Doctors group MedChi will push for state legislation during next year's General Assembly session to prohibit the use of tanning devices by minors under the age of 18.

 “The legislation will protect youth from melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer," MedChi CEO Gene Ransom said in a statement.

The group said that  millions of adolescents use indoor tanning facilities and nearly 25 percent of indoor tanning users ranged in age 13 to 19 years-old. 

Researchers have linked the use of tanning devices early in life  to an increased risk of the three most common skin cancers.

A large study from the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston revealed that when compared with nonusers of tanning beds, the risk for basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma increased by 15 percent for every 4 visits made to a tanning salon per year, and the risk for melanoma increased by 11 percent.

A review of many studies estimates an overall 75 percent increased risk of developing melanoma associated with tanning bed use started before age 35, Medchi said.

Howard County passed local legislation prohibiting the use of tanning devices by minors under the age of 18 a number of years ago.

The United States also lags behind a number of other countries in Europe, by prohibiting use of tanning devices by minors, Medchi said.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 12:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Two-thirds of Maryland voters support increasing the state’s tobacco tax, according to a new poll from the Maryland Citizens’ Health Initiative, the group that pushed the dime-a-drink tax on alcohol last General Assembly session.

The group says their poll by Opinion Works shows 65 percent endorse the idea of another $1 a pack tax on cigarettes while less than 30 percent oppose it. About 72 percent of Maryland voters like the idea of taxing cigars and smokeless tobacco at the same rate as cigarettes. (The phone poll of more than 800 people was conducted last week.)

The group believes increasing the tax will cut consumption and fund health care programs, especially among youth who have adopted the use of cigars, especially flavored one. As of 2010, 15.2 percent of adults and 14.1 percent of high school students in Maryland were smokers.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say smoking and secondhand smoke cause 443,000 deaths and $96 billion in related disease annually – or $10.47 per pack consumed if lost productivity is counted. The average price nationally for cigarettes is about $5.58.

“Increasing taxes on cigars and smokeless tobacco is a public health imperative,” said Vincent DeMarco, president of the Maryland Citizens’ Health Initiative, in a statement. “The people of Maryland strongly support this because they know doing so will reduce the use of these deadly products by young people.”

What DeMarco doesn’t have is the support of the leadership in Annapolis. The extra buck would bring the total in taxes to $3, among the highest in the nation. The tax has been raised three times in 1999, mostly recently in 2007.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Business of health, Cancer, Consumer health
        

Dozer is official now.

The goldendoodle who inadvertently ran last year’s Maryland Half Marathon, which benefits the University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, now has his own race.

Dozer busted out of his yard and joined runners in the last eight miles of the race last May, without permission from his family. When race organizers discovered this, and made sure he was safely returned home, they awarded him a medal, and set up a fundraising page that has taken in more than $25,000.

(Organizers hoped to raise a total of $1 million for the cancer center by this, the fourth, year. They’re up to $750,000.)

This May 6, the organizers of the Howard County race have added Dozer’s Dash, an eight-mile race within a race. It will start at the five-mile mark and runners with the lowest times in this leg of the half marathon will be awarded medals of honor and named Top Dog of Dozer’s Dash.

Dogs won’t be allowed to run this year but the leased, escorted ones will be allowed to cheer.  

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 4:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Just because the temperatures are dropping, don’t forget the sunscreen. That’s the message from Dr. Ronald Moy, president of the American Academy of Dermatology and a professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles.

He says winter sun can still cause skin cancer, premature aging and sun burn.

Moy said those who participate in winter sports such as snowboarding and skiing ought to be especially careful because athletes spend more time outside with their faces exposed. They also may be at higher altitudes where there is less atmosphere to filter UV rays. (Someone can burn in 14 minutes on Miami Beach and eight minutes in Denver, he said.)

Look for sunscreen with protection from UVA and UBV rays.

“People assume since the sun isn’t shining, there’s little risk for sunburn or skin damage,” he said in a statement. “This is false. UVA rays are constant all day throughout the year. In fact, the sun reflecting off the snow doubles overall exposure. It’s just as important to wear a moisturizing sunscreen in the winter as in the summer.”

In addition to sunscreen, Moy says sunglasses with UV protection are also a good idea, as is covering as much skin as possible.

Skin cancer is the most prevalent type of cancer – 1 million new cases are expected this year in the United States -- and most is preventable.

Associated Press photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Breast cancer organization Susan G. Komen for the Cure is providing $2 million to two Maryland institutions for research in breast cancer issues, including why African American breast cancer patients develop heart problems. 

The money will also be used to help develop more personalized treatment strategies for women with an aggressive form of breast cancer.

The grants to Johns Hopkins University and Mercy Medical Center were announced Thursday. They are among four that Komen for the Cure is funding in Maryland this year, and part of Komen's $66 million investment in new research, patient support and scientific conferences this year.

Komen has spent more than $685 million for breast cancer research in its 29 years, making it the largest non-profit funder of breast cancer research outside of the federal government. 

 At Mercy Medical Center, almost $450,000 is being granted to a team led by Lisa Gallicchio to study why African American breast cancer patients may be more likely to develop heart problems after being treated with a class of drugs known as aromatase inhibitors. Kathy Helzlsouer, also at Mercy, will receive almost $600,000 to develop a web-based program to remind breast cancer patients about upcoming treatments and to better manage their symptoms.

 At Johns Hopkins, Christopher Umbricht will use a $600,000 Komen grant to find better ways to identify patients who are most likely to respond to chemotherapy as they fight triple negative breast cancer, an aggressive form of the disease. Another $180,000 grant to Gregg Semenza, and Daniele Gilkes will be used to study whether dense breast tissue is a cause or a consequence of breast cancer, and whether and how breast density contributes to cancer's spread.

"These grants may help us find better treatments, while also ensuring that breast cancer patients are meaningfully followed during their treatment," Komen President Elizabeth Thompson said in a statement. "They tie squarely to our mission to fund cutting-edge breast cancer research along the entire cancer continuum -- from prevention to early diagnostics, disparities in outcomes, more effective treatments, and answers for aggressive and metastatic disease. "

Posted by Andrea Walker at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Johns Hopkins researchers say they have uncovered the path that breast cancer takes to the lungs, information that could lead to therapies to block metastases responsible for 90 percent of breast cancer deaths.

“Metastasis transforms breast cancer from a local, curable disease, to one that is systemic and lethal,” said Dr. Gregg L. Semenza, director of the Vascular Program in the Institute for Cell Engineering, in a statement. “Metastasis was long thought a late event in cancer progression, but we have now shown metastasis to be an early event that is dependent on HIF-1.”

The HIF-1 protein, which Semenza and a team discovered two decades ago, controls the genes that enable cells to survive in tumors where there is low oxygen. Other research has shown increased HIF-1 activity results in lower survival rates in those with breast cancer.

The findings are published in the Sept. 12 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science Early Edition and in the August 22 issue of Oncogene.

The researchers focused on the lung to trace the role HIF-1 plays in breast cancer metastasis.

They found the protein enabled breast cancer cells to produce enzymes that prepare the lung for cancer to spread. They also play a role in helping cancer cells travel to the lungs through blood vessels.

Semenza and other researchers also found that a medication used to treat irregular heartbeats can block HIF-1 production and can stop liver and prostate cancer cells from growing. They studied whether digitalis can do the same with metastatic breast cancer – and in mice, there were fewer and smaller tumors in the lungs.

Clinical trials could be next.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 5:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Cancer is a tough topic, but one most everyone confronts at some time or another. But what is proper “cancer etiquette?” The Cancer Treatment Centers of America say everyone is different, and there are different approaches.

But the professionals there have come up with some basics about the subject:

+Don’t ignore someone with cancer just because you don’t know what to say. They advise using thoughts such as “I’m here for you,” or “I love you and we’ll get through this together,” or even “I dn’t know what to say.” A note saying “I’m thinking of you,” also appropriate.

+Listen without interrupting. A sympathetic ear is often appreciated. Or if no one wants to talk, just sit quietly.

+Become an advocate or more effective caregiver by participating in the conversation with the doctors. Bring a list of questions.

+Act normal. Talk about other things besides cancer.

+Take care of yourself so you’re in good shape emotionally and physically to offer support.

Anyone else have tips?

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Greater Baltimore Medical Center in Towson has opened a new healing garden in honor of breast cancer month.

The Pink Garden with bushes and trees with pink flowers will bloom nine to 10 months a year. The garden includes a special water effect and a stone bed in the shape of the cancer ribbon with water constantly flowing over the stones.

The garden was funded through donations and is the result of a collaboration between the Roland Park Garden Club, Signature Landscape and the Sandra & Malcolm Berman Cancer Institute.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 11:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

When E! News anchor Giuliana Rancic announced she discovered she had breast cancer during her IVF treatments, many women also going through such treatment likely wondered if they were at greater risk of the disease. Experts seem to agree that generally the answer is no.

But Dr. Kala Visvanathan, an associate professor of oncology and epidemiology at Johns Hopkins, says more study is needed on women in certain subgroups such as older women and those with higher risk factors for breast cancer.

Much of the published data involve younger women using certain hormones and other fertility drugs, and the age of women in treatment and their medications have changed somewhat over time.

The numbers using the technology certainly has grown in the last few decades: There were more than 60,000 live births from IVF cycles in 2009, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or more than 1 percent of all infants born in the United States.

