Effects of long-term selenium supplementation on the incidence of type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial.
Context Research suggests that selenium supplements may improve glucose metabolism. Contribution The investigators examined the incidence of type 2 diabetes among participants in a clinical trial designed to assess the effects of selenium supplementation on skin cancer. Participants randomly assigned to receive selenium were more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than were those assigned to placebo. Cautions Diabetes was a secondary outcome of the original trial. The diagnosis was self-reported, and most participants were older and white. Implication Long-term selenium supplementation appears to increase the risk for type 2 diabetes. The Editors Insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance, and type 2 diabetes are all linked to oxidative stress, which may be the pathogenic mechanism that links these conditions to cardiovascular disease (1). Observational epidemiologic studies show a protective association of dietary or plasma antioxidants against the development of type 2 diabetes (2, 3). However, the few clinical trials that have examined the efficacy of antioxidant supplementation in the prevention of type 2 diabetes or its complications have had negative results (46). Experimental evidence from animal models suggests that supplementation with low doses of the antioxidant selenium may exert beneficial effects on glucose metabolism, possibly through many insulin-like actions, and may delay complications of diabetes. The effects of high-dose selenium supplements, however, are less clear (710). Some studies in patients with diabetes suggest that selenium supplementation may help to prevent vascular complications (11) and that diabetic patients may be deficient in selenium relative to healthy persons (12). Conversely, recent findings from the SU.VI.MAX (Supplementation with Antioxidant Vitamins and Minerals) study (13) showed no effect of supplementation with a combination of antioxidants, including selenium (100 g/d), on fasting plasma glucose levels after 7.5 years of follow-up. Because no randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials to date have tested the effect of long-term supplementation with selenium alone (200 g/d) on the risk for type 2 diabetes, we examined the efficacy of selenium supplementation in preventing new-onset type 2 diabetes in the NPC (Nutritional Prevention of Cancer) trial, a randomized, double-blind clinical trial designed primarily to evaluate the efficacy of selenium supplementation for prevention of cancer (14, 15). Specifically, we assessed the incidence of type 2 diabetes as a secondary end point throughout the blinded phase of the trial (19831996) among participants who did not have type 2 diabetes at baseline (n= 1202). Methods Design and Participants The rationale, design, and methods of the NPC trial are described in detail elsewhere (14). In brief, the NPC trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 1312 participants who were recruited in 1983 to 1991 from 7 dermatology clinics in areas of low selenium consumption of the eastern United States. Randomization was blocked by time and stratified by clinic. Persons were eligible if they had a confirmed history of nonmelanoma skin cancer in the year before randomization, had an estimated life expectancy of 5 years, and had no reported internal cancer in the previous 5 years. Participants with a history of clinically important liver or kidney disorders were excluded. Because the primary aim of the trial was to determine the effects of selenium supplementation on nonmelanoma skin cancer, we excluded nonwhite persons. This restriction served to control the effects of skin pigmentation on the risk for skin cancer recurrence. As a result, almost all participants in the NPC trial were non-Hispanic white persons; about 1.4% (n= 18) of persons who were randomly allocated were identified as Hispanic, and some persons were from other ethnic groups. Although recruitment was sex-neutral, about three quarters of the participants were male. Of the 1316 persons recruited, random assignment was successful for 1312. At the end of the blinded treatment period on 1 February 1996, no participant was lost to vital follow-up, generating a total of 9301 person-years of follow-up. Self-reported adherence indicated that 79.3% of participants (80.3% in the placebo group and 78.4% in the selenium group) adhered to the intervention (16). This was corroborated by the fact that plasma selenium levels remained constant throughout the trial in the placebo group but were substantially higher in the selenium group (Figure 1). Figure 1. Mean plasma selenium levels. We analyzed only participants with a valid baseline selenium value obtained within 4 days from the date of randomization (1250 of 1312 participants), a decision that is consistent with previously published studies from the NPC trial (1517). Baseline characteristics of the total NPC cohort of 1312 participants and the