Prostate cancer prevention seeks to contain costs and prevent morbidities associated with diagnosis and treatment. Prevention strategies target all stages of the disease process . Interventions focused on primary prevention of prostate cancer aim to prevent incident disease. Secondary prevention involves screening for preclinical disease in an at-risk population. An example familiar to urologists is serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Tertiary prevention aims to reduce disease progression or recurrence in patients with known disease. Many primary and tertiary prevention therapies focus on modifiable risk factors for disease, including nutrition, physical activity, and lifestyle.
The review summarizes the current state of clinical evidence for prostate cancer primary and tertiary prevention using diet, exercise, and lifestyle modification.
Dietary recommendations for prostate cancer prevention closely mirror those for cardiovascular and overall health. They generally involve increasing vegetable and fruit intakes, whereas decreasing red meat and saturated fat intakes. Preclinical and epidemiological data support the benefits of these approaches. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) do not support micronutrient supplementation for primary prevention; one RCT of tertiary prevention has results forthcoming.
Primary prevention: macronutrients and energy balance
Data from preclinical studies have identified various pathways through which diet affects prostate cancer development. Investigators have linked carbohydrate resistance to prostate cancer incidence and progression. Ryan et al.  found that insulin growth factor-1 (IGF-1) receptor was expressed on normal prostate, localized prostate cancer, and metastatic foci; Lubik et al.  observed that IGF-2 was overexpressed in prostate cancer, with insulin-mediated activation leading to androgen receptor pathway activation. Taken together, these data offer a possible mechanism linking carbohydrate consumption with prostate cancer development.
Observational studies have similarly found diet to be associated with primary prostate cancer prevention. A meta-analysis evaluating the role of tomato and lycopene found a significantly reduced risk of incident prostate cancer associated with high intake of both raw [relative risk (RR) = 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8–1.00] and cooked (RR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.71–0.92) tomato products . Similarly, in a meta-analysis of coffee intake, each three additional cups/day reduced the risk of fatal prostate cancer (RR = 0.89; 95% CI 0.82–0.97) . Utilizing the Physicians’ Health Study (PHS), Yang et al. analyzed blood fatty acid levels in two patterns: polyunsaturated fatty acid metabolism and de novo lipogenesis . Although the former was not significantly associated with prostate cancer risk, the latter was associated with increased incident prostate cancer [odds ratio (OR) = 1.63; 95% CI 1.04–2.55]. In 20 316 Hawaiian men, Le Marchand et al.  noted elevated risks of prostate cancer with higher beef (RR = 1.6; 95% CI 1.1–2.4), milk (RR = 1.4; 95% CI 1.0–2.1), and animal fat (RR = 1.6; 95% CI 1.0–2.4) consumption. Similarly, in a population-based case–control study, West et al.  reported a nearly three-fold increased risk for aggressive prostate cancer in men aged 68–74 years with higher dietary fat intake (OR = 2.9; 95% CI 1.0–8.4).
Cohort data also suggest that both positive energy balance and obesity as measured by BMI are associated with increased risks of aggressive disease. Among 280 000 men in the National Institutes of Health-American Association of Retired Persons Diet and Health Study (NIH-AARP), BMI more than 35 kg/m2 was positively associated with prostate cancer mortality (RR = 2.12; 95% CI 1.08–4.15, P = 0.02) . Findings were similar among 141 895 men in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort, in which BMI was inversely associated with total prostate cancer risk but positively associated with high-grade and fatal disease [5th versus 1st quintile, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.32, 95% CI 1.01–1.72; HR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.09–1.68, respectively] [10▪]. In 2952 men from the UCSF Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor registry, overweight, obese, and very obese men had an increased risk of aggressive prostate cancer at time of diagnosis . In the Cancer Prevention I, (n = 381 638) and II (n = 434 630) Studies, prostate cancer mortality was significantly higher for obese (BMI >30 kg/m2) than nonobese (BMI <25 kg/m2) men, and prostate cancer mortality was over 30% higher in the heaviest (BMI 18.50–22.99 kg/m2) compared with the leanest (BMI <18.50 kg/m2) men .