“The data so far doesn’t suggest that there is a link when you look at it overall,” she said. “Whether there is a link between subgroups of individuals is yet to be known.”

Women who are older may want to talk to their doctors about whether a mammogram is a good idea for them before they begin IVF, Visvanathan said. Age is a risk factor for breast cancer, as is delaying childbirth. Also, whatever is causing the infertility may also put women at higher risk for cancer.

Rancic, 36, who is a University of Maryland, College Park alumna, told the Today show that she had a mammogram on her doctor’s advice. She said her doctor told her, “'I don't care if you're 26 or 36, but I will not get you pregnant if possibly there's a small risk that you have cancer because the hormones will accelerate the cancer. I never in my wildest dreams expected anything would be wrong.”

Visvanathan said there isn’t good data on whether the estrogen used in IVF can exacerbate cancer that already is forming from abnormal cells in the breast. Estrogen generally is known to fuel tumors. And estrogen used for long periods of time in hormone replacement therapy in post-menopausal women is also known to cause cancer.

“The good news is the data doesn’t show a large association between IVF and breast cancer,” Visvanathan said. “There’s not data to say you shouldn’t do this. But you do need to balance that with your risk.”

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 3:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

An Annapolis group that raises money for research of metastatic breast cancer has awarded $75,000 in grants to two professors.

METAvivor Research and Support said today it has awarded a $50,000 research grant to Alana Welm at the University of Utah and a $25,000 grant to Andrea Mastro at Penn State University.

The awards coincide with the kick-off of METAvivor's "30% for 30% Campaign." The organization believes 30 percent of breast cancer research dollars should go to metastatic breast cancer because 30 percent of women with the disease metastasize, which is when the cancer spreads to other organs in the body.

Metastatic breast cancer research currently receives about 2 percent of funds.

Welm and a group of researchers have generated new mouse models for metastatic breast cancer research. Tumors taken directly from patients have been grafted into mouse mammary glands.

The grant will allow Welm and her team to "determine whether tumor grafts are reliable predictors of a tumor's actual response to therapy in the patient." If successful, these mouse models can potentially be used to select treatment for individual patients.

Mastro has developed a bone-like matrix in a petri dish so that researchers will now be able to study the impact of the bone microenvironment molecules on breast cancer cell metastasis.

Tumor cells stay dormant for months to years before they reactivate and cause metastatic growth in a secondary organ such as bone. One of the hurdles in metastatic breast cancer research has been the lack of proper tools to study these dormant tumors in the petri dish and control their reactivation.

The grant will allow Mastro and her team to use the bone–like matrix to test the role that various factors play in the metastatic breast cancer cell's escape from dormancy and then its growth in the bone. These grants are the second and third metastatic breast cancer research grants to be awarded by METAvivor Research and Support.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 12:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

There’s a place in downtown Baltimore where out-of-town cancer patients can go and stay for free while they are in treatment. And now the American Cancer Society’s Hope Lodge at Baltimore is adding some a set of services that will help them cope with that treatment.

The Wellness Program, which launches Thursday, will be the first of its kind in the country, according to the cancer society. It will offer patients and caregivers activities for their bodies and minds, including yoga, massage therapy, nutrition counseling and one-on-one personal training, among other options. They will learn to sustain their programs.

The hope is they cope better with side effects and feel better. This program is also free.

“Our overall goal with this wellness program is to help cancer patients transition into strong and healthy proactive cancer survivors that feel secure in their mind, body and spirit,” said Jessie Bernstein, Hope Lodge Wellness Program coordinator, in a statement. “We have a terrific team of volunteers who are experts in the field of health and wellness.”

The lodge was opened in 1987 and is funded through donations to the cancer society, Hope Lodge residents, local businesses and foundations. The property was donated by the University of Maryland.

There are 31 such lodges around the country. For more information on the facility click here.

For information on other support and treatment programs, click here.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

It’s been reported (including on this blog) that Apple founder Steve Jobs died of pancreatic cancer, but some experts and readers point out that he did not have the common form. He had a neuroendocrine tumor.

Dr. Mansur Shomali, from Union Memorial Hospital’s Diabetes & Endocrine Center, explains that the pancreas is divided into two parts: the “exocrine” pancreas and the “endocrine” pancreas. The common form of pancreatic cancer arises from the exocrine pancreas, the part that makes digestive enzymes.

Job’s reported cancer came from the endocrine pancreas, which is made cells that produce hormones like insulin. They cluster and are called islets. Sometimes they produce tumors, which aren’t always cancerous.

Shomali said they are called neuroendocrine because they originate from neurologic tissue during embryologic development.

He said he’s seen only one patient in the last 12 months with such a tumor.

And while he did not treat Jobs and doesn’t know the detail of his case, he said when caught early, the tumors are treatable. While some tumors are very aggressive, many are benign and don’t spread.

The National Cancer Institute reports that 80 percent of patients survive the first year and 22 percent survive 10 years – many times the survival rates for more common pancreatic cancer.

It’s unclear what sort of treatment Jobs had and why, for example, he had a liver transplant – Shomali said he’s not had a patient that needed one.

For more information, go to http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/isletcell/Patient.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Checker Cab is giving free rides all month to breast cancer patients who need to get to doctor appointments.

Those who want to take advantage of the promotion - being done for breast cancer awareness month - can call 443-573-3460 for an appointment. The cab company needs about 24 hours advanced notice.

The company will also donate $200 each week to the American Cancer Society's "Making Strides Against Breast Cancer" program. They have also painted a cab pink.

The free rides are being given in conjunction with the American Cancer Society.

“Every time a passenger rides in our pink vehicle, from October 1 through October 31, they’ll know they are riding in a vehicle that is helping to raise funds in the fight against breast cancer,” said Checker Cab general manager Navin Dass.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

No specific reason was given for former Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ death, but it’s well-known he battled pancreatic cancer, an extremely lethal kind of the disease.

November is Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month, and here’s a little about the disease from the American Cancer Society:

+In 2011 an estimated 44,030 new cases will be found and there will be 37,660 deaths.

+About 20 percent of people live at least one year but fewer than 4 percent live longer than 5 years. Catching disease early gives the best odds.

+Causes are unknown though but risk factors include age (most patients are older than 55), being male and African American, smoking, obesity, diabetes, chronic pancreatitis or inflammation, cirrhosis of the liver, exposure to certain chemicals, family history.

+There’s no surefire way to prevent pancreatic cancer.

+It’s hard to detect early because the pancreas is deep in the belly and tumors aren’t usually felt and blood tests don’t generally work early. The cancer has usually spread by the time symptoms arise, which is why it’s so deadly. Genetic testing of those with strong family history may show risk for an individual.

+Symptoms can be mistaken for other problems because they are general. They can include yellowing of the eyes and skin, pain in the belly or middle back, weight loss, fatigue, nausea, swollen gallbladder, blood clots and digestive issues because it releases enzymes that break down fats and proteins in food and makes hormones including insulin that help balance sugar in the blood.

+Treatments include surgery, radiation therapy and chemotherapy. A complex procedure called the Whipple can cure the cancer. It involves removing parts of the pancreas, stomach and small intestine, common bile duct, as well as the gallbladder and some lymph nodes. Other treatments can shrink tumors or kill cancer cells. New methods of early detection are now being employed and some targeted drugs also are being used. Clinical trials of new therapies are ongoing.

Hospitals in the area have specialists that research and treat pancreatic cancer, including Johns Hopkins, University of Maryland  and St. Joseph.

Reuters photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Cancer
        

A new Johns Hopkins study has revealed men who have prostate biopsies are more than twice as likely to be hospitalized with a serious complication within 30 days.

The biopsies are outpatient procedure done to diagnose and monitor prostate cancer more than 1 million times a year. The study found the men have a 6.9 percent rate of hospitalization, compared with a 2.9 percent for those in the control group in the study.

The results of the study, the largest ever analysis of Medicare patients aged 65 or older in the last two decades, were published online in the Journal of Urology.

Researchers still say the biopsies are necessary: Prostate cancer is the second leading cancer killer among men. But they also advise doctors to weigh the risks and benefits, take extra precautions and advise patients of the possibilities.

The complications were bleeding, infection and flare-ups of other medical conditions. Hospitalization in general from the procedures are dropping, but the men who were hospitalized for infections were still 12 times as likely to die as those who did not have biopsies. This could be because of an increase in antimicrobial resistance, said Dr. Edward Schaeffer, an associate professor in the Hopkins School of Medicine and its Brady Urological Institute and the study's senior investigator.

“Prostate biopsy is an essential procedure for detecting prostate cancers,” Schaeffer said in a statement. “Coupled with appropriate screening, prostate biopsies save lives. However, it is important for men to be aware of the possible risks of prostate biopsies, which are often described as simple outpatient procedures.”

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 10:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Cancer
        

Join us at noon Sept. 13 at baltimoresun.com/healthchat for a live chat with Dr. Paul Christo of Johns Hopkins on treating breast cancer pain, such as inflammatory breast cancer, lymphedema and other issues.

Christo is director of the Multidisciplinary Pain Fellowship Training Program at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He also has a radio talk show Saturday nights on WBAL.

Can't make the chat? Send questions in advance to healthcalendar@baltsun.com and return here to read the transcript.

Posted by Kim Walker at 6:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

If you're young with early-stage breast cancer, a mastectomy isn't your only option for treatment, according to a study by the University of Maryland.

Researchers found that a lumpectomy and radiation is just as viable.

