Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2014, Article ID 436123, 6 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/436123
Review Article

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Prostatic Diseases

1Photocatalyst Group, Kanagawa Academy of Science and Technology, 3-25-13 Tonomachi, Kawasaki-ku, Kanagawa, Kawasaki 210-0821, Japan
2Department of Urology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Kanagawa, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan

Received 15 December 2013; Accepted 22 April 2014; Published 12 May 2014

Academic Editor: Paul Crispen

Copyright © 2014 Hitoshi Ishiguro and Takashi Kawahara. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Prostatic diseases are characterized by increased activity of cytokines, growth factors, and cyclooxygenases- (COX-) 1 and 2. Activation of COX-1 and COX-2 results in increased levels of prostaglandins and the induction of angiogenic, antiapoptotic and inflammatory processes. Inhibition of COX enzymes by members of the widely used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) class of drugs decreases prostaglandin production, and exerts a variety of anti-inflammatory, antipyretic, and antinociceptive effects. While numerous in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies have shown that NSAIDs inhibit the risk and progression of prostatic diseases, the relationship between NSAIDs and such diseases remains controversial. Here we review the literature in this area, critically analyzing the benefits and caveats associated with the use of NSAIDs in the treatment of prostatic diseases.

1. Introduction

The initiation and progression of prostatic diseases involve a variety of factors, including the amplification and mutation of genes encoding the androgen receptor, tumor suppressor genes, oncogenes, growth factors, and cytokines, in addition to other processes such as infection [14]. Given the role of inflammation in the development and progression of prostatic disease, it has been suggested that inhibition of inflammation would decrease the risk of prostatic diseases. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used in the world for their antinociceptive, anti-inflammatory, and antipyretic effects in many diseases, including prostate cancer and prostatic disease. In contrast, several studies have reported that the use of NSAIDs increases the risk of prostatic diseases and the relationship between this class of drugs and prostatic disease remains controversial. Current opinion suggests that NSAID treatment would be beneficial for most prostatic diseases, in particular benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer. In this review, we discuss the relationship between NSAIDs and prostatic diseases.

2. NSAIDs

The primary mechanism of action of NSAIDs is the inhibition of the activity of cyclooxygenase enzymes (COX-1 and COX-2) and a consequent reduction in prostaglandin levels [5]. COX-1 is constitutively expressed in most tissues and has important roles in tissue homeostasis, particularly in the stomach and kidney, as well as in blood clotting. In contrast, expression of COX-2 is induced by cytokines or growth factors [6]. Both enzymes convert arachidonic acid to prostaglandin G2 (Figure 1), which is in turn converted to various mediators of inflammation, including prostaglandin H, prostaglandin E, prostaglandin D, and thromboxane A.

436123.fig.001
Figure 1: Schematic of the mechanism of action of NSAIDs. NSAID inhibition of cyclooxygenase-1 and/or cyclooxygenase-2 suppresses prostaglandin G2 production, promoting apoptosis and blocking angiogenesis, inflammation, and tumor progression.

NSAIDs are classified into two groups: COX-2 nonselective NSAIDs, which inhibit both COX-2 and COX-1 and COX-2 selective NSAIDs. Since COX-1 inhibition has been associated with severe side effects such as gastrointestinal bleeding and damage to gastric mucosa [7], there has been an emphasis on the development of COX-2 selective NSAIDs. COX-2 selective NSAIDs have been shown to inhibit inflammation without damaging the gastric mucosa [8], although some have been linked with cardiovascular toxicity [9].

Given the myriad adverse side effects of classical NSAIDs, increasing attention is being focused on nitric oxide-donating NSAIDs (NO-NSAIDs), which are associated with fewer side effects [10]. NO released from NO-NSAIDs inhibits gastrointestinal bleeding and damage to the gastric mucosa by increasing blood flow and mucus secretion. Moreover, NO-NSAIDs have been shown to be more effective inhibitors of cancer cell growth than classical NSAIDs [10]. Collectively these data suggest that NSAIDs have potential as a novel class of drugs for the prevention of prostatic diseases and prostate cancer.

