Christine

Published on September 11, 2008 Being diagnosed with lung cancer is no longer the misfortune of smokers alone. Non-smokers – people who haven’t lighted a cigarette ever, seem to die of the disease at the same rate, researchers with the American Cancer Society have established. Though smoking, particularly cigarettes, is by far the key contributor to lung cancer with estimated 87 percent lung cancer deaths each year in the United States, non-smokers can still develop the disease. As high as 10-15 percent cases are triggered by factors other than smoke, the health authorities highlighted. The occurrence of lung cancer in non-smokers is often attributed to a combination of genetic factors, radon gas, asbestos, viral infections and air pollution including passive smoking. "The great majority of lung cancers are caused by smoking," stressed study author Dr. Michael Thun, Head of Epidemiological Research at the American Cancer Society. "But there has been a lot of interest lately in those lung cancer cases that affect patients who have never smoked." The researchers gathered information from 13 large studies and 22 cancer registries – collectively representing nearly 2 million men and women living in 10 countries across North America, Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa. The key points highlighted in the study include: • Regardless of age and racial groups, more men are likely to die of the disease than women. • Both men and women, age 40 and above, were equally likely to develop the disease. • African Americans, Asians residing in Korea and Japan, are more likely to die from lung cancer than those of European descent. • For non-smokers, the incidences of the disease don't seem to be rising, especially among women in the U.S, age 40 to 69. The comparisons were made between nonsmoking women population in 1930 with that of today. • The disease is more common in East Asian women than in women from other parts of the world where female smoking rates are not too high. The findings are published in the September issue of PloS Medicine.

http://www.startribune.com/local/east/2 ... tkEP7DhUsr A rare survival story in a brush with a rare and deadly cancer By PAT PHEIFER, Star Tribune August 26, 2008 Dying was not an option, Heather Von St. James says as her 3-year-old daughter, Lily, rushes in and out of the dining room, climbing on her lap, then dashing off again. But dying was a terrifying possibility when doctors found a lump the size of an orange in Von St. James's left lung when Lily was only 3 months old. The diagnosis was mesothelioma -- a rare and often fatal form of lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. Now, just over 2 1/2 years after undergoing radical surgery to remove her left lung, the lining around her heart, half of her diaphragm, her sixth rib and a few lymph nodes to be on the safe side, all traces of the cancer are gone. "I claim cured," says Von St. James. Dr. David Sugarbaker, who heads the International Mesothelioma Program at Brigham & Women's Hospital in Boston, said Von St. James is a shining example of the progress he is beginning to see in the fight against a disease that traditionally carried a maximum survival of 12 to 18 months. "I am the poster child for hope after meso," the 39-year-old Roseville woman said. Sugarbaker, who treated Von St. James, is only slightly more circumspect. "What I can say is that right now in this present moment she is disease-free," he said. About 2,000 cases of mesothelioma are diagnosed in the United States each year, according to the National Cancer Institute. Unusually high rates of the disease have been reported among men from Minnesota's Iron Range since the late 1980s. The state Department of Health has so far identified 59 cases among mine workers and is planning a study with the University of Minnesota aimed at determining what might have caused the illness. Sugarbaker said the disease has a 20- to 35-year latency period and traditionally has been diagnosed in people with direct exposure to asbestos, but doctors are seeing more patients with secondhand, nonoccupational exposure. Von St. James believes her cancer was caused by childhood exposure to her father's asbestos-covered work clothes. Rollie Rosedahl, 66, of Spearfish, S.D., was a construction laborer for Ainsworth-Benning while Heather was growing up. Many of the products he worked with contained asbestos. Von St. James said she was "a total daddy's girl" and often would shrug into her father's boots and coat to feed the rabbits they kept out back. "In that day and age it was just dust," she said. "We didn't know what it contained." In December 2006, Von St. James sued Ainsworth-Benning and a dozen other companies, primarily manufacturers of the products that contained asbestos, in Ramsey County District Court. But last month, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that she can't sue Ainsworth-Benning in Minnesota, saying the company doesn't have enough of a connection to the state. Von St. James' attorney, Jessica Dean, said the suit was supposed to go to trial in September but was put on hold pending the Appeals Court ruling. Dean said she will ask the court to set a trial date, either for December or March. 'Is it cancer?' The then-Heather Rosedahl moved to the Twin Cities in April 1998. Two months later she met Cameron Von St. James and it was "love at first sight." They married 10 months later and moved into his childhood home in Roseville to help his mother care for his ailing father. She managed an upscale salon in Minnetonka. Just after Thanksgiving 2004, they learned she was pregnant. Von St. James gained only 5 pounds, but said her doctor wasn't concerned because "I'd always been a little on the larger side," she said. She noticed more pressure under her left breast and was short of breath but figured that was normal. Lily Rose Von St. James was born by C-section on Aug. 4, 2005. Although Von St. James was exhausted when she returned to work part-time in August, she chalked it up to being a new mom. By October, when she returned full-time, she felt "like a truck was parked on my chest," she said. Her shortness of breath worried her doctor. He ordered blood work, then a chest X-ray that showed fluid around her left lung. "I said, 'Is it cancer?'" Von St. James recalled. "He goes, no, no, no, it can't be cancer. He thought it was pneumonia or something." But the doctor was concerned enough to send her that afternoon to United Hospital in St. Paul to have the fluid drained and a CT scan performed. "They sit me in this cold little waiting room and he [the doctor] comes back in and says, 'They found a mass.' The next day, she returned for a needle biopsy. Pathologists sent the sample to the Mayo Clinic. On Nov. 21, Von St. James and her husband found themselves in Dr. James Flink's office at United Hospital. "What you have is a cancer called mesothelioma," she recalled the doctor saying. "My husband said, 'Oh that's bad. That's the asbestos cancer.'" Flink gave her options: Do nothing and live maybe 15 months, try chemotherapy and radiation and probably live five years, or go see Dr. Sugarbaker in Boston. "My husband without blinking says get us to Boston," she said. Von St. James underwent surgery on Feb. 2, 2006, was in the hospital for 18 days and stayed in Boston for a month. When Von St. James left Boston, she moved in with her parents for two months. In May, she returned home and began chemotherapy -- every three weeks for 12 weeks. This October will mark two years since the end of the treatments. Von St. James still goes to Boston every four months for a CT scan, but so far, the cancer has not returned. "I'm going to be the first meso patient to live 50-plus years. I told my doctor he would retire before I did," she said. "And he's OK with that."