The results of the analysis of nearly 15,000 patients listed in a nationwide cancer registry will be presented at the 2011 Breast Cancer Symposium in San Francisco this week.

The researchers said that mastectomies have been on the rise among young women because of concerns regarding cancer recurrence.

“We believe these findings are very significant for young women with early-stage breast cancer who might choose to have a mastectomy in the hope of improving their outcome," Steven J. Feigenberg, a radiation oncologist at the University of Maryland and lead author of the study, said in a statement. "This study confirms that breast-conservation therapy is a safe, effective treatment option and will not have a detrimental effect on survival."

Women under 40 can have more aggressive tumors and are often at higher risk for having their cancer recur. Previous studies have suggested that young women have higher local recurrences of their cancer with breast-conservation therapy, but these studies did not demonstrate an effect on survival, Dr. Feigenberg says.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 1:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

The University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center has won renewal of its National Cancer Institute designation for five years, along with $7.6 million in new federal funding for cancer research.

The NCI bestows this special designation on the nation’s top cancer centers in recognition of their scientific excellence and outstanding patient care.

The Greenebaum Cancer Center was first named an NCI-designated center in 2008. The NCI renewed the designation following a review process, which included a 1,100-page grant proposal and site visit earlier this year by a team of two dozen NCI-appointed scientists.

“We’re enormously pleased that the National Cancer Institute has renewed our designation...that will help us significantly expand our clinical and basic science research programs,” Kevin J. Cullen, the cancer center’s director and professor of medicine at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, said in a statement. “Achieving this designation for a second time not only reflects the hard work of our scientists, physicians and staff, but also underscores our cancer center’s reputation as a national leader in cancer research.”

Since the cancer center first received NCI designation, its total research funding has increased 55 percent, to a current level of $74.2 million. The staff has expanded as well, employing 215 scientists and physicians, all of whom are on the faculty of the University of Maryland School of Medicine and three University of Maryland professional schools in Baltimore as well as two other campuses in Catonsville and College Park.

Key areas of research at the cancer center include cancer health disparities; cancer vaccines and tumor immunology; resistance of certain cancers to chemotherapy; HIV-related cancers; development of new cancer drugs and treatments; and the genetics of cancer – the role that certain genes play in how the disease develops.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer
        

The Cancer Institute at St. Joseph Medical Center was awarded a $50,000 matching grant by the American Cancer Society South Atlantic Division to support an outreach program for breast health literacy.

The funds, matched by the medical center, will target uninsured and underinsured African American and Latina women in Baltimore County and Baltimore City. The 18-month program, called One Voice, aims to educate the women about breast health and routine screening. These women have a 38 percent higher rate of death nationally than white women.

“We are very excited about this project and this opportunity to have a positive impact on earlier detection and survival for underserved women at risk for breast cancer,” said Dr. Michael Schultz, medical director of St. Joseph‘s Breast Center, in a statement. “One Voice continues and expands our tradition at the St. Joseph Breast Center, which has always included outreach to underserved and at-risk minority populations in our community.”

Specifically, the program will implement 12 culturally appropriate programs to raise awareness of breast cancer and the importance of routine screening, provide free mammograms for up to 135 women and provide patient navigation services to women with breast cancer who are treated at St. Joseph.

St. Joseph will work with Sisters Network Inc., an African American breast cancer survivorship organization, and Nueva Vida, a support group of Latinas with cancer and their families.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Maryland health officials plan to release today their newest plan to control cancer, a set of diseases responsible for one in four deaths in the state.

The officials say the plan to be used by health care providers, policy makers, communities and individuals is ambitious, aiming to save some 1,200 more people a year. Now, about 10,000 Marylander die a year from all kinds of cancer.

“Cancer remains a leading cause of death and we have to attack it from multiple angles,” said Dr. Joshua M. Sharfstein, secretary of the state Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, in an interview before the announcement at Johns Hopkins. (Look for full coverage in the Baltimore Sun tomorrow or on Baltimoresun.com later today.) Update: Story is here.

The plan is required by each state by the U.S. Centers of Control and Prevention, which notes that the cost nationally from cancer was more than $206 billion in 2006. In Maryland, it was estimated to be $3.9 billion.

Officials from the public and private sectors who contributed to the report outlined the steps that should be taken by all stakeholders. It takes into account the latest research and strategies on prevention, early detection and treatment for the disparate types of cancer that most commonly afflict Marylanders and Americans, such as breast and prostate, lung, colon and ovarian cancer.

The overall goal is to decrease cancer mortality to160 deaths per 100,000 Marylanders from 187 deaths per 100,000 recorded in 2006.

Officials note that Maryland has come a long way in controlling cancer. Until the epidemic peaked in the state in 1990, Maryland had the third highest cancer mortality rate in the country. The rate decreased enough by 2000 to rank the state 11th and 20th by 2006.

But the population is aging and more cancers are likely to be found, the report says. That makes lifestyle choices for younger people all the more important, said Dr. Kevin J. Cullen, director of the University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center.

Smoking and eating habits are the two most crucial elements to change, said Cullen, who is also a member of the Maryland State Council on Cancer Control that facilitate the plan that involved input from hundreds of people.

“Many cancers are preventable, probably the majority of them, if people did the simple things of not smoking and keeping their body weight in recommended range the overall burden of cancer would probably drop by at least half.”

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Doctors around the region and the nation are looking to treat pancreatic cancer before it starts by examining cysts. (See story here.)

About 13 percent of people have pancreatic cysts but only a small number will become cancer. With all the imaging and testing, they still can’t say with certainty which will develop into cancer. So, some people have major surgery when they don’t need it.

But Johns Hopkins scientists may have developed a gene-based test to distinguish between the precancerous ones and the benign ones. A report on the test is published in the July 20 issue of Science Translational Medicine.

Cysts are generally found when a patient has imaging for another reason.

Dr. Bert Vogelstein, co-director of the Ludwig Center at Johns Hopkins and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, and colleagues looked at cysts from 19 patients and searched for mutations in 169 cancer-causing genes. They identified two mutations: one in the KRAS gene, known for its prevalence in pancreatic cancers, and the GNAS gene, not previously been associated with pancreatic cancer.

The researchers then tested 132 precancerous pancreatic cysts for those mutations and found GNAS mutations in more than half and KRAS mutations in 108. Nearly all had one or the other or both. There were no differences in age, gender or smoking histories of the patients. And the mutations were not found in benign cysts. 

“There has long been a need for accurate, quantitative ways to identify cysts that are more worrisome and to help patients avoid unnecessary surgeries for harmless cysts,” said Vogelstein, the Clayton Professor of Oncology at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center.

He notes more studies are needed before the gene-based test can be widely offered. Other scientists working on the test are from Hopkins, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Indiana University.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 2:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Public health officials know that kids who watch their heroes smoke in movies are much more likely to begin smoking. And while those at the National Cancer Institute who track onscreen tobacco use say the incidents on film are dropping, there are still enough shots to be a problem.

In a report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Cancer Institute says for the fifth straight year, the number of incidents of smoking in movies rated G, PG or PG-13 has dropped. The drop was 71.6 percent from 2005 to 2010 (2,093 incidents to 595 incidents).

Three major motion picture companies with stated polices of reducing tobacco use on camera dropped an average drop of 95.8 percent, compared to a drop of 41.7 percent among independent film companies and three other major companies without polices.

The report said kid with the highest amount of exposure to onscreen smoking are about two times as likely to begin smoking as those with the least exposure, and policies do have an impact.

Think watching people smoke in the movies makes you want to smoke?

Baltimore Sun file photo of John Waters telling movie-goers not to smoke in the theater

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 2:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

More screening means fewer people are dying of colorectal cancer, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Still, the CDC says in a new report that more people need to be screened to prevent more cases of colorectal cancer, the No. 2 killer in the United States.

The findings:

+The rate of new cases fell to 45.4 per 100,000 in 2007 from 52.3 per 100,000 in 2003.

+The death rate fell to 16.7 per 100,000 in 2007 from 19 per 100m000 in 2003.

+That’s 66,000 fewer cancers and 32,000 fewer deaths.

+Direct medical cost of the cancer was $14 billion 2010 and lost productivity was $15.3 billion.

+Screening, recommended at age 50, has increased to 65 percent in 2010 from 52 percent in 2002, but one in three people aged 50 to 75 was not getting screened.

“Colon cancer can be prevented, and we are making progress in getting more people screened,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, CDC director, in a statement. “Those who receive these life-saving screening tests can lead longer, healthier and more productive lives. Saving our nation the health care costs associated with treating colon cancer is an additional benefit.”
See the report at www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer
        

The cancer drug Avastin is slated to lose it's approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating breast cancer.

Hearings are underway now. According to this Tribune blog post, some women and the drug's maker, Genentech, are hoping the agency reconsiders. Some claim it has worked for them, and losing the approval means insurance would likely no longer cover the cost.

The drug would remain approved for other kinds of cancer, and thus still available to doctors who wish to prescribe it "off label." But without insurance, that would likely put it out of reach.

The FDA approved Avastin for use in breast cancer in 2008 under a fast track system, pending further review. That review didn't show much effect on breast cancer, but some nasty side effects.

Anyone know of someone taking Avastin for breast cancer? It work for them? Should the FDA put this drug out of reach considering the study results?

Bloomberg photo 

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 5:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Sales of tobacco to minors has hit an all time low, according to a new government report.

