Men's health supplement use and outcomes in men receiving definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer1-3

Nicholas Zaorsky, Thomas M. Churilla, Karen Ruth, Shelly B. Hayes, Mark L. Sobczak, Mark A. Hallman, Marc C. Smaldone, David Y.T. Chen, Eric M. Horwitz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed cancer patients start taking dietary supplements. Men's health supplements (MHSs), which we define as supplements that are specifically marketed with the terms men's health and prostate health (or similar permutations), are often mislabeled as having potential anticancer benefits. Objective: We evaluated the effects of MHSs on patient outcomes and toxicities in patients who were undergoing definitive intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer. Design: This retrospective analysis included patients who were being treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and consented to have information stored in a prospective database. MHSs were queried online. Outcome measures were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) (biochemical failure was defined with the use of the prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2-ng/mL definition), freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as well as toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, Fine and Gray competing-risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), and Cox models were used. Results: From 2001 to 2012, 2207 patients were treated with IMRT with a median dose of 78 Gy, and a median follow-up of 46 mo. Of these patients, 43% were low risk, 37% were intermediate risk, and 20% were high risk; 10% used MHSs. MHSs contained a median of 3 identifiable ingredients (range: 0-78 ingredients). Patients who were taking an MHS compared with those who were not had improved 5-y OS (97% compared with 92%, respectively; P = 0.01), but there were no differences in the FFBF (94% compared with 89%, respectively; P = 0.12), FFDM (96% compared with 97%, respectively; P = 0.32), or CSS (100% compared with 99%, respectively; P = 0.22). The unadjusted association between MHS use and improved OS was attenuated after adjustment for patient lifestyle factors and comorbidities. There was no difference in toxicities between the 2 groups (late-grade 3-4 genitourinary ,3%; gastrointestinal ,4%). Conclusion: The use of MHSs is not associated with outcomes or toxicities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1583-1593
Number of pages11
JournalAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Volume104
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

Fingerprint

Men's Health
Prostate
Radiotherapy
Survival
Life Style
Neoplasms
Neoplasm Metastasis
National Cancer Institute (U.S.)
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Dietary Supplements
Proportional Hazards Models
Comorbidity
Prostatic Neoplasms
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Zaorsky, Nicholas ; Churilla, Thomas M. ; Ruth, Karen ; Hayes, Shelly B. ; Sobczak, Mark L. ; Hallman, Mark A. ; Smaldone, Marc C. ; Chen, David Y.T. ; Horwitz, Eric M. / Men's health supplement use and outcomes in men receiving definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer1-3. In: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2016 ; Vol. 104, No. 6. pp. 1583-1593.
@article{7c1b30039de4427a96948d16f776c368,
title = "Men's health supplement use and outcomes in men receiving definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer1-3",
abstract = "Background: Approximately 50{\%} of newly diagnosed cancer patients start taking dietary supplements. Men's health supplements (MHSs), which we define as supplements that are specifically marketed with the terms men's health and prostate health (or similar permutations), are often mislabeled as having potential anticancer benefits. Objective: We evaluated the effects of MHSs on patient outcomes and toxicities in patients who were undergoing definitive intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer. Design: This retrospective analysis included patients who were being treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and consented to have information stored in a prospective database. MHSs were queried online. Outcome measures were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) (biochemical failure was defined with the use of the prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2-ng/mL definition), freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as well as toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, Fine and Gray competing-risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), and Cox models were used. Results: From 2001 to 2012, 2207 patients were treated with IMRT with a median dose of 78 Gy, and a median follow-up of 46 mo. Of these patients, 43{\%} were low risk, 37{\%} were intermediate risk, and 20{\%} were high risk; 10{\%} used MHSs. MHSs contained a median of 3 identifiable ingredients (range: 0-78 ingredients). Patients who were taking an MHS compared with those who were not had improved 5-y OS (97{\%} compared with 92{\%}, respectively; P = 0.01), but there were no differences in the FFBF (94{\%} compared with 89{\%}, respectively; P = 0.12), FFDM (96{\%} compared with 97{\%}, respectively; P = 0.32), or CSS (100{\%} compared with 99{\%}, respectively; P = 0.22). The unadjusted association between MHS use and improved OS was attenuated after adjustment for patient lifestyle factors and comorbidities. There was no difference in toxicities between the 2 groups (late-grade 3-4 genitourinary ,3{\%}; gastrointestinal ,4{\%}). Conclusion: The use of MHSs is not associated with outcomes or toxicities.",
author = "Nicholas Zaorsky and Churilla, {Thomas M.} and Karen Ruth and Hayes, {Shelly B.} and Sobczak, {Mark L.} and Hallman, {Mark A.} and Smaldone, {Marc C.} and Chen, {David Y.T.} and Horwitz, {Eric M.}",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3945/ajcn.115.119958",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "104",
pages = "1583--1593",
journal = "American Journal of Clinical Nutrition",
issn = "0002-9165",
publisher = "American Society for Nutrition",
number = "6",

}

Men's health supplement use and outcomes in men receiving definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer1-3. / Zaorsky, Nicholas; Churilla, Thomas M.; Ruth, Karen; Hayes, Shelly B.; Sobczak, Mark L.; Hallman, Mark A.; Smaldone, Marc C.; Chen, David Y.T.; Horwitz, Eric M.