3. Prostatitis

According to the NIH consensus classification of prostatitis syndromes includes 4 categories. These four categories include (1) acute bacterial prostatitis, (2) chronic bacterial prostatitis, (3) chronic prostatitis/CPPS consisting of A: inflammatory and B: noninflammatory, and (4) asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis [11]. While antibacterial drugs are effective in the treatment of acute bacterial prostatitis, they are less effective in the treatment of the other types of prostatitis. As a consequence, therapy for chronic prostatitis is primarily aimed at managing its symptoms. COX-2 selective NSAIDs have been shown to abrogate or partially relieve dysuric symptoms in 66% and 17% of chronic prostatitis patients, respectively, and to improve inflammatory symptoms in 54% of patients [12]. In a 2003 study comparing the efficacy of different NSAIDs in the treatment of chronic prostatitis [13], a total of 161 chronic prostatitis patients were randomized into three groups treated with 25 mg and 50 mg rofecoxib or placebo, respectively, for 6 weeks. The results indicated that treatment with 50 mg rofecoxib effected a statistical improvement in the quality of life of the patients. Collectively, these data indicate that treatment with NSAIDs might hold many benefits for chronic prostatitis patients.

4. Benign Prostate Hyperplasia

Recent in vitro and epidemiological evidence has shown that age, genetics, endocrine status, inflammation, and lifestyle are risk factors for BPH and/or lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) [14]. Inflammation has been linked with the development and progression of BPH [15, 16], and several studies have reported the presence of intraprostatic inflammatory infiltration in BPH tissues [17, 18]. The inflammatory cytokine IL-17, which is not expressed in normal prostate, has been shown to be expressed in inflammatory prostate [19]. Moreover, COX-1 and COX-2 are expressed in BPH tissues [2023], and elevated COX-2 expression has been associated with increased levels of Bcl-2 and cell proliferation in BPH [23]. Given the inhibitory effect on COX-1 and COX-2 activity by NSAID treatment, would be anticipated to reduce the risk of BPH development and progression.

In a 2005 study [24], 46 patients with LUTS and BPH were divided to two groups and treated with finasteride only or , respectively, for 24 weeks. Compared with the finasteride only group, patients in the group had a higher decreasing of average international prostate symptom score (IPSS) after 4 weeks and faster overall relief of BPH symptoms. In another study, compared with LUTS and BPH patients treated with an α-blocker alone, patients treated with a COX-2 inhibitor + an α-blocker had a higher decreasing of average IPSS, quality of life (QoL) index, and overactive bladder symptoms score (OABSS) [25]. Jhang et al. showed that an α-blocker combined with celecoxib group decreased the IPSS score, but not significantly, compared to α-blocker monotherapy group [26]. Moreover, nocturia associated with LUTS has been shown to be improved by treatment with sedatives and analgesics, including COX-2 inhibitors [27].

Daily use of NSAIDs has been shown to result in improved urinary symptoms, increased urine flow rate, and decreased prostate volume and prostate-specific antigen levels [28]. In addition, administration of NSAIDs reportedly decreased both IPSS and mean nocturnal urination frequency, another well-known symptom of BPH, suggesting that NSAIDs are a novel option to improve symptoms of BPH [29]. While some studies have reported a lack of side effects associated with NSAID treatment [30], others have reported the opposite results. For example, in a cohort study of NSAID and risk of BPH, using 4,735 men without BPH as a baseline, Schenk et al. found that NSAIDs were not associated with the risk of BPH [31]. In contrast, other studies have reported that NSAIDs increased the risk of BPH [32, 33]. Moreover, acute urinary retention has been associated with the use of COX-2 selective NSAIDs but not with the use of nonselective NSAIDs [34].

While data are limited, several in vitro and in vivo studies have probed the mechanism(s) underlying the improvement in BPH and its symptoms effected by NSAIDs. Ibuprofen and aspirin, two commonly used NSAIDs, have been shown to decrease viability and suppress proliferation of BPH cell lines [35]. Moreover, certain animal models of BPH are characterized by elevated expression of the enzymes COX-2 and 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX) that also regulates inflammation [36]. Treatment of these animals with a dual inhibitor of COX and 5-LOX decreased prostaglandin E2 levels and expression of the antiapoptotic factor Bcl-2 and increased expression of the proapoptotic factors Bax and caspase-9, resulting in the induction of apoptosis.