Reducing tobacco sales has been a priority nationally and in Maryland for years, and now the average violation rate by retailers is down to 9.3 percent, the lowest level in the 14 year history of the Synar program. Synar, named for a former congressman from Oklahoma, aims to eliminate sales to minors and is administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Admistration.

The program requires states to have laws and enforce programs to cut sales of tobacco products to minors. They have to annually report the percentage of inspected retail shops that sold products to customers under 18.

The average rate has been trending down, and for the fifth year in a row no state was out of compliance, which would be more than  20 percent of shops selling tobacco to minors. Most states found fewer than 15 percent of shops violating the rules in fiscal 2010. About a third were below 10 percent.

Maryland was at 16.8 percent of shops violating the rules in fiscal 2010. In fiscal 2009, the state was at 5.1 percent.

Report authors said the despite this good news, progress in reducing actual tobacco use has stalled because of the economy. And that may be the reason for the uptick in sales in Maryland, too. Kathleen Rebbert-Franklin, deputy director of the state's Alcohol and Drug Abuse Administration, said money to localities to do checks at the shops has dropped.

Without the checks, shops get a little loose with the rules, she said. Or there isnt training for employees as they turnover. But a new influx of federal dollars means the state will pick up where the localities have left off.

Clearly, the spot checks matter, as the Synar report shows, she said.

"We're trying to keep our eye on the prize during tight budget times," she said. 

FDA photo of new labelling required on cigarette packages

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 1:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer, Pediatrics
        

Stem cells from newborns’ umbilical cords and placenta are normally tossed, but some Johns Hopkins students have come up with a new system that could significantly increase collections.

The stem cells could then be used to boost the immune systems of patients with leukemia and lymphoma and other blood disorders.

The invention called CBx System is in the testing stage, but the students – all pursuing master's degrees in the university's Center for Bioengineering Innovation and Design -- have gotten a provisional patent for the technology and formed a company called TheraCord LLC. They hope it will eventually be widely used in hospital maternity wards.

“Cord blood, collected from the umbilical cord and placenta after live birth, is the most viable source of stem cells, yet over 90 percent is uncollected and discarded,” the team members wrote for a presentation at the university's recent Biomedical Engineering Design Day. “One of the main reasons valuable cord blood is so frequently discarded is because no adequate collection method exists.”

Now, when a baby is born the parents have to opt to save the cord blood and pay for it, unless they are at one of 180 hospitals that are affiliated with public cord blood banks where parents can donate cord blood.

And the method of collection relies on gravity. Only 40-50 percent of units collected can be used for transplants and the stem cells are usually only enough for a child. The students’ collection method uses mechanical forces and a chemical solution to detach and flush more stem cells from the cord and placenta vessels – up to 50 percent more stem cells.

The students, who have graduated, will keep working so they can get even more.

So, would you donate?

Getty Images photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer, Pediatrics
        

The FDA is trying to warn people about the dangers of smoking with shock advertising.

The federal regulatory agency today released nine in-your-face images that will be required to appear on every single pack of cigarettes sold in the country. The images will also run on cigarette advertisements.

The bold images include a man smoking a cigarette through a hole in his throat, a corpse with an incision in the chest and a mouth full of rotten teeth and sores.

The FDA said the warnings represent the most significant changes in cigarette advertising in 25 years.

In a statement, the FDA said the new advertising "will help prevent children from smoking, encourge adults who do to quit and ensure every American understands the dangers of smoking."

The warnings are required under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which was signed into federal law in 2009. They will appear on cigarette packages no later than Sept. 2012.

Check out all the images here.

Also, take or poll and let us know what you think about the new warnings. Great idea? Or too graphic?

Posted by Andrea Walker at 3:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

The Environmental Working Group is out with its sunscreen guide, as usual, they don’t recommend a lot of the products – only one in five.

There are not federal safety guidelines, so that left the group to do its own analysis about what is safe and effective. In all, the group rated more than 1,700 sunscreens, lip balms, and SPF moisturizers and makeup.

On the list of sunscreens the researchers liked included such brands as Alba, Badger, Kiss My Face and Sun Bunnies. Some ingredients they liked included zinc, titanium dioxide and avobenzone. They also like water-resistant creams that were 30 SPF.

Some things they didn’t like were oxybenzone, Vitamin A and added insect repellent. They also didn’t like sprays, powders and any SPF above 50 because they were dangerous or ineffective.

Of course, they also recommended staying out of the sun.

See the whole report here.

AP photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer, Consumer health, Environmental health
        

Dozer was a last-minute entry in the Maryland Half Marathon last Sunday.

The three-year-old goldendoodle busted out of his yard and joined the more than 2,000 runners going past his house at about the 5 mile marker.

He was spotted at several points on the race, with runners and spectators unaware he was unescorted. Organizers snapped this shot of him crossing the finish line – at 2 hours and 14 minutes. (If he ran the whole thing, it would have been a very respectible time of just over 10-minute miles.)

Dozer’s owners were frantically looking for him, according to University of Maryland officials. The race benefited Maryland’s Greenebaum Cancer Center. The dog returned Monday morning with muddy feet and limping.

Dozer’s been to the vet and is fine, the owners reported to Maryland.

Normally, running races as a "bandit" or unregistered, is frowned upon.  But this race's co-chairmen, Michael Greenebaum and Jon Sevel, plan this week to give Dozer a medal and some dog treats.

He’s deserves it. Since the race, he’s raised more than $800 on his runner’s page set up at www.ummsfoundation.org/dozer.

See more photos from the race here. 

Photo courtesy of the University of Maryland

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Colon cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States and the Susan Cohan Colon Cancer Foundation wants to get the word out about prevention and screening.

The education and advocacy foundation is holding its Susie’s Cause Colon Cancer Health Festival this Saturday in the West Baltimore MARC train parking lots from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. The event is also sponsored by Bon Secours Baltimore Health System, St. Joseph Medical Center – The Cancer Institute and Operation Reachout Southwest.

They hope to raise awareness about colon cancer and show people how to reduce their risk.
They are especially hoping to draw people from the predominately African American neighborhoods of West Baltimore, which has a high rate of cancer diagnosis and cancer-related death, the groups say. The groups note that the American College of Gastroenterology recommends African Americans begin screening for colon cancer at age 45, rather than 50.

“Colon cancer falls especially hard on underserved communities and we need to get the message out about how to prevent and treat it,” said David Cohan, president of Susie’s Cause, in a statement.

Added Samuel L. Ross, chief executive of Bon Secours Baltimore Health System, “We want the members of our community to feel empowered by the information we’re providing at the health festival, and to take action. Everyone can take small steps to prevent colon cancer by eating healthier, exercising and most importantly getting screened.”

The festival will offer choirs, cooking demonstrations and vegetable gardening tips. Healthy snacks will be provided. Emcee for the event will be Reverend Lee Michaels, host of WMAR-TV’s “Grace and Glory.”

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Spring is here, meaning many of us will be out enjoying the sunshine.

As the warm weather brings us all outdoors, The Skin Cancer Foundation wants to remind us about the dangers of the sun's rays.

The foundation has brought its "Healthy Skin Tour" to the Baltimore area and is giving free cancer screenings.

They will be at the Rite Aid on Brandermill Road in Gambrills until 1 p.m. today. Saturday they'll hit the Rite Aid on Reistertown Road in Pikesville from 10 a.m. to noon.

The hope is to catch skin cancer early on and educate people on how to protect themselves.

You'll be able to spot them in their tour van.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Men with low-grade prostate cancer can opt out of surgery without much risk of death, according to a long-running Johns Hopkins study of 769 men with the disease.

“Active surveillance” may be a better option according to the study, published online in the Journal of Clinical Oncology and thought to be the longest and largest of its kind. 

None of the men, mostly 65 and older, have died since the study began in 1995, though some have had surgery because the cancer spread.

“This study offers the most conclusive evidence to date that active surveillance may be the preferred option for the vast majority of older men diagnosed with a very low-grade or small-volume form of prostate cancer,” Dr. J. Ballentine Carter, study senior investigator and urologist, said in a statement.

Many men still prefer to have the tumor removed, up to 90 percent of the 217,000 American men diagnosed a year, including most 75 and older, said Carter, director of adult urology at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and its Brady Urological Institute.

Carter says the excessive treatment for patients with milder disease needs to be addressed. Complications from surgery or radiation include incontinence and other bowel, urinary or sexual problems.

Carter’s team plans to expand the surveillance study to other institutions. He also hopes to update National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines to include surveillance for low-grade cancer. There also are plans for a web-based educational program.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Men who used a cardiac drug called digoxin had a 24 percent lower risk for prostate cancer, which could potentially lead to using that drug or similar ones to treat that cancer, Johns Hopkins scientists say.

Digoxin is made from the foxglove plant used for centuries in folk medicine and for congestive heart failure and rhythm abnormalities. It’s now a leading candidate among 3,000 screened by the Hopkins researchers for prostate cancer.

Researcher emphasize the drug isn’t proven to prevent prostate cancer and it has significant side effects. “This is not a drug you’d give to health people,” said Elizabeth Platz, professor of epidemiology, oncology, and urology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

But it shows promise for treatment: Platz did an epidemiologic study after collaborators in the Kimmel Cancer Center whittled the list of potential cancer drug candidates down to 38 in their lab. All of the drugs reduced prostate cancer cell growth by at least 50 percent. The dual approaches reduced the possibility that results were due to chance.

