(HealthDay News) -- Needle-delivered frying or freezing technologies can be useful weapons against both lung and kidney cancers, new research shows.
In one study conducted in France, patients with advanced lung cancer who were not candidates for surgery underwent a procedure known as radiofrequency ablation (RFA), which basically heats the tumors and kills them.
Seventy percent of the patients with lung metastases or primary non-small cell lung cancer were still alive after two years -- similar to results seen after surgery.
Furthermore, 85 percent of patients with non-small cell primary lung cancer treated with RFA had no viable tumors visible on imaging one year later, while 77 percent had no viable tumors after two years.
"It means that you can actually do a very good job of local control of lung tumors in patients who aren't fit for surgery," said Dr. Damian Dupuy, a professor of diagnostic imaging at Warren Alpert Medical School at Brown University and director of tumor ablation at Rhode Island Hospital in Providence.
"The medical establishment, being very conservative, has always said if you aren't fit for surgery you just basically get chemo and radiation and most of the time [they] don't work well and you die of your tumor. But even the most unfit for surgery can have this procedure safely," Dupuy said.
The Brown researcher was not involved in the French study, but his group completed a lung cancer trial last year with similarly good results.
The new study, led by Dr. Thierry de Baere of Institute Gustave Roussy, in Villejuif, France, was to be presented Monday at the annual meeting of the Society for Interventional Radiology in Washington, D.C.
Lung cancer is the number one cancer killer in the United States and a full 25 percent of patients who have operable disease can't undergo surgery because of co-existing conditions, Dupuy noted.
"This is a huge advance for them," he said. "This procedure is done at almost every hospital that has an interventional radiologist, which is most. It's like a lung biopsy."
"If you have to stick a needle in to diagnose lung cancer anyway, why not do it in a single sitting?" Dupuy asked.
Most patients go home the same day, he noted. According to Dupuy, the procedure may also hold promise for pain relief in patients who are dying.
Two other studies presented at the meeting used the other end of the temperature spectrum -- cryoablation -- to successfully freeze and kill kidney cancer tumors.
"This is a minimally invasive, non-surgical cancer treatment without an incision, explained Dr. Christos S. Georgiades, lead author of one of the studies and an assistant professor of radiology and surgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. "You put a probe, which is basically a needle, into the tumor, freeze the central volume of the tissue with temperatures close to negative 150 degrees centigrade. The patients don't feel the cold."
In Georgiades' study, the procedure was 95 percent effective for tumors 4 centimeters or smaller and almost 90 percent effective in tumors up to 7 centimeters in diameter after one year. This was in patients with disease that had not yet spread beyond the kidney, he noted.
"The technique has been around for a few years, but we're only now proving that it works," Georgiades said. "Patients have recovery close to that of surgery and many do not have to have surgery. Many procedures are done on an outpatient basis."
The third study, from the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute in Detroit, looked at tumors treated with cryoablation whose average size was 2.8 centimeters. After 1.3 years, most of the tumors still came up on imaging as dead tissue, the team found.
More information
For more on these and other procedures, visit the Society of Interventional Radiologists.
Showing posts with label Lung-Cancer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lung-Cancer. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
BSD Medical Participates on Invitation at International Conference on Hyperthermic Oncology and Medicine in India
BSD Medical Corporation (AMEX:BSM) today announced that Richard A. White, Vice President of International Sales, along with some of the leading researchers in hyperthermia therapy, spoke and participated in a panel discussion as invited guests at the International Conference on Hyperthermic Oncology and Medicine held at the Mahavir Cancer Center in Patna, India February 16-17.
The two-day meeting was devoted entirely to the use of hyperthermia therapy in treating cancer. The panel upon which Mr. White and international scientists from the field participated was centered upon strategies to bring hyperthermia therapy to developing countries. At the meeting the invited scientists spoke on the clinical support for the use of hyperthermia therapy in treating cancer, as largely performed on BSD Medical's hyperthermia systems.
The conference received strong attention from the Indian Government, as Her Excellency, the President of India, Shrimati Pratibha Devisingh Patil opened the conference. The President said, "Cancer can be controlled if diagnosed well in time, however, in India, about two-thirds of cancer patients are diagnosed at the advanced stage when it becomes more difficult to treat."
GA_googleFillSlotWithSize("ca-pub-5440138744487553", "News_Main_300x250", 300, 250);
Dr. Nagraj Huigol, the National Secretary of the Association of Hyperthermic Oncology and Medicine (in India), stated that "Hyperthermia could be beneficial even for those suffering from resistant cancers. In fact a combination of the conventional mode of treatment and hyperthermia could create wonders if handled aptly." Dr. Nagraj appealed to the central and state governments to set up prominent medical centers for the benefit of those cancer patients who have lost all hope.
More than 800,000 people in India are diagnosed with cancer every year, and more than 400,000 die from the disease annually. Of these, lung cancer (250,000 cases), cervical cancer (126,000 cases) and breast cancer (80,000 cases) are the most prevalent. About 70% of the cases are diagnosed when the cancer is in an advanced T3 or T4 stage, where the use of hyperthermia therapy may be particularly implied for some cancers.
About BSD Medical Corporation
BSD Medical Corp. is the leading developer of systems used to deliver hyperthermia therapy for the treatment of cancer. Hyperthermia therapy is used to kill cancer directly and increase the effectiveness of companion radiation treatments. Research has also shown promising results from the use of hyperthermia therapy in combination with chemotherapy, and for tumor reduction prior to surgery. For further information visit BSD Medical's website at http://www.bsdmedical.com/ or BSD's patient website at http://www.treatwithheat.com/.
Statements contained in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties detailed in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Source: Business Wire
The two-day meeting was devoted entirely to the use of hyperthermia therapy in treating cancer. The panel upon which Mr. White and international scientists from the field participated was centered upon strategies to bring hyperthermia therapy to developing countries. At the meeting the invited scientists spoke on the clinical support for the use of hyperthermia therapy in treating cancer, as largely performed on BSD Medical's hyperthermia systems.
The conference received strong attention from the Indian Government, as Her Excellency, the President of India, Shrimati Pratibha Devisingh Patil opened the conference. The President said, "Cancer can be controlled if diagnosed well in time, however, in India, about two-thirds of cancer patients are diagnosed at the advanced stage when it becomes more difficult to treat."
GA_googleFillSlotWithSize("ca-pub-5440138744487553", "News_Main_300x250", 300, 250);
Dr. Nagraj Huigol, the National Secretary of the Association of Hyperthermic Oncology and Medicine (in India), stated that "Hyperthermia could be beneficial even for those suffering from resistant cancers. In fact a combination of the conventional mode of treatment and hyperthermia could create wonders if handled aptly." Dr. Nagraj appealed to the central and state governments to set up prominent medical centers for the benefit of those cancer patients who have lost all hope.