In summary, while the determining of the efficacy of NSAIDs in the treatment of BPH requires further clinical studies, in vitro evidence suggests that NSAIDs might be beneficial for alleviating symptoms in BPH patients and for reducing the risk of the development or progression of the disease in unaffected individuals.

5. Prostate Cancer

Inflammation arising from a variety of physiological insults is thought to be a major cause and promoter of various cancers, including prostate cancer [3740]. Inflammation of the prostate is associated with the induction of cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors, as well as COX-2, which is also overexpressed in prostate cancer [21, 41]. Given their anti-inflammatory roles in the reduction of COX activity and prostaglandin synthesis, therefore [37, 42], it has been speculated that treatment with NSAIDs might reduce the risk of prostate cancer [43].

In vitro studies have provided evidence pointing to the suppression of prostate cancer development and progression by NSAIDs. For example, celecoxib, a COX-2 selective NSAID, has been shown to induce apoptosis in PC3 and LNCaP cells via inhibition of Akt and activation of caspase-3 [44, 45] and G1 arrest [46]. The fact that these cell lines do not express COX-2 indicates that celecoxib inhibits prostate cancer cell line growth via a COX-2 independent mechanism. In support of this notion, a celecoxib analog deficient in COX-2 inhibition has been shown to inhibit prostate cancer cell growth, also via repression of Akt and G1 arrest [46].

Other studies have investigated the relationship between NSAIDs, androgen signaling, and radiation therapy in the context of prostate cancer. Compared with parental LNCaP cells, LNCaP cells expressing COX-2 are more resistant to radiation therapy, and treatment with the COX-2 inhibitor diclofenac enhanced the effects of radiation therapy on these cells [47]. Similar results were also obtained in xenograft models [47]. NSAIDs have also been shown to delay the progression of prostate tumors from androgen-dependent to androgen-independent growth [48]. NSAIDs delayed the regrowth of LNCaP xenografts in castrated SCID mice. Another paper showed the possibility for the combination of hormone ablation therapy and NSAID treatment [49]. Celecoxib treatment increases the efficacy of androgen ablation therapy.

Studies of the transgenic adenocarcinoma of the mouse prostate (TRAMP) model, which has elevated COX-2 expression and activity, further suggest the potential of NSAIDs in retarding prostate cancer development and progression. In this model, celecoxib suppresses expression of androgen receptor, COX-2, NFκB, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), reduces prostaglandin E2 levels, and increases levels of E-cadherin, α-catenin, and β-catenin [50, 51]. In the same model, celecoxib inhibits the development of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and adenocarcinoma in the prostate in a dose-dependent manner [52, 53]. The net effect of celecoxib in this model is to suppress invasion and metastasis, induce apoptosis, and enhance overall survival. NSAIDs have also been shown to increase cell cycle arrest and apoptosis via regulation of cell cycle regulatory protein in an animal model of chemical induction of prostate cancer [53]. Collectively these experimental reports suggest that NSAIDs may be beneficial for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

By virtue of their decreased side effects, NO-NSAIDs are gaining attention as an alternative to classical NO-NSAIDs side effects. NO-NSAIDs have been shown to inhibit cancer cell growth [10] and, in prostate cancer cells specifically, have proapoptotic and anti-invasive properties which exceed those of classical NSAIDs [5457]. Moreover, NO-NSAIDs directly inhibit hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α), a transcriptional activator of VEGF, and other cancer-related genes [58]. Based on these and other studies, NO-NSAIDs show considerable potential as an alternative to classical NSAIDs for the treatment of prostate cancer.