By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent Last Updated: 4:23PM BST 27 Aug 2008 Giving cancer patients chemotherapy drugs in the afternoon can make them twice as effective at shrinking tumours, new research suggests. Scientists found that giving the drugs at between 1 and 4pm also reduced side effects by up to five times. The team behind the study believe that the effect is due to changes in the natural rhythms of our bodies. Scientists know that cells divide differently at different times of the day. In cancer cells this normal division is accelerated but chemotherapy drugs target how the cells divide, slowing down the rate. If the drugs can be given at the perfect time in the natural rhythm of the cell, doctors believe that they can be more effective. In the study, scientists at the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research in Paris gave different chemotherapy drugs at different times to 114 patients with bowel cancer and another 45 with lung cancer. They found that the most effective time for giving the drugs was in the afternoon, between 1 and 4pm. The drugs were twice as effective at shrinking tumours compared to the least effective times and their side effects up to five times less. Francis Lévi, who led the study, reported in New Scientist magazine, said that it proved that the "interaction of the drug with its target will depend on the time when the cell is exposed to it".

http://www.cancerwise.org/july_2008/dis ... &color=red Precancerous Cells Respond to High Doses Celecoxib, an anti-inflammatory medication sold under the brand name Celebrex®, is suggested to be safe and effective in slowing growth of precancerous cells in the lungs of current and former smokers, according to a new study. Significance of results This was the first large study of the use of celecoxib to slow growth of precancerous cells in the lungs, say M. D. Anderson researchers, who presented the results at the American Society for Clinical Oncology annual meeting in June. Celecoxib is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), like aspirin or ibuprofen, which works by blocking chemical enzymes that cause inflammation. It inhibits cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), an enzyme that researchers believe helps tumor growth. COX-2 is found at high levels in precancerous lung tissue. "This study showed the importance of COX-2 and its possible relationship to lung cancer,” says the study's lead author Edward Kim, M.D., assistant professor in M. D. Anderson's Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology. "It also affirmed the safety of this drug class. As we move forward in researching how to prevent lung cancer, these drugs may be important." Research methods From November 2001 to September 2006, 212 people enrolled in the study. Participants: Were current or former smokers Had at least a 20-pack-a-year smoking habit Had been cancer-free at least six months The study examined levels of KI-67, a biomarker associated with precancerous lung lesions. Before the study, each participant underwent a bronchoscopy, a procedure in which a small viewing instrument is inserted down the throat. Biopsies, which involve the removal of tissue samples, can be conducted during the test. Participants also took one of two different kinds of pills twice a day. Participants took either: 400 milligrams of celecoxib A placebo After three months, each participant underwent a second bronchoscopy and was given the option to continue on the trial for three more months. Those who continued had a third bronchoscopy at six months. Primary results KI-67 production decreased in current and former smokers treated with celecoxib, and there were no adverse cardiac side effects. Additional results “These findings are also important because they show it is acceptable to patients to have more than one bronchoscopy, thus allowing us to measure important markers in the tissue,” Kim says. "Other imaging tools are important, but in lung cancer it is beneficial to be able to analyze the actual tissue.” Background In December 2004, M. D. Anderson voluntarily stopped this trial at the request of Pfizer, the manufacturer of celecoxib, and the National Cancer Institute, the funding source for the study, until celecoxib's risk for heart problems could be studied. Months later, advisors to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommended that the drug continue to be studied for the treatment and prevention of cancer. After adding stringent guidelines to further reduce cardiac risk, M. D. Anderson investigators reopened the study in May 2005. Jonathan Kurie, M.D., professor in the Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, was the principal investigator on the clinical trial, and Waun Ki Hong, M.D., head of M. D. Anderson's Division of Cancer Medicine, was principal investigator on the trial grant. What’s next? “Our next steps include evaluating other important markers in lung tissue and conducting a similar study in high-risk patients,” Kim says. — Adapted by Dawn Dorsey from an M. D. Anderson news release

courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-cancer0703.artjul03,0,2097420.story Running a teaspoon of blood through a Harvard University-developed device may enable doctors to tailor lung-cancer treatment to the severity of the disease in an individual patient, a study said. Doctors found that the microchip-based device, about the size of a business card, could tell when patients with non-small-cell lung cancers were worsening, according to a study in today's New England Journal of Medicine. The technique may eventually help doctors decide which patients should get powerful drugs with toxic side effects and spare the ones who wouldn't benefit, said Daniel A. Haber, the senior author. Not only would the device show doctors more quickly when treatments are working, it could also allow researchers to begin to discover what makes cancers spread. Little is known about metastasis, the process by which the disease spreads from its original organ to another. The device captures what is known as circulating tumor cells. "We've never been able to study human tumor cells as they metastasize," said Haber, professor of oncology at Harvard and director of the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston, in a telephone interview Wednesday. "If we can study cells causing metastasis, we can develop drugs and treatments against them." The technology was licensed to CellPoint Diagnostics Inc. of Mountain View, Calif., Haber said. With more refinements, the device could be on the market as soon as two years from now, he said. Northgate Capital and Mohr Davidow Ventures are among the investors in CellPoint, according to the company's website. The cells were identified in the 27 patients studied. The scientists identified rare tumor mutations, called T790M, which were linked to shorter periods in which patients' cancer didn't worsen. Those with the mutation lived 7.7 months without the cancer worsening; those without lived 16.5 months. The device could be used in ailments other than lung cancer, he said. A previous study in Nature showed that it captured tumor cells in patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, breast cancer, colon cancer and pancreatic cancer as well. The cells weren't analyzed for mutations. The researchers ran about a teaspoon of a patient's blood through the device, which has about 80,000 tiny pillars, or microposts, coated with an antigen "glue" that captures non-blood cells. The normal blood flows through the device while the cancer cells stick, enabling scientists to analyze them.

