Life Extension Magazine June 2005
Effect of resveratrol and beta-sitosterol in combination on reactive oxygen species and prostaglandin release by.
The objective of this project was to identify some possible mechanisms by which two common phytochemicals, resveratrol and beta-sitosterol, inhibit the growth of human prostate cancer PC-3 cells. These mechanisms include the effect of the phytochemicals on apoptosis, cell cycle progression, prostaglandin synthesis and the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Prostaglandins have been known to play a role in regulating cell growth and apoptosis. PC-3 cells were supplemented with 50 microM resveratrol or 16 microM beta-sitosterol alone or in combination for up to 5 days. Phytochemical supplementation resulted in inhibition in cell growth. beta-Sitosterol was more potent than resveratrol and the combination of the two resulted in greater inhibition than supplementation with either alone. Long-term supplementation with resveratrol or beta-sitosterol elevated basal prostaglandin release but beta-sitosterol was much more potent than resveratrol in this regard. beta-Sitosterol was more effective than resveratrol in inducing apoptosis and the combination had an intermediate effect after 1 day of supplementation. Cells supplemented with resveratrol were arrested at the G1 phase and at the G2/M phase in the case of beta-sitosterol while the combination resulted in cell arrest at the two phases of the cell cycle. beta-Sitosterol increased ROS production while resveratrol decreased ROS production. The combination of the two phytochemicals resulted in an intermediate level of ROS. The observed changes in prostaglandin levels and ROS production by these two phytochemicals may suggest their mediation in the growth inhibition. The reduction in ROS level and increase by resveratrol supplementation in PC-3 cells reflects the antioxidant properties of resveratrol. It was concluded that these phytochemicals may induce the inhibition of tumor growth by stimulating apoptosis and arresting cells at different locations in the cell cycle and the mechanism may involve alterations in ROS and prostaglandin production.
Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 2005 Mar;72(3):219-26
Beta-sitosterols for benign prostatic hyperplasia.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of beta-sitosterols (B-sitosterol) on urinary symptoms and flow measures in men with of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). SEARCH STRATEGY: Trials were searched in computerized general and specialized databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Phytodok), by checking bibliographies, and by contacting manufacturers and researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were eligible for inclusion provided they (1) randomized men with BPH to receive B-sitosterol preparations in comparison to placebo or other BPH medications, and (2) included clinical outcomes such as urologic symptom scales, symptoms, or urodynamic measurements. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information on patients, interventions, and outcomes was extracted by at least two independent reviewers using a standard form. Main outcome measure for comparing the effectiveness of B-sitosterols with placebo and standard BPH medications was the change in urologic symptom scale scores. Secondary outcomes included changes in nocturia as well as urodynamic measures (peak and mean urine flow, residual volume, prostate size). Main outcome measure for side effects was the number of men reporting side effects. MAIN RESULTS: 519 men from 4 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials, (lasting 4 to 26 weeks) were assessed. 3 trials used non-glucosidic B-sitosterols and one utilized a preparation that contained 100% B-sitosteryl-B-D-glucoside. B-Sitosterols improved urinary symptom scores and flow measures. The weighted mean difference (WMD) for the IPSS was -4.9 IPSS points (95%CI = -6.3 to -3.5, n = 2 studies). The WMD for peak urine flow was 3.91 ml/sec (95%CI = 0.91 to 6.90, n = 4 studies) and the WMD for residual volume was -28.62 ml (95%CI = -41. 42 to -15.83, n = 4 studies). The trial using 100% B-sitosteryl-B-D-glucoside (WA184) show improvement in urinary flow measures. B-sitosterols did not reduce prostate size. Withdrawal rates for men assigned to B-sitosterol and placebo were 7.8% and 8. 0%, respectively. REVIEWER’S CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests non-glucosidic B-sitosterols improve urinary symptoms and flow measures. Their long term effectiveness, safety and ability to prevent BPH complications are not known.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD001043
In vitro and in vivo (SCID mice) effects of phytosterols on the growth and dissemination of human prostate cancer PC-3 cells.
