Individual and combined soy isoflavones exert differential effects on metastatic cancer progression

To investigate the effects soy isoflavones in established cancers, the role of genistein, daidzein, and combined soy isoflavones was studied on progression of subcutaneous tumors in nude mice created from green fluorescent protein (GFP) tagged-MDA-MB-435 cells. Following tumor establishment, mice were gavaged with vehicle or genistein or daidzein at 10 mg/kg body weight (BW) or a combination of genistein (10 mg/kg BW), daidzein (9 mg/kg BW), and glycitein (1 mg/kg BW) three times per week. Tumor progression was quantified by whole body fluorescence image analysis followed by microscopic image analysis of excised organs for metastases. Results show that daidzein increased while genistein decreased mammary tumor growth by 38 and 33% respectively, compared to vehicle. Daidzein increased lung and heart metastases while genistein decreased bone and liver metastases. Combined soy isoflavones did not affect primary tumor growth but increased metastasis to all organs tested, which include lung, liver, heart, kidney, and bones. Phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3-K) pathway real time PCR array analysis and western blotting of excised tumors demonstrate that genistein significantly downregulated 10/84 genes, including the Rho GTPases RHOA, RAC1, and CDC42 and their effector PAK1. Daidzein significantly upregulated 9/84 genes that regulate proliferation and protein synthesis including EIF4G1, eIF4E, and survivin protein levels. Combined soy treatment significantly increased gene and protein levels of EIF4E and decreased TIRAP gene expression. Differential regulation of Rho GTPases, initiation factors, and survivin may account for the disparate responses of breast cancers to genistein and daidzein diets. This study indicates that consumption of soy foods may increase metastasis

Soy isoflavones, estrogen therapy, and breast cancer risk: analysis and commentary

There has been considerable investigation of the potential for soyfoods to reduce risk of cancer, and in particular cancer of the breast. Most interest in this relationship is because soyfoods are essentially a unique dietary source of isoflavones, compounds which bind to estrogen receptors and exhibit weak estrogen-like effects under certain experimental conditions. In recent years the relationship between soyfoods and breast cancer has become controversial because of concerns – based mostly on in vitro and rodent data – that isoflavones may stimulate the growth of existing estrogen-sensitive breast tumors. This controversy carries considerable public health significance because of the increasing popularity of soyfoods and the commercial availability of isoflavone supplements. In this analysis and commentary we attempt to outline current concerns regarding the estrogen-like effects of isoflavones in the breast focusing primarily on the clinical trial data and place these concerns in the context of recent evidence regarding estrogen therapy use in postmenopausal women. Overall, there is little clinical evidence to suggest that isoflavones will increase breast cancer risk in healthy women or worsen the prognosis of breast cancer patients. Although relatively limited research has been conducted, and the clinical trials often involved small numbers of subjects, there is no evidence that isoflavone intake increases breast tissue density in pre- or postmenopausal women or increases breast cell proliferation in postmenopausal women with or without a history of breast cancer. The epidemiologic data are generally consistent with the clinical data, showing no indication of increased risk. Furthermore, these clinical and epidemiologic data are consistent with what appears to be a low overall breast cancer risk associated with pharmacologic unopposed estrogen exposure in postmenopausal women. While more research is required to definitively allay concerns, the existing data should provide some degree of assurance that isoflavone exposure at levels consistent with historical Asian soyfood intake does not result in adverse stimulatory effects on breast tissue