ScienceDaily (June 27, 2008) — People who have never smoked but whose cells cannot efficiently repair environmental insults to DNA are at higher risk of developing lung cancer than those with effective genomic repair capability, according to researchers from the Department of Epidemiology at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. "About 15 percent of lung cancers occur in lifetime never smokers. Risk factors for lung cancer in people who have never smoked are poorly understood, but this study demonstrates that poor DNA repair capacity is an important predictor of lung cancer risk in never smokers," said the study's lead author, Olga Gorlova, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Epidemiology. In the June issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, the researchers say that, overall, nonsmokers with suboptimal DNA repair capacity (DRC) are almost twice as likely to develop lung cancer, compared with nonsmokers with normal DRC. Study participants with the lowest ability to repair their DNA had a more than a threefold increased risk, compared with individuals with efficient DRC. Secondhand smoke exposure is another established risk factor; in participants with inefficient DRC who also reported such exposure, the risk of lung cancer was almost fourfold. Although the research team has not pinpointed the gene or genes that cause suboptimal DRC, their data suggest that the trait is heritable to some degree. Notably they found that first-degree relatives of those with lowest DRC were 2.5 times more likely to develop lung cancer than were first-degree relatives of people with efficient DRC. "Our findings demonstrate that suboptimal DNA repair capacity together with secondhand smoke exposure are strong lung cancer risk factors in lifetime never smokers," Gorlova said. This is the first study that has looked at functional DNA repair capacity as a risk factor for lung cancer in nonsmokers. Researchers drew white blood cells from 219 lung cancer patients and 309 matched control participants, all of whom had never smoked. They used the cells to conduct a host-cell reactivation assay, a complicated test that introduced a specific carcinogen, benzo[a]pyrene diol epoxide (BPDE) into the cells. BPDE is a hydrocarbon found in smoke of all kinds (tobacco, wood, etc.) that is highly carcinogenic and mutagenic, capable of changing the composition of DNA. The study is a continuation of research underway at M. D. Anderson that is looking for genetic and epigenetic components to lung cancer risk. The research group has previously shown that DNA repair capacity as measured by the host cell reactivation assay was significantly lower in lung cancer patients who were current or former smokers than in matched controls. "Many people think they aren't at risk for lung cancer because they don't smoke, but anyone who has non-smoking relatives with lung cancer should avoid not just tobacco smoke, but all the other carcinogens and mutagens that are products of combustion," Gorlova said.

June 25, 2008, WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) today introduced the Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act of 2008. This legislation would establish a coordinated federal interagency policy aimed to reduce the lung cancer mortality rate. The Lung Cancer Mortality Act of 2008 implements the policy recommendations laid out in S. Res 87, which Senator Hagel has introduced the last two Congresses. "The federal government should implement a comprehensive policy to help reduce the mortality rate of lung cancer, which accounts for 28% of all cancer deaths in men and women in the United States. We have seen great advancements in prostate and breast cancer survival rates; and we must commit ourselves to making the same progress with lung cancer. We must bring people together and have the resources to fight this insidious disease," Hagel said. "Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in both men and women, but efforts to fund research and innovative new drug therapies have been shortchanged when compared to other cancers. This bill would boost funding and expand research into the causes and treatment of this deadly scourge. It's time for the federal government to step up its efforts and make fighting lung cancer a national priority," Feinstein said. This legislation authorizes additional funding for specific Institutes at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to expand and intensify their research into causes and treatments for lung cancer. It also calls upon the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to implement an early disease research and management program and encourages the development of drugs or devices for the prevention and treatment of lung cancer.

http://www.curetoday.com/htmlemail/cure ... index.html

Paul Newman has responded obliquely to a number of published reports that say he is gravely ill with cancer, while a longtime business associate and friend of the star has confirmed that the 83-year-old screen hero is battling the disease. While not specifying the type of cancer, writer A.E. Hotchner, a founding partner in Newman's Own salad dressing company, told the Associated Press on Wednesday that Newman first informed him about the health battle 18 months ago. On Tuesday, Newman's spokesman in Los Angeles, Jeff Sanderson, told Reuters and other media outlets: "Newman says he's doing nicely." Without elaborating, Sanderson added: "He says he's doing nicely, and this is the statement I wanted to share with you, and that's what I have. I spoke to his office [in Connecticut]. This is the statement that came directly from him." According to numerous but unconfirmed media accounts, Newman is undergoing outpatient treatment for lung cancer at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in Manhattan. A spokeswoman for the medical facility told Reuters she had no information about Newman's being a patient there. Possibly helping to stir the current concerns about Newman's condition was a photo that appeared last Friday on Martha Stewart's blog, in which, standing beside the domestic expert at a fundraiser for the Newman-launched Hole in the Wall Camp Gang, for kids battling severe diseases, the handsome leading man looked like a shadow of his former self. Born in Cleveland and raised in the Midwest, Newman was a Broadway actor before making his first movie in 1954, the ancient costume drama The Silver Chalice, which he has called one of the worst movies of all time. A Screen Giant He is much better known for a progression of hits in the later '50s and continuing through the '90s, including Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, The Hustler, Cool Hand Luke, Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid, The Sting and 1986's The Color of Money, which brought him his Oscar. And all of these movies showed off his beautiful blue eyes to their best advantage. One recent role was his distinctive voice only, as "Doc" Hudson in Disney-Pixar's 2006 Cars. Last year he announced his retirement from acting, saying on Good Morning America, "I'm not able to work anymore ... at the level that I would want to." Last month, citing unspecified health issues, he withdrew as director of a stage production of John Steinbeck's "Of Mice and Men" at Connecticut's Westport Country Playhouse – whose artistic director is Newman's wife of 50 years, The Three Faces of Eve Oscar-winning actress Joanne Woodward. Besides acting and directing, Newman has two great passions that have long driven him: racecar driving and doing charitable acts. Through his food company Newman's Own – whose motto is, "Shameless exploitation for the common good" – the star and his Newman’s Own Foundation have "donated all profits and royalties after taxes for educational and charitable purposes," according to the Newman's Own Web site. In all, that has amounted to more than "$200 million to thousands of charities worldwide since l982."