The most effective drug was one used to treat alcoholism and not widely used, so they went with the heart drug, which was used enough on people to be studied. The data came from 47,000 men aged 40-75 in a Harvard study from 1986-2006. About 5,000 cases of cancer were diagnosed after 1986 and tose on digoxin since the start of the study had a 24 percent lower risk of getting the disease.

The drug alters enzymatic pathways for sodium and potassium in heart cells and may do the same for prostate cancer. The next step is testing the effect on prostate cancer cells. The findings are published in the April 3 issue of Cancer Discovery.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer, Cardiovascular Health
        

Traditional Chinese medicinal plants are used for a lot of maladies, but researchers at Johns Hopkins say one could serve as a starting point for development of new anticancer drugs.

The researchers found that a natural product isolated from a plant known as thunder god vine, or lei gong teng, and used to treat maladies including rheumatoid arthritis, works by blocking gene control machinery in the cell.

Their report was published in the March issue of Nature Chemical Biology.

“Extracts of this medicinal plant have been used to treat a whole host of conditions and have been highly lauded for anti-inflammatory, immunosuppressive, contraceptive and antitumor activities,” says Jun O. Liu, a professor of pharmacology and molecular sciences at Johns Hopkins. “We've known about the active compound, triptolide, and that it stops cell growth, since 1972, but only now have we figured out what it does.”

In animal models, triptolide was effective against cancer, arthritis and skin graft rejection. It also has shown to block growth of all 60 U.S. National Cancer Institute cell lines, even killing some. Other experiments suggest it interferes with proteins known to activate genes, and that’s what Lui and colleagues say could aid the cancer research.

They tested triptolide’s effect on different proteins involved in gene control. They found it blocks the enzymatic activity of one, the XPB protein. That could explain the anti-inflammatory and anticancer effects and the researcher plan to study the relationship further.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and her mother, Dr. Nina Rawlings, will be the keynote speakers March 26 at an educational symposium hosted by the Maryland affiliate of Susan G. Koman for the Cure, the breast cancer organization.

The forum will be held from 8 a.m.-noon at the New Psalmist Baptist Church in Baltimore City and will offer lessons on the impact of breast cancer within the community, commentary from experts and survivors and information on local resources.

It’s free and open to the public, though advanced registration is required by March 21. Go to www.komenmd.org for more information or to register.

Rawlings-Blake and her mother, a breast cancer survivor and a pediatrician, will share experiences, according to the group.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 5:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

This is the latest in a series of blog posts by Mark Jeter, who is getting treated for stomach cancer.

He is chronicling his experience for The Sun in an effort to bring attention to the disease and tell people his story. He recently finished his first week of chemotherapy.

Here his wife Carla fills us in on some of the symptoms of treatment. She also talks about how her husband, who is always joking with people, has developed a bond with one of the technicians at the hospital:

Today was a great day for Mark!

He had a little indigestion this morning, got some meds, then felt great!

He is sleeping a lot more, but that's normal because the chemo makes you fatigued. He's lost a little of his appetite, which is also normal.

We went for a walk early this evening, and now we're chilling watching American Idol.

We will be discharged tomorrow morning.

Mark has met his match in his night technician Shenita, aka Smiley! She is hilarious and can go toe to toe with him! Lol. He tried to give her a hard way to go, but she came right back every time!

Read more about Mark's journey with cancer.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 12:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Cancer, Mark Jeter's Cancer Journey
        

Baltimore native Mark Jeter has agreed to chronicle his battle with stomach cancer on this blog.

I told you earlier this week how he discovered a 14 centimeter round cell sarcoma in his stomach last year.

He had it removed and this week began chemotherapy at Greater Baltimore Medical Center to kill any other traces of the disease.

His wife Carla has been by his side at the hospital.

Here, he writes about his first day of chemotherapy:

Arrived at the GBMC at 7:30 a.m. to get a double port put in my chest. This will allow them to run two different drugs that go into my main artery at the same time. They don't put you to sleep for the double port, they numb the area and you can feel alot of pressure, some blood running and some pain.

I waited seven hours to get to a room to start chemo. Completed the first round of chemo and they put five different drugs in me. I thought they were going to put me to sleep but they kept my butt up and I felt everything - it was a little painful. The chemo started last night at 8 p.m. and won't stop until Wednesday night or Thursday morning.

I am one day into treatment and all it is IV's running day and night. I got sick today, nothing serious but I started sweating, felt flush and the nurse came in with some medicine and I felt so much better.

Now it's 7 p.m. and I am waiting on some food from Ruby Tuesday.

A brother has got to eat good.

Read more about Mark's battle with cancer.

(Photo courtesy of Mark Glaze. Mark Jeter and wife Carla.)

Posted by Andrea Walker at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer, Mark Jeter's Cancer Journey
        

Mark Jeter's life changed last year when he was hit with excruciating stomach pains and became gravely ill.

The 47-year-old, who at the time was enjoying being a newlywed with wife Carla, found out he had cancer.

Doctors in Baltimore removed a round cell sarcoma, that had grown to 14 centimeters, from his stomach. It's a rare form of cancer and doctors had to send the tumor to a specialist at Emory University to figure out exactly what it was and how to treat it.

Jeter, who grew up in Baltimore, is now undergoing that treatment and has agreed to share his story with readers of The Sun on this blog. He and wife Carla hope it will be cathartic to share their experience with others and may also help others dealing with a similar illness.

Jeter is determined to beat the disease and has an extremely optimistic attitude. He looks to two daughters (from a previous relationship), a granddaughter and of course wife, Carla, for inspiration and support. He also has a large family that likes to get together for big feasts on weekends that have also helped to keep him upbeat.

Jeter is also a friend of mine.

He will share his experiences when he feels up to it. At times, he may convey his feelings to Carla who will put them on paper. The amateur photographer will also share pictures with us from the hospital.

Here is the first post on how he is grappling with cancer.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)
Categories: Cancer, Mark Jeter's Cancer Journey
        

As if we didn't get enough warnings this week of the hazards of smoking -- a new study links it to increased risk of breast cancer.

The increased risk was modest, and pertains only to women who smoked before menopause, according to the research appearing in the latest Archives of Internal Medicine. The data was gleaned from the long-running Nurse's Health Study, where Harvard researchers examined the records of nearly 112,000 women between 1976 and 2000, checking for women who smoked or who were around secondhand smoke.

Some 8,772 breast cancer cases developed during a follow-up. People who smoked a lot in their youth for a long amount of time were most likely to develop breast cancer, the report concluded. Meanwhile, not smoking or exposure to parents who smoked at home were not related to increased risk for breast cancer.

The carcinogens in cigarettes have long been known to cause lung cancer, as well as several other types including kidney, bladder and pancreatic cancers, according to the National Cancer Institute. But the relationship with breast cancer has been inconclusive for years.

The new study says it's the largest thus far to examine the risk associated between tobacco use and breast cancer. Past studies have tried to investigate the link, but their results were mixed and the relationship was unclear. This study, however, found that smoking impacts a woman's cancer risk depending on her age and hormones may be at play.

“Smoking before menopause was positively associated with breast cancer risk, and there were hints from our results that smoking after menopause might be associated with a slightly decreased breast cancer risk,” the study states. “This difference suggests an antiestrogenic effect of smoking among postmenopausal women that may further reduce their already low endogenous estrogen levels.”

Associated Press photo

Continue reading "Study: smoking could increase breast cancer risk" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

How’s this for holiday warmth? The University of Maryland Medical Center Knit & Crochet Circle have made a bunch of lap blankets for cancer patients. They’ve been handing them out this week in the Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center.

The goal of the group, made up of people who knit and crochet from the center, was to make 100 blankets for patients undergoing cancer treatment during the holidays.

Trisha Kendall, a nurse and the group’s founder, said they exceeded their goal with help from people inside and outside the center.

“Staff from across the medical center joined forces with community members from the Waxter Center, local churches and cancer survivors to give to others this season,” she said in a statement. “It’s very touching to see how many people came through to help.”

They made 156 blankets – all with tags that wish the survivors strength, peach and recovery.

The circle meets on the first Wednesday of the month from noon to 2 p.m. at the center. The public is welcome. For more information, call Trisha at 410-328-5420 or email tkendall@umm.edu.

Photo of Trisha Kendall and a cancer patient courtesy of the University of Maryland Medical Center

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 2:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Today is the Great American Smokeout. That’s the day when smokers are supposed to quit for at least one day.

State officials believe there will be a flood of calls to its free Quitline, 1-800-QUIT-NOW, which is manned from 8 a.m. to 3 a.m. seven days a week by professionals who can help smokers with their addiction.

Last year, more than 12,000 Marylanders called – a number that officials say helped the state achieve the 6th lowest prevalence of cigarette smoking in the nation, based on data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s despite cuts to the state’s smoking cessation funding, which comes from the Cigarette Restitution Fund created by a legal settlement with tobacco companies.

The day is sponsored by the American Cancer Society. Tips for quitting can be found on the group’s website. So can benefits, which include lower blood pressure, better lung function and circulation, and lower chance of heart disease and stroke. That annoying cough will also diminish.

Think you can quit, even for a day?

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer
        

The new body scanners at U.S. airports are getting a lot of attention for how much they show of the human body, but doctors are saying there’s another problem: The radiation ticks up the chance of developing skin cancer.

In an interview with Agence France Presse, Dr. Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, said, “They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays."

Travelers have the option of going through the scanner or getting a full-body pat down. But given the time constraints it’s not clear how many people will opt for that.

