Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- DILI (1)
- RUCAM (1)
- Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (1)
- breast cancer (1)
- chemoprevention (1)
- colorectal cancer (1)
- diagnostic biomarkers (1)
- drug induced liver injury (1)
- epidemiology (1)
- esophageal cancer (1)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
Green tea (GT) and green tea extracts (GTE) have been postulated to decrease cancer incidence. In vitro results indicate a possible effect; however, epidemiological data do not support cancer chemoprevention. We have performed a PubMED literature search for green tea consumption and the correlation to the common tumor types lung, colorectal, breast, prostate, esophageal and gastric cancer, with cohorts from both Western and Asian countries. We additionally included selected mechanistical studies for a possible mode of action. The comparability between studies was limited due to major differences in study outlines; a meta analysis was thus not possible and studies were evaluated individually. Only for breast cancer could a possible small protective effect be seen in Asian and Western cohorts, whereas for esophagus and stomach cancer, green tea increased the cancer incidence, possibly due to heat stress. No effect was found for colonic/colorectal and prostatic cancer in any country, for lung cancer Chinese studies found a protective effect, but not studies from outside China. Epidemiological studies thus do not support a cancer protective effect. GT as an indicator of as yet undefined parameters in lifestyle, environment and/or ethnicity may explain some of the observed differences between China and other countries.
Drug induced liver injury (DILI) is a potentially serious adverse reaction in a few susceptible individuals under therapy by various drugs. Health care professionals facing DILI are confronted with a wealth of drug-unrelated liver diseases with high incidence and prevalence rates, which can confound the DILI diagnosis. Searching for alternative causes is a key element of RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) to assess rigorously causality in suspected DILI cases. Diagnostic biomarkers as blood tests would be a great help to clinicians, regulators, and pharmaceutical industry would be more comfortable if, in addition to RUCAM, causality of DILI can be confirmed. High specificity and sensitivity are required for any diagnostic biomarker. Although some risk factors are available to evaluate liver safety of drugs in patients, no valid diagnostic or prognostic biomarker exists currently for idiosyncratic DILI when a liver injury occurred. Identifying a biomarker in idiosyncratic DILI requires detailed knowledge of cellular and biochemical disturbances leading to apoptosis or cell necrosis and causing leakage of specific products in blood. As idiosyncratic DILI is typically a human disease and hardly reproducible in animals, pathogenetic events and resulting possible biomarkers remain largely undisclosed. Potential new diagnostic biomarkers should be evaluated in patients with DILI and RUCAM-based established causality. In conclusion, causality assessment in cases of suspected idiosyncratic DILI is still best achieved using RUCAM since specific biomarkers as diagnostic blood tests that could enhance RUCAM results are not yet available.