http://www.cancerwise.org/June_2008/dis ... &color=red Genes May Determine Lung Cancer Risk Variations Increase Risk for Current, Former Smokers A common, inherited genetic variation may help explain why some smokers are more likely to develop lung cancer than others. Significance of results While all smokers and former smokers are at increased risk for lung cancer, fewer than 20% develop the disease. The genetic variations identified in the study, which were present in about half the population studied, suggest new mechanisms influencing lung cancer development. "This is the first study to identify a common genetic variant that influences the risk for developing lung cancer," says the study’s lead author Chris Amos, Ph.D., professor in M. D. Anderson's Department of Epidemiology. Amos and other M. D. Anderson scientists who led the multi-center research team reported the results in the April 2 online edition of Nature Genetics. Researchers from Johns Hopkins University, the Institute for Cancer Research and the University of Cambridge also participated in the study. Primary results The genetic variations involve two single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) on chromosome 15. SNPs are places in the human genome that vary by a single DNA chemical building block or nucleotide. Alleles (different forms of the same gene) at the two SNPs that were studied tend to co-occur in Caucasian individuals, so that scientists think they point to only a single genetic variant influencing lung cancer risk. People who have smoked and who have one or two copies of these SNPs have a 28% to 81% greater chance of developing lung cancer, Amos says. The study also found that three of the five genes in the area of chromosome 15 serve as receptors, or docking sites, to which nicotine can bind. This finding supports a growing body of evidence that nicotine, long known as the prime addictive compound in cigarettes, might cause lung cancer. Additional results Researchers in another study reported by Hung and colleagues in Nature did not find any association of these SNPs with either head and neck cancers or espophageal cancer. Amos and colleagues reported no association of these SNPs with lung cancer in those who have never smoked, suggesting that a combination of both genetic factors and tobacco smoking is needed to unmask the harmful effects of the variant in this region. Research methods Researchers obtained genetic samples from former and current smokers in Houston who participated in a long-term, 17-year M. D. Anderson study of the epidemiology of lung cancer. Participants were tested for about 314,000 SNP markers. The participants included: 1,154 who had developed lung cancer 1,137 who had not developed lung cancer Another group of scientists conducted the same genetic studies in the United Kingdom. Those participants included: 2,013 who had developed lung cancer 3,062 who had not developed lung cancer They were grouped by: Smoking behavior Age Gender Years since they stopped smoking The study was performed in Caucasians to minimize the effect of ethnic genetic variations. What’s next? Further studies in African-American populations with different SNP patterns may help define which of the five genes close to chromosome 15 causes lung cancer. Once a region has been further defined, subsequent DNA sequencing of blood samples from individuals with lung cancer will begin, to find the single mutation that influences lung cancer risk. Adapted by Dawn Dorsey from an M. D. Anderson news release

My father passed away on Saturday, April 19. It was unexpected as he was admitted to the hospital with mild abdominal pain. One thing led to another and two weeks later he's gone. Within 16 months I have lost both of my parents. It's hard to grasp, really. One day I have a family... the next day I don't. Thank you for all of your support during these past few years. It means more than you could possibly know. Christine

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/conte ... r_Risk.asp Regular exposure to hair dyes, processing agents, and other chemicals used in hair salons and barbershops probably increases cancer risk, according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a World Health Organization panel that maintains the world's most commonly-used system for classifying carcinogens. But there’s not enough evidence to say whether personal use of these products is linked to elevated risk, according to the report. The IARC has labeled these occupations as "probably carcinogenic to humans," a classification the agency reserves for those exposures backed by fairly strong evidence. In 1993, the IARC found that hairdressers and barbers were probably exposed to cancer-causing substances, but at that time, evidence of an increased cancer risk in this population as "inadequate." This week's report, published in the Lancet Oncology, is based on a review of epidemiological studies published since that time. Some of the products used by hairdressers and barbers--such as dyes, pigments, rubber chemicals, and curing agents—have been found to cause tumors in rats in laboratory studies or have been known to cause bladder cancer in humans. In some studies, increased risk has been associated with permanent dyes and use of darker-colored hair dyes. IARC researchers found a small, but consistent, risk of bladder cancer among male hairdressers and barbers. However, according to the American Cancer Society's Michael Thun, MD, vice president, epidemiology and surveillance research, "it was unclear whether that was caused by past exposure to chemicals that are no longer used or continuing exposure to ingredients in contemporary products." Some coloring agents were discontinued in the 1970s because lab studies revealed they had cancer-causing properties. "IARC classifications are particularly important for regulatory agencies that have direct responsibility for workplace safety," says Dr. Thun. "Workers can reduce skin exposure to these products by wearing gloves." Some studies have looked at whether personal use of hair dyes is associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer, leukemia, multiple myeloma, Hodgkin disease, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, lung cancer, breast cancer, oral cancer, and cervical cancer, but according to the IARC, the evidence for a link thus far is "inadequate." The IARC's findings on this topic will be published as Volume 99 of the IARC Monographs. For more information on this topic, see the American Cancer Society documents, Known and Probable Carcinogens and Hair Dyes.

