This sure does not boost my confidence in MCP. Doesnt really give any specifics, just a general, "it is better than nothing, but not by much"? Again, any insight would help.
Modified citrus pectin (MCP) increases the prostate-specific antigen doubling time in men with prostate cancer: a phase II pilot study
Abstract
This trial investigated the tolerability and effect of modified citrus pectin (Pecta-Sol®) in 13 men with prostate cancer and biochemical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure after localized treatment, that is, radical prostatectomy, radiation, or cryosurgery. A total of 13 men were evaluated for tolerability and 10 for efficacy. Changes in the prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) of the 10 men were the primary end point in the study. We found that the PSADT increased (P-value<0.05) in seven (70%) of 10 men after taking MCP for 12 months compared to before taking MCP. This study suggests that MCP may lengthen the PSADT in men with recurrent prostate cancer.
Written by
Teufelshunde
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
The initial theory was that MCP had anti-adhesive properties as well as potentially increasing apoptotic responses of tumor cells to chemotherapy as seen in this study.
A most useful study showing that increased PSA doubling time for biochemically recurrent PCa is normal even in the absence of interventions, strongly indicating that single-arm trials on PSADT have limited value. There must be a placebo arm to yield valid information.
I always go to pubmed.gov which is the National Library of Science. There are quite a few studies on modified citrus pectin. Here's just one I found today. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/349...
Given the link provided by TA indicating that increased PSADT is a common feature of BRPC even in the absence of interventions, could Dr. Eliaz be asked about this and why there was not a placebo arm in the study you linked to, or suggested that a future trial incorporate this? It beats me why he goes to all the trouble of making this study without a randomized placebo arm when the science shows that in the case of PSADT this is needed.
In the study, with a quote below, the increased doubling time in this single-arm trial is touted as the largest indicated benefit of MCP. However, decreased/stable PSA, observed in 58% of patients, was also an apparently substantial benefitm, so maybe MCP is a good substance.
The study states that ADT and other cancer treatmeants were discontinued at least six months before the start of the trial. Another question for Dr. Eliaz would be if it is known whether participants started other cancer treatments during the trial. If my PSA was increasing, would I dare trust MCP as my only treatment?
From the study: "Based on PSA dynamics, we report on the safety and the primary outcome analysis of a prospective phase II study of P-MCP in non-metastatic BRPC based. Sixty patients were enrolled, and one patient withdrew after a month. Patients (n = 59) were given P-MCP, 4.8 grams X 3/day, for six months. The primary endpoint was the rate without PSA progression and improved PSA doubling time (PSADT). Secondary endpoints were the rate without radiologic progression and toxicity. Patients that did not progress by PSA and radiologically at six months continued for an additional twelve months. After six months, 78% (n = 46) responded to therapy, with a decreased/stable PSA in 58% (n = 34), or improvement of PSADT in 75% (n = 44), and with negative scans, and entered the second twelve months treatment phase. Median PSADT improved significantly (p = 0.003). Disease progression during the first 6 months was noted in only 22% (n = 13), with PSA progression in 17% (n = 10), and PSA and radiologic progression in 5% (n = 3)".
I was on MCP for some time, but didn´t renew the order. It didn´t quite make it to the top tier of supps that I can logistically handle. If only a study like the one you linked to had been better designed...
Hi Annie, when I go to dreliaz.com I get redirected to dreliaz.org and I can´t find any way to contact him there. Could you let me know some way of contacting him, or can I write you the questions for forwarding? In case the latter, here they are:
Dear Dr. Eliaz,
As a user of your Modified Citrus Pectin, Pectasol, may I ask a couple of questions?
The phase II pilot study shows a statistically significant and impressive increase in PSA doubling time when using Pectasol. However, I understand that PSA doubling time normally increases even in the absence of any intervention for men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer, according to this study: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...
If possible, it would be great to get a comment from you!
The study states that ADT and other cancer treatmeants were discontinued at least six months before the start of the trial. Is it known whether any of the 59 patients may have started ADT or other cancer treatments during the trial? My high-risk cancer is currently senescent, but if my PSA was increasing, I doubt if I would dare trust MCP as my only treatment no matter how much I believe in it!
I wrote my name and contact details here, but got an error message that I shouldn´t do this.
Here's a possible other way. I will try to pass on your message. If his email is not public, I cannot gift it to you. I will let you know if he responds, or perhaps you can email me - address on our website, and I can forward it.