In: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 104, No. 6, 01.12.2016, p. 1583-1593.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Men's health supplement use and outcomes in men receiving definitive intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer1-3

AU - Zaorsky, Nicholas

AU - Churilla, Thomas M.

AU - Ruth, Karen

AU - Hayes, Shelly B.

AU - Sobczak, Mark L.

AU - Hallman, Mark A.

AU - Smaldone, Marc C.

AU - Chen, David Y.T.

AU - Horwitz, Eric M.

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Background: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed cancer patients start taking dietary supplements. Men's health supplements (MHSs), which we define as supplements that are specifically marketed with the terms men's health and prostate health (or similar permutations), are often mislabeled as having potential anticancer benefits. Objective: We evaluated the effects of MHSs on patient outcomes and toxicities in patients who were undergoing definitive intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer. Design: This retrospective analysis included patients who were being treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and consented to have information stored in a prospective database. MHSs were queried online. Outcome measures were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) (biochemical failure was defined with the use of the prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2-ng/mL definition), freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as well as toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, Fine and Gray competing-risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), and Cox models were used. Results: From 2001 to 2012, 2207 patients were treated with IMRT with a median dose of 78 Gy, and a median follow-up of 46 mo. Of these patients, 43% were low risk, 37% were intermediate risk, and 20% were high risk; 10% used MHSs. MHSs contained a median of 3 identifiable ingredients (range: 0-78 ingredients). Patients who were taking an MHS compared with those who were not had improved 5-y OS (97% compared with 92%, respectively; P = 0.01), but there were no differences in the FFBF (94% compared with 89%, respectively; P = 0.12), FFDM (96% compared with 97%, respectively; P = 0.32), or CSS (100% compared with 99%, respectively; P = 0.22). The unadjusted association between MHS use and improved OS was attenuated after adjustment for patient lifestyle factors and comorbidities. There was no difference in toxicities between the 2 groups (late-grade 3-4 genitourinary ,3%; gastrointestinal ,4%). Conclusion: The use of MHSs is not associated with outcomes or toxicities.

AB - Background: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed cancer patients start taking dietary supplements. Men's health supplements (MHSs), which we define as supplements that are specifically marketed with the terms men's health and prostate health (or similar permutations), are often mislabeled as having potential anticancer benefits. Objective: We evaluated the effects of MHSs on patient outcomes and toxicities in patients who were undergoing definitive intensitymodulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for localized prostate cancer. Design: This retrospective analysis included patients who were being treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center and consented to have information stored in a prospective database. MHSs were queried online. Outcome measures were freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) (biochemical failure was defined with the use of the prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2-ng/mL definition), freedom from distant metastasis (FFDM), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) as well as toxicities. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, Fine and Gray competing-risk regression (to adjust for patient and lifestyle factors), and Cox models were used. Results: From 2001 to 2012, 2207 patients were treated with IMRT with a median dose of 78 Gy, and a median follow-up of 46 mo. Of these patients, 43% were low risk, 37% were intermediate risk, and 20% were high risk; 10% used MHSs. MHSs contained a median of 3 identifiable ingredients (range: 0-78 ingredients). Patients who were taking an MHS compared with those who were not had improved 5-y OS (97% compared with 92%, respectively; P = 0.01), but there were no differences in the FFBF (94% compared with 89%, respectively; P = 0.12), FFDM (96% compared with 97%, respectively; P = 0.32), or CSS (100% compared with 99%, respectively; P = 0.22). The unadjusted association between MHS use and improved OS was attenuated after adjustment for patient lifestyle factors and comorbidities. There was no difference in toxicities between the 2 groups (late-grade 3-4 genitourinary ,3%; gastrointestinal ,4%). Conclusion: The use of MHSs is not associated with outcomes or toxicities.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85002509784&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85002509784&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3945/ajcn.115.119958

DO - 10.3945/ajcn.115.119958

M3 - Article

C2 - 27797706

AN - SCOPUS:85002509784

VL - 104

SP - 1583

EP - 1593

JO - American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

JF - American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

SN - 0002-9165

IS - 6

ER -