http://www.medicexchange.com/mall/depar ... ontentview It may be possible to predict whose lung cancer is likely to come back after surgery has apparently cured it, US researchers reported on Wednesday. And the findings could lead to more effective treatments for lung cancer, the researchers reported in the New England Journal of Medicine. They saw clear changes in four genes in patients whose cancer came back within five years after surgery and said the findings might be used as the basis for a test. Patients found to have a high risk might consider special chemotherapy after surgery. "These people are at increased risk of recurrence. We think that there are numerous ways that you can take care of them," said Dr. Malcolm Brock of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, who led the study. "One is of course more chemotherapy. But we also believe that by giving them targeted therapies, new types of therapies, we can help these patients," Brock said in a telephone interview. Brock's team tested 157 patients with stage I non-small-cell lung cancer who had had small tumors surgically removed. Of the patients, 51 had the cancer come back within 40 months while 116 stayed tumor-free. The researchers found changes called methylation of the promoter region in four genes among the patients whose cancer returned. Methylation is a process that switches genes on and off. "The four genes of interest in our study are p16, CDH13, APC, and RASSF1A. They are involved in cell-cycle control (p16), invasion and metastasis (CDH13, APC), and Ras signaling (RASSF1A)," the researchers wrote. The researchers' test has been licensed to Belgian biotech company OncoMethylome. "This is DNA forensics for cancer," Brock said. "All of these tumors that we are talking about are early stage tumors. They are very small," he added. Yet a third of patients with such tumors have their cancer return. After surgery, it appears all the cancer is gone. Pathologists look at the nearby tissue and lymph nodes under a microscope and declare the patient cancer-free. "But in 40 months the patient comes back with metastatic disease in all of their body. How is that possible?" Brock asked. "It must be that the microscope, which is a 17th century innovation ... is not picking up all of the disease." But the DNA test does, Brock believes. And the findings could lead to new treatments for lung cancer, one of the deadliest cancers. Some drugs can home in on these changes -- notably drugs used to treat myelodysplastic syndromes, sometimes known as pre-leukemia. They are known as hypomethylating agents and include 5-azacytidine, decitabine and lenalidomide. Brock's team is also testing these agents in lung cancer patients. "There are lots of them and there are lots of choices," he said. He believes the test has wider uses. "We really think that if this can be validated that it would have broader applications to other solid tumors," he said. "It gives weight to an idea that your tumor DNA and my tumor DNA might be slightly different. It might even show us ways that we can do personalized therapy." Lung cancer kills more than one million people each year worldwide. Only 15 per cent of patients survive five years or more. Source: Reuters

http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCove ... ng/tb/8774 WASHINGTON, March 17 -- Radiofrequency ablation of small malignant lung lesions appears to offer survival of at least two years for nearly three-quarters of patients not suitable for surgery, a French researcher said here. In 244 patients, 70% were still alive two years after the procedure and 38.8% had no viable malignant lung tissue, according to Thierry de Baere, M.D., of Institut Gustave-Roussy, near Paris. The survival rates are comparable to those with surgical resection, Dr. de Baere said at the Society of Interventional Radiology meeting. "We have great hopes to be able to replace surgery in some patients," Dr. de Baere said. This study was published as an abstract and presented orally at a conference. These data and conclusions should be considered to be preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed publication. He said the procedure -- in which a physician threads an RF ablation device into the lesion through a catheter and destroys the tissue with heat -- has few side effects, requires shorter hospital stays than surgery, and leaves most of the lung intact. "The treatment can be repeated when needed because it's quite safe and can preserve lung function," Dr. de Baere said. The investigators studied 244 patients with either lung metastases from primary tumor at another site (195 patients) or primary non-small-cell lung cancer (49 patients). At the end of two years, 72% of those with lung metastases and 64% of those with primary tumors were still alive, Dr. de Baere reported. The study found that of those with primary tumors who survived, 85% had no viable tumors on imaging at one year and 77% had nothing visible at two years. The study also found: The rate of local progression at two years for tumors less than two cm was 8.2%, compared with 19.4% for larger tumors. The difference was borderline significant at P=0.057. Overall, at one year 57.5% of the patients had no viable lung tumors and at two years 38.8% had no viable lung tumors. One-year survival was 88.7% and two-year survival was 70.3% Dr. de Baere said the study was not a randomized trial and therefore can't be used to make reliable comparisons with surgical techniques. But he said the data in this study are strong enough that patients who are not deemed to be good surgical candidates should ask if RF ablation might be another option. One of the main attractions of the RF procedure is that it is easy on the patient, according to Suresh Vedantham, M.D., of Washington University in St. Louis. "You really have to think about the patient population (in the study)," Dr. Vedantham said. "These are mostly smokers, with heart problems and emphysema, and even if they could undergo surgery, their recovery time would be very long," he said. "They quality of life during that process would be very, very poor," he said. "The ability to do this without having to go to the operating room would be a major advance."