One of the issues products from the 'natural' world have, is that they cannot be patented. Therefore Big Pharma is not interested (unless they can make a synthetic version). It costs multiple millions to do an RCT (randomized clinical trial), the evidence sought by most researchers. Due to the above, there are few studies, and those are often at incompatible doses or timing and thus hard to aggregate (known as meta-analyses.) BUT there may be many smaller studies indicating beneficial results. This is worth paying attention to.
Yes, generally the studies on natural are not Level 1. That was my point, but there are now many. Back in the day, all these ideas were called ALTERNATIVE. I started exploring in 1993 or so. Another of the issues is FDA approval. That requires a large-scale trial and sometimes two (although too many IMO drugs are approved too casually these days. Many do not do what the preliminary data suggests. And I agree that many clinical trials are not reproducible. That's not a problem specific to natural substances at all. It seems to be quite widespread. Some very well known researchers have written about this problem.
I take half a dozen of the substances you mention, on the premise that the odds favour at least one or two actually panning out against my PCa, with no way to know which ones. To really go this statistical route, I suppose I should take all of them, and more, but it just gets to be too many so I´ve picked my choices FWIW.
Branching off a little... statins is one of my choices. But I find studies indicating they blunt exercise effects. Do you know if this is something one should be concerned with? I don´t take my Pitavastatin, with a 12-hour halfing rate, on the two evenings preceeding gym days, i.e. about half of all days.
Well, for some who have gone the "clean" path and ignored dietary and other so called benefits. There's really nothing to lose by giving some of these a go! Funny thing is inflammatory disease is highly associated with cancers of all sorts. Yet, if you go the anti-inflammatories vs Supplements and diet, there's supposedly no benefit. Hmmmm... Interesting of course.
The pharmacokinetics, the metabolic, the entire endocrine system and more, all playing with us. Why we can't play with it? To each his own... Because in the end, some would welcome an extra month or two, or three. But some things cannot be explained away because it cannot be replicated in a lab setting. We all know Labs don't help much at all. And of course controls for dietary studies, including supplements, is almost impossible. But we do have have historical data in a sense, old wives tales, thousands of years of Traditional Chinese Medicine, etc. Cannot easily dismissed... Best example of this is how resistive Western Medicine was to Accu-Puncture, but yet today, is approved for a variety of issues, with some amazing success, absent medication use. Guess that's Hocus pocus too (to some). Just years ago, using a multi modality to treat cancer was also a no-no...
So, my point is, the "Right to Try" is something that should exist everywhere! Those who would volunteer to be that live lab rat, see how things work (for them). Ultimately, even with approved modalities, it's fairly noted the end point doesn't change much for those with an advanced diagnosis. So why are we then "submissive" to being live lab rats, but for established medicine only and exclusively??? Problem really is finding an oncologist who would allow "you" to follow your own path, and participate in your care by monitoring and making note of changes, being involved in a support role, rather than commanding role. All in order to allow for ventures into unknown territory. Who and how, was our own health care decisions relegated inferior to that by an approved agency!? Approved methods and methodology only?
All of our cancers are different, and is well known. Yet today still, we don't have individualized medicine that addresses the patient as an individual, rather than being placed into a stratified group, for convenience of course. But convenience for whom?
For myself, I prescribe to SOC, but challenge at every turn, and have very deep discussions with my care team. I'm confounded by the conflicting information both beneficial and contradictory with various supplements, many though seem to be associated with the amounts consumed and timing, etc. One works with low dose and adverse with high, and you look at another and find the opposite. Then discovery on Lipophilic or hydrophilic comes into play. Add what mechanism of action(s) identified sometimes are only reliant upon the limited studies done, if any... Combine with any drugs you're taking and potential contraindications, etc., make it all complicated. But there are some study data available for many of the more popular ones, just do your homework!
Love your thought process. If there is SOME evidence the substance helps, it goes on the list. Then list is narrowed down. Sulforaphane, but only BROQ in dose used in the RCT, made the cut. I take a statin and baby asprin anyway so that is there, pom juice now (posted post for help comparing that to pomi-t), and then a host of others that have some evidence, but are widely know and recognized as generally good re anti-inflammatory actions, etc, like curcumin, garlic, licopene . . . . Only adverse effects are a lighter wallet, and possibility of bad things in the supplements. For that, I rely somewhat on consumerlabs.com and other certifications. And of course, diet and exercise have always been a priority. I always tell my fellow old people, lift heavy shit and do HIIT cardio. Forget the light weights and walking, unless of course that is all one can do, then better than nothing. Thinking of keeping MCP but only do 5g/day maintenance dose. We are out here just doing the best we can. Appreciate all the data and opinions.
