Comparable effects of Jiedu Granule, a compound Chinese herbal medicine, and sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A prospective multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Sorafenib has been extensively used for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and Chinese herbal medicine has also been used to manage advanced HCC. The present work evaluates the effectiveness and safety of Jiedu (JD) Granule, a compound of traditional Chinese herbal medicine, side-by-side with sorafenib for the treatment of advance HCC. METHODS: Patients with advanced HCC receiving treatment with JD Granule or sorafenib were enrolled from December 2014 to March 2018. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to control for possible selection bias from the study group allocation process. RESULTS: Of the 325 patients included, 161 received JD Granule and 164 received sorafenib. No significant differences were found in OS or PFS among patients receiving JD Granule compared to sorafenib (P > 0.05). Median OS of the two study groups was 6.83 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.83-9.47) in the group receiving JD Granule and 8 months (95% CI: 6.67-9.80) in the group receiving sorafenib, with half-, 1- and 2-year survival rates of 53.6%, 31.2% and 13.2% vs 60.1%, 35.5% and 14.2%, respectively. Even after PSM, the median survival time did not differ between the JD Granule group (9.03 months; 95% CI: 6.37-14.2) and the sorafenib group (7.93 months; 95% CI: 6.5-9.97), with comparable half-, 1- and 2-year survival rates. The most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (13.7%) and fatigue (5.6%) in the JD Granule group, and hand-foot skin reaction (46.3%) and diarrhea (36.6%) in the sorafenib group. The JD Granule was more cost-effective than sorafenib treatment for advanced HCC. CONCLUSION: Compared to sorafenib, JD Granule was more cost-effective and caused fewer AEs for the treatment of Chinese patients with advanced HCC.

Effect of vitamin B supplementation on cancer incidence, death due to cancer, and total mortality: A PRISMA-compliant cumulative meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have suggested that vitamin B supplementation is associated with cancer risk, but this association remains controversial. A pooled data-based meta-analysis was conducted to summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of vitamin B supplementation on cancer incidence, death due to cancer, and total mortality. METHODS: PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify trials to fit our analysis through August 2015. Relative risk (RR) was used to measure the effect of vitamin B supplementation on the risk of cancer incidence, death due to cancer, and total mortality using a random-effect model. Cumulative meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, heterogeneity tests, and tests for publication bias were also conducted. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs reporting the data on 74,498 individuals were included in the meta-analysis. Sixteen of these trials included 4103 cases of cancer; in 6 trials, 731 cancer-related deaths occurred; and in 15 trials, 7046 deaths occurred. Vitamin B supplementation had little or no effect on the incidence of cancer (RR: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.10; P = 0.216), death due to cancer (RR, 1.05; 95% CI: 0.90-1.22; P = 0.521), and total mortality (RR, 1.00; 95% CI: 0.94-1.06; P = 0.952). Upon performing a cumulative meta-analysis for cancer incidence, death due to cancer, and total mortality, the nonsignificance of the effect of vitamin B persisted. With respect to specific types of cancer, vitamin B supplementation significantly reduced the risk of skin melanoma (RR, 0.47; 95% CI: 0.23-0.94; P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: Vitamin B supplementation does not have an effect on cancer incidence, death due to cancer, or total mortality. It is associated with a lower risk of skin melanoma, but has no effect on other cancers.

MiR-181a contributes to bufalin-induced apoptosis in PC-3 prostate cancer cells.

BACKGROUND: Bufalin is a major active compound of cinobufacini, which comes from dried toad venom and has been used for treatments of various cancers in China for many years. A number of studies have demonstrated that bufalin can induce apoptosis in some cancers. However, effects and mechanism of bufalin on prostate cancer cells remain unknown. METHODS: Apoptosis assay was measured by the annexin-V/PI flow cytometric assay. Western blot was used to measure Caspase-3 and Bcl-2. qRT-PCR was used to measure the relative expression of miR-181a. RESULTS: Bufalin was found to induce the expression of miR-181a, a small non-coding RNA believed to induce apoptosis by repressing its target gene, BCL-2. In prostate cancer PC-3cell line, bufalin-induced apoptosis can be largely attenuated by a miR-181a inhibitor, which blocked bufalin-induced Bcl-2 reduction and caspase-3 activation. CONCLUSIONS: Our dataindicatedthat miR-181a mediates bufalin-induced apoptosis in PC-3 cells. Thus, we presented here a new pharmacological mechanism for bufalin in anti-tumor therapy.