Although in vitro studies point to the ability of NSAIDs to protect against cancer progression, results from clinical studies are more inconsistent. Many studies have linked NSAIDs with a reduced risk of prostate cancer [5964]. For example, aspirin and other NSAIDs have been shown to decrease plasma prostate serum antigen (PSA) levels and to reduce the risk of prostate cancer (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68–0.99). Daily use of aspirin also reduced further prostate cancer risk. Smith et al. investigated the effect of NSAIDs on serum PSA after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy in 78 men randomly divided into placebo (40 men) and celecoxib (38 men) groups. Relative to the placebo group, individuals in the celecoxib group had a 2-fold higher PSA doubling time and significantly decreased PSA velocity [61]. Moreover, combination treatment with an α1-blocker and COX-2 inhibitor has been shown to decrease serum PSA in 53.3% of patients [26]. In addition, administration of 200 mg celecoxib twice daily to 20 patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy effected a reduction in serum PSA in 60% of individuals [65]. In further support of these findings, daily consumption of more than six aspirins has been shown to reduce prostate cancer risk (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60–0.98) [60]. In contrast, other studies have failed to associate aspirin with a reduced risk of prostate cancer [66, 67], and one has suggested that treatment with NSAIDs increases the risk of prostate cancer (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.07 to 1.64) [68]. Interestingly, Leitzmann et al. indicated that, while aspirin reduced the risk of metastatic prostate cancer risk, it did not protect against the risk of prostate cancer [69]. Based on these observations, the association between NSAIDs and prostate cancer risk requires further study.

6. Conclusions

Many studies have demonstrated a link between inflammation and prostatic diseases, such as BPH and prostate cancer. Although there are some suggestions that NSAIDs increase the risk of prostatic diseases, most of studies suggest that NSAIDs have potential to improve symptoms in, and reduce the risk of, prostatic diseases.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