As for MCP, Swanson´s MCP caps and powder are cheaper than Eliaz´ Pectasol, do you have any opinion on whether the quality of the latter is superior? Will decide if MCP will after all make it into my list of "just might be good" supps to take.
I have taken the Pectasol powder for awhile. My PSA tripled while on ADT. Now CRPC and have added Abiraterone and Prednisone.
I have dropped most supplements. Only take sulforaphane, vitamin K2, vitamin D and a calcium mineral supplement for my bones that are becoming fragile because of the long term effects of ADT.
I have tried many different supplements and diet changes but the cancer is progressing as it should. I haven’t found the silver bullet yet.
Sorry to hear that. There is no silver bullet in supplements, or the drugs they prescribe, unfortunately. My thoughts on anything that is good for your body, reduces inflammation, or has other general health benefits, and no downside, better to take than not.
I did it per my nat dr for 18 months s straight. I went into remission dropped it and have stayed clear over seven years now . The pectin helped me! Each to their own healing! Good luck ! Happy new year!
this is an n=1 but I’m 67, a fairly serious cyclist and I’m on Metformin because I’m diabetic and a statin because my cholesterol is slightly elevated (btw, ADT doesn’t help either of those things) Since I’ve been taking them (about 1year) my FTP (functional threshold power) has increased 30 watts, and my VO2 max has gone from 45 to 53. I’ve done this with some hard training, sure, but at my age and coming off of ADT (and still feeling some effects of that), these increases wouldn’t happen if there was a serious problem with oxidative stress. My muscles would simply hurt too much to train with any serious intent. I had to try several different statins to find one that didn’t make my legs sore but once it clicked in I have zero side-effects. Like I said, n=1 , my own experience, for what’s worth. Everyone has different reactions, especially to metformin and statins so your experience may very.
Yes, The same seems to be true for the guy who sells the BROC supplement. Anytime you're reviewing clinical trials related to a proprietary supplement, such as BROC or Tocotrienols (or MCP), always check the potential conflict of interest section of the written report
Tough question. What is called an N of 1, makes it difficult to be sure. I do feel a level of confidence in saying it may have helped me avoid metastatic spread of breast cancer, and lymphoma. Others in my situation (many tumors from both cancers), develop Mets. I have not, 30 years and 4 years out.
I take a number of things, like MCP, IP-6, a statin, metformin, vit K2, DIM and Bitter Melon. Maybe if each helps just a little they do just enough to keep the disease in check. I take other things for heart health too. I'll be turning 73 in several weeks.
The study you found from 2021 is fascinating, here is another quote from it:
"Collectively, our results suggest that taking either compound alone (note: metformin/statin) may cause deleterious consequences in exercising muscle, possibly due to shifts in muscle metabolism and inhibition of mTORC1 signaling. However, in our cohort, the hypertrophic adaptive response to PRT was rescued when metformin was combined with statin therapy. Thus, combination therapy may benefit the muscle microenvironment by preventing negative effects from monotherapy on cellular muscle features needed for more robust hypertrophy".
I am taking both compounds. Until I learn more perhaps after your talk with your NMD, I will tentatively, based on this study, keep taking both all evenings except the last evening before gym day, when I am not away from home, which will summed up mean about 200 days a year. Whilst writing this I realize it may be too few days for the potential positive effects to fully materialize.
I see that you shift between two statins, probably wise. Neither of them is pitavastatin, have you ever considered this? I use pitavastatin, partly based on a single study with weak evidence of superiority over atavastatin on cancer (small sample size six cancers vs one, and a single PCa vs zero, P just above the cutoff point 0.051 so science says no evidence). dovepress.com/the-anti-canc...
I do not take pitavastatin for its CVD protection but don´t mind that possible booster effect and according to this study it is superior in that respect over atavastatin internationaljournalofcardi... "Pitavastatin therapy compared with atorvastatin more may prevent cardiovascular events in hypercholesterolemic patients with one or more risk factors for atherosclerotic diseases despite similar effects on LDL-C levels".
However, I also chose pitavastatin because I believe it is acknowledged to have less drug interactions than other statins and I trust this is not negative from the point of view of synergy with metformin.....
Thanks for the link to that study, let´s hope what it indicates is valid!
Yep, feeling pretty good about the whole thing. I was diagnosed on the cusp of my 45 birthday, and turn 75 in about 5 weeks! Yep, good stuff. Dealing with 2 cancers, but feeling good.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Modified Fruit Pectin
Modified Citrus pectin article
Galectin-3 Level and Modified Citrus Pectin