WEDNESDAY 13 FEBRUARY 2008 Minimally-invasive biopsy methods can accurately determine the stage of disease in patients diagnosed with lung cancer, scientists have said. Determining how far the disease has progressed is important for discovering a patient's prognosis and deciding upon suitable treatment. However, current methods require surgery and can produce inaccurate results. The latest finding, which is published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, suggests that less invasive methods could potentially be used, and with a greater degree of accuracy. Researchers at the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Florida conducted a study to compare the accuracy of three minimally-invasive procedures - blind transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA), endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EBUS-FNA). The team, led by professor of medicine Dr Michael Wallace, compared the three diagnostic methods in 138 patients with suspected lung cancer, 42 of whom had cancer that had spread to their lymph nodes. EBUS-FNA was found to be more accurate than TBNA, picking up 69 per cent of malignant lymph nodes compared to 36 per cent. However, the study suggests that a combination of EBUS-FNA and EUS-FNA would be even more accurate, as it had around 93 per cent sensitivity. Dr Wallace commented: "This study suggests that a less invasive set of procedures are highly accurate and less invasive than surgical procedures, and therefore might be an alternative."

Newsday.com ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. A judge says years of breathing secondhand smoke in an Atlantic City c.asino gave a dealer lung cancer. Kam Wong never smoked. But a state worker's compensation judge determined a decade of exposure to secondhand smoke at the former Claridge c.asino Hotel caused her illness. She was awarded 60 percent disability pay and lost wages for time she missed before and after two surgeries. Her attorney says there was constantly smoke around Wong. Atlantic City passed smoking restrictions for its 11 c.asinos last April, limiting smoking to no more than 25 percent of the c.asino floor.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111798 ... 1&nid=2562 "Married ... With Children" creator Ron Leavitt died Feb. 10 in Los Angeles from lung cancer. He was 60. A native of Brooklyn, Leavitt began his television career in the 1970s writing episodes for laffers "Happy Days," "Laverne & Shirley" and "The Bad News Bears." In 1987, Leavitt co-created "Married ... With Children" with Michael G. Moye. He went on to exec produce and write or co-write almost 150 episodes of the show, which became the second-longest running sitcom on Fox, behind "The Simpsons." The skein was nominated seven times for Emmys. More recently, Leavitt co-created, exec produced and wrote "Unhappily Ever After," which aired for five seasons on the WB. Outside of the television realm, Leavitt was recognized by the state of California as citizen of the year in 2001. Leavitt is survived by a son and a daughter.

Lung cancer is globally recognized as a big killer and it is undoubtedly a leading cause of cancer deaths in Europe and in the world. Researchers provide evidence of advancements which lead to continuous considerable improvements in possible treatments of lung cancer and offer valuable contributions to change the political and social environment for more pro-active prevention initiatives. Organized as a joint effort between the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), the European Lung Cancer Conference will be held biennially, alternating with the World Conference on Lung Cancer and the ESMO chest tumors conference. The event will gather top multidisciplinary experts to provide the audience (European and worldwide) with state-of-the-art education as well as with the most recent research data on both the most common and uncommon types of lung cancer. Meeting highlights: * The future of imaging * IASLC staging report of lung cancer * Advances in surgical techniques for in-situ carcinoma * Controversies on new radiotherapy techniques associated to surgery * Novel curative treatments for early disease * Targeted therapies and selection of patients on genomic analyses * Toxicity management * Identification of new diseases: is adenocarcinoma a cancer or not? * Tobacco policy Among the top international experts that have contributed to this unique conference: David Beer, US; Paul A. Bunn, US; Jim Cox, US; Jeffrey Engelman, US; David Gandara, US; Heine H. Hansen, DK; David Jablons, US; François Mornex, FR (Conference Co-Chair); Joseph Nevins, US; Rafael Rosell, ES (Conference Co-Chair); Nagahiro Saijo, JP; Frances A. Shepherd, CA; Robert Timmermann, US; William Travis, US; Andrew Turrisi, US Click here to view the full conference program: http://www.esmo.org/activities/jntconf/ ... jntlung08/ ---------------------------- Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/96869.php Experts at the American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) said that whole foods, and not dietary supplements, play a role in lowering cancer risk. Citing a huge and comprehensive AICR report on cancer prevention, the panel of experts cautioned against relying on pills and powders as a means of protection. "When the panel examined the accumulated evidence from almost 50 different supplement trials, cohort studies and case-control studies, the results were simply too inconsistent to justify using supplements to protect against cancer," said AICR Nutrition Advisor Karen Collins, MS, RD Under certain conditions, some high-dose supplements seemed protective at specific doses, some did nothing, and some actually increased the risk of cancer. In contrast, the research was much more consistent when the AICR expert panel examined over 440 studies on cancer risk and foods that contained specific vitamins, minerals and phytochemicals. These widely different results led them to conclude: "Dietary supplements are not recommended for cancer prevention." Collins noted, however, that in the AICR Expert Report, Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective , the panel explicitly states that supplements can have a place in a healthy diet. Certain groups - such as women of child-bearing age - may even receive health benefits from taking controlled doses of specific dietary supplements. But according to the report, lower risk of cancer should not be considered one of those benefits. "Let's be clear: although some people have misread the recommendation as simply, 'Don't take supplements ever,' that's not what the expert panel concluded," said Collins. "The panel members were careful to make an important distinction, namely: Don't rely on supplements to protect you from cancer." Different Grades for Different Cancer Links When the AICR expert panel reviewed the accumulated data from supplement studies, they noted that much of the research showing high-dose dietary supplements influencing cancer risk was conducted among people who were already at high risk for cancer. That means the results from these studies may or may not extend to the rest of the population. The panel concluded that there is no way to reliably predict the risks and benefits that widespread use of such supplements could produce, and the potential for unexpected and unfavorable side effects is real. Certain supplements have indeed been shown to increase the risk of cancer among specific high-risk groups. The evidence that beta-carotene supplements cause lung cancer in current smokers is convincing, according to the AICR report. (A judgment of convincing was the most exacting "grade" the AICR expert panel assigned to various links between diet and cancer; the next strongest links earned a grade of probable. Other grades included limited, but suggestive; limited, but no conclusion possible and finally substantial effect on risk unlikely.) Of all the supplements reviewed by the panel, only two seemed to have a potential role in protection, and even then the research was less than clear. According to the panel, selenium probably protects against prostate cancer, while calcium probably protects against colorectal cancer. Yet they also concluded that high calcium consumption probably increases risk for prostate cancer. Whole Foods vs. Supplements The data on prevention are considerably more consistent, however, when it comes to foods that contain many of the same vitamins, minerals and other substances that are often sold in supplement form. The panel judged the evidence on several categories of such foods as protective against a variety of cancers, including: - Foods containing folate are probably protective against pancreatic cancer - Foods containing carotenoids are probably protective against cancers of the mouth, pharynx, larynx and lung. - Foods containing beta-carotene are probably protective against esophageal cancer. - Foods containing lycopene are probably protective against prostate cancer. - Foods containing vitamin C are probably protective against esophageal cancer. - Foods containing selenium are probably protective against prostate cancer. The panel also concluded that other categories of plant foods - including non-starchy vegetables, allium vegetables (onions, leeks, etc.), garlic and fruits in general are probably protective against seven different kinds of cancer. Exactly why this is so remains unclear - perhaps other substances in whole foods actually provide the cancer protection; perhaps the substances in question interact in unknown synergistic ways to reduce risk, or perhaps diets high in these foods simply tend to be lower in foods linked to increased risk, such as red and processed meat. But the bottom line remains: diets high in plant foods are associated with greater protection against many different kinds of cancer. The AICR report collectively examined over 7,000 studies on all aspects of diet, physical activity, weight and cancer risk, Collins said. "When you compare the evidence on whole foods to the evidence on supplements, there's simply no contest," said AICR's Collins. "It's clear that choosing nutrient-rich whole foods and drinks is preferable to loading up on dietary supplements." The panel noted, however, that if low-dose dietary supplements are used to supplement (and not replace) healthy diets, they may offer some health benefits in other regards. Some examples include vitamin B12 (for people over 50 who have difficulty absorbing natural B12), folic acid (for women who may become or who are pregnant) and vitamin D (for people who are not exposed to sufficient sunlight or who do not synthesize adequate amounts from sunlight.) A doctor or nutritionist may make more specific recommendations in accordance with an individual's nutritional needs. The American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) is the cancer charity that fosters research on the relationship of nutrition, physical activity and weight management to cancer risk, interprets the scientific literature and educates the public about the results. It has contributed more than $86 million for innovative research conducted at universities, hospitals and research centers across the country. AICR has published two landmark reports that interpret the accumulated research in the field, and is committed to a process of continuous review. AICR also provides a wide range of educational programs to help millions of Americans learn to make dietary changes for lower cancer risk. Its award-winning New American Plate program is presented in brochures, seminars and on its website, http://www.aicr.org. American Institute for Cancer Research

http://www.wcbd.com/midatlantic/cbd/new ... -0011.html Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death for both men and women. Now there's a new screening program that may give patients a fighting chance for long-term survival. Years of inhaling cigarette smoke when he was a child motivated Robert Schmitt to get screened for lung cancer. Schmitt doesn't smoke, but he's concerned about his family history. "My father was a smoker who went through a couple packs a day and died of lung cancer," Schmitt said. The 47-year-old is participating in a lung cancer early detection program at Sequoia Hospital in Redwood City, California. Sequoia Hospital pulmonologist Dr. Melissa Lim said the goal of the program is to "ultimately to decrease mortality from a very lethal disease." Schmitt is also part of an international study looking at early lung cancer among people who may be at risk but don't have any symptoms. "We're looking for anyone 40 to 80 who is a smoker, former smoker or had secondhand smoke exposure," Lim said. A special 64-slice CT scan is so detailed it can pick up tiny tumors the size of a grain of rice instead of the dime-sized tumors traditional screenings may show. The difference to a patient is enormous. Doctors say early detection is critical because only 15 percent of all lung cancer cases diagnosed are early stage. The rest are more advanced and much more difficult to treat. The scan is also safer than most, delivering a third the dose of radiation of a traditional CT scan. Within a week, Schmitt will learn if he has any signs of lung cancer. If he does not he'll come back next year for another screening.

Governor Rod R. Blagojevich today proclaimed January as Radon Action Month in Illinois and urged people throughout the state to test their homes to see if they have elevated levels of the radioactive gas known to cause lung cancer. Radon is recognized as the second-leading cause of lung cancer in the nation, behind smoking, but is the leading cause of lung cancer for non-smokers. Blagojevich noted that a new law should increase public awareness about the health risks associated with radon. The Illinois Radon Awareness Act, which took effect Jan. 1, requires sellers to provide anyone buying a home, condominium or other residential property in Illinois with information about indoor radon exposure and the fact that radon is the leading cause of lung cancer in non-smokers and the second leading cause overall. The new law doesn’t require that homes be tested for radon prior to the sale or that radon remediation work be conducted if test results show high levels of radon. However, under the new law, if a radon test has been conducted on the home those results must be provided to the buyer. For Illinois residents only, request your free radon testing kit at: www.state.il.us/iema/radon/RadonTestKit.asp