subsample of 1250 participants with valid baseline selenium levels did not statistically significantly differ (17), and our findings did not change substantially when analyses were expanded to include all 1312 participants (data not reported). We focus on the 1202 participants who did not have type 2 diabetes at baseline (600 selenium recipients and 602 placebo recipients). Ascertainment of prevalent type 2 diabetes at baseline was based on a self-reported diagnosis of type 2 diabetes before randomization, with subsequent evaluation of medical records (48 cases [21 in the selenium group and 27 in the placebo group]). Figure 2 shows the flow diagram of the NPC participants included in our analysis. Figure 2. Flow diagram of the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer Trial, 19831996. Clinical Examination and Laboratory Methods The intervention agent was 200 g of selenium daily, supplied in a 0.5-g, high-selenium baker's yeast tablet provided by Nutrition 21 (La Jolla, California) through 1995 and by Cypress Systems (Fresno, California) thereafter. The placebo group received a tablet containing yeast only. Selenium and placebo pills were coated with titanium oxide to ensure identical appearance and smell. Each patient was assigned a unique sequential treatment number. Treatment group assignment was made centrally by using sealed identical pill bottles that were distributed at the clinic. The coordinating center held all treatment information in blinded form (14). The selenium content of each batch of pills was determined in the laboratories of Dr. Combs and of I.S. Palmer, MD (South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota), by the diaminonapthalene fluorometric procedure after nitricperchloric acid digestion (18). Plasma selenium level was determined in the laboratory of Dr. Combs by using an automated electrothermal atomic absorption spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer 3030, Perkin-Elmer, Norwalk, Connecticut) equipped with an electrodeless discharge lamp and automatic Zeeman-effect background correction. Quality control included multiple aliquots of human plasma as external control samples. A coefficient of variation less than 7% (for duplicate analyses) was the criterion for acceptance (19). Participants visited their respective clinics biannually to provide blood samples and report new illnesses and medications. Patient medical records from both study and nonstudy visits were periodically reviewed to ensure completeness and accuracy. At the baseline interview, data were collected on sociodemographic, anthropometric, and behavioral characteristics, including education (0 to 18 years), body mass index (BMI), use of vitamin supplements, alcohol consumption (drinks consumed per day), smoking status (never, former, or current), and pack-years of smoking. For participants who became inactive, annual monitoring was attempted by using the National Death Index and ChoicePoint Services (formerly Equifax, Atlanta, Georgia) to determine vital status and identify diagnoses of new illnesses. Ascertainment of Type 2 Diabetes and Follow-up Participants who had a new diagnosis of type 2 diabetes during the blinded phase of the trial (15 September 1983 to 1 February 1996) were noted. The initial report of diabetes came from 3 sources: self-report during the clinical interview, reported use of drugs for diabetes, and reports in medical record documents. Medical record requests were then sent to the primary physicians for every patient with a report. This process of requesting and reviewing documentation was done in a blinded manner. About 92% of these reports, regardless of source, were corroborated with medical record documentation, as determined by registered nurse reviewers. Person-years of follow-up were accrued from the date of randomization as the start date to the date of an incident case of type 2 diabetes, the date of death, or the end of the blinded period of the trial. Statistical Analysis For continuous and categorical variables, we used t tests and chi-square tests, respectively, to determine the statistical significance of any difference in the distribution of baseline variables between treatment groups. Cumulative incidence curves of type 2 diabetes by treatment group were constructed by comparing NelsonAalen cumulative hazard function estimates that were calculated at different time points of the trial and by using the 2-sided log-rank test (20). In unadjusted analyses, incidence data were statistically analyzed by calculating relative risks as the ratios of the incidence density for the treatment groups, with corresponding 95% CIs. P values were derived from log-rank tests. In adjusted analyses, hazard ratios and 95% CIs were calculated by using the Cox proportional hazard model, which allowed adjustment for age, BMI (continuous variable), sex, and smoking status at baseline as covariates. We decided a priori to adjust for these diabetes risk factors regardless of whether they differed between treatment groups. Tests of proportional hazards assumptions were based on S