²⁶

  Genetics of specific cancers and inherited cancer syndromes, and ethical, legal, and social concerns.

• PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries: Complementary and Alternative Medicine ²⁷

  Information about complementary and alternative forms of treatment for patients with cancer.

Important:

This information is intended mainly for use by doctors and other health care professionals. If you have questions about this topic, you can ask your doctor, or call the Cancer Information Service at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).