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a ... e=printart Caroline Carney Doebbeling is an associate professor of internal medicine and psychiatry at the Indiana University School of Medicine and a research scientist at the Regenstrief Institute. Question: You recently published a study that showed that lung cancer patients who receive treatment from primary-care doctors for non-cancer-related ailments have higher survival rates than those who do not. What prompted you to look at this? Answer: I had been working in the Indiana University Cancer Center as a psychiatrist and I'm also a primary-care doctor. Patient after patient after patient who would come to see me was not getting primary care needs addressed with the oncologist. The cancer doctors think, "I'm so busy trying to save this person's life and treat their cancer, I'm not going to treat their cold; that's not what they're here for." That's a mistaken assumption. We did our best to control for factors like age, other co-morbidities and the stage of cancer, and we found that those lung cancer patients who had received primary care visits during the time of their cancer treatment had a survival advantage. Concurrently taking care of primary care problems... things like hypertension, diabetes... seemed to give a survival advantage. Q: Was it a significant advantage? A: The survival advantage increased with the number of visits to primary care. We're talking a significant number of months. That's a substantial thing with a disease, especially like lung cancer that has a high mortality with it. So I think that the message is pretty clear, that we can't forget to take care of the whole person. I've always been a person who says you want to take care of psychosocial problems while someone is facing a terminal illness. We also need to take care of the rest of their health care. We don't want to save someone from cancer only to have someone die of a heart attack or complications from diabetes. The second message is the whole idea of taking care of the whole person. Who is really carrying the baton for our patients and should we ever really hand it off? The oncologist is responsible for handling the cancer but no longer is up to speed, so I really think that the role of the primary-care doctor needs to be enhanced in the care of the patient as well. Q: What's next? A: We want to repeat this study with national data. We're pretty excited by this. It doesn't matter if we have the best medicine in world or the best screening tools -- if that patient's not being treated, they won't do any good.

BARCELONA, Spain, Jan. 8 (UPI) -- Researchers at the Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona said that the enzyme AKR1B10 could serve as a good marker in the diagnosis and prognosis of lung cancer. Scientists led by Xavier Pares said the enzyme is detected in large quantities only in lung cancers, particularly those caused by smoking and can appear even when the cancer hasn't developed and lesions are precancerous. Pares said both the experiments using test tubes and cell cultures revealed that the enzyme lowers the levels of the most active form of vitamin A, or retinoic acid, a strong anticancerous agent. Retinoic acid is present in several biological processes -- from fetus development to cell proliferation and differentiation -- by controlling the expression of certain genes, Pares said. The identification of these structural elements makes it possible to create a specific design for drugs that may treat lung cancer. The findings are published in the American journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. United Press International

http://www.northender.com/northend_news ... sp?id=1311 Cold Spring Harbor, NY –Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory’s (CSHL) researcher Raffaella Sordella, Ph.D. was awarded $100,000 by Joan’s Legacy: The Joan Scarangello Foundation to Conquer Lung Cancer. The two-year grant will fund CSHL’s pioneering lung cancer research involving a new class of genetic mutations that appear to be a trigger in non-small cell lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. The mutations, called epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFR), are more common in women than in men. This raises the possibility that interactions between EGFR and estrogen might be important in the development of tumors harboring EGFR mutations. “Our research will build upon preliminary observations that estrogen provokes EGFR activity in non-small cell lung cancer,” Sordella said. “We hypothesize that normal estrogen levels prevent the development of tumors harboring EGFR genetic abnormalities, tumors harboring these genetic lesions may arise when estrogen levels decrease, as is the case with post-menopausal women.” The Joan’s Legacy grant awarded to Dr. Sordella is part of a $1.2 million grant designated by the Foundation for twelve researchers conducting innovative projects at nationally recognized institutions like Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Over the past five years, the Foundation has awarded 36 grants, including those made in collaboration with other research-focused lung cancer nonprofits. A 2005 Joan’s Legacy grant awarded to CSHL researcher David Mu, Ph.D. enabled his discovery of three new genes that cause lung cancer. “In 2007, we received a record-breaking 65 proposals for funding. This overwhelming response demonstrates how funding availability can stimulate the scientific community to focus efforts on this often neglected disease with its low survival rates,” said Joan’s Legacy President Mary Ann Tighe. Lung cancer is the number one cancer killer in the United States, taking more than 160,000 lives each year. Yet lung cancer receives less research funding than almost any other cancer, making the work of Joan’s Legacy even more compelling. Joan’s Legacy is named for Joan Scarangello, a writer and nonsmoker who died at age 47 after a valiant nine-month fight with lung cancer. The Foundation is committed to fighting lung cancer by funding innovative research and increasing awareness of the world’s leading cancer killer, with a special focus on non-smoking-related cancer. For more information about Joan’s Legacy and lung cancer, visit www.joanslegacy.org. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory is a private, non-profit research and education institution dedicated to exploring molecular biology and genetics in order to advance the understanding and ability to diagnose and treat cancers, neurological diseases, and other causes of human suffering. For more information, visit www.cshl.edu.

By Miranda Hitti WebMD Medical News Jan. 8, 2008 -- People taking cholesterol-lowering statin drugs may be less likely to develop cancer. Researchers report that news in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Theirs is the latest in a series of studies on statins and cancer prevention. "Several laboratory studies have shown that statins may inhibit cancer cell progression, although results from population studies have been mixed," write the researchers, who included Wildon Farwell, MD, MPH, of the VA Boston Healthcare System. Farwell's team studied some 62,800 veterans in New England. The group included more than 37,000 veterans taking statin drugs, which lower LDL ("bad") cholesterol, and more than 25,000 taking drugs for high blood pressure but not taking statins. The veterans were 66 years old, on average; most were men. The veterans were followed for five years, on average. During that time, 9% of those taking statins were diagnosed with cancer, compared with 13% of those not taking statins, VA records show. Lung cancer and colorectal cancer were among the cancers that were rarer in statin users. Non-melanoma skin cancer wasn't included in the results. Other factors -- including age, history of smoking, and heart disease -- didn't affect the findings. But the data don't include information on the veterans' diet, exercise, and amount of alcohol and tobacco use. The researchers call for further studies to evaluate statins for cancer prevention.