References

  1. R. Schrecengost and K. E. Knudsen, “Molecular pathogenesis and progression of prostate cancer,” Seminars in Oncology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 244–258, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. G. Penna, N. Mondaini, S. Amuchastegui et al., “Seminal plasma cytokines and chemokines in prostate inflammation: interleukin 8 as a predictive biomarker in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome and benign prostatic hyperplasia,” European Urology, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 524–533, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. J. A. Macoska, “Chemokines and BPH/LUTS,” Differentiation, vol. 82, no. 4-5, pp. 253–260, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. T. Cai, S. Mazzoli, F. Meacci et al., “Epidemiological features and resistance pattern in uropathogens isolated from chronic bacterial prostatitis,” The Journal of Microbiology, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 448–454, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. J. R. Vane, “Inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis as a mechanism of action for aspirin-like drugs,” Nature, vol. 231, no. 25, pp. 232–235, 1971. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. R. N. DuBois, S. B. Abramson, L. Crofford et al., “Cyclooxygenase in biology and disease,” The FASEB Journal, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 1063–1073, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. J. R. Vane, Y. S. Bakhle, and R. M. Botting, “Cyclooxygenases 1 and 2,” Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, vol. 38, pp. 97–120, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. C. Bombardier, L. Laine, A. Reicin et al., “Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 343, no. 21, pp. 1520–1528, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. R. S. Bresalier, R. S. Sandler, H. Quan et al., “Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib in a colorectal adenoma chemoprevention trial,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 352, no. 11, pp. 1092–1102, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. B. Rigas and K. Kashfi, “Nitric-oxide-donating NSAIDs as agents for cancer prevention,” Trends in Molecular Medicine, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 324–330, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. J. N. Krieger, L. Nyberg Jr., and J. C. Nickel, “NIH consensus definition and classification of prostatitis,” The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 282, no. 3, pp. 236–237, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. D. Canale, I. Scaricabarozzi, P. Giorgi, P. Turchi, M. Ducci, and G. F. Menchini-Fabris, “Use of a novel non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, nimesulide, in the treatment of abacterial prostatovesiculitis,” Andrologia, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 163–166, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. C. Nickel, M. Pontari, T. Moon et al., “A randomized, placebo controlled, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of rofecoxib in the treatment of chronic nonbacterial prostatitis,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 169, no. 4, pp. 1401–1405, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. K. Parsons, “Benign prostatic hyperplasia and male lower urinary tract symptoms: epidemiology and risk factors,” Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 212–218, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. C. Nickel, “Inflammation and benign prostatic hyperplasia,” Urologic Clinics of North America, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 109–115, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. B. Chughtai, R. Lee, A. Te, and S. Kaplan, “Role of inflammation in benign prostatic hyperplasia,” Reviews in Urology, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 147–150, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  17. P. W. Kohnen and G. W. Drach, “Patterns of inflammation in prostatic hyperplasia: a histologic and bacteriologic study,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 121, no. 6, pp. 755–760, 1979. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. F. di Silverio, V. Gentile, A. de Matteis et al., “Distribution of inflammation, pre-malignant lesions, incidental carcinoma in histologically confirmed benign prostatic hyperplasia: a retrospective analysis,” European Urology, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 164–175, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. G. E. Steiner, M. E. Newman, D. Paikl et al., “Expression and function of pro-inflammatory interleukin IL-17 and IL-17 receptor in normal, benign hyperplastic, and malignant prostate,” The Prostate, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 171–182, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. G. P. O'Neill and A. W. Ford-Hutchinson, “Expression of mRNA for cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 in human tissues,” FEBS Letters, vol. 330, no. 2, pp. 156–160, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. A. Kirschenbaum, A. P. Klausner, R. Lee et al., “Expression of cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 in the human prostate,” Urology, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 671–676, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. L.-M. Lee, C.-C. Pan, C.-J. Cheng, C.-W. Chi, and T.-Y. Liu, “Expression of cyclooxygenase-2 in prostate adenocarcinoma and benign prostatic hyperplasia,” Anticancer Research, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1291–1294, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. W. Wang, A. Bergh, and J.-E. Damber, “Chronic inflammation in benign prostate hyperplasia is associated with focal upregulation of cyclooxygenase-2, Bcl-2, and cell proliferation in the glandular epithelium,” The Prostate, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 60–72, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. F. di Silverio, C. Bosman, M. Salvatori et al., “Combination therapy with rofecoxib and finasteride in the treatment of men with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH),” European Urology, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 72–79, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. I. Ozdemir, O. Bozkurt, O. Demir, G. Aslan, and A. A. Esen, “Combination therapy with doxazosin and tenoxicam for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms,” Urology, vol. 74, no. 2, pp. 431–435, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. J.-F. Jhang, Y.