More than 800,000 people in India are diagnosed with cancer every year, and more than 400,000 die from the disease annually. Of these, lung cancer (250,000 cases), cervical cancer (126,000 cases) and breast cancer (80,000 cases) are the most prevalent. About 70% of the cases are diagnosed when the cancer is in an advanced T3 or T4 stage, where the use of hyperthermia therapy may be particularly implied for some cancers.
About BSD Medical Corporation
BSD Medical Corp. is the leading developer of systems used to deliver hyperthermia therapy for the treatment of cancer. Hyperthermia therapy is used to kill cancer directly and increase the effectiveness of companion radiation treatments. Research has also shown promising results from the use of hyperthermia therapy in combination with chemotherapy, and for tumor reduction prior to surgery. For further information visit BSD Medical's website at http://www.bsdmedical.com/ or BSD's patient website at http://www.treatwithheat.com/.
Statements contained in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties detailed in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Source: Business Wire
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Quality of Life Predicts Lung Cancer Survival
(HealthDay News) -- Quality of life is the most important predictor of survival for patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, U.S. researchers report."In the past, we've considered the stage of disease or tumor size along with other empirical data to predict how long a patient will survive, but now we know quality of life is a critical factor in determining survival," lead author Dr. Nicos Nicolaou, an attending physician in the radiation oncology department at Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia, said in a prepared statement.
The study of 239 patients found that those with a quality of life score less than the median (66.7) had a 69 percent higher death rate than patients with a score greater than the median.
"We conducted two different statistical analyses including all the usual prognostic factors and, either way, quality of life remained the strongest predictor of overall survival. What's more, if a patient's quality of life increased over time, we saw a corresponding increase in survival," senior author Dr. Benjamin Movsas, chairman of the radiation oncology department at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, said in a prepared statement.
The researchers also found that married patients or those with a partner had the highest quality of life scores.
"We found a significantly lower quality of life score for single, divorced and widowed patients, which deserves further study," Nicolaou said.
Overall, the study findings "underscore the importance of helping out patients improve the quality of life where we can in order to help them live longer better."
The study was expected to be presented Tuesday at the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology annual meeting, in Los Angeles.
More information
The U.S. National Cancer Institute has more about non-small cell lung cancer.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Scientists Probe Radiotherapy-Linked Brain Changes
(HealthDay News) -- Researchers believe certain brain changes may be linked to the dementia experienced by many cancer patients after whole-brain radiation treatment.Each year, about 200,000 people in the United States receive whole-brain radiation, which is used to treat recurrent brain tumors as well as to prevent breast cancer, lung cancer, and malignant melanoma from spreading to the brain.
About a year after whole-brain radiation treatment, up to 50 percent of patients develop progressive learning and memory problems.
In their research with rats, a team at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, N.C., found that whole-brain radiation caused compositional changes in brain cell receptors for the neurotransmitter glutamate.
A neurotransmitter carries signals between brain nerve cells. The changes in these receptors appear to be associated with cognitive problems.
"By identifying exactly how radiation causes these side effects, our hope is that we can find a way to prevent or reverse them," study lead author and research fellow Lei Shi explained in a prepared statement.
The findings were presented Monday at the annual meeting of the Radiation Research Society, in Philadelphia.
"There is growing concern about the cognitive consequences of whole-brain radiation. Our findings suggest that very subtle changes may be critical and that glutamate receptors may be one of those changes," Wake Forest senior researcher Judy Brunso-Bechtold, professor of neurobiology and anatomy, said in a prepared statement.
More information
The U.S. National Cancer Institute has more about whole-brain radiation.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Minorities Less Likely to Receive Care at High-Volume Hospitals
(HealthDay News) -- Race matters, at least when it comes to medical care received in big hospitals and Medicare managed-care plans.
Two studies in the Oct. 25 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that racial minorities generally received lower quality care than whites or had less access to better care.
According to the first paper, black, Asian and Hispanic patients, as well as uninsured patients, were less likely to undergo complex surgery at high-volume hospitals that specialize in that type of surgery. These hospitals are thought to produce better results because they perform so many of the procedures.
To see who was actually using high-volume hospitals, the authors looked at the characteristics of 719,608 patients who underwent 10 inpatient procedures in California from 2000 to 2004.
The procedures were: elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair; coronary artery bypass grafting; carotid endarterectomy; esophageal cancer resection; hip fracture repair; lung cancer resection; cardiac valve replacement; coronary angioplasty; pancreatic cancer resection; and total knee replacement.
Overall, nonwhites, Medicaid recipients and uninsured patients were less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals and more likely to go to low-volume hospitals.
Blacks were "significantly" -- 28 percent to 60 percent -- less likely than whites to receive surgical care at high-volume hospitals for six of the 10 operations. Asians were 9 percent to 40 percent less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals for five of the procedures, while Hispanics were 12 percent to 54 percent less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals for nine of the procedures.
Medicaid patients were 34 percent to 78 percent less likely than Medicare patients to receive their surgical care at high-volume hospitals for seven of the operations, while uninsured patients were 19 percent to 80 percent less likely to be treated at high volume hospitals for nine of the surgeries.
Right now, the goal is to send all patients in need of a specific type of procedure to hospitals that routinely perform such procedures and have the best results. But this might not be feasible or equitable. Rather than try to refer nonwhites and Medicaid recipients to high-volume hospitals, "the question becomes how to improve the quality of low-volume hospitals, raise the tide and lift all the boats," said Dr. Clifford Ko, senior author of the study and professor of surgery and director of the center for surgical outcomes and quality at the University of California, Los Angeles.
"There is no single, perfect way to improve quality and, even though we've put a lot of stock into volume, it is not perfect," Ko continued. "We need to find additional ways that hospitals can improve quality."
The second study found that black enrollees in Medicare managed-care plans do less well when it comes to managing conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes or high cholesterol, compared to white patients. The study authors looked at 431,573 individual-level observations in 151 Medicare health plans from 2002 to 2004. They were interested in gauging how well the plans performed on key clinical measures -- controlling blood pressure, cholesterol and blood sugar.
"If people have those measures under control, they're less likely to have heart attacks, strokes and are less likely to die prematurely," said study lead author Dr. Amal N. Trivedi, assistant professor of community health at Brown Medical School in Providence, R.I. "These are very important clinical outcomes." Trivedi started the research while at Harvard Medical School.
"There were large racial disparities in performance in the system as a whole with an absolute gap of 7 percent for blood pressure control all the way up to 14 percent for controlling cholesterol after a heart attack," Trivedi said.
The real question was whether there was any connection between these disparities and the overall quality of the plans. The answer was no, Trivedi said.
"There was basically no connection between the overall quality of the plan and how big its racial disparity, so this isn't an issue that affects just a few low-performing plans," Trivedi said. "We found that it's basically universal among Medicare managed care."
The bottom line is that managed-care plans need to start collecting this information, Trivedi said.
Stephen Thomas is director of the Center for Minority Health at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health. He said, "These articles tell us more of the same. The fundamental question is what are we going to do? What we need now is third generation health disparity research that is focused on solutions. Institutions need to be accountable to implementing solutions."
More information
The Kaiser Family Foundation has more on race, ethnicity and health care.