In contrast, BMI has been associated with a modestly decreased risk of incident prostate cancer. In a meta-analysis of 25 prospective studies, obesity was associated with decreased and increased risks of localized and advanced prostate cancer, respectively . Higher BMI was also associated with a decreased total prostate cancer risk in the NIH-AARP and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) cohorts [9,14]. Studies have consistently observed inverse associations of serum PSA with BMI [15–21]. Therefore, one interpretation of these data are that diminished PSA in obese men delays diagnosis relative to nonobese men, thereby leading to more advanced stages of disease and corresponding increases in prostate cancer mortality. A PSA-related delay in diagnosis would also potentially explain the decreased incidence of localized prostate cancer in obese men.
Primary prevention: micronutrients and energy balance
Despite promising epidemiological evidence, two landmark RCTs failed to show benefit for micronutrient supplements in prostate cancer prevention [22–27]. The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial randomized 35 533 men with normal digital rectal examination and PSA less than 4 ng/ml to one of four daily interventions: placebo, selenium 200 μg, vitamin E 400 IU, or both . The primary endpoint was incident prostate cancer. The study was terminated early because of futility, and extended follow-up analysis later noted a 17% increased risk of incident prostate cancer among the vitamin E alone arm (HR = 1.17, P = 0.008) . In post hoc analyses, men with high baseline selenium experienced a 91% increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer with selenium supplementation (HR = 1.91; 95% CI 1.20–3.05, P = 0.008), whereas men with low baseline selenium experienced an increased risk of total and high-grade disease with vitamin E supplementation (HR = 1.63, P = 0.02; HR = 2.11, P = 0.008, respectively) . The authors concluded that neither vitamin E nor selenium levels should exceed recommended daily requirements.
The Physicians’ Health Study II randomized 14 641 US male physicians into one of four arms: daily placebo, vitamin E 400 IU, vitamin C 500 mg, or both [31,32]. After 11.2 years mean follow-up, neither intervention demonstrated any effect on prostate cancer incidence.
Caloric intake, obesity, and energy balance may potentially affect prostate cancer progression. In an analysis of 82 men on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for recurrence after local therapy, the presence of metabolic syndrome upon ADT initiation – defined by modified Adult Treatment Panel-III criteria, which includes obesity defined by increased waist circumference – was associated with a 2.55-fold increased risk of PSA progression (P = 0.003) and a 2.65-fold increased risk of death (P = 0.045) after adjusting for covariates . The authors also noted a 2.78-fold increased risk of PSA progression with BMI more than 30 kg/m2 (P = 0.003) – mirroring the increased risk of progression and death from high-risk disease in larger observational studies. Similarly, obesity has been associated with an increased risk of biochemical recurrence and decreased progression-free survival after radical prostatectomy [34–38] and radiation [39,40].
Dietary patterns after prostate cancer diagnosis appear to affect progression. Yang et al. stratified men in the PHS by intake of Western (high fat, meat, processed foods) and ‘prudent’ (high vegetable, fruit, fish, whole grains) diets and found that men with predominantly Western diets experienced higher prostate cancer specific (HR = 2.53; 95% CI 1.0–6.42, P = 0.02) and all-cause mortality (HR = 1.67; 95% CI 1.16–2.42, P = 0.01) compared with men with ‘prudent’ diets . Similarly, Van Blarigan et al.  found an association of high saturated fat intake with all-cause and prostate cancer-specific mortality, whereas high vegetable fat intake was associated with decreased all-cause mortality. In 1000 men within the α-Tocopherol, β-Carotene Cancer Prevention Study, men in the highest quintile of vitamin D had a 28% reduced risk of prostate cancer death compared with the lowest quintile (HR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.52–0.99) .
Although there have as yet been no published RCTs of the effect of diet change on prostate cancer progression, the Men's Eating and Living Study is a multicenter RCT in which 478 men on active surveillance were randomized to a telephone-based diet intervention emphasizing high vegetable intake versus a control state [44▪▪]. The primary outcome is a composite endpoint of clinical progression as measured by total PSA, PSA doubling time, and pathology on repeat biopsy. Secondary endpoints include rates of definitive treatment, disease-related anxiety, and health-related quality of life. Follow-up completed in September 2017 and results are expected in 2018.
As with diet, physical activity recommendations for prostate cancer prevention mirror those for cardiovascular and overall health. Preclinical studies have suggested that exercise modulates tumor development through alteration of oxidative stress, whereas epidemiological and clinical data have shown improved prostate cancer outcomes with higher levels of exercise.
Preclinical studies have demonstrated a beneficial antioxidative effect of exercise on tumor development [45–49]. One model posited hydrogen peroxide as the primary regulator among numerous pathways contributing to prostate cancer proliferation (Ras, PI3-kinase, p53) ; exercise reduces intracellular levels of peroxide via its antioxidative effect, thus diminishing tumorigenesis [47,51,52]. Reviewing the biochemical changes after exercise, Thomas et al.  found direct effects of oxidative stress, IGF-1, chronic inflammation (interleukin-2, tumor necrosis factor, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, prostaglandins), and heat shock proteins – all which have been implicated in cancer development – to be favorably modified after exercise.
Epidemiological studies have consistently demonstrated 10–30% decreased risks of incident prostate cancer with increased physical activity [54–57], including the HPFS, in which men more than 65-year old with the highest level of vigorous activity demonstrated a 67% reduced risk of advanced disease (P = 0.003) and a 74% reduced disease-specific mortality risk (RR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.11–0.66) .
Observational studies have also demonstrated a decreased risk of aggressive and fatal disease with increased physical activity. Arem et al.  found a pooled 11% decreased risk of overall cancer mortality among physically active patients within the NIH-AARP cohort (HR = 0.89; 95% CI 0.84–0.94, P < 0.001), but no significant difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality. In a meta-analysis, Friedenreich et al. [60▪] found a pooled 37% risk reduction in death from any cancer (RR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.54–0.73); they demonstrated a 38% prostate cancer-specific risk reduction (RR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.47–0.82). This meta-analysis drew from the HPFS, the Swedish National Prostate Cancer Register, and the Alberta Cancer Registry, each of which demonstrated an inverse association of physical activity with prostate cancer-specific mortality among men diagnosed with prostate cancer [61,62▪,63]. Among 957 prostate cancer patients followed for up to 17 years, increased postdiagnosis physical activity was associated with lower aggressive prostate cancer (HR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.43–0.95) and disease-specific mortality risk (HR = 0.67; 95% CI 0.48–0.94) .
Prospective interventions of physical activity for prostate cancer are limited. A pilot study to validate Fitbit as a tool to measure physical activity among men with localized prostate cancer has demonstrated this as a feasible tool [64▪▪]. Thus, a relatively low-cost intervention may be sufficient to measure physical activity, thus eliminating the confounder of self-reported activity upon which so much epidemiological data rests. A multinational RCT (Intense Exercise for Survival) is underway examining the effects of a 2-year structured exercise program in men with castrate-resistant prostate cancer, which may inform the clinical care of men with advanced disease [65▪▪].
Diet and exercise are inherently linked. As efforts to influence one will impact the other, it may be more appropriate to measure the impact of combined interventions. To this end, Kenfield et al. [66▪] proposed a lifestyle score for prevention of prostate cancer death, incorporating smoking cessation, physical activity, BMI less than 30 m/kg2, and a Mediterranean diet. Patients with higher scores had 68% decreased risk of death from prostate cancer (HR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.19–0.52) among HPFS men; a similar trend was observed among men in PHS.
Prospective interventions have replicated this effect. In the Prostate Cancer Lifestyle Trial, 93 men on active surveillance were randomized to an exercise, psychosocial, and nutritional intervention versus regular care; significantly fewer men in the intervention arm underwent treatment with surgery, radiation, or ADT after 2 years of follow-up . The Gene Expression Modulation by Intervention with Nutrition and Lifestyle pilot study evaluated gene expression alterations of 30 men via prostate biopsy 3 months after an intensive nutritional and lifestyle (physical activity, stress management, psychosocial support) intervention . Among this group, gene expression pathways with roles in tumorigenesis were significantly modulated, such that similar interventions may impact progression of prostate cancer. More studies are necessary to evaluate whether these effects can: be sustained for a longer duration, either at the gene expression level or via measureable physical and/or mental health outcomes; stand up to comparison with a control group; and be translated to measureable improvements in disease specific or overall survival.
Although affecting oncologic outcomes, lifestyle interventions may also ameliorate the physical and emotional burdens of prostate cancer. Among 440 men receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer, increased physical activity was associated with significantly reduced side-effects (rectal symptoms, erectile, and urinary function, all P < 0.01); smokers and overweight men had significantly worse rectal symptoms (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively) . Similarly, an HPFS analysis demonstrated significantly improved health-related quality of life scores among men with higher physical activity levels . A trial of 121 men undergoing radiotherapy with or without ADT – randomized to 24 weeks of resistance training, aerobic exercise, or usual care – demonstrated short-term benefits of both regimens in reducing fatigue (the primary outcome), and more durable benefits for resistance training (P = 0.002) . Other benefits accrued included improved quality of life (P = 0.015), strength (upper and lower body, P < 0.001), and preventing weight gain (P = 0.049).
Despite the limited amount of high-quality data in support of diet, nutrition, and lifestyle factors in the prevention of incident, recurrent, or fatal prostate cancer, these interventions have been incorporated within clinical practice guidelines and patient-directed materials (https://www.pcf.org/) [72,73]. In part, this may reflect the limited number of modifiable factors affecting prostate cancer, as well as their minimal risks; certainly, the generalized benefits of nutrition and physical activity on cardiovascular and overall health support their inclusion within clinical practice.
Yet some aspects of the current evidence are wanting. First, numerous studies have drawn conclusions from relatively few observational studies; some of these findings may not be generalizable to the public. Second, the same data may be confounded by a reliance upon self-report, particularly because nutrition and physical activity are culturally biased toward overestimation. Third, there is a lack of high-quality level one evidence, with one completed RCT evaluating a nutrition intervention (results pending) and no RCTs of exercise. With increased utilization of active surveillance (newly recommended by updated American Urological Association guidelines), these cohorts of men could serve as a fertile ground for future investigative research .
Still, there are few – if any – disadvantages to encouraging healthy diets and increased exercise among patients. Urologists, and the medical community, would benefit the public health by encouraging their patients to adopt all of these choices, and thus improve their overall and prostate health Table 1.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDED READING
Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as:
- ▪ of special interest
- ▪▪ of outstanding interest
1. Gordon RS Jr. An operational classification of disease prevention
. Public Health Rep 1983; 98:107–109.
2. Ryan CJ, Haqq CM, Simko J, et al. Expression of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor in local and metastatic prostate cancer
. Urol Oncol 2007; 25:134–140.
3. Lubik AA, Gunter JH, Hollier BG, et al. IGF2 increases de novo steroidogenesis in prostate cancer
cells. Endocr Relat Cancer 2013; 20:173–186.
4. Etminan M, Takkouche B, Caamaño-Isorna F. The role of tomato products and lycopene in the prevention
of prostate cancer
: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004; 13:340–345.
5. Discacciati A, Orsini N, Wolk A. Coffee consumption and risk of nonaggressive, aggressive and fatal prostate cancer
: a dose-response meta-analysis. Ann Oncol 2014; 25:584–591.
6. Yang M, Ayuningtyas A, Kenfield SA, et al. Blood fatty acid patterns are associated with prostate cancer
risk in a prospective nested case-control study. Cancer Causes Control 2016; 27:1153–1161.
7. Le Marchand L, Kolonel LN, Wilkens LR, et al. Animal fat consumption and prostate cancer
: a prospective study in Hawaii. Epidemiology 1994; 5:276–282.
8. West DW, Slattery ML, Robison LM, et al. Adult dietary intake and prostate cancer
risk in Utah: a case-control study with special emphasis on aggressive tumors. Cancer Causes Control 1991; 2:85–94.
9. Wright ME, Chang SC, Schatzkin A, et al. Prospective study of adiposity and weight change in relation to prostate cancer
incidence and mortality. Cancer 2007; 109:675–684.
10▪. Perez-Cornago A, Appleby PN, Pischon T, et al. Tall height and obesity are associated with an increased risk of aggressive prostate cancer
: results from the EPIC cohort study. BMC Med 2017; 15:115.
The large cohort study (n = 141 856) found similar associations of body size and obesity with prostate cancer. Strengths of the study included the large sample size, population-based nature, and median follow-up of 13.9 years.
11. Kane CJ, Bassett WW, Sadetsky N, et al. Obesity and prostate cancer
clinical risk factors at presentation: data from CaPSURE. J Urol 2005; 173:732–736.
12. Rodriguez C, Patel AV, Calle EE, et al. Body mass index, height, and prostate cancer
mortality in two large cohorts of adult men in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001; 10:345–353.
13. Discacciati A, Orsini N, Wolk A. Body mass index and incidence of localized and advanced prostate cancer
: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Ann Oncol 2012; 23:1665–1671.
14. Möller E, Wilson KM, Batista JL, et al. Body size across the life course and prostate cancer
in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Int J Cancer 2016; 138:853–865.
15. Baillargeon J, Pollock BH, Kristal AR, et al. The association of body mass index and prostate-specific antigen in a population-based study. Cancer 2005; 103:1092–1095.
16. Bañez LL, Hamilton RJ, Partin AW, et al. Obesity-related plasma hemodilution and PSA concentration among men with prostate cancer
. JAMA 2007; 298:2275–2280.
17. Barqawi AB, Golden BK, O’Donnell C, et al. Observed effect of age and body mass index on total and complexed PSA: analysis from a national screening program. Urology 2005; 65:708–712.
18. Freedland SJ, Platz EA, Presti JC, et al. Obesity, serum prostate specific antigen and prostate size: implications for prostate cancer
detection. J Urol 2006; 175:500–504.
19. Grubb RL, Black A, Izmirlian G, et al. Serum prostate-specific antigen hemodilution among obese men undergoing screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009; 18:748–751.
20. Rundle A, Neugut AI. Obesity and screening PSA levels among men undergoing an annual physical exam. Prostate 2008; 68:373–380.
21. Thompson IM, Leach R, Troyer D, et al. Relationship of body mass index and prostate specific antigen in a population-based study. Urol Oncol 2004; 22:127–131.
22. Ip C, Thompson HJ, Zhu Z, Ganther HE. In vitro and in vivo studies of methylseleninic acid: evidence that a monomethylated selenium metabolite is critical for cancer chemoprevention. Cancer Res 2000; 60:2882–2886.
23. Jiang C, Wang Z, Ganther H, Lu J. Caspases as key executors of methyl selenium-induced apoptosis (anoikis) of DU-145 prostate cancer
cells. Cancer Res 2001; 61:3062–3070.
24. Menter DG, Sabichi AL, Lippman SM. Selenium effects on prostate cell growth. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000; 9:1171–1182.
25. Taylor PR, Albanes D. Selenium, vitamin E, and prostate cancer
: ready for prime time? J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:1184–1185.
26. Yoshizawa K, Willett WC, Morris SJ, et al. Study of prediagnostic selenium level in toenails and the risk of advanced prostate cancer
. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:1219–1224.
27. Fleshner N, Fair WR, Huryk R, Heston WD. Vitamin E inhibits the high-fat diet promoted growth of established human prostate LNCaP tumors in nude mice. J Urol 1999; 161:1651–1654.
28. Lippman SM, Klein EA, Goodman PJ, et al. Effect of selenium and vitamin E on risk of prostate cancer
and other cancers: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention
Trial (SELECT). JAMA 2009; 301:39–51.
29. Klein EA, Thompson IM, Tangen CM, et al. Vitamin E and the risk of prostate cancer
: the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention
Trial (SELECT). JAMA 2011; 306:1549–1556.
30. Kristal AR, Darke AK, Morris JS, et al. Baseline selenium status and effects of selenium and vitamin e supplementation on prostate cancer
risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014; 106:djt456.
31. Gaziano JM, Glynn RJ, Christen WG, et al. Vitamins E and C in the prevention
of prostate and total cancer in men: the Physicians’ Health Study II randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2009; 301:52–62.
32. Gaziano JM, Sesso HD, Christen WG, et al. Multivitamins in the prevention
of cancer in men: the Physicians’ Health Study II randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2012; 308:1871–1880.
33. Flanagan J, Gray PK, Hahn N, et al. Presence of the metabolic syndrome is associated with shorter time to castration-resistant prostate cancer
. Ann Oncol 2011; 22:801–807.
34. Eden CG, Chang CM, Gianduzzo T, Moon DA. The impact of obesity on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2006; 98:1279–1282.
35. Fitzsimons NJ, Sun LL, Dahm P, et al. A single-institution comparison between radical perineal and radical retropubic prostatectomy on perioperative and pathological outcomes for obese men: an analysis of the Duke Prostate Center database. Urology 2007; 70:1146–1151.
36. Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Kane CJ, et al. Impact of obesity on biochemical control after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer
: a report by the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database study group. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22:446–453.
37. Ho T, Gerber L, Aronson WJ, et al. Obesity, prostate-specific antigen nadir, and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: biology or technique? Results from the SEARCH database. Eur Urol 2012; 62:910–916.
38. Keto CJ, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, et al. Obesity is associated with castration-resistant disease and metastasis in men treated with androgen deprivation therapy after radical prostatectomy: results from the SEARCH database. BJU Int 2012; 110:492–498.
39. Stroup SP, Cullen J, Auge BK, et al. Effect of obesity on prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer
as measured by the 2006 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-American Society for Therapeutic Radiation and Oncology (RTOG-ASTRO) Phoenix consensus definition. Cancer 2007; 110:1003–1009.
40. Wang LS, Murphy CT, Ruth K, et al. Impact of obesity on outcomes after definitive dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer
. Cancer 2015; 121:3010–3017.
41. Yang M, Kenfield SA, Van Blarigan EL, et al. Dietary patterns after prostate cancer
diagnosis in relation to disease-specific and total mortality. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2015; 8:545–551.
42. Van Blarigan EL, Kenfield SA, Yang M, et al. Fat intake after prostate cancer
diagnosis and mortality in the Physicians’ Health Study. Cancer Causes Control 2015; 26:1117–1126.
43. Mondul AM, Weinstein SJ, Moy KA, et al. Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin d and prostate cancer
survival. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016; 25:665–669.
44▪▪. Parsons JK, Pierce JP, Mohler J, et al. Men's Eating and Living (MEAL) study (CALGB 70807 [Alliance]): recruitment feasibility and baseline demographics of a randomized trial of diet in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer
. BJU Int 2017.
This is the only prospective trial testing a nutritional intervention among men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Follow-up has completed and results will be analyzed within the next year.
45. Khandrika L, Kumar B, Koul S, et al. Oxidative stress in prostate cancer
. Cancer Lett 2009; 282:125–136.
46. Kumar B, Koul S, Khandrika L, et al. Oxidative stress is inherent in prostate cancer
cells and is required for aggressive phenotype. Cancer Res 2008; 68:1777–1785.
47. Ma Q. Transcriptional responses to oxidative stress: pathological and toxicological implications. Pharmacol Ther 2010; 125:376–393.
48. Reuter S, Gupta SC, Chaturvedi MM, Aggarwal BB. Oxidative stress, inflammation, and cancer: how are they linked? Free Radic Biol Med 2010; 49:1603–1616.
49. Valko M, Leibfritz D, Moncol J, et al. Free radicals and antioxidants in normal physiological functions and human disease. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 2007; 39:44–84.
50. Rebillard A, Lefeuvre-Orfila L, Gueritat J, Cillard J. Prostate cancer
and physical activity
: adaptive response to oxidative stress. Free Radic Biol Med 2013; 60:115–124.
51. Clarkson PM, Thompson HS. Antioxidants: what role do they play in physical activity
and health? Am J Clin Nutr 2000; 72 (2 Suppl):637S–646S.
52. Radak Z, Chung HY, Koltai E, et al. Exercise, oxidative stress and hormesis. Ageing Res Rev 2008; 7:34–42.
53. Thomas RJ, Kenfield SA, Jimenez A. Exercise-induced biochemical changes and their potential influence on cancer: a scientific review. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51:640–644.
54. Friedenreich CM. Physical activity
and cancer prevention
: from observational to intervention research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001; 10:287–301.
55. Johnsen NF, Tjønneland A, Thomsen BL, et al. Physical activity
and risk of prostate cancer
in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition
(EPIC) cohort. Int J Cancer 2009; 125:902–908.
56. Nilsen TI, Romundstad PR, Vatten LJ. Recreational physical activity
and risk of prostate cancer
: a prospective population-based study in Norway (the HUNT study). Int J Cancer 2006; 119:2943–2947.
57. Patel AV, Rodriguez C, Jacobs EJ, et al. Recreational physical activity
and risk of prostate cancer
in a large cohort of U.S. men. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14:275–279.
58. Giovannucci EL, Liu Y, Leitzmann MF, et al. A prospective study of physical activity
and incident and fatal prostate cancer
. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165:1005–1010.
59. Arem H, Moore SC, Park Y, et al. Physical activity
and cancer-specific mortality in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort. Int J Cancer 2014; 135:423–431.
60▪. Friedenreich CM, Neilson HK, Farris MS, Courneya KS. Physical activity
and cancer outcomes: a precision medicine approach. Clin Cancer Res 2016; 22:4766–4775.
A meta-analysis demonstrating improved survival among all cancers as well as in a substratified analysis of prostate cancer, showing a 38% decreased prostate cancer-specific mortality among men with increased physical activity.
61. Bonn SE, Sjölander A, Lagerros YT, et al. Physical activity
and survival among men diagnosed with prostate cancer
. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2015; 24:57–64.
62▪. Friedenreich CM, Wang Q, Neilson HK, et al. Physical activity
and survival after prostate cancer
. Eur Urol 2016; 70:576–585.
A prospective study with up to 17 year follow-up of 830 men with prostate cancer. The authors found a significant decrease in prostate cancer specific and overall mortality among men with increased physical activity; this was true when measuring postdiagnosis activity as well as pre and postdiagnosis physical activity.
63. Kenfield SA, Stampfer MJ, Giovannucci E, Chan JM. Physical activity
and survival after prostate cancer
diagnosis in the health professionals follow-up study. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29:726–732.
64▪▪. Van Blarigan EL, Kenfield SA, Tantum L, et al. The Fitbit one physical activity
tracker in men with prostate cancer
: validation study. JMIR Cancer 2017; 3:e5.
One of few prospective trials for physical activity and prostate cancer, this study demonstrates that the Fitbit could serve as a reliable measure of physical activity among men with prostate cancer.
65▪▪. Saad F, Kenfield SA, Chan JM, et al. Intense exercise for survival among men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer
(INTERVAL – MCRPC): a Movember funded multicenter, randomized, controlled phase III study. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34:
An ongoing multinational trial whose results could help to better characterize the role of exercise in advanced, aggressive prostate cancer.
66▪. Kenfield SA, Batista JL, Jahn JL, et al. Development and application of a lifestyle
score for prevention
of lethal prostate cancer
. J Natl Cancer Inst 2016; 108:
A unique composite analysis of the various lifestyle factors that can contribute to prostate cancer death. Using data from the HPFS and PHS, the authors developed a predictive score incorporating diet, physical activity, and smoking.
67. Frattaroli J, Weidner G, Dnistrian AM, et al. Clinical events in prostate cancer lifestyle
trial: results from two years of follow-up. Urology 2008; 72:1319–1323.
68. Ornish D, Magbanua MJ, Weidner G, et al. Changes in prostate gene expression in men undergoing an intensive nutrition
intervention. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008; 105:8369–8374.
69. Thomas RJ, Holm M, Williams M, et al. Lifestyle
factors correlate with the risk of late pelvic symptoms after prostatic radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2013; 25:246–251.
70. Phillips SM, Stampfer MJ, Chan JM, et al. Physical activity
, sedentary behavior, and health-related quality of life in prostate cancer
survivors in the health professionals follow-up study. J Cancer Surviv 2015; 9:500–511.
71. Segal RJ, Reid RD, Courneya KS, et al. Randomized controlled trial of resistance or aerobic exercise in men receiving radiation therapy for prostate cancer
. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27:344–351.
72. Kushi LH, Doyle C, McCullough M, et al. American Cancer Society 2010 Nutrition
and Physical Activity
Guidelines Advisory Committee. American Cancer Society Guidelines on nutrition
and physical activity
for cancer prevention
: reducing the risk of cancer with healthy food choices and physical activity
. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62:30–67.
73. Segal R, Zwaal C, Green E, et al. Exercise for people with cancer: a clinical practice guideline. Curr Oncol 2017; 24:40–46.
74. Sanda MG, Chen RC, Crispino T, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer
: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. In: American Urological Association, editor. 2017.