Cancer Treatments From the Kitchen

Sharks have a reputation for having very low rates of cancer, although a study from 2004 revealed that the reputation may not be warranted—the fish certainly do get the disease. In any case, the popular myth wasn't the basis for Lu's study, he says: "It's interesting but irrelevant." What intrigued him more was the fact that shark cartilage contains chemicals that stop the growth of blood vessels—an "anti-angiogenic" effect that mirrors the mechanisms of more conventional tumor-killing drugs. Block the tumor's blood supply, the thinking goes, and you essentially starve it to death.

Alas, any anti-angiogenic effects the shark cartilage may have had in the test tube didn't translate to Lu's 384 human patients. All of the patients had advanced lung cancer, and all were treated with chemotherapy and radiation, but half also drank eight ounces of a shark-cartilage solution each day. Sadly, the second group lived no longer than the first. In fact, they actually did a little worse: They lived for 14.4 months on average after starting the trial, while the placebo group lived an average of 15.6 months. The difference is not statistically significant, so for all practical purposes, the cartilage had no effect, says Lu. As for the previous preliminary studies that showed a positive effect, he adds, "they could have been a statistical fluke." Aeterna Zentaris no longer lists AE-941 as being in development. But Lu says he suspects cancer patients will continue to ask him about shark cartilage anyway, hopeful for any piece of further good news. Before the trial, he says, "I would always say we really don't have any good data. Now I would say there is one large respectable study." And if patients insist on spending their money, he adds, they should spend it on "something that has more promise."

© 2007