-H. Jiang, and H.-C. Kuo, “Adding cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor to alpha blocker for patients with benign prostate hyperplasia and elevated serum prostate specific antigen could not improve prostate biopsy detection rate but improve lower urinary tract symptoms,” International Journal of Clinical Practice, vol. 67, no. 12, pp. 1327–1333, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  27. M. Kaye, “Aging, circadian weight change, and nocturia,” Nephron Physiology, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. p11–p18, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. J. L. St. Sauver, D. J. Jacobson, M. E. Mcgree, M. M. Lieber, and S. J. Jacobsen, “Protective association between nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug use and measures of benign prostatic hyperplasia,” American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 164, no. 8, pp. 760–768, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. S. Falahatkar, G. Mokhtari, F. Pourreza, S. A. Asgari, and A. N. Kamran, “Celecoxib for treatment of nocturia caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study,” Urology, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 813–816, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. A. Kahokehr, R. Vather, A. Nixon, and A. G. Hill, “Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for lower urinary tract symptoms in benign prostatic hyperplasia: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials,” BJU International, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 304–311, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  31. J. M. Schenk, G. S. Calip, C. M. Tangen et al., “Indications for and use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and the risk of incident, symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: results from the prostate cancer prevention trial,” American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 176, no. 2, pp. 156–163, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  32. J. B. Meigs, B. Mohr, M. J. Barry, M. M. Collins, and J. B. McKinlay, “Risk factors for clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia in a community-based population of healthy aging men,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 54, no. 9, pp. 935–944, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. D. Kang, G. L. Andriole, R. C. van de Vooren et al., “Risk behaviours and benign prostatic hyperplasia,” BJU International, vol. 93, no. 9, pp. 1241–1245, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. K. M. C. Verhamme, J. P. Dieleman, M. A. M. van Wijk et al., “Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and increased risk of acute urinary retention,” Archives of Internal Medicine, vol. 165, no. 13, pp. 1547–1551, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. C. H. Minnery and R. H. Getzenberg, “Benign prostatic hyperplasia cell line viability and modulation of JM-27 by doxazosin and ibuprofen,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 174, no. 1, pp. 375–379, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. D. Altavilla, L. Minutoli, F. Polito et al., “Effects of flavocoxid, a dual inhibitor of COX and 5-lipoxygenase enzymes, on benign prostatic hyperplasia,” British Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 167, no. 1, pp. 95–108, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  37. E. Kashiwagi, M. Shiota, A. Yokomizo et al., “Prostaglandin receptor EP3 mediates growth inhibitory effect of aspirin through androgen receptor and contributes to castration resistance in prostate cancer cells,” Endocrine-Related Cancer, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 431–441, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  38. A. M. de Marzo, E. A. Platz, S. Sutcliffe et al., “Inflammation in prostate carcinogenesis,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 256–269, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. K. S. Sfanos and A. M. de Marzo, “Prostate cancer and inflammation: the evidence,” Histopathology, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 199–215, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. J. Haverkamp, B. Charbonneau, and T. L. Ratliff, “Prostate inflammation and its potential impact on prostate cancer: a current review,” Journal of Cellular Biochemistry, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 1344–1353, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. S. Gupta, M. Srivastava, N. Ahmad, D. G. Bostwick, and H. Mukhtar, “Over-expression of cyclooxygenase-2 in human prostate adenocarcinoma,” The Prostate, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 73–78, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  42. M. Majima, H. Amano, and I. Hayashi, “Prostanoid receptor signaling relevant to tumor growth and angiogenesis,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 524–529, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. T. Veitonmäki, T. L. Tammela, A. Auvinen, and T. J. Murtola, “Use of aspirin, but not other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is associated with decreased prostate cancer risk at the population level,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 938–945, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  44. M. I. Patel, K. Subbaramaiah, B. Du et al., “Celecoxib inhibits prostate cancer growth: evidence of a cyclooxygenase-2-independent mechanism,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 1999–2007, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. A.-L. Hsu, T.-T. Ching, D.-S. Wang, X. Song, V. M. Rangnekar, and C.-S. Chen, “The cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib induces apoptosis by blocking Akt activation in human prostate cancer cells independently of Bcl-2,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 275, no. 15, pp. 11397–11403, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. S. K. Kulp, Y.-T. Yang, C.-C. Hung et al., “3-phosphoinositide-dependent protein kinase-1/Akt signaling represents a major cyclooxygenase-2-independent target for celecoxib in prostate cancer cells,” Cancer Research, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 1444–1451, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. T. Inoue, S. Anai, S. Onishi et al., “Inhibition of COX-2 expression by topical diclofenac enhanced radiation sensitivity via enhancement of TRAIL in human prostate adenocarcinoma xenograft model,” BMC Urology, vol. 13, article 1, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  48. X. Zheng, X.-X. Cui, Z. Gao et al., “Atorvastatin and celecoxib in combination inhibits the progression of androgen-dependent LNCaP xenograft prostate tumors to androgen independence,” Cancer Prevention Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 114–124, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. P. Abedinpour, V. T. Baron, J. Welsh, and P. Borgström, “Regression of prostatetumors upon combination of hormone ablation therapy and celecoxib in vivo,” The Prostate, vol. 71, no. 8, pp. 813–823, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. B. A. Narayanan, N. K. Narayanan, B. Pittman, and B. S. Reddy, “Regression of mouse prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the transgenic adenocarcinoma mouse prostate model,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 10, no. 22, pp. 7727–7737, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. S. Gupta, V. M. Adhami, M. Subbarayan et al., “Suppression of prostate carcinogenesis by dietary supplementation of celecoxib in transgenic adenocarcinoma of the mouse prostate model,” Cancer Research, vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 3334–3343, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. B. A. Narayanan, N. K. Narayanan, B. Pttman, and B. S. Reddy, “Adenocarcina of the mouse prostate growth inhibition by celecoxib: downregulation of transcription factors involved in COX-2 inhibition,” The Prostate, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 257–265, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. B. A. Narayanan, M. S. Condon, M. C. Bosland, N. K. Narayanan, and B. S. Reddy, “Suppression of N-methyl-N-nitrosourea/testosterone-induced rat prostate cancer growth by celecoxib: effects on cyclooxygenase-2, cell cycle regulation, and apoptosis mechanism(s),” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 3503–3513, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. J. S. Royle, J. A. Ross, I. Ansell, P. Bollina, D. N. Tulloch, and F. K. Habib, “Nitric oxide donating nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs induce apoptosis in human prostate cancer cell systems and human prostatic stroma via caspase-3,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 172, no. 1, pp. 338–344, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. S. Huguenin, J. Fleury-Feith, L. Kheuang et al., “Nitrosulindac (NCX 1102): a new nitric oxide-donating non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NO-NSAID), inhibits proliferation and induces apoptosis in human prostatic epithelial cell lines,” The Prostate, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 132–141, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. G. D. Stewart, J. Nanda, D. J. G. Brown, A. C. P. Riddick, J. A. Ross, and F. K. Habib, “NO-sulindac inhibits the hypoxia response of PC-3 prostate cancer cells via the Akt signalling pathway,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 124, no. 1, pp. 223–232, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. W. Lu, H. N. Tinsley, A. Keeton, Z. Qu, G. A. Piazza, and Y. Li, “Suppression of Wnt/β-catenin signaling inhibits prostate cancer cell proliferation,” European Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 602, no. 1, pp. 8–14, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. G. L. Semenza, “Targeting HIF-1 for cancer therapy,” Nature Reviews Cancer, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 721–732, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. J. E. Nelson and R. E. Harris, “Inverse association of prostate cancer and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): results of a case-control study,” Oncology Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 169–170, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. L. A. Habel, W. Zhao, and J. L. Stanford, “Daily aspirin use and prostate cancer risk in a large, multiracial cohort in the US,” Cancer Causes & Control, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 427–434, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. M. R. Smith, J. Manola, D. S. Kaufman, W. K. Oh, G. J. Bubley, and P. W. Kantoff, “Celecoxib versus placebo for men with prostate cancer and a rising serum prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy and/or radiation therapy,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 24, no. 18, pp. 2723–2728, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. A. E. Norrish, R. T. Jackson, and C. U. McRae, “Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and prostate cancer progression,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 77, no. 4, pp. 511–515, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  63. C. A. Salinas, E. M. Kwon, L. M. Fitzgerald et al., “Use of aspirin and other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medications in relation to prostate cancer risk,” American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 172, no. 5, pp. 578–590, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. R. O. Roberts, D. J. Jacobson, C. J. Girman, T. Rhodes, M. M. Lieber, and S. J. Jacobsen, “A population-based study of daily nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and prostate cancer,” Mayo Clinic Proceedings, vol. 77, no. 3, pp. 219–225, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. R. S. Pruthi, J. E. Derksen, and D. Moore, “A pilot study of use of the cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib in recurrent prostate cancer after definitive radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy,” BJU International, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 275–278, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. R. J. Menezes, H. Swede, R. Niles, and K. B. Moysich, “Regular use of aspirin and prostate cancer risk (United States),” Cancer Causes & Control, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 251–256, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. C. Bosetti, R. Talamini, E. Negri, S. Franceschi, M. Montella, and C. la Vecchia, “Aspirin and the risk of prostate cancer,” European Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 43–45, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. M. J. S. Langman, K. K. Cheng, E. A. Gilman, and R. J. Lancashire, “Effect of anti-inflammatory drugs on overall risk of common cancer: case-control study in general practice research database,” British Medical Journal, vol. 320, no. 7250, pp. 1642–1646, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. M. F. Leitzmann, M. J. Stampfer, J. Ma et al., “Aspirin use in relation to risk of prostate cancer,” Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 1108–1111, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus