New paper [1].
I have known from the start (14 years ago) that phosphorus/phosphate could inhibit vitamin D utilization. But tumorigenesis?
Kapur addressed the viamin D issue in a 1999 paper [2]: "Phosphorus balance and prostate cancer.":
"Several studies support the view that higher levels of 1,25-(OH)2D, the active metabolite of vitamin D, reduce the risk of BPH and CaP. Men with high serum levels of 1,25-(OH)2D have a reduced risk of poorly differentiated and clinically advanced CaP. ... Incidentally, a low dietary intake of phosphorus has been reported to increase serum levels of 1,25-(OH)2D. In addition, dietary fructose reduces plasma phosphate levels by 30 to 50% for more than 3 hr."
Prior to PCa, I had been using zylitol as a sugar alternative, but I soon switched to fructose. The reason is that healthy prostatic cells can convert 25-D to active 1,25-D {1,25-(OH)2D}, but PCa cells cannot. We can supplement with high levels of cholecalciferol & build up a good 25-D resevoir, but this means nothing if we inhibit kidney production of 1,25-D.
Too much calcium or phosphate in the diet will do that, whereas small amounts of fructose will increase 1,25-D by reducing phosphate levels.
Giovannucci has been writing about the 1,25-D issue for as long as Kapur. In 2015, he published; "Calcium and phosphorus intake and prostate cancer risk: a 24-y follow-up study." [3]:
"Calcium intakes >2000 mg/d were associated with greater risk of total prostate cancer and lethal and high-grade cancers. These associations were attenuated and no longer statistically significant when phosphorus intake was adjusted for. Phosphorus intake was associated with greater risk of total, lethal, and high-grade cancers, independent of calcium and intakes of red meat, white meat, dairy, and fish. In latency analysis, calcium and phosphorus had independent effects for different time periods between exposure and diagnosis. Calcium intake was associated with an increased risk of advanced-stage and high-grade disease 12-16 y after exposure, whereas high phosphorus was associated with increased risk of advanced-stage and high-grade disease 0-8 y after exposure."
There is generally no need for Americans to supplement with phosphate. In fact, the danger in the U.S. is not deficiency, but toxicity.
Protein does not itself contain phosphorus, but an adequate intake of protein guarantees adequate phosphorus. Unfortunately, one gets used to being served large portions of meat. IMO, the primary issue with meat is the phosphorus burden.
& many deli meats have added phosphates.
Soft drinks generally have phosphates.
& processed foods can contain them.
Overall, there is a substantial risk of overload in the general population.
The authors of the new paper co-authored a 2015 paper" "Phosphate toxicity: a stealth biochemical stress factor?" [4]:
"The nutrition boards, such as that of the Institute of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health in the United States, most often rely on scientific consensus when setting dietary recommendations. Weighing the scientific evidence usually involves following the direction in which most of the available research points at the time. Unfortunately, the research question of whether the public is getting too much dietary phosphorus is not even on the radar screen, and only a few studies examining phosphate toxicity are just beginning to surface within the scientific community. So far, implications from research findings on phosphate toxicity and its stress on the body are concerning, implicating phosphate toxicity as a possible cause of premature aging and of many non-communicable diseases such as kidney disease, osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease and cancer."
"Chang et al. found that mortality increased in the healthy adult US population when daily phosphorus intake reached 1400 mg, but the My Plate program of the United States Department of Agriculture continues to recommend daily menus that provide adults with over 1800 mg of phosphorus, with no intention to modify this recommendation."
"dairy, meat, chicken, fish, eggs, legumes, and grains are the most common sources of phosphorus in the Western diet."
Here's the Abstract from the new paper:
"In this brief opinion article, we briefly summarized evidence that cellular phosphate burden from phosphate toxicity is a pathophysiological determinant of cancer cell growth. Tumor cells express more phosphate cotransporters and store more inorganic phosphate than normal cells, and dysregulated phosphate homeostasis is associated with the genesis of various human tumors. High dietary phosphate consumption causes the growth of lung and skin tumors in experimental animal models. Experimental studies show that excessive phosphate burden induces growth-promoting cell signaling, stimulates neovascularization, and is associated with chromosome instability and metastasis. Studies have also shown phosphate is a mitogenic factor that affects various tumor cell growth. Among epidemiological evidence linking phosphorus and tumor formation, the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study found that high dietary phosphorus levels were independently associated with lethal and high-grade prostate cancer. Further research is needed to determine how excessive dietary phosphate consumption influences initiation and promotion of tumorigenesis, and to elucidate prognostic benefits of reducing phosphate burden to decrease tumor cell growth and delay metastatic progression. The results of such studies could provide the basis for therapeutic modulation of phosphate metabolism for the improved patient outcome."
-Patrick
[1] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/296...
[2] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/105...
Hexose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase blockade reverses enzalutamide resistance
Study shows supplement successfully fights lethal prostate cancer
Natural Vit E and Prevention
Coffee and Tea and PC