A Sun Sentinel story that rounds up Love’s and others’ comments, quotes scientists and doctors concerned about the screening because so many people use the nation’s airports. That story quotes scientists with the University of California at San Francisco who wrote a letter to the White House Office of Science and Technology in April raising concerns.

“While the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high,” said the letter, adding that “independent safety data do not exist” and raising the potential for further harm if a high dosage was accidentally emitted."

The government said the doses were small and met safety standards.

So, which is more concerning, radiation or exposure?
 
Chicago Tribune photo of scanners

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 6:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer
        

Since news broke that CT scans are better than X-rays in finding early lung cancer tumors, and thus increasing the chances of survival, the questions from patients have begun.

So, the University of Maryland has set up a web chat with Dr. Martin Edelman, a lung cancer expert.  It will be held today at 1:30 p.m.

The link at Maryland is here: http://www.umm.edu/webchat/. You can post a question there, or just read more about lung cancer.
 
You also can read my story in The Sun on the trial that produced the data.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

A years-long study that compared methods of detecting lung cancer is ending early because the researchers believe they have identified a method that can reduce deaths by 20 percent.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths. It killed 159,390 people in 2009, according to the National Cancer Institute – more people than breast, prostate, colon and pancreatic cancer combined.

Not all lung cancer is a result of smoking. But with 90 million current and former smokers around the nation at higher risk of developing lung cancer, finding a way to diagnose and treat them has been a priority at the National Cancer Institute, which initiated the study.

The randomized clinical trial, which began in 2002 with 53,000 current and former heavy smokers, found that spiral computed tomography (CT) scans are better than standard X-rays. Thirty sites were used to test the patients for lung cancer, including Johns Hopkins in Maryland. A University of Maryland oncologist also helped verify the study results.

Now, most lung cancers are detected when there are symptoms, often after it has spread outside the lung in up to 30 percent of cases, according to the National Cancer Institute. The CT scan, first used in the 1990s, is better at finding small cancers before they have spread.

While the CT scans were found to be more effective in finding cancer earlier, there were drawbacks. It’s more costly and not covered by most insurance or Medicare. It can have a higher rate of false positives, which could lead to more unnecessary procedures. And there’s more radiation to the patients, itself a cancer causer.

The study was supposed to last 10 years, but a body examining the study said there was enough evidence to stop and issue findings and publish the data in a peer-reviewed journal.

According to Dr. Harold Varmus, NCI Director, during a press conference today, “Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in the U.S. and throughout the world, so a validated approach that can reduce lung cancer mortality by even 20 percent has the potential to spare very significant numbers of people from the ravages of this disease. 

He added, "But these findings should in no way distract us from continued efforts to curtail the use of tobacco, which will remain the major causative factor for lung cancer and several other diseases.”

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

The American Cancer Society is reporting that 7,000 people turned up for Sunday's Making Strides Against Breast Cancer event in Baltimore. The 4-mile walk raised more than $430,000 to benefit the society's screening and patient support programs, according to event publicists.

Are you a survivor who participated in the event? If so, share your photo here.

And as Breast Cancer Awareness Month draws to a close, check out our coverage.

Photo by Maximilian Franz, courtesy of Maroon PR

Posted by Kim Walker at 3:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

It's Breast Cancer Awareness Month and everything seems to be pink, from yogurt containers to NFL football players' shoes to the flag on the Baltimore Sun website.

To be sure, one in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime. It's the second most deadly kind of cancer for women behind lung cancer.

But Dr. Barron Lerner, a medical historian at Columbia University Medical Center, wrote a column on the New York Times' Well blog about the fatigue and even backlash.

He writes that not everyone believes awareness is helping advance the cause. And at worst, some believe all the money raised is going to corporate interests that are not always aligned with prevention of breast cancer (some are polluters that may contribute to cancer's rise and others want only to develop treatment drugs and not a cure.)

What do you think of all the pink?

Baltimore Sun file photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)
Categories: Cancer
        

A couple of years ago, a coworker of mine, Stephanie Desmon, wrote a series about women with breast cancer who volunteered to receive a vaccine as part of a clinical trial. Sue Marangi was one of them.

Sue and the other women had hoped not only to save themselves, but to help others -- who had yet to even be diagnosed with breast cancer. Sue had fought cancer for three decades and survived two more years after Stephanie's series. But, recently, she passed away at 62.

Since it's Breast Cancer Awareness Month, I thought I'd share the official obit the Sun ran. And here's a moving tribute to the woman, written by Stephanie, who now works for Johns Hopkins.

And to learn more about breast cancer, cutting-edge treatments and some of the women living with the disease -- the second most diagnosed and the second most deadly kind of cancer for women -- look for a special section in your Sun or in Baltimoresun.com this weekend.

Baltimore Sun file photo of Sue Marangi

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 4:53 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Cooler temperatures are coming, but your skin can still be damaged by the sun.

The Skin Cancer Foundation is reminding everyone to continue using protection from cancer-causing ultraviolet radiation.

“It’s not just the sunburns that usually occur during the summer or on vacation that are associated with skin cancer,” said Dr. Perry Robins, president of the foundation, in a statement. “All of your lifetime sun exposure adds to your risk of skin cancer.”

There are different types of skin cancer, caused by different kinds of exposure:
Intense, intermittent sun exposure is the kind you get from laying out on the beach and getting burned, or even raking leaves in October.

The damage can lead to melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, the foundation says. Almost 69,000 melanomas are diagnosed a year, and about 8,650 people die. It can also lead to basal cell carcinoma, the most common type of skin cancers with more than 2 million Americans affected a year.

The incidental sun exposure that accumulates over time while you’re out walking the dog or to your car can lead to squamous cell carcinoma, the second most common type of skin cancer. There are an estimated 700,000 cases annually in the United States, leading to some 2,500 deaths. You can also get basal cell carcinomas this way.

The foundation wants everyone to have a year-round sun protection regimen. The group recommends: wearing densely woven and bright- or dark- colored clothes that cover as much skin as possible, wearing broad-brimmed hats and sunglasses that block ultraviolet radiation, seeking shade outside and wearing sunscreen with a sun protection factor (SPF) of 15 or more.

Doing a self exam every month and getting a dermatologist to do an annual exam is also recommended because most skin cancers are curable when caught early.

AFP/Getty photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Breast cancer awareness month isn't until October, but we're always interested in stories about personal health journeys. We have a gallery in which breast cancer survivors can upload a photo of themselves and share a little about their experience. Click here to participate. And find current breast cancer news coverage, here and calendar of local events here.

Baltimore Sun file photo of last year's Komen Race for the Cure.

Posted by Kim Walker at 6:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

A Toronto woman who told friends that she had terminal cancer and then set up a fake charity has been exposed as a fake, according to the Toronto Sun.

Ashley Kirilow is now missing with the thousans of dollars that people thought was going to cancer research through Change for a Cure.

On Facebook, the very venue that the woman used to scam people, there now a facebook page DEMANDING ASHLEY KIRILOW BE HELD FULLY ACCOUTABLE AND ARRESTED! It's got 249 members and they all seem pretty disgusted that someone would prey on others, particularly those who have lost loved ones.

So, think it's easier now in the age of social media to scam people? Will people always fall for a sad story? Does this make you less likely to give to a charity? 

Photo courtesy of Demanding Ashley Kirilow be held fully accountable and arrested Facebook page

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 1:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer
        

A bit of good news for those with pancreatic tumors: Johns Hopkins doctors did their first laparoscopic Whipple operation.

Generally, these six or seven-hour operations are highly invasive. The patients are cut all the way up the abdomen and parts of several organs are removed: the head of the pancreas, gallbladder, common bile duct and part of the duodenum, stomach and small intestine.

The surgery leaves a big scar that can become infected.

But the surgeons, Martin Makary and Barish Edil, were able to avoid the big incision. The had been doing parts of the Whipple operation laparoscopically – through tiny incisions – but never the whole thing. They gave it a try when a 43-year-old North Carolina woman asked them to. They had warned her that it might not be possible.

When she awoke, she had three small bandages on her belly. And the fist-sized tumor turned out not to be malignant. She didn’t have cancer.

Other doctors have performed such a surgery, but this is a first at Hopkins, where the procedure is considered one of the signature surgeries. Perhaps more could be done this way?

It would cut down on hospital stays and reduce the risk of infection. 

Graphic courtesy of Johns Hopkins

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Cancer
        

Most Americans are getting screened for colon and breast cancer, two of the nation’s deadliest cancers. But millions still are not, and more than 30,000 people died last year because they weren’t screened, according to new data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Colorectal screenings have increased to 63 percent in 2008 from 52 percent in 2002, the CDC said. And 81 percent of women 50-74 years old did get the recommended mammography screening for breast cancer in 2008.

That left more than 22 million people who did not have the colon screening and about 7 million women without a mammogram.

“It's encouraging to see more adults getting recommended cancer screenings,” said Dr. Thomas Frieden, CDC director, in a statement. “But we have more to do, especially when it comes to getting more people screened for colorectal cancer, which kills more American non-smokers than any other cancer.”

The data come from the state-level 2008 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey.

Freiden said that the data show one in three people who should be screen for colon cancer have not been, with rates lower for Hispanics and Blacks. He said 32,000 lives could be saved is every adult 50 and older got tested regularly. Colon cancer is the second leading cause of death in the country, after lung cancer.

He estimated 12,000 women’s lives are saved by mammography every year. Breast cancer is the most commonly found cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths among American women.