Two studies in the Oct. 25 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that racial minorities generally received lower quality care than whites or had less access to better care.
According to the first paper, black, Asian and Hispanic patients, as well as uninsured patients, were less likely to undergo complex surgery at high-volume hospitals that specialize in that type of surgery. These hospitals are thought to produce better results because they perform so many of the procedures.
To see who was actually using high-volume hospitals, the authors looked at the characteristics of 719,608 patients who underwent 10 inpatient procedures in California from 2000 to 2004.
The procedures were: elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair; coronary artery bypass grafting; carotid endarterectomy; esophageal cancer resection; hip fracture repair; lung cancer resection; cardiac valve replacement; coronary angioplasty; pancreatic cancer resection; and total knee replacement.
Overall, nonwhites, Medicaid recipients and uninsured patients were less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals and more likely to go to low-volume hospitals.
Blacks were "significantly" -- 28 percent to 60 percent -- less likely than whites to receive surgical care at high-volume hospitals for six of the 10 operations. Asians were 9 percent to 40 percent less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals for five of the procedures, while Hispanics were 12 percent to 54 percent less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals for nine of the procedures.
Medicaid patients were 34 percent to 78 percent less likely than Medicare patients to receive their surgical care at high-volume hospitals for seven of the operations, while uninsured patients were 19 percent to 80 percent less likely to be treated at high volume hospitals for nine of the surgeries.
Right now, the goal is to send all patients in need of a specific type of procedure to hospitals that routinely perform such procedures and have the best results. But this might not be feasible or equitable. Rather than try to refer nonwhites and Medicaid recipients to high-volume hospitals, "the question becomes how to improve the quality of low-volume hospitals, raise the tide and lift all the boats," said Dr. Clifford Ko, senior author of the study and professor of surgery and director of the center for surgical outcomes and quality at the University of California, Los Angeles.
"There is no single, perfect way to improve quality and, even though we've put a lot of stock into volume, it is not perfect," Ko continued. "We need to find additional ways that hospitals can improve quality."
The second study found that black enrollees in Medicare managed-care plans do less well when it comes to managing conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes or high cholesterol, compared to white patients. The study authors looked at 431,573 individual-level observations in 151 Medicare health plans from 2002 to 2004. They were interested in gauging how well the plans performed on key clinical measures -- controlling blood pressure, cholesterol and blood sugar.
"If people have those measures under control, they're less likely to have heart attacks, strokes and are less likely to die prematurely," said study lead author Dr. Amal N. Trivedi, assistant professor of community health at Brown Medical School in Providence, R.I. "These are very important clinical outcomes." Trivedi started the research while at Harvard Medical School.
"There were large racial disparities in performance in the system as a whole with an absolute gap of 7 percent for blood pressure control all the way up to 14 percent for controlling cholesterol after a heart attack," Trivedi said.
The real question was whether there was any connection between these disparities and the overall quality of the plans. The answer was no, Trivedi said.
"There was basically no connection between the overall quality of the plan and how big its racial disparity, so this isn't an issue that affects just a few low-performing plans," Trivedi said. "We found that it's basically universal among Medicare managed care."
The bottom line is that managed-care plans need to start collecting this information, Trivedi said.
Stephen Thomas is director of the Center for Minority Health at the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health. He said, "These articles tell us more of the same. The fundamental question is what are we going to do? What we need now is third generation health disparity research that is focused on solutions. Institutions need to be accountable to implementing solutions."
More information
The Kaiser Family Foundation has more on race, ethnicity and health care.
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Protein Predicts Lung Cancer's Response to Treatment
(HealthDay News) -- Levels of a protein linked to cellular DNA repair can predict how well non-small-cell lung cancer patients will respond to cisplatin, a common chemotherapy.
So concludes a French study published in the Sept. 7 New England Journal of Medicine.
Patients with low levels of the protein marker, called ERCC1, "will have a very significant level of benefit from adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy," said lead researcher Dr. Jean-Charles Soria, from the Department of Medicine, Institute Gustave Roussy, Villejuif.
Cisplatin is a standard component of chemotherapy for lung and other cancers; however, not everyone benefits from the drug. This new study suggests that screening for levels of the ERCC1 protein in lung biopsies can help doctors determine who will benefit from the treatment and who will not.
According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer accounts for 13 percent of all new cancers and is the leading cancer killer of American men and women. Non-small cell cancers comprise 85 percent of the nearly 175,000 new cases of lung cancer diagnosed in the United States each year.
In their study, Soria's group looked at 761 lung cancer tumors. Of these, 44 percent had high levels of ERCC1, and 56 percent had low levels of the protein.
They found that patients who had low levels of ERCC1 benefited from cisplatin treatment, which helped extend life for these patients.
However, this was not the case among patients with high levels of ERCC1.
These patients "do not derive benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, and if not treated, they do have a better 'spontaneous' prognosis than those who are ERCC1-negative," Soria said.
The French researcher believes that ERCC1 screening could spot those most likely to benefit from cisplatin treatment. "In our study, ERCC1 expression was evaluated by means of immunohistochemistry" of tissues in the laboratory, he said. "This is a simple technique, reliable, cheap and widely applicable," he added.
Screening patients might also help determine individual reaction to treatment, he added. "The goal of providing individualized chemotherapy based on different genetic traits, such as polymorphisms, gene mutations, and overexpression of drug target proteins, is on the verge of becoming clinical practice for the benefit of cancer patients," Soria said.
Two other experts agreed that ERCC1 screening should become part of a standard assessment of how patients might react to platinum-based chemotherapy, such as cisplatin.
"In my view, it's time to begin to think about whether or not we should begin to use this information to screen patients," said Dr. Eddie Reed, the director of the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the author of an accompanying journal editorial.
Reed believes that ERCC1 screening for other cancer where cisplatin is commonly used -- such as ovarian and colorectal cancer -- needs to be examined, as well. "It's time to consider whether or not we should use this strategy," he said.
Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer for the American Lung Association, agreed.
ERCC1 screening "is something that could save a substantial number of patients a substantial amount of discomfort," he said.
More information
Find out more about lung cancer at the American Cancer Society.
So concludes a French study published in the Sept. 7 New England Journal of Medicine.
Patients with low levels of the protein marker, called ERCC1, "will have a very significant level of benefit from adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy," said lead researcher Dr. Jean-Charles Soria, from the Department of Medicine, Institute Gustave Roussy, Villejuif.
Cisplatin is a standard component of chemotherapy for lung and other cancers; however, not everyone benefits from the drug. This new study suggests that screening for levels of the ERCC1 protein in lung biopsies can help doctors determine who will benefit from the treatment and who will not.
According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer accounts for 13 percent of all new cancers and is the leading cancer killer of American men and women. Non-small cell cancers comprise 85 percent of the nearly 175,000 new cases of lung cancer diagnosed in the United States each year.
In their study, Soria's group looked at 761 lung cancer tumors. Of these, 44 percent had high levels of ERCC1, and 56 percent had low levels of the protein.
