4.7 Article

Urinary phytoestrogen excretion and prostate cancer risk: a nested case-control study in the Multiethnic Cohort

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 101, Issue 1, Pages 185-191

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605137

Keywords

phytoestrogens; urinary excretion; prostate neoplasms; case-control study; multiethnic population

Categories

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [P01 CA33619, S10 RR020890, P30 CA71789, R37 CA54281]
  2. National Institutes of Health [N01-PC-35137]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Phytoestrogens are of special interest in prostate cancer research because populations in Asia with a high consumption of phytoestrogens have a lower incidence of the disease than comparable populations in Western countries. METHODS: This case-control study is nested within a large multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and California. Urine samples were analysed for daidzein, genistein, equol, and enterolactone among 249 incident prostate cancer cases and 404 controls matched on age, race/ethnicity, date/time of specimen collection, and fasting status. RESULTS: The median excretion of daidzein was 0.173 nmol mg(-1) creatinine in cases and 0.291 in controls (P = 0.01), and the median excretion of genistein was 0.048 in cases and 0.078 in controls (P = 0.05). An inverse association was seen for daidzein overall (odds ratio for the highest vs lowest quintile = 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.98, P-trend = 0.03) and seemed to apply to localized (P-trend = 0.08) as well as advanced or high-grade cancer (P-trend = 0.09). This association was consistent across the four ethnic groups examined. Although the relationship was weaker for genistein, the odds ratios and trends were similarly inverse. Urinary excretion of equol and enterolactone was not significantly related to prostate cancer risk. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that high intake of isoflavones, as reflected by urinary excretion of daidzein and genistein, may be protective against prostate cancer. British Journal of Cancer (2009) 101, 185-191. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605137 www.bjcancer.com Published online 16 June 2009 (C) 2009 Cancer Research UK

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available