The CDC found that doctor recommendations and health insurance coverage strongly influence screening rates. Officials also said the doctor recommendations were underused.

For more information, go to the CDC’s site for colon cancer  and the agency’s screening site.

AP photo of a mammogram

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 3:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Wearing sunblock and drinking plenty of fluids are well known defenses against the harmful effects of the sun.

But Rebecca Myrowitz, a nutritionist, in the Greater Baltimore Medical Center's Comprehensive Obesity Management Program, says food is important too.

"It's getting nicer outside, and people are enjoying the weather," she said. "It's important to wear sunblock and drink fluids, but don't forget about food."

Fruits and vegetables have protective qualities for skin, as well as hair and nails, because they contain vitamins, minerals and anti-oxidants, she said.

But there are others high in biotin, omega 3s, manganese, copper, vitamin E, and protein.

Here are her five picks to mix things up:

+Sunflower seeds: They are an excellent source of vitamin E. which is an antioxidant that provides protecton from damage caused in cells by free radicals. UV radiation from the sun causes free radicals in the body that can mutate DNA and lead signs of aging and cancer.

+Almonds and Greek yogurt: They both have biotin, a B vitamin that is a natural skin protectant. Greek yogurt is higher in protein than regular yogurt, 18 grams of protein vs. 6 grams. Protein supports skin, hair and nails, which are most susceptible to damage when exposed to sunlight.

+Salmon: It's an excellent source of anti-inflammatory omega-3s. Low-grade inflammation increases a person's risk for cancer. It also helps lower cholesterol.

+Quinoa: This looks like a grain but is the seed of a plant, that is becoming more common in stores. It contains magnesium and copper, which make an enzyme that protects the skin from free radicals.

So if you are wondering about good-for-you-foods for summertime, Myrowitz hopes you think of these.

"Sunblock for the outside, these foods for the inside," she said.

Associated Press photo of almond-incrusted salmon

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer, Diet and exercise
        

With summer officially in full swing -- and the 90 degree heat we'll be experiencing all week -- now is a good time to talk about sun exposure and skin cancer. Anne Arundel Medical Center dermatologist Dr. Lisa Renfro will be taking reader questions about skin cancer and other conditions. Dr. Renfro is a board-certified dermatologist, and is also a dermatologic surgeon who specializes in MOHS micrographic surgery and surgical excisions for skin cancer. She has extensive experience with basal cell carcinoma and malignant melanoma, as well as a host of other cancerous and non-cancerous skin conditions.

Feel free to post questions now and we'll get to them at our noon discussion. Questions submitted Monday and earlier today will be added.

Posted by Kim Walker at 11:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Cancer
        

Today is the summer solstice, the longest day of the year and generally thought of as the official start of the season, so I thought it would be a good opportunity to talk about sunscreen again.

Here's a link to an earlier post on an Environmental Working Group study of sunscreens. Take a look at see where yours ranks.  

The advocacy and research group looked at harmful ingredients and effectiveness in 500 beach and sports sunscreens. In the end, officials recommended only 8 percent. They didn't like anything that promised SPF over 50 or anything with oxybenzone, which the group says is linked ot cancer and reproductive problems. They also didn't like anything with vitamin A, linked to accelerated development of skin tumors.

SPF of 50 or higher, and others contained oxybenzone, which the group says is linked to cancer and reproductive problems, or vitamin A, which has recently been linked to accelerated development of skin tumors and lesions.

In general, the group said to wear a hat and shirts, choose lotions over sprays and powders, choose SPF 30+ over SPF 50+ and pick zinc or titanium dioxide over oxybenzone.

My colleage Liz Kay also wrote Sunday on the subject. Read her findings here. She also had some tips, including avoiding prime hours outside in the sun, applying sunscreen 15 minutes before you go outside and reapplying often.

AP photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 10:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer in the United States, according to the National Institutes of Health. And during the summer, sun exposure is of particular concern. At noon Tuesday, Anne Arundel Medical Center dermatologist Dr. Lisa Renfro will be taking reader questions about skin cancer and other conditions here at Picture of Health. Feel free to post questions in our comments field now to be used during Tuesday's chat.

Updated: The link for the chat is here. Questions submitted earlier are already in the system.

Posted by Kim Walker at 6:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Cancer
        

Researchers have long considered the possibility that Vitamin D might be used to prevent cancer, but a new study shows that is not the case.

The large-scale study looked at whether increased Vitamin D would reduce the risk in seven cancers - non-Hodgkin lymphoma and cancers of the endometrium, esophagus, stomach, kidney, ovary or pancreas.

 Kathy J. Helzlsouer, director of the Prevention & Research Center at Mercy Medical Center, chaired the study. Other institutitions, including the National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute, were also involved. Details will appear in the July 1 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology.

Researchers took samples of Vitamin D levels from about 12,000 men and women before they were diagnosed with cancer. They followed the people for more than three decades.

They then compared the samples to those participants who were eventually diagnosed with cancer during that time period to those who didn't get the disease. There was no significant variation of Vitamin D levels between the two groups, meaning higher levels didn't make a difference in cancer risk.

Vitamin D is made naturally by the body when the skin is exposed to sunlight. It can also be obtained by the body in foods, fortified foods and nutritional supplements. The vitamin is used for healthy bones, calcium absorption and immune function.

Posted by Andrea Walker at 12:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)
Categories: Cancer
        

We're all getting conditioned to go online to Wikipedia to find quick information. But we're also constantly warned that it's not policed and it's not always accurate.

Well, some researchers from the Kimmel Cancer Center at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia found that the info is rarely wrong.

And that's good news. The bad news is that they found it's hard for people to understand because it's not written in plain English.

Researchers lead by Dr. Yaacov Lawrence, assistant professor of Radiation Oncology at Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, compared Wikipedia's cancer information with  information found on the patient-oriented section of the National Cancer Institute's Physician Data Query, a peer-reviewed cancer database.

"There are a vast number of websites where patients can obtain cancer information," Lawrence said in a statement. "The purpose of this study was to answer one question: Is the cancer information on Wikipedia correct? Reassuringly, we found that errors were extremely rare on Wikipedia. But the way information was presented on PDQ is more patient-friendly."

The researchers looked at information on 10 cancer types on both websites. The found less than two percent of the information either site was wrong. Both sites had about the same depth of coverage. Both glossed over controversial aspects of care. But the PDQ site was more readable -- it was geared toward a 9th grader while the Wikipedia was written more for a college student, the researchers said.

They plan to bring in some cancer patients to test their findings. In the meantime, if you want online cancer information, you have a choice. Anyone use either of these sites?

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has come out with a study that says U.S. brands of cigarettes have higher levels of cancer causing chemicals than foreign made ones.

CDC researchers took samples from the mouths of smokers in the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. Their findings were reported in the June issue of Cancer Epidemiology Biomakers and Prevention.

The results centered around nitrosamines, the major carcinogens in tobacco. And the study was the first ever to compare the cancer causing agent in people from different countries.

"We know that cigarettes from around the world vary in their ingredients and the way they are produced," said Dr. Jim Pirkle, deputy director for science at CDC's National Center for Envirnmental Health, Division of Laboratory Sciences, in a statement. "All of these cigarettes contain harmful levelsof carcinogens, but these finding show that amounts of tobacco-specific nitrosamines differ from country to country, and U.S. brands are the highest in the study."

The researchers said U.S. brands had an "American blend" of tobacco with higher nitrosamine levels. The other countries used "bright" tobacco, lighter in color and clue-cured. If the American makers switched blending and curing practices they could reduce exposure to one type of carcinogen, though not necessarily make the cigarettes safer.

So, does this matter to you? If you smoke, how loyal are you to your brand?

AFP/Getty photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Local governments have banned minors from using them and even the FDA is considering taking that step, but tanning beds remain popular. New research, however, suggests that indoor tanning might be riskier than previously thought.

In a study of about 2,200 people, those who used indoor tanning beds had a 74 percent higher risk of getting melanoma, the most dangerous form of skin cancer, than those who did not, according to new research published this week in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

The study asked about lifetime sun exposure and found the risks increased the most for those who tanned for 10 years or longer.

The study provides some of the strongest evidence yet of the link between tanning beds and melanoma, which strikes nearly 69,000 Americans every year, killing nearly 9,000, this USA Today story explains. Although the folks at the Tanning Association disagree with the findings, the story states.

Last year, the World Health Organization put tanning beds on its list of known carcinogens. Local governments including Howard County's have banned people under 18 from using tanning beds and FDA is considering doing the same. Health care reform legislation even includes a 10 percent tax on tanning. And we told you about a study earlier this year that likened tanning to an addiction. Yet, many remain devoted to the tanning bed. Are you?

AP photo

Continue reading "Study: Tanning beds vastly increase skin cancer risk" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

The results of the world's biggest study on whether cell phones are linked to brain cancer turned up inconclusive, researchers reported yesterday. But the bigger story might just be the controversy behind the report.

This Reuters article explains major flaws in how the study was conducted. Instead of finally putting to rest the question of a possible link between cancer and cell phones, the long-awaited Interphone study has only left everyone -- scientists included -- frustrated, the story explains. 

While studies structured this way can help explain whether a disease is associated with a lifestyle, they're voluntary and, well, that can make the results unreliable, the story explains. Some people may have participated because they believe that cell phones caused their brain cancer, skewing results, the story states.

In the 10-year study of 13,000 people, cell phone use didn't increase the risk of developing two types of brain cancer.

