Dietary Supplement
Ionic Minerals Research
The following research abstracts
are presented to reflect the findings of possible benefits from
minerals as a dietary supplement and nutritional supplement.
For more information on individual minerals, please visit the
ionic minerals page.
Prostate cancer:
Diagnosis and Treatment
DAmico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz
SB, Schultz D,
Tomaszewski JE, Wein A,
J Clin Oncol 1997 APR;15(4):1465-1469
DAmico AV, Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Joint Ctr Radiat Therapy,
330 Brookline Ave, Boston,MA 02215 USA
Purpose: A multivariable analysis
to evaluate the potential clinical and pathologic factors that
predict for early biochemical failure in patients with pathologically
organ-confined and margin-negative disease was performed to
define patients who may benefit from adjuvant therapy. Patients
and Methods: Three hundred forty-one prostate cancer patients
treated with a radical retropubic prostatectomy between January
1989 and June 1995 and found to have pathologically organ-confined
and margin-negative disease comprised the study population.
A logistic regression multivariable analysis to evaluate the
predictive value of the preoperative prostate-specific antigen
(PSA) level, pathologic (prostatectomy) Gleason score, and pathologic
stage on PSA failure occurring during the first postoperative
year was performed. Results: Predictors of PSA failure during
the first postoperative year in patients with pathologically
organ- confined disease included pathologic Gleason score greater
than or equal to 7 (P = .0007) and preoperative PSA level greater
than 10 (P .0001). Corresponding 3-year freedom- from-PSA-failure
rates for these pathologic organ-confined patients with both,
one, or neither of these factors were 60%, 75% to 84%, and 95%,
respectively (P .0001). Conclusion: Prostate cancer patients
with pathologically organ-confined and margin-negative disease
and a preoperative PSA level greater than 10 ng/mL or a pathologic
Gleason score greater than or equal to 7 have significant decrements
in short-term PSA-failure-free survival. Therefore, these patients
should be considered for adjuvant therapy in the setting of
a phase III clinical trial. (C) 1997 by American Society of
Clinical Oncology.
Kupelian PA, Kupelian VA, Witte
JS, Macklis R, Klein EA,
J Clin Oncol 1997 APR;15(4):1478-1480
Kupelian PA, Cleveland Clin Fdn, Dept Radiat Oncol,
Desk T28, Cleveland,OH 44195 USA
Purpose: To determine if familial
prostate cancer patients have a less favorable prognosis than
patients with sporadic prostate cancer after treatment for localized
disease with either radiotherapy (RT) or radical prostatectomy
(RP). Patients and Methods: One thousand thirty-eight patients
treated with either RT (n = 583) or RP (n = 455) were included
in this analysis, These patients were noted as having a positive
family history if they confirmed the diagnosis of prostate cancer
in a first-degree relative, The outcome oi: interest was biochemical
relapse-free survival (bRFS). We used proportional hazards to
analyze the effect of the presence of family history and other
potential confounding variables (ie, age, treatment modality,
stage, biopsy Gleason sum [GS], and initial prostate-specific
antigen [iPSA] levels) on treatment outcome. Results: Eleven
percent of all patients had a positive family history, The 5-year
bRFS rates for patients with negative and positive family histories
were 52% and 29%, respectively (P .001). The potential confounders
with bRFS rates were iPSA levels, biopsy GS, and clinical tumor
stage; treatment modality and age did not appear to be associated
with outcome. After adjusting for potential confounders, family
history of prostate cancer remained strongly associated with
biochemical failure. Conclusion: This is the first study to
demonstrate that the presence of a family history of prostate
cancer correlates with treatment outcome in a large unselected
series of patients. Our findings suggest that familial prostate
cancer may have a more aggressive course than nonfamilial prostate
cancer, and that clinical and/or pathologic parameters may not
adequately predict this course. (C) 1997 by American Society
of Clinical Oncology.
Dawson NA, Figg WD, Cooper MR,
Sartor O, Bergan RC,
Senderowicz AM, Steinberg SM,
Tompkins A, Weinberger B, Sausville EA, Reed E, Myers CE,
J Clin Oncol 1997 APR;15(4):1470-1477
Dawson NA, Walter Reed Army Med Ctr,
Washington,DC 20307 USA
Purpose: To assess the efficacy
and toxicity of suramin, hydrocortisone, leuprolide, and flutamide
in previously untreated metastatic prostate cancer. Patients
and Methods: patients with stage D2 and poor- prognosis stage
D1 prostate cancer were given suramin on a pharmacokinetically
derived dosing schedule to maintain suramin concentrations between
175 and 300 mu g/mL. Additionally, all patients received flutamide
250 mg orally three times daily, initiated on day 1 and continued
until disease progression; depot leuprolide 7.5 mg intramuscularly
begun on day 5 and repeated every 4 weeks indefinitely; and
replacement doses of hydrocortisone. Results: Fifty patients
were entered onto the study: 48 with stage D2 and two with stage
D1 disease, The median age was 59 years (range, 42 to 79) and
31 patienf 5 had a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of 100%.
Forty-five patients had bone metastases and 25 had measurable
soft tissue disease, Forty-one (82%) had severe disease. The
overall response rate in 49 assessable patients was three complete
responses (CRs) and 30 partial responses (PRs) for an overall
response rate of 67%, Eighteen patients have died, The median
survival time has not been reached, with a median potential
follow-up duration of 44 months. Grade 3 to 4 toxicity was seen
in 38% of patients and was predominantly hematologic and reversible.
Conclusion: The high response rate and prolonged survival in
a poor-prognosis group of patients with metastatic prostate
cancer warrant a phase III randomized comparison of this regimen
versus hormonal therapy alone, Toxicity was moderate and reversible.
Wirth MP, Froschermaier SE
Urol Res 1997 APR;25:S67-S71
Wirth MP, Tech Univ Dresden, Dept Urol,
Fetscherstr 74, D 01307 Dresden, GERMANY
In 1989 the unanticipated agonist
effect of antiandrogens on LNCaP prostate cancer cells was detected.
A ''flutamidewithdrawal syndrome'' was first described by Kelly
andScher [15], who reported a decrease in serum prostate-specific
antigen (PSA) levels after the removal offlutamide from the
treatment regimen. In the last fewyears the paradoxical response
to antiandrogens has alsobeen reported for bicalutamide, chlormadinone
acetate andothers. Therefore the name of the syndrome has changed
to''antiandrogen withdrawal syndrome.'' Several reasons suchas
mutations in the androgen receptor or a directstimulatory effect
of the antiandrogen for this effecthave been discussed, but
the exact molecular mechanismremains unclear. However, in patients
with hormonallyrelapsed prostate cancer, a trial of ''withdrawaltherapy''
is required prior to the initiation of toxictherapies.