The dietary effect of phytosterols (PS) versus cholesterol on the growth and metastasis of the PC-3 human prostate cancer cells in SCID mice was studied. Also, their direct effect on the growth and migration of these cells in vitro was analysed. In the in vivo experiment, SCID mice were fed a diet containing 2% of either PS mixture or cholesterol plus 0.2% cholic acid and implanted with 2 x 10(6) tumour cells per mouse. Tumour growth was monitored for 8 weeks post inoculation. Animals fed the PS diet had tumours 40-43% smaller than those fed the cholesterol diet. Furthermore, the number of mice with lymph node and lung metastasis was almost one-half that of the cholesterol-fed group. In the in vitro studies, both beta-sitosterol and campesterol inhibited the growth of PC-3 cells by 70% and 14%, respectively, while cholesterol supplementation increased the growth by 18% when compared with controls. PS inhibited the invasion of PC-3 cells into Matrigel-coated membranes by 78% while cholesterol increased it by 43% as compared with the cells in the control media. Migration of tumour cells through 8 microm pore membranes was reduced by 60-93% when the PC-3 cells were in PS media, as compared with a 67% increase after cholesterol supplementation. PS supplementation reduced the binding of PC-3 cells to laminin by 15-38% and fibronectin by 23% while cholesterol increased binding to type IV collagen by 36%. It was concluded that PS indirectly (in vivo as a dietary supplement) and directly (in tissue culture media) inhibited the growth and metastasis of PC-3 cells. beta-Sitosterol was more effective than campesterol in offering this protection in most of the parameters studied.
Eur J Cancer Prev. 2001 Dec;10(6):507-13
Treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia with beta-sitosterol: an 18-month follow-up.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the long-term effects of phytotherapy with beta-sitosterol (the trade name for beta-sitosterol used in this study is Harzol(R)) for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Patient and methods At 18 months after enrolment in a 6-month multicentre double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial with beta-sitosterol (reported previously), patients were re-evaluated using the modified Boyarsky score, the International Prostate Symptom Score and quality-of-life index, the maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). In this open extension of the original trial (after 6 months of treatment or placebo), patients were free to chose their further treatment for BPH. RESULTS: In all, 117 patients (59%) were eligible for analysis during the follow-up. Of the formerbeta-sitosterol group, 38 patients who continued beta-sitosterol treatment had stable values for all outcome variables between the end of the double-blind study and after 18 months of follow-up. The 41 patients choosing no further therapy had slightly worse symptom scores and PVR, but no changes in Qmax. Of the former placebo group, 27 patients who started beta-sitosterol after the double-blind trial improved to the same extent as the treated group for all outcome variables. The 18 patients choosing no further therapy showed no signs of improvement. CONCLUSION: The beneficial effects of beta-sitosterol treatment recorded in the 6-month double-blind trial were maintained for 18 months. Further clinical trials should be conducted to confirm these results before concluding that phytotherapy with beta-sitosterol is effective.
BJU Int. 2000 May;85(7):842-6
Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease, and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California Seventh-day Adventists.
Results associating diet with chronic disease in a cohort of 34192 California Seventh-day Adventists are summarized. Most Seventh-day Adventists do not smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and there is a wide range of dietary exposures within the population. About 50% of those studied ate meat products <1 time/wk or not at all, and vegetarians consumed more tomatoes, legumes, nuts, and fruit, but less coffee, doughnuts, and eggs than did nonvegetarians. Multivariate analyses showed significant associations between beef consumption and fatal ischemic heart disease (IHD) in men [relative risk (RR) = 2.31 for subjects who ate beef > or =3 times/wk compared with vegetarians], significant protective associations between nut consumption and fatal and nonfatal IHD in both sexes (RR approximately 0.5 for subjects who ate nuts > or =5 times/wk compared with those who ate nuts <1 time/wk), and reduced risk of IHD in subjects preferring whole-grain to white bread. The lifetime risk of IHD was reduced by approximately 31% in those who consumed nuts frequently and by 37% in male vegetarians compared with nonvegetarians. Cancers of the colon and prostate were significantly more likely in nonvegetarians (RR of 1.88 and 1.54, respectively), and frequent beef consumers also had higher risk of bladder cancer. Intake of legumes was negatively associated with risk of colon cancer in nonvegetarians and risk of pancreatic cancer. Higher consumption of all fruit or dried fruit was associated with lower risks of lung, prostate, and pancreatic cancers. Cross-sectional data suggest vegetarian Seventh-day Adventists have lower risks of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and arthritis than nonvegetarians. Thus, among Seventh-day Adventists, vegetarians are healthier than nonvegetarians but this cannot be ascribed only to the absence of meat.
Am J Clin Nutr. 1999 Sep;70(3 Suppl):532S-538S