The researchers themselves acknowledged the report's limitations.

So now what, you ask? Back to the drawing board. Researchers said more study is needed, particularly when it comes to how cell phones affect teens, who are the fastest growing group of cell users.

"This was a very complex study, and results were very difficult to interpret because of a number of methodological issues," said Elisabeth Cardis at the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, who led the group of 21 international scientists conducting the study, told the Washington Post.

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

We hear a lot about pricey new cancer drugs driving up the cost of treating the disease, but a new study suggests meds aren't the sole reason for soaring treatment costs.

The research, published today in the journal Cancer, finds the cost of treating cancer doubled over the last two decades with  more people getting treated for the disease helping to drive that cost.

The total cost of treating cancer in the U.S. in 1987 was $24.7 billion (in 2007 dollars), compared with $48.1 billion a year during 2001-2005, according to the research compiled by experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But that cost kept in line with the rapid rise in health care spending. Cancer treatment as a percentage of overall medical treatment has stayed steady at about 5 percent for the past two decades.

That's not to discount the exorbitant cost of new cancer drugs. Consider this story from the NYT about prohibitively expensive cancer treatments that leads with a new chemo medication that costs $30,000. You read that right -- 30K.

And heard of Provenge? The prostate cancer vaccine that recently won FDA approval? That's expected to cost a mere $93,000.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Tennis legend Martina Navratilova has been diagnosed with a non-invasive breast cancer called ductal carcinoma in situ. Known as DCIS, the condition affects the milk ducts and has about a 98 percent survival rate.

The malignancy can be detected by mammograms and accounts for 20 to 25 percent of all breast cancers diagnoses. But how and if to treat it remains controversial, particularly in light of renewed debate over the merits of breast cancer screening for women in their 40s.

Researchers with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force say it's unknown if DCIS progresses to an invasive cancer and argue that treatment of it may represent overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

A recent study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute recently called for more research on how to deal with DCIS, the LA Times explains.

AP photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 2:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer, Women's health
        

Skin cancer diagnoses are on the rise and the disease affects more people than all other cancers combined, according to two new studies that aim to sound the alarm on what experts are calling an epidemic.

Researchers estimate that in 2006 there were more than 3.5 million non-melanoma skin cancers in the U.S., with about 2.1 million patients treated for the disease, according to the articles, appearing in the latest Archives of Dermatology.

Most skin cancers are of the non-melanoma variety, meaning they start in the basal or squamous cells on the outer layer of the skin. The culprit: too much sun. (Here are some skin cancer basics from the American Cancer Society)

This form of cancer is far less deadly than the melanoma variety, not to mention other cancers. But the disease is serious and treating it comes at a high cost. In 2004, nearly $1.5 billion was spent on treating non-melanoma skin cancer.

Researchers said that many non-melanomas aren't reported to cancer registries, so they came up with their own estimates which they say are more accurate. In one article, Dr. Robert S. Stern, of Harvard Medical School developed a mathematical model to estimate the prevalence of non-melanoma skin cancer in 2007. Another researcher, Dr. Howard W. Rogers, of Advanced Dermatology, Norwich, Conn. reviewed Medicare databases and national surveys.

Tanning beds could have something to do with the rise, say advocates. Howard County, Maryland, has already outlawed tanning beds for people under 18 and similar actions have been considered in states nationwide. 

Do you tan? Be honest, now... 

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Doctors should educate their patients better about the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening, according to new guidelines from the American Cancer Society.

Physicians should discuss the downsides to the blood test, known as prostate-specific antigen screening, or PSA, including potential diagnosis of cancers that may never harm them or kill them and along the way, exposing them to unnecessary treatment, the recommendations say.

The guidelines also question the use of digital rectal exams saying they should be considered optional, not a standard part of screening.

The guidelines come on the heels of several studies that raise doubts about PSA testing. The recommendations reference early findings of two long-range studies underway about screening.

In one, researchers randomly assigned 76,600 men to two groups. One received annual PSA tests for 6 years and digital rectal examinations every year for 4 years and the other was the control. Researchers found little difference in prostate cancer death rates between the two groups after 7 years and again after a decade.

We reported here about a study last year raising concerns that men are being overtreated for the disease and as a result, subjected to unnecessary biopsies and treatment. And another study published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that men are not getting adequate counseling from their doctors on the risks of screening. 

Continue reading "American Cancer Society urges more education on prostate cancer screening" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 1:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Cancer, Men's health
        

We're less than 24 hours away from our live chat on everything you wanted to know about mammograms. 

Confused about controversial new government recommendations concerning who should get the breast x-rays? Have a question about how mammograms are done? Confused about the newest mammogram technology?

Dr. Jean Warner, director of the Tyanna O'Brien Center for Women's Imaging at Mercy Medical Center, will be here at noon Tuesday to answer your questions. Feel free to start asking in advance, either here in the comments section or by sending me an email: kelly.brewington@baltsun.com

See you then.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 1:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

African-Americans have the highest incidence and death rates for lung cancer. As with many puzzling racial disparities in health, researchers don't know for sure why blacks are more likely than other racial groups to suffer from the disease. But a new study suggests blacks may hold mistaken and fatalistic perceptions toward lung cancer treatment which, coupled with a reluctance to visit the doctor, could attribute to the disparity.

Researchers at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston wondered if perception of lung cancer among different races could explain some of the disparity. The study, appearing today CANCER, the journal of the American Cancer Society, surveyed 1,530 people from a National Cancer Institute 2005 study.

Both blacks and whites underestimated how lethal lung cancer is, with many saying that the percentage of people who survive lung cancer past 5 years is 50 percent, when the actual figure is 15 percent. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the U.S., killing 162,000 people each year.

But on other issues, blacks and whites had very different views. African-Americans were more likely than whites (53 percent vs. 37 percent) to say they were confused by too many recommendations on how to prevent lung cancer. Blacks were also less likely than whites to say the disease caused by lifestyle (i.e. smoking) --73 percent of blacks vs. 85 percent of whites.

And here's where it gets interesting: 22 percent of blacks said they would be reluctant to be checked for lung cancer symptoms because they're scared of getting a bad prognosis. That figure was just 9 percent for whites.

Continue reading "Racial disparities in lung cancer -- could attitudes be at play?" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Cancer
        

A government panel's recommendation last fall that women start routine mammograms at age 50, not 40 and that doctors shouldn't bother teaching breast self-exams, set of a firestorm of controversy and much confusion.

Well, the uproar isn't over.

Doctors and patients disagree about the guidelines, with doctors more likely to adopt the new recommendations and patients more apt to reject them, a new editorial in today's Annals of Internal Medicine reveals.

The editorial includes the results of a survey of 651 people, about 60 percent were physicians or other medical professionals and nearly 40 percent were members of the general public. 

Some 67 percent of medical professionals said they would stop offering routine mammograms to patients in their 40s. Another 41 percent say they would stop advising patients to do breast self-exams.

Women thought otherwise. About 71 percent said they were very or somewhat unlikely to forgo routine screening in their 40s, no matter what their doctor recommended.

The findings underscore the complexity of the debate, the editorial goes on to say. Breast cancer on its own is emotional. Everyone knows someone touched by the disease. Add the new guidelines, and you've got the makings of a confusing, politically-charged discussion that has yet to be resolved.  (Indeed, some feared insurance companies would no longer cover the screening, others predicted it was the beginning of rationing, and politicians moved to get legislation passed to guarantee women get mammograms starting at 40.)

So, now what?

The editors at the Annals of Internal Medicine come to the defense of the task force saying that even though people claim mammograms save lives, "only a fraction of abnormalities initially detected on mammography and subsequently treated truly represents a life saved rather than unnecessary or premature treatment."

Continue reading "Women, doctors at odds over mammogram guidelines" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

The mammogram debate may be have simmered since the uproar of a couple months ago. But confusion among women about when to start getting breast x-rays surges on.

In case you missed it, a federal panel of experts said in November that women should start getting mammograms at age 50, not 40. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force said its goal was to reduce the harms of unnecessary treatment.

But critics -- doctors and patient advocates alike -- pounced on the recommendations and groups such as the American Cancer Society said women in their 40s should still get the screening tests. Maryland's own Sen. Barbara Mikulski even got a provision written into the health care bill on the issue.

So, what to do?

If you live in the Baltimore area, Anne Arundel Medical Center will host a free community forum on breast imaging Monday from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on the seventh floor of its Health Sciences Pavilion. Here are more details. During the forum, a breast surgeon, a radiologist and an oncologist, will offer their thoughts on the controversy.

The issue is far from settled. Screening has its downsides, argues a pair of pieces in the Journal of the American Medical Association. One, by Dr. Steven Woolf of Virginia Commonwealth University, notes the task force's recommendation wasn't calling for a ban of mammograms for women in their 40s, but rather advising doctors to discuss the matter with their patients to come to a decision on whether to screen. And ultimately, the decision rests with the patient, offers this doc. 

Chicago Tribune photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

There are lots of assumptions made about the U.S. health care system and how it differs from say, the British nationalized model. In America, everyone has unfettered access to top-notch drugs, while the Brits ration their care, goes the stereotypes. That leads many critics of U.S. health reform efforts to assume the American system is just fine the way it is.

But a new study by Johns Hopkins researchers finds the perceptions aren't so. The study compares the two systems' access to the most expensive cancer medications and asks: Which is more fair? And which cancer patients are better off?

The study, appearing in Milbank Quarterