|
|
|
2007-8-31 14:47:52 |
|
Chicago - A recent trial of shark cartilage extract, which many people believe helps treat cancer, indicates that using this supplement to treat lung caner might be just wasting money. Shark cartilage extract, AE-941 or Neovastat used for the trial, was made by Aeterna Zentaris, a biopharmaceutical company based in Quebec, Canada, which said early this year that it has stopped clinical development of the pharmaceutical. The trial conducted by researchers at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, one of the best known cancer research centers, concluded that shark cartilage was no better than a placebo when it comes to increasing the survival time for the lung cancer patients. The finding was presented by Charles Lu, MD, associated professor in the Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology at the 43rd annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Shark cartilage has been used by many due to the fact that cartilage does not contain blood vessels assumedly because of possible presence of inhibitors of angiogenesis. Another fact that cancer is in shark prompts people to believe that there is some anticancer substance in the fish. The benefits of shark cartilage are not pure speculation. According to Lu, early Phase I and II studies in lung and renal cancers suggested shark cartilage extract like AE-941 does provide some benefit when used at high doses. The current study is the first large Phase III randomized trial of shark cartilage as an anticancer agent. The cartilage used was actually a pharmaceutical, but not an alternative supplement, says Lu, the principle investigator of the study. Lu and his colleagues conducted the trial of 384 patients who were newly diagnosed untreated Stage III non-small cell lung cancer at 53 sites in the United Sates and in Canada including 60 patients from M.D. Anderson between June 2000 and February 2006. All patients received standard treatment of induction chemotherapy and chemo-radiation. They were randomly assigned either four ounces of shark cartilage or placebo both in the form of a liquid, twice a day and continued the regimen after completing standard therapy. After the average 3.7-year treatment, researchers found no difference in the survival in both groups, 14.4 months for patients on shark cartilage versus 15.6 months for those on a placebo. "Clearly, these results demonstrate that AE-941 is not an effective therapeutic agent for lung cancer," says Lu. "So, too, these findings have to cast major skepticism on shark cartilage products that are being sold for profit and have no data to support their efficacy as cancer-fighting agent." "We have absolutely no data showing improvements in survival, tumor shrinkage and/or clinical benefits to patients," says Lu. "Now when patients ask their oncologists about shark cartilage, physicians can point to this large NCI-sponsored Phase III trial and tell patients that, at this point, the only studies that have been done with cartilage-derived products have been negative." The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a government agency in which the US invests tens of billions a year to find a cure for cancer. Lung cancer is the leading cancer killer in both men and women. It is expected that 213,380 will be diagnosed with this disease and 160,390 will die from it in 2007 alone, according to the American Cancer Society. Non-small cell is the most common disease, accounting for about 80 percent of all lung cancers, Lu says. |
