Insights & Discussion
Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) possess multiple advantages, including multiple targets, pathways, and low toxicity, for the treatment of prostate cancer.
The research team undertook an in-depth review of experimental research and clinical practices related to the use of CHMs for prostate cancer treatment, with the data being sourced from PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. The focus of the review was on recent studies published within the last five years. The research identified five CHM formulas and six single CHM extracts, along with 12 CHM-derived compounds.
The research findings demonstrated that CHMs induced apoptosis, autophagy, and cell cycle arrest in prostate cancer cells, and concurrently suppressed angiogenesis, proliferation, and cell migration. The CHMs also displayed efficacy in overturning drug resistance and in enhancing anti-tumor immunity. The modes of action were identified as the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase-B/mammalian target of rapamycin, androgen receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor, and Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathways which are known to play key roles in the development of prostate cancer. Additionally, the researchers discussed the benefits of CHMs in treating hormone-sensitive and castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Discover Related Insights
The combination of traditional Chinese medicine and endocrine therapy may be more effective in slowing prostate cancer progression and increasing patients' survival time.
2016 PLOS One A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Oral Chinese Herbal Medicine for Prostate Cancer Cao H, Mu Y, Li X, Wang Y, Chen S, Liu J
Randomised Controlled Trial Prostate Cancer
The team of researchers carried out a comprehensive literature search across various databases until August 2015 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of traditional Chinese medicine (CHM), or its combination with conventional medicine, in treating prostate cancer. Only reports on CHM versus no treatment or on CHM as an adjunctive treatment were considered. The main outcomes evaluated were patients' survival times, time to disease progression, and quality of life, using the Cochrane Handbook's risk of bias assessment to evaluate the quality of the methodologies used in the trials.
From the total of 17 RCTs involving 1,224 participants, a single trial compared CHM to no treatment, whereas the other 16 assessed CHMs as an additional treatment to endocrine therapy. However, due to the poor quality of most of the methodologies used in the trials, only limited evidence was available. This evidence suggested that the combination of CHM and endocrine therapy might be more successful in slowing the progression of the disease and improving patients' performance statuses when compared to endocrine therapy alone. Importantly, no severe adverse events related to CHM were reported.