They found that patients who had low levels of ERCC1 benefited from cisplatin treatment, which helped extend life for these patients.
However, this was not the case among patients with high levels of ERCC1.
These patients "do not derive benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, and if not treated, they do have a better 'spontaneous' prognosis than those who are ERCC1-negative," Soria said.
The French researcher believes that ERCC1 screening could spot those most likely to benefit from cisplatin treatment. "In our study, ERCC1 expression was evaluated by means of immunohistochemistry" of tissues in the laboratory, he said. "This is a simple technique, reliable, cheap and widely applicable," he added.
Screening patients might also help determine individual reaction to treatment, he added. "The goal of providing individualized chemotherapy based on different genetic traits, such as polymorphisms, gene mutations, and overexpression of drug target proteins, is on the verge of becoming clinical practice for the benefit of cancer patients," Soria said.
Two other experts agreed that ERCC1 screening should become part of a standard assessment of how patients might react to platinum-based chemotherapy, such as cisplatin.
"In my view, it's time to begin to think about whether or not we should begin to use this information to screen patients," said Dr. Eddie Reed, the director of the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the author of an accompanying journal editorial.
Reed believes that ERCC1 screening for other cancer where cisplatin is commonly used -- such as ovarian and colorectal cancer -- needs to be examined, as well. "It's time to consider whether or not we should use this strategy," he said.
Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer for the American Lung Association, agreed.
ERCC1 screening "is something that could save a substantial number of patients a substantial amount of discomfort," he said.
More information
Find out more about lung cancer at the American Cancer Society.
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Nicotine May Help Spur Lung Cancer
FRIDAY, July 21 (HealthDay News) -- While the nicotine in tobacco and in nicotine-replacement patches and gums doesn't cause lung cancer, it may help it along, a new study finds.
"Nicotine can promote the growth of new blood vessels and new cells -- two things that are correlated with the progression of cancer -- and our study shows how this actually happens," said study co-author Srikumar P. Chellappan, an associate professor in the Drug Discovery Program with the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute at the University of South Florida, in Tampa.
The finding raises questions about the use by lung cancer patients of nicotine-containing interventions aimed at helping smokers quit, such as popular patches and gums.
Chellappan's team identified a key binding process taking place between nicotine and receptors found on cells lining the lung's air passages, and in lung cancer cells themselves. The bond between nicotine and these receptors provokes further lung cancer cell proliferation, the researchers report in the August issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation.
The Florida group conducted their lab work on cancer cells taken from patients afflicted with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLS).
According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer accounts for 13 percent of all new cancers and is the leading cancer killer of American men and women. Non-small cell cancers comprise 85 percent of the nearly 175,000 new cases of lung cancer diagnosed in the United States each year.
But while tobacco smoke is the direct cause of eight out of 10 lung malignancies, nicotine -- the addictive chemical in tobacco -- does not have cancer-causing properties. The role, if any, of nicotine in lung cancer has long been the subject of debate.
In previous work, Chellapan found that nicotine exposure among lung cancer patients did appear to undermine chemotherapy's effectiveness in killing off cancer cells. Because so many patients use nicotine patches or gums to help them quit, this raise the troubling notion that these interventions might actually help encourage the disease.
In this study, Chellappan's focused on NSCLS cells and adjacent cells from the lung's air passages also known as bronchial cells. They exposed both cell types to nicotine in the test tube. The amount of nicotine used was the equivalent to what would typically be present in the bloodstream of a patient who smokes one pack of cigarettes a day.
In addition to binding with what are known as nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, the nicotine appeared to help create signaling pathways that promoted the cancer cell growth cycle. This growth activated and recruited other cell machinery known to stimulate tumor growth.
The researchers concluded that, in the test-tube setting, nicotine appears to go beyond simply protecting cancer cells as had been previously observed. Instead, it appears to promote cancer-cell proliferation and tumor progression.
"We found that a normal amount of nicotine that is typically present in the blood of smokers can really induce a proliferation of cancer cells, and we have identified some proteins in the cell that facilitate this proliferation," said Chellappan.
"So, smokers should be staying away from all products that contain nicotine," he cautioned. "Not just cigarettes -- anything. I can not say that this is just about smoking. This is about exposure to any nicotine. Even a patch to help quit smoking may not be the best idea."
Nevertheless, one expert is still on the fence when it comes to the risks and benefits for lung cancer patients in using nicotine-replacement therapies.
"You can't necessarily say whether nicotine-replacement therapy is a good or bad idea," said Dr. Norman H. Edelman, chief medical officer with the American Lung Association.
"My guess is that it's a good idea to engage in smoking cessation," he said. "Smoking cessation is a much healthier way to go rather than avoiding the nicotine in smoking-cessation therapies based on the theoretical risk shown in test tubes that nicotine can promote tumors."
Edelman emphasized, however, that the current study is "an important biologic finding" that will need to be followed up with research in animals and ultimately humans.
Two other major groups agreed. The U.S. National Cancer Institute's Web site states that "any potential risks of short-term use of nicotine-replacement therapy to stop smoking are far outweighed by the significant and known benefits that accrue to patients who stop smoking."
And the American Cancer Society's Web site notes that "numerous studies have shown that these products are safe and effective in helping smokers quit." Society experts also point out that the use of nicotine-replacement products, alongside in-person and phone counseling, can double a smoker's chances of successfully quitting.
More information
For more on cancer and nicotine, head to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
Last reviewed: 07/21/2006 Last updated: 07/21/2006
"Nicotine can promote the growth of new blood vessels and new cells -- two things that are correlated with the progression of cancer -- and our study shows how this actually happens," said study co-author Srikumar P. Chellappan, an associate professor in the Drug Discovery Program with the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute at the University of South Florida, in Tampa.
The finding raises questions about the use by lung cancer patients of nicotine-containing interventions aimed at helping smokers quit, such as popular patches and gums.
Chellappan's team identified a key binding process taking place between nicotine and receptors found on cells lining the lung's air passages, and in lung cancer cells themselves. The bond between nicotine and these receptors provokes further lung cancer cell proliferation, the researchers report in the August issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation.
The Florida group conducted their lab work on cancer cells taken from patients afflicted with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLS).
According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer accounts for 13 percent of all new cancers and is the leading cancer killer of American men and women. Non-small cell cancers comprise 85 percent of the nearly 175,000 new cases of lung cancer diagnosed in the United States each year.
But while tobacco smoke is the direct cause of eight out of 10 lung malignancies, nicotine -- the addictive chemical in tobacco -- does not have cancer-causing properties. The role, if any, of nicotine in lung cancer has long been the subject of debate.
In previous work, Chellapan found that nicotine exposure among lung cancer patients did appear to undermine chemotherapy's effectiveness in killing off cancer cells. Because so many patients use nicotine patches or gums to help them quit, this raise the troubling notion that these interventions might actually help encourage the disease.
In this study, Chellappan's focused on NSCLS cells and adjacent cells from the lung's air passages also known as bronchial cells. They exposed both cell types to nicotine in the test tube. The amount of nicotine used was the equivalent to what would typically be present in the bloodstream of a patient who smokes one pack of cigarettes a day.
In addition to binding with what are known as nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, the nicotine appeared to help create signaling pathways that promoted the cancer cell growth cycle. This growth activated and recruited other cell machinery known to stimulate tumor growth.
The researchers concluded that, in the test-tube setting, nicotine appears to go beyond simply protecting cancer cells as had been previously observed. Instead, it appears to promote cancer-cell proliferation and tumor progression.
"We found that a normal amount of nicotine that is typically present in the blood of smokers can really induce a proliferation of cancer cells, and we have identified some proteins in the cell that facilitate this proliferation," said Chellappan.
"So, smokers should be staying away from all products that contain nicotine," he cautioned. "Not just cigarettes -- anything. I can not say that this is just about smoking. This is about exposure to any nicotine. Even a patch to help quit smoking may not be the best idea."
Nevertheless, one expert is still on the fence when it comes to the risks and benefits for lung cancer patients in using nicotine-replacement therapies.
"You can't necessarily say whether nicotine-replacement therapy is a good or bad idea," said Dr. Norman H. Edelman, chief medical officer with the American Lung Association.
"My guess is that it's a good idea to engage in smoking cessation," he said. "Smoking cessation is a much healthier way to go rather than avoiding the nicotine in smoking-cessation therapies based on the theoretical risk shown in test tubes that nicotine can promote tumors."
Edelman emphasized, however, that the current study is "an important biologic finding" that will need to be followed up with research in animals and ultimately humans.
Two other major groups agreed. The U.S. National Cancer Institute's Web site states that "any potential risks of short-term use of nicotine-replacement therapy to stop smoking are far outweighed by the significant and known benefits that accrue to patients who stop smoking."
And the American Cancer Society's Web site notes that "numerous studies have shown that these products are safe and effective in helping smokers quit." Society experts also point out that the use of nicotine-replacement products, alongside in-person and phone counseling, can double a smoker's chances of successfully quitting.
More information
For more on cancer and nicotine, head to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
Last reviewed: 07/21/2006 Last updated: 07/21/2006
Monday, July 10, 2006
Holocaust Survivors at Higher Long-Term Cancer Risk
(HealthDay News) -- A new study finds that rates of cancer and cancer-related death are especially high among survivors of the Holocaust in Israel.
An Israeli research team found that Holocaust survivors who emigrated from Europe to Israel following World War II are at higher risk for cancer compared to European Jews who moved there before the war began.
Much of the difference can be attributed to cancers found among the youngest Holocaust survivors. Specifically, male and female immigrants born in Europe between 1940 and 1945 faced the highest odds of developing breast or colorectal cancers, the researchers found.
While the findings may have implications for survivors of mass atrocities in general, they are of immediate concern to the 238,600 Holocaust survivors still living in Israel, said study co-author Dr. Micha Barchana.
"The bad news is that Holocaust survivors are at a higher risk to get cancer, but the good news is that we can do something [about it]," he said. "We are focusing on the practical implementation of the research results: the need for survivors to participate in early-detection programs that are offered in Israel as well as in most modern countries, due to the finding that classifies them as a high-risk population," he explained.
Barchana serves as the director of the National Cancer Registry in the Israeli Health Ministry and is also a senior lecturer in the school of public health at the University of Haifa in Israel.
He and his colleagues presented their research earlier this year at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, held in Lyon, France.
The work was funded by the Israel Cancer Society.
Barchana's team reviewed records from the Israeli government's Central Bureau of Statistics to first draft a list of all Jewish immigrants to Israel born in Europe between 1920 and 1945.
They then turned to the Israeli Health Ministry's National Cancer Registry to compile cancer incidence and death rates among these immigrants.
The researchers found that those immigrants born between 1920 and 1945 who came to Israel between the end World War II and 1989 were at significantly higher risk for cancer than immigrants born between 1920 and 1939 who migrated to Israel before the onset of World War II.
Barchana said his team does not know how many of the post-war European immigrants suffered through the experience of Nazi concentration camps or wartime Jewish ghettos. However, he said his team assumed that many or most did, and that, in any case, "all the Jews in Europe at war time had gone through severe food deprivation and other stresses."
Higher cancer risks seemed to linger for decades for this group, the researchers found. Male Holocaust survivors experienced a 14 percent higher cancer incidence rate than pre-war immigrants and were 2.4 times more likely to get cancer than their pre-war compatriots.
Female Holocaust survivors had a 21 percent higher rate of cancer than pre-war immigrants and were 2.3 times more likely to have a cancer diagnosis than pre-war immigrants.
Breaking down cancer incidence by specific diseases, the authors found that Holocaust survivors were at a significantly higher risk for lung cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma (a rare form of skin malignancy), and prostate cancer.
Heightened risks for certain other cancers stood out. For example, male Holocaust survivors were nine times more likely to be diagnosed with cancer of the large intestine than pre-war immigrants. Female Holocaust survivors faced more than double the risk for cancer of the large intestine and a 50 percent higher risk of developing breast cancer, the study found.
In addition, Barchana's team found that the younger the Holocaust survivor was during the war, the greater their risk for getting cancer. In fact, most of the increase in risk among Holocaust survivors was borne by those who were 14 years of age or younger during World War II.
Barchana said that finding has been shown in other studies involving survivors of terrible events. "Research on A-bomb survivors in Japan clearly shows that women that were at a young age are at higher risk of developing cancer later in life," he said. Similar data is emerging among those affected by the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident, Barchana added.
Patients who had survived the Holocaust also had a tougher battle to fight off the disease once it was diagnosed, the researchers found. According to Barchana, that may be due to the fact that "Holocaust survivors are being diagnosed at later stages compared to the control group."
Five-year cancer survival rates were 5 percent to 13 percent lower among Holocaust survivors compared to other immigrants, regardless of sex or age.
According to the researchers, the findings suggest that severe deprivation, from whatever cause, may weaken the body's long-term defenses against cancer. Inmates in the Nazi concentration camps suffered prolonged exposure to extreme poverty, food deprivation, over-crowding, harsh weather, physical abuse and mental stress.
The authors called for Holocaust survivors and their families to be increasingly vigilant about cancer detection, particularly for breast and colorectal cancers, and to avail themselves of the free screenings for such diseases that are currently available in Israel.
On a wider note, Barchana emphasized the role that food deprivation probably plays as a contributing factor to increased cancer risk.
"There has been some (prior) data on the possible role of malnutrition in breast cancer etiology," he remarked. "This work completes this knowledge, and this aspect of the study should be further investigated," Barchana said.
Dr. Michael Thun, vice president of epidemiology and surveillance research with the American Cancer Society in Atlanta, said the study was interesting and, in some ways, surprising.
"When one compares these results to studies of the Dutch Famine of 1944 to 1945, what they had found was that there was an increase in breast cancer risk, but they did not find the same increase in other cancers," Thun noted. "So, in this study, it was surprising to me that there was an increase in risk in colorectal cancer and a range of different cancers," he said.
"But in the case of the Holocaust, people had so many terrible things happen that it's even more complex and dreadful than just the famine resulting from war," added Thun. "So, I agree with the authors' conclusions that closer screening of these people is warranted to detect cancers early," he said.
More information
For advice on cancer screening, visit the American Cancer Society.
An Israeli research team found that Holocaust survivors who emigrated from Europe to Israel following World War II are at higher risk for cancer compared to European Jews who moved there before the war began.
Much of the difference can be attributed to cancers found among the youngest Holocaust survivors. Specifically, male and female immigrants born in Europe between 1940 and 1945 faced the highest odds of developing breast or colorectal cancers, the researchers found.
While the findings may have implications for survivors of mass atrocities in general, they are of immediate concern to the 238,600 Holocaust survivors still living in Israel, said study co-author Dr. Micha Barchana.
"The bad news is that Holocaust survivors are at a higher risk to get cancer, but the good news is that we can do something [about it]," he said. "We are focusing on the practical implementation of the research results: the need for survivors to participate in early-detection programs that are offered in Israel as well as in most modern countries, due to the finding that classifies them as a high-risk population," he explained.
Barchana serves as the director of the National Cancer Registry in the Israeli Health Ministry and is also a senior lecturer in the school of public health at the University of Haifa in Israel.
He and his colleagues presented their research earlier this year at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, held in Lyon, France.
The work was funded by the Israel Cancer Society.
Barchana's team reviewed records from the Israeli government's Central Bureau of Statistics to first draft a list of all Jewish immigrants to Israel born in Europe between 1920 and 1945.
They then turned to the Israeli Health Ministry's National Cancer Registry to compile cancer incidence and death rates among these immigrants.
The researchers found that those immigrants born between 1920 and 1945 who came to Israel between the end World War II and 1989 were at significantly higher risk for cancer than immigrants born between 1920 and 1939 who migrated to Israel before the onset of World War II.
Barchana said his team does not know how many of the post-war European immigrants suffered through the experience of Nazi concentration camps or wartime Jewish ghettos. However, he said his team assumed that many or most did, and that, in any case, "all the Jews in Europe at war time had gone through severe food deprivation and other stresses."
Higher cancer risks seemed to linger for decades for this group, the researchers found. Male Holocaust survivors experienced a 14 percent higher cancer incidence rate than pre-war immigrants and were 2.4 times more likely to get cancer than their pre-war compatriots.
Female Holocaust survivors had a 21 percent higher rate of cancer than pre-war immigrants and were 2.3 times more likely to have a cancer diagnosis than pre-war immigrants.
Breaking down cancer incidence by specific diseases, the authors found that Holocaust survivors were at a significantly higher risk for lung cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma (a rare form of skin malignancy), and prostate cancer.
Heightened risks for certain other cancers stood out. For example, male Holocaust survivors were nine times more likely to be diagnosed with cancer of the large intestine than pre-war immigrants. Female Holocaust survivors faced more than double the risk for cancer of the large intestine and a 50 percent higher risk of developing breast cancer, the study found.
In addition, Barchana's team found that the younger the Holocaust survivor was during the war, the greater their risk for getting cancer. In fact, most of the increase in risk among Holocaust survivors was borne by those who were 14 years of age or younger during World War II.
Barchana said that finding has been shown in other studies involving survivors of terrible events. "Research on A-bomb survivors in Japan clearly shows that women that were at a young age are at higher risk of developing cancer later in life," he said. Similar data is emerging among those affected by the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident, Barchana added.
Patients who had survived the Holocaust also had a tougher battle to fight off the disease once it was diagnosed, the researchers found. According to Barchana, that may be due to the fact that "Holocaust survivors are being diagnosed at later stages compared to the control group."
Five-year cancer survival rates were 5 percent to 13 percent lower among Holocaust survivors compared to other immigrants, regardless of sex or age.
According to the researchers, the findings suggest that severe deprivation, from whatever cause, may weaken the body's long-term defenses against cancer. Inmates in the Nazi concentration camps suffered prolonged exposure to extreme poverty, food deprivation, over-crowding, harsh weather, physical abuse and mental stress.
The authors called for Holocaust survivors and their families to be increasingly vigilant about cancer detection, particularly for breast and colorectal cancers, and to avail themselves of the free screenings for such diseases that are currently available in Israel.
On a wider note, Barchana emphasized the role that food deprivation probably plays as a contributing factor to increased cancer risk.
"There has been some (prior) data on the possible role of malnutrition in breast cancer etiology," he remarked. "This work completes this knowledge, and this aspect of the study should be further investigated," Barchana said.
Dr. Michael Thun, vice president of epidemiology and surveillance research with the American Cancer Society in Atlanta, said the study was interesting and, in some ways, surprising.
"When one compares these results to studies of the Dutch Famine of 1944 to 1945, what they had found was that there was an increase in breast cancer risk, but they did not find the same increase in other cancers," Thun noted. "So, in this study, it was surprising to me that there was an increase in risk in colorectal cancer and a range of different cancers," he said.
"But in the case of the Holocaust, people had so many terrible things happen that it's even more complex and dreadful than just the famine resulting from war," added Thun. "So, I agree with the authors' conclusions that closer screening of these people is warranted to detect cancers early," he said.
More information
For advice on cancer screening, visit the American Cancer Society.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
Sunlight May Help You Survive Cancer
SUNBATHING could improve your chances of surviving cancer, doctors say.
Those diagnosed with the disease in summer and autumn live longer than those diagnosed at other times of the year, British research shows.
This is probably because their vitamin D levels are topped up by sun exposure.
Researchers say vitamin D can affect the rate of cell division in tumour development and can trigger the self- destruction of cells developing in the wrong way.
The study of more than one million patients suggests the season when cancer is detected and treated could make a significant difference to progress of the disease.
It says that diagnosis in the summer and autumn months is 'associated with improved survival, especially in lung and breast cancer patients.
'We found sunlight exposure to be a predictor of cancer survival.
'Our results add to a growing body of evidence that vitamin D may play an important role in cancer survival.' The study, which is a fast track publication in the International Journal of Cancer, looked at 590,000 men and 606,000 women diagnosed between 1971 and 2002. Diagnoses made in summer and autumn when blood levels of vitamin D are highest had the lowest risk of death.
Women with breast cancer had a 14 per cent lower risk of death, while women with bowel cancer were 6 per cent less likely to die.
There was a reduction of 6 per cent in the death rate for all cancers combined for both sexes when diagnosed in summer and autumn.
The study, which was led by Dr Henrik Moller, head of the Thames Cancer Registry based at King's College London, analyzed their season of diagnosis, with summer and autumn defined as June 1 to November 30.
The researchers also obtained data on sunlight from the British Meteorological Office and calculated levels of cumulative sunlight hours for each season during the study period.
Their report says the results support the hypothesis that variation in vitamin D levels through sunlight exposure lies behind the differences in survival.
But it says data on sunlight hours probably underestimates the true effect of exposure because it does not measure the intensity of light which is much stronger in summer and would have a more significant impact on blood levels of vitamin D.
The findings come as evidence grows that vitamin D could play a vital role in helping prevent disease, with sun exposure helping to top up natural levels more effectively than through diet.
A study last year showed taking a large dose of vitamin D every day 1,000 international units (IU) or 25mcg could halve your chance of developing cancers such as breast, ovarian, colon, and prostate.
Oliver Gillie, who runs Health Research Forum, a not-for-profit organisation, published a report showing that topping up levels of vitamin D could help prevent more than 25 chronic diseases.
He added: 'The research evidence shows Government advice to avoid sunbathing is misguided.
Tanning should properly be seen as a sign of health, as indeed it is by most members of the public, although care should be taken to avoid burning.'
Mr Gillie said cancer patients should get advice from their doctors about whether they can safely sunbathe, as chemotherapy and radiotherapy can sensitize the skin to sunlight.
Date: July 5, 2006
© 2006 Daily Mail. via ProQuest Information and Learning Company;
All Rights Reserved
Those diagnosed with the disease in summer and autumn live longer than those diagnosed at other times of the year, British research shows.
This is probably because their vitamin D levels are topped up by sun exposure.
Researchers say vitamin D can affect the rate of cell division in tumour development and can trigger the self- destruction of cells developing in the wrong way.
The study of more than one million patients suggests the season when cancer is detected and treated could make a significant difference to progress of the disease.
It says that diagnosis in the summer and autumn months is 'associated with improved survival, especially in lung and breast cancer patients.
'We found sunlight exposure to be a predictor of cancer survival.
'Our results add to a growing body of evidence that vitamin D may play an important role in cancer survival.' The study, which is a fast track publication in the International Journal of Cancer, looked at 590,000 men and 606,000 women diagnosed between 1971 and 2002. Diagnoses made in summer and autumn when blood levels of vitamin D are highest had the lowest risk of death.
Women with breast cancer had a 14 per cent lower risk of death, while women with bowel cancer were 6 per cent less likely to die.
There was a reduction of 6 per cent in the death rate for all cancers combined for both sexes when diagnosed in summer and autumn.
The study, which was led by Dr Henrik Moller, head of the Thames Cancer Registry based at King's College London, analyzed their season of diagnosis, with summer and autumn defined as June 1 to November 30.
The researchers also obtained data on sunlight from the British Meteorological Office and calculated levels of cumulative sunlight hours for each season during the study period.
Their report says the results support the hypothesis that variation in vitamin D levels through sunlight exposure lies behind the differences in survival.
But it says data on sunlight hours probably underestimates the true effect of exposure because it does not measure the intensity of light which is much stronger in summer and would have a more significant impact on blood levels of vitamin D.
The findings come as evidence grows that vitamin D could play a vital role in helping prevent disease, with sun exposure helping to top up natural levels more effectively than through diet.
A study last year showed taking a large dose of vitamin D every day 1,000 international units (IU) or 25mcg could halve your chance of developing cancers such as breast, ovarian, colon, and prostate.
Oliver Gillie, who runs Health Research Forum, a not-for-profit organisation, published a report showing that topping up levels of vitamin D could help prevent more than 25 chronic diseases.
He added: 'The research evidence shows Government advice to avoid sunbathing is misguided.
Tanning should properly be seen as a sign of health, as indeed it is by most members of the public, although care should be taken to avoid burning.'
Mr Gillie said cancer patients should get advice from their doctors about whether they can safely sunbathe, as chemotherapy and radiotherapy can sensitize the skin to sunlight.
Date: July 5, 2006
© 2006 Daily Mail. via ProQuest Information and Learning Company;
All Rights Reserved
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
The finding demonstrates for the first time that diallyl sulfide triggers a gene alteration in PhIP
"The finding demonstrates for the first time that diallyl sulfide triggers a gene alteration in PhIP that may play a significant role in preventing cancer, notably breast cancer, induced by PhIP in well-done meats," the researchers reported.All of these findings come on the heels of a sixth study, reported in last week's issue of The Lancet, which found that people with a genetic susceptibility to lung cancer could cut their risk for the disease by eating vegetables from the cabbage family.
"We found protective effects with at least weekly consumption of cruciferous vegetables," says lead researcher Paul Brennan of the International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon, France.
One expert says the results of the six studies are interesting. And while it may be some time before they have any practical applications for people, that should not stop us from adding more vegetables and fruits to our diet. "An extensive body of epidemiologic evidence suggests consistently, if not decisively, that generous consumption of fruits and vegetables is associated with reduced cancer risk," says Dr. David L. Katz, an associate professor of public health and director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine.
Further study should provide "a clearer picture both of what foods reduce cancer risk, and how," Katz says. "Understanding in each of these areas will lead to new insights in the other. A refined ability to use diet in the prevention of cancer will ensue. "That is an exciting prospect," he adds. "But excitement about what may come should not distract from what is already in hand. Even with gaps in our knowledge, the case for increasing fruit and vegetable consumption to promote health and prevent disease -- cancer included -- is compelling and strong."
(The HealthDay Web site) 2005 HealthDay News
Saturday, May 27, 2006
Believing Cancer Myths?
Believing Cancer Myths?
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: I have been told that the smell of burnt coffee means you have cancer. I've also heard other cancer myths. Can you debunk some common ones? -- Georgie J.
A: I've never heard the one about burnt coffee and haven't been able to track it down. But there are plenty of other cancer myths in circulation:
Cancer spreads when exposed to air during surgery: This is false but widely believed. A survey by researchers at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center among patients with lung cancer and with other types of pulmonary disease in five hospitals across the United States showed that 45 percent had heard this myth and 37 percent believed it to be true. Results of the study were published in the October 7, 2003 Annals of Medicine.
Drug companies are withholding the cure for cancer because they would lose the money that they get from treating patients with today's drugs: This conspiracy theory is nonsense. First of all, cancer is not one disease but many.
It is unlikely that any single "cure" would work for all of them. Besides, there has been impressive progress. The American Cancer Society notes that only a few decades ago, fewer than one in 10 children with leukemia survived 10 years after diagnosis.
Today's treatment has raised the cure rate to almost 80%. Similar advances have been made in curing Hodgkin's lymphoma, bone and kidney cancers in children, and testicular cancer. Just ask Lance Armstrong.
Injuries can lead to cancer: This old wives tale has been around for more than a century. It was disproved a long time ago. The only known instances where cancer can stem from injuries are related to chemical burns. Swallowing caustic liquids is a risk factor for cancer of the esophagus, and skin cancer sometimes develops in scars caused by chemical or thermal burns.
Antiperspirants cause breast cancer: This persistent Internet hoax warns that antiperspirants or deodorants contain substances that can be absorbed through the skin or enter the body through nicks caused by shaving.
There's no evidence to support this idea, and, in fact a study published in the Oct. 16, 2002 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found no increased breast cancer risk among women who reported using underarm deodorants or antiperspirants, those who used these products after shaving with a blade razor and those who used the products within one hour after shaving with a blade razor. Other studies have reported similar results.
Andrew Weil, MD
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: I have been told that the smell of burnt coffee means you have cancer. I've also heard other cancer myths. Can you debunk some common ones? -- Georgie J.
A: I've never heard the one about burnt coffee and haven't been able to track it down. But there are plenty of other cancer myths in circulation:
Cancer spreads when exposed to air during surgery: This is false but widely believed. A survey by researchers at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center among patients with lung cancer and with other types of pulmonary disease in five hospitals across the United States showed that 45 percent had heard this myth and 37 percent believed it to be true. Results of the study were published in the October 7, 2003 Annals of Medicine.
Drug companies are withholding the cure for cancer because they would lose the money that they get from treating patients with today's drugs: This conspiracy theory is nonsense. First of all, cancer is not one disease but many.
It is unlikely that any single "cure" would work for all of them. Besides, there has been impressive progress. The American Cancer Society notes that only a few decades ago, fewer than one in 10 children with leukemia survived 10 years after diagnosis.
Today's treatment has raised the cure rate to almost 80%. Similar advances have been made in curing Hodgkin's lymphoma, bone and kidney cancers in children, and testicular cancer. Just ask Lance Armstrong.
Injuries can lead to cancer: This old wives tale has been around for more than a century. It was disproved a long time ago. The only known instances where cancer can stem from injuries are related to chemical burns. Swallowing caustic liquids is a risk factor for cancer of the esophagus, and skin cancer sometimes develops in scars caused by chemical or thermal burns.
Antiperspirants cause breast cancer: This persistent Internet hoax warns that antiperspirants or deodorants contain substances that can be absorbed through the skin or enter the body through nicks caused by shaving.
There's no evidence to support this idea, and, in fact a study published in the Oct. 16, 2002 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found no increased breast cancer risk among women who reported using underarm deodorants or antiperspirants, those who used these products after shaving with a blade razor and those who used the products within one hour after shaving with a blade razor. Other studies have reported similar results.
Andrew Weil, MD
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
How Bad Is Secondhand Smoke for Kids?
How Bad Is Secondhand Smoke for Kids?
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: I don't like to leave my kids with my mother-in-law because she smokes. Am I right to think this could be harmful? I'm getting a really hard time about my objections to her babysitting. -- Val
A: Of course, you're right. Secondhand smoke is particularly harmful to children. In fact, new research in England has confirmed earlier findings that children exposed to secondhand smoke are at much higher than normal risk for lung cancer later in life than those who weren't exposed.
And researchers in Hong Kong recently found that nonsmoking adults who were exposed to secondhand smoke at home were 24 percent more likely to die from any cause including lung cancer, other lung diseases, other types of cancer, heart disease, and stroke if there was one smoker at home. If there were two smokers in the household, the nonsmokers chance of dying increased by 74 percent. Both studies were published in the February 5, 2005 issue of the British Medical Journal.
The British study included more than 123,000 people who were nonsmokers or had given up smoking at least ten years before joining the study. The former smokers were at a higher risk of lung cancer than those who had never smoked, but among the nonsmokers, those who were exposed to secondhand smoke at home when they were growing up had more than triple the normal risk.
The statistics below, from the American Lung Association, may help you make your point about the dangers of secondhand smoke:
Andrew Weil, MD
Provided by: DrWeil.com
Q: I don't like to leave my kids with my mother-in-law because she smokes. Am I right to think this could be harmful? I'm getting a really hard time about my objections to her babysitting. -- Val
A: Of course, you're right. Secondhand smoke is particularly harmful to children. In fact, new research in England has confirmed earlier findings that children exposed to secondhand smoke are at much higher than normal risk for lung cancer later in life than those who weren't exposed.
And researchers in Hong Kong recently found that nonsmoking adults who were exposed to secondhand smoke at home were 24 percent more likely to die from any cause including lung cancer, other lung diseases, other types of cancer, heart disease, and stroke if there was one smoker at home. If there were two smokers in the household, the nonsmokers chance of dying increased by 74 percent. Both studies were published in the February 5, 2005 issue of the British Medical Journal.
The British study included more than 123,000 people who were nonsmokers or had given up smoking at least ten years before joining the study. The former smokers were at a higher risk of lung cancer than those who had never smoked, but among the nonsmokers, those who were exposed to secondhand smoke at home when they were growing up had more than triple the normal risk.
The statistics below, from the American Lung Association, may help you make your point about the dangers of secondhand smoke:
- Secondhand smoke causes about 3,000 deaths each year from lung cancer among people who don't smoke.
- Secondhand smoke is estimated to cause about 35,000 deaths annually from heart disease among nonsmokers.
- Children who breathe secondhand smoke are more likely to suffer from pneumonia, bronchitis and other lung diseases.
- Children who breathe secondhand smoke have more ear infections and are more likely to develop asthma (among all youngsters with asthma, those who breathe secondhand smoke have more frequent attacks).
- Infants and children under 18 months of age who breathe secondhand smoke develop an estimated 150,000 to 300,000 infections, such as bronchitis and pneumonia, every year resulting in between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations.
I'm sure your mother-in-law wouldn't willingly put her grandchildren's health at risk. Perhaps the information above will persuade her to curb her smoking when she's taking care of your kids.
Andrew Weil, MD
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Pesticides Increase a Farmer's Cancer Risks Too
You've probably noticed the encroachment of pesticides in our homes, water and food chain has been one of the more popular topics my Web site has followed in recent months.
No surprise, based on new findings from the government-sponsored Agricultural Health Study, day-to-day exposure to diazinon increased a farmer's risk of lung cancer, even when the results were adjusted for smoking.
Don't expect those numbers to improve anytime soon either, considering U.S. farmers treated their crops with 4 million pounds of diazinon last year.
So, if pesticides are hurting the people who grow the foods you buy in the grocery store, have you given any thought lately about what those harmful chemicals, as well as other toxins may be doing to your health?
Yahoo News November 29, 2005
American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 162, No. 11, December 2005: 1079-1079
No surprise, based on new findings from the government-sponsored Agricultural Health Study, day-to-day exposure to diazinon increased a farmer's risk of lung cancer, even when the results were adjusted for smoking.
Don't expect those numbers to improve anytime soon either, considering U.S. farmers treated their crops with 4 million pounds of diazinon last year.
So, if pesticides are hurting the people who grow the foods you buy in the grocery store, have you given any thought lately about what those harmful chemicals, as well as other toxins may be doing to your health?
Yahoo News November 29, 2005
American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 162, No. 11, December 2005: 1079-1079
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Balancing Your Hormones Without Drugs... You Can Feel Good Again$19.95  Hormone imbalance can be reversed! Look and feel better than ever, just take the time to learn about yourself and read the information contained in this just released e-book about reversing hormone imbalance. Are you ready to finally look and feel great? If so... read on... - E-Book Version.(BH) |