Vitamin D Helps Against Lung Cancer

May 2, 2005

Vitamin D looks more and more like a sharp weapon against cancer. An American study points towards high Vitamin D status being a great advantage, if you have lung cancer.

The belief that vitamin D counteracts cancer is strongly growing. It is based, among other things, on the known normalizing effect of the vitamin on cells and tissues, but also that the frequency of, for example, breast, prostate and colon cancer is considerably higher in countries low in sun such as Denmark, where the sun low in the sky from September to May, so low that No vitamin D is formed in the skin. In addition, the Danish diet completely lacks vitamin D, except fatty fish.

With regard to breast cancer, the hypothesis was substantiated almost a year ago when the English showed that women who, for hereditary reasons, make poor use of vitamin D have a doubled risk of developing breast cancer. At the same time, it was found that women with low vitamin D status have a quadrupled frequency of lumpy breasts, a known risk factor for breast cancer.

Now, an American study of 456 patients with early stages of the most common (non-small cell) form of lung cancer shows that the connection may also apply to lung cancer. Lung cancer patients who underwent surgery in the summer months, when vitamin D stores are highest, fared much better in the study than those who underwent surgery in the winter.

After five years, 70% of those operated in the summer were still disease-free, while the same was true for only 54% of those operated in the winter. When blood levels of vitamin D were also taken into account, the difference was even greater: 83% of those operated in the summer, who had high vitamin D status, were still disease-free after five years, compared to 30% of those operated in the winter with low vitamin D status.

It goes without saying that you shouldn’t wait six months to have surgery if you’re diagnosed with lung cancer in the winter. But the study naturally raises the question of whether lung cancer patients – and smokers – wouldn’t be wise to ensure they get more vitamin D than normal.

Much more vitamin D
Until now, it has been officially recommended that everyone get 5 micrograms of vitamin D per day in their diet. This is difficult for most people. It is even more difficult for older people to get the previously officially recommended 10 micrograms, which is still recommended for everyone over 60.

But it will be almost impossible for nursing home residents to meet the latest recommendations of getting 20 micrograms a day. It is almost impossible to do this without supplementation. In a regular vitamin pill there is a completely inadequate five micrograms, or what is found in 50-60 grams of herring. Very few nursing home residents eat half a pound of herring a day.

And yet, according to several vitamin D researchers, even this intake is not enough. The estimated upper limit for risk-free intake is 50 micrograms daily, while some recommend 100 micrograms as a cancer prevention measure for those at particular risk or for certain neurological diseases.

Significantly more people believe that an intake of around 25 micrograms – equivalent to the content in 10 ml of cod liver oil – should be the norm for all adults. Regardless of which one chooses, it cannot be achieved without supplementation.

For now, research is continuing at full speed. From the Japanese side, it has been shown that substances closely related to vitamin D inhibit both the spread of lung cancer and the formation of blood vessels in tumors.

Others have shown that vitamin D promotes cell death or normalizes abnormal cells in a wide range of tumors, both in the laboratory and in animal studies. Positive results have also been obtained in men with prostate cancer, where traditional anti-hormone therapy is no longer effective.

One thing seems certain: You should avoid sunburn, but you shouldn’t uncritically rely on dermatologists’ long-standing warnings against sunlight. You could risk getting cancer.

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. American Association for Cancer Research. Press Release 18 April 2005.
2. Trump DL et al. Anti-tumor activity of calcitriol: pre-clinical and clinical studies. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2004 May;89-90(1-5):519-26.
3. Nakagawa K et al. 22-oxa-1{alpha},25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 inhibits metastasis and angiogenesis in lung cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2005 Feb 17;[Epub ahead of print].

www.aacr.org
www.sciencedirect.com
carcin.oupjournals.org
www.iom.dk

Antioxidants Prevent Lung Cancer After All

August 4, 2004

Smokers taking a wide range of antioxidants through their diet, reduce their risk of getting lung cancer. This is demonstrated by a follow up study from a world famous research study (ATBC). The ATBC study has been the source of the opposite interpretation for ten years.

The startling result is sourced from the so called ATBC-study, a Finnish study from 1994, which demonstrated that the risk for male smokers getting lung cancer did not decrease, but increased, when they were given large dosages of betacarotene – the yellow colouring substance in carrots.

The ATBC study was a shock for researchers all over the world, who on the basis of numerous animal studies were convinced that antioxidants prevent cancer. Since then the ATBC study has been the standing argument for recurrent warnings against antioxidants on TV etc.

In the new study, staticians from the prestigious American Yale University together with Finnish colleages looked through 1,787 cases of lung cancer, approximately the amount of the 27,000 male heavy smokers in the ATBC group, who got lung cancer during the 14 years.

In the new study, measurements were taken not just for one single antioxidant, but for the total intake of the antioxidants selenium, Vitamin E, Vitamin C as well as coloured parts in plants, the so called carotenoids and flavonoids. The most updated inclusive index was calculated in advance stating the total antioxidant intake with just one figure.

It turned out that the fifth of the smokers, who had the highest index statisticly seen through their diet, had a 16% less risk of lung cancer! Smokers who ate large amounts of meat had a 25% decrease, despite of red meat having a high oxidative effect! This supports the fact that it was the antioxidative effect that made the difference.

It is not the first time such results are seen, but they are of great importance, because they are sourced from the same ATBC study, which has been one of the most outspoken arguments to warn against antioxidants. Two other larger studies has found the risk of lung cancer decreased up to as much as 32% and 68%.

The researchers emphasize in a commentary, that when the original study was a disappointment, the explanation may lie in the fact that smokers did not get a combination of vitamins etc., but were given betacarotene alone. They recommend smokers to always take a wide selection of antioxidants as a protection against cancer.

By: Vitality Council

References:
1. Wright ME et al. Development of a comprehensive dietary antioxidant index and application to lung cancer risk in a corhort of male smokers. Am J Epidemiol 2004;160:68-76.
2. Yong LC et al.Intake og vitamins E, C and A and risk of lung cancer: The NHANES I epidemiologic follow-up study. Am J Epidemiol 1997;146:231-43.
3. Michaud DS et al. Intake of specific carotenoids and risk of lung cancer in 2 prospective US cohorts. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;72:990-7.

jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/290/4/476
www.aje.oupjournals.org
www.ajcn.org
www.iom.dk