EFSA says: no link between EPA, DHA and prostate cancer
EFSA: no link between EPA, DHA and prostate cancer
There is no scientific evidence demonstrating an association between EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid), DHA (docosahexaenoic acid), and prostate cancer risk. This is stated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in a document that also confirms the safety of Omega-3, and the possibility of increasing the maximum daily intake of EPA and DHA-rich oil extracted from the algae Schizochytrium for the adult population.
The scientific opinion was issued by an EFSA expert panel following a request from the European Commission to clarify the risks of increasing the allowable amount of Omega-3 taken via algal supplements, and the possible relationship between EPA, DHA, and prostate cancer risk, which arose after a study published last year.
Schizochytrium sp.: a safe source of Omega-3
Schizochytrium sp is a marine microalga containing high concentrations of fatty acids such as DHA, EPA, and palmitic acid. The oil obtained from this microalga has a minimum DHA content of 22.5% and EPA of 10%. It is marketed in a wide range of foods and supplements. Currently, the maximum allowed daily dose of EPA and DHA from supplements is 0.25 grams for adults and 0.45 grams for pregnant and breastfeeding women. On April 29, 2013, UK authorities submitted a report to the European Commission stating that daily intake of algal oil supplements containing up to 3 grams of EPA and DHA meets acceptance criteria established by regulations. A few months later, some EU Member States raised an objection, claiming that with intake of supplements containing these doses of DHA and EPA, and possible consumption of Omega-3-rich foods, the total intake of DHA and EPA could exceed 5 grams per day. The European Commission’s inquiry also concerns the association between high plasma concentrations of DHA and EPA and prostate neoplasia risk, a precursor to prostate cancer. Although some studies in recent years have suggested a protective role of Omega-3s against prostate cancer, EFSA experts were asked to review studies investigating the link between EPA, DHA, and increased cancer risk.
Experts clarify
In the document recently published by EFSA, scientific evidence confirms the unfoundedness of concerns related to increasing the allowed doses of EPA and DHA supplements. By collecting dietary intake data from the European Union, experts showed that even combining EPA and DHA-rich foods, fortified foods, and dietary supplements, the 5 grams per day intake of Omega-3 is not exceeded in most European countries. It should also be considered that the fatty acid profile of algal oil rich in DHA and EPA derived from Schizochytrium sp. is comparable to that of fish-derived products and, as such, does not raise safety concerns. Moreover, EFSA does not change the current maximum authorized intake level of algal oil for pregnant and breastfeeding women, which remains 0.45 grams per day.
No risk of prostate cancer
Besides providing evidence on the toxicological and allergenic safety of DHA and EPA-rich oil derived from Schizochytrium sp, experts commented on the unfoundedness of studies suggesting increased prostate cancer risk linked to Omega-3 intake. The panel noted there is no evidence of such association from cohort studies, nor from some case-control studies, due to uncertainties in measuring blood levels of DHA and EPA, which these studies rely on. In particular, the authors disputed the findings of a meta-analysis published last year by Dr. Theodore Brasky, which pooled results of a small number of case-control studies investigating the association between blood biomarker concentrations of DHA and EPA (expressed as a percentage of total fatty acids) and prostate cancer risk.
The measurement of these molecules does not only reflect DHA and EPA intake, but also their absorption, metabolism, and incorporation into cells or tissues. These are genetically determined mechanisms that depend on the individual's health status and presence of other dietary fatty acids, especially when expressed as a percentage of total fatty acids.
Considering studies on prostate carcinoma individually, and the blood concentrations of DHA and EPA biomarkers, results are conflicting: three reported a positive association, three found no significant association, and two found a negative association. With a majority of null, negative, or weak associations, the expert panel concludes there is no evidence to suggest a role of EPA and DHA in prostate cancer development.
Source: Scientific Opinion on the extension of use for DHA and EPA-rich algal oil from Schizochytrium sp. as a Novel Food ingredient. EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA), EFSA Journal 2014;12(10):3843
