soy and phytoestrogens help hormonal negatives....

[RobinP]

I was shocked to read that soy may actually help inhibit cancer cell growth in hormonal negatives. Read on in the following excerpt and article:

"Perhaps the most clinically promising data concern the ability of phyto-oestrogen compounds to inhibit the proliferation of ER-negative breast cancer cultures and tumour xenografts in rodents. Although ER-positive cells are often growth stimulated by low phyto-oestrogen concentrations, stimulatory effects have not been reported in cells devoid of functional ER. Phytoestrogen compounds may thus potentially prove to be clinically useful for the treatment of ER-negative breast tumours that are typically unresponsive to traditional tamoxifen hormonal therapy."

The complete abstract:
http://breast-cancer-research.com/content/6/3/119

[AlaskaAngel]

I found the article very interesting. One thought I have in regard to the "critical" importance of childhood soy consumption is sort of a chicken/egg question; what is it that causes us to have either ER positivity or ER negativity in tumors? Does the soy consumption early in life favor one vs the other? If it does, then the lifelong soy consumption by the Japanese with a resulting lower rate of bc makes more sense to me, in that any ER- cancer cells that might occur would be continuously dealt with early by the soy.

Beyond that question, I go back to the question of "if one is not eating as much meat, then what IS one eating?" In other words, if there is something critically important about childhood phytoestrogen consumption, is it not so much that they are getting the phytoestrogens, but what they are NOT getting by not eating as much animal products in the diet (not to mention the latter-day antibiotics and growth hormones that can be included if one eats animal products).

A.A.

[vickie h]

I eat beans, nuts, seeds and protein shakes devoid of any soy. I wouldn't touch soy with a ten foot pole, it is the most genetically engineered food on the planet now, a health hazard. I lived on soy (I eas a vegan for 25 years) everyday. No More! I love all the variety I get in a simple diet. Love, Vickie

[Hopeful]

Alaska Angel,

My understanding is that consumption of soy early in life leads to more differentiated breast cells as an adult, ergo, fewer cells that don't know what they want to be when they grow up to be tempted by the "gang members" of bc to cross over to the dark side. This is why childbirth is thought to decrease the risk of bc, as the homonal changes of pregnancy cause the undifferentiated cells to differenciate. Soy consumption in middle age is thought to act like HRT and feed existing tumors that are ER+; most post-menopausal bc is ER+. Why that is, I do not know. I think it has something to do with the body switching over from estrogen produced by the ovaries to aromatase; apparently there are several transcription factors that come into play at that point, and a specific genetic instability has been linked to an abberant use of the tx factors and some bc. I took soy supplements for hot flashes on the advice of my gyn because I refused HRT, and my hunch is my tumor chowed down on it, and, well, here I am.

Hopeful

[Andrea Barnett Budin]

My NY oncol/hematol/nutritional expert says soy should only be nat'l and in moderation or soy powder only.

He has given me the nod in my groping to tame my hot flashes (which HRT did for the short while I was on it). Now of course, I won't HRT. Against mainstream thinking, I plead guilty to tripling my E to 1200 (as per PBS woman GYN who's face is in my head but name escapes me). I checked w/my cardiol who says not effecting my cholesterol/lipids so ok by him. I also dare to take black cohash extract 49 and evening primrose oil 1300 and Phto Formula (1 tiny scoop in OJ w/soy lechitin powder and lycopenes and antioxidants to fight free radicals) boost imm sys, Omega 3 1000 AM/PM -- improves brain function, detoxifies, heart healthy, anti-cancer. Mainstrm docs say no. NY onc who knows supplement info well and is w/NY Presbyterian says yes, and maybe even good for me. Have been on most of these since '98, and remain since '99 NED. So if you check w/yr onc, AS YOU MUST, you are likely to get a big NO. It is exasperating finding an onc who is holistic and understands supplements and vitamins upside down and backwards.

Oh, and I have been taking a plant estrogen isoflavone (as red clover extract 40) after my ON/GYN son-in-law showed me an article in one of his medical journals. He is always looking out for me, trying to quell my dripping wet all day condition (which calms at night w/Xanax, Ativan) but I don't feel comfortable taking those meds and driving.

Why am I NED since '99. Depends which school of thought you go by I think. So many factors contribute. Surely meditating, visualizing, directing my thoughts to be full of positivity, clarifying my EXPECTION and INTENTION with fervor, the supplement, Vit H, the wisdom of my 4 oncs in gen'l, loving support of husband and family and friends, writing daily, reading daily -- are all highly therapeutic, healing and importance in wellness, body, mind and soul... CHECK OUT LASTED POSTS ON "CONTROVERSAIL TOPICS" (click SEARCH above, and type in). Some contributors have a magnificent point of view on this mindbody link. Very inspiring. Uplifting. Sending loving, healing energy to all my Soul Sisters as always... ANDI

[Adriana Mangus]

Dear Robin: Thanks for posting the interesting article. I'm Hormone receptor Negative. This is a good thing for those with receptors negative and cannot benefit from any of those hormone + therapies.

[RobinP]

Amazingly, soy has an antiproliferative effect on hormonal negative breast cancers. This is good news for hormonal negatives. I must warn, though, that hormonal status may change over the course of time. 20% of the hormonal negatives that relapse, convert to hormonal positive.

Other benefits of phyto-estrogens for hormonal negative, her2+s:


Dietary phyto-oestrogens are capable of inhibiting the proliferation epidermal growth factor (EGF),(Her-2). Similar findings were reported in a recent study investigating the chemoprotective effects of the green tea polyphenol epigallocatechin-3 gallate (EGCG). The treatment of Her-2/neu over-expressing mouse mammary cells with 20–80 μg/ml EGCG inhibited proliferation in a dose-dependent manner, correlating with a reduction in Her-2/neu signalling activity [72]. The basal tyrosine phosphorylation of Her-2/neu was decreased by approximately 96% following treatment with 80 μg/ml EGCG. Downstream activities of the signalling proteins phosphoinositide 3-kinase, Akt and nuclear factor-κB were similarly repressed, suggesting a potential clinical application of EGCG in breast cancer therapy.The soy isoflavones have additionally been proposed to regulate the proliferation of breast epithelia via an alternative mechanism involving the modulation of TGF-β synthesis [73].

[Gina]

I think what may be going on here is the same thing I used to talk about when I would say that for certain her-2 mediated disease, estrogen is a good thing. I got a LOT of critique for those posts back then, but in my case, me being ER- and PR-, I have found that my natural estrogen has been a big help in keeping the her-2 in line and so I am not surprised at these new findings, although I must admit, that I personally, have never followed a diet that was intentionally high in phytoestrogens except back in 1998 when the hard core chemo I was on stopped my periods at 33. Soy milk and tofu gave me MY brain back--at least some of it and stopped the hot flashes fairly effectively. Fortunately, after the chemo was stopped my periods came back and have continued. Although I eat some soy and tofu occasionally, I have not emphasized it and have actually avoided supplements that included soy as one of the fillers. Hmmm...this new research may have me rethink that.

Other thoughts??? does anyone out there have some data from their own experience pro or con with phytoestrogens??

Take care,
Gina

[RobinP]

Howdy Gina, it’s great to hear from you! I must admit that this research on the positive effects of phytoestrogens is somewhat surprising and I was specifically thinking of you when I posted this, knowing that you thought the her2+ hormonal negative pathway could be abrogated via estrogen. Now there is some research that MAY indirectly support your theories, at least as far as phyto-estrogens are concerned. I would think the sooner a phyto-estrogen diet would be started in hormonal negatives, the more effective, particularly to possibly prevent conversion to hormonal negative status and to control her2.

Gina, as I recall, you said that when you monitored your serum her2, it went down when you had your period (this is when your estrogen levels were high) and up when your period was gone or when you estrogen was lowest. Is that right? Perhaps, as the phyto-estrogens have a negative impact on the her2 pathway, so do natural or biologically similar estrogens, as in your case. However, I'm not so sure I would advocate HRT as a replacement for phyto-estrogens as this article specifically addresses phytoestrogens and we know that BCL2 is decreased, estrogen Alpha, her2 pathway with phyto-estrogens. Although we do not know that the same holds true for natural estrogen or HRT, as research study is lacking here. Furthermore, probably phyto-estrogens in one's diet is probably safer than HRT, considering the negative impact of HRT on blood clotting, in some cases new bc development, etc.

Now, phytoestrogens are very ubiquitous and are virtually everywhere in fruits, herbal teas, healthy olive oils and vegetables. In fact, if you really wanted to eat a healthy diet with fruits and vegetables, it would be difficult to avoid phyto-estrogens. Therefore, many of us have to realize that we are already getting a substantial amount of phyto-estrogens in our diet, whether we want to or not. Perhaps, this level would be increased even further, as the article suggested, with soy and green tea. Yes, I was surprised green tea was much more potent than soy in phyto-estrogen content. Funny, you never hear people posting about being afraid of green tea; yet, I frequently see posts about avoiding soy. Well, I've been drinking green tea pretty frequently since my diagnosis and I will continue since it prevents proliferation of the her2 pathway and since I’m hormonal negative.

By the way, Gina, this is thinking out of the box, but thats what you're best at... I wonder if estrogen manipulation may be used in the future during bc treatment. I see a role for anti estrogens for her2+ hormonal negatives during Herceptin treatment where you would want a low level of estrogen to increase the her2 pathway so that the Herceptin could optimally be used in that pathway, thus, destroying more cancerous cells.

On the other side of the coin, I wonder if estrogen therapy or HRT will be used for hormonal negatives? I don't think so as the HABITS trial, a trial where those with bc were given HRT, was stopped early due to increased incidence of bc, even in hormonal negatives. The Stockhomn trial of the HABITS did not see an increase in bc events but that trial used progesterin sequentially every few months rather than continuously. I gather progesterin is particularly a bad combination with estrogen, where it facilitates bc growth. Having the results of the HABITS trial makes one question the value of HRT, even in hormonal negatives. However, I must say other studies do not always agree with the HABITS and show no increased bc event risks. All the inconsistencies makes for confusion.

As far as hormones go, I do wonder if it is safe menstruating and having your own hormones circulating, even if you are hormonal negative. I did note that in the ATAC study, a small percentage of hormonal negatives did not benefit from aromatase inhibitors and we know they don't benefit from tamoxifen. In fact, tamoxifen is deleterious to hormonal negatives and increases the number of bc events; furthermore, tamoxifen didn't decrease contra lateral bc. I must admit there is not enough research on the safety of menstruating while having hormonal negative bc. However, from the little research done, it appears safer to menstruate than to take tamoxifen or AIs.

PS. I can see why your own estrogen, phytoestogens and HRT may decrease distant bone mets as bone turn over is decreased with estrogen therapy. The same would hold true for biphosphonates. See supporting article links where the study analyzed women who had taken HRT prior to diagnosis vs. those who had not:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...0953803c9fc1f6
http://www.oncolink.com/resources/ar...nth=5&id=14166


http://www.asco.org/portal/site/ASCO...abstractID=229

<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

[RobinP]

Helferich and colleagues offer one view against soy, Messian and colleagues offer another:
http://www.vegetarian-nutrition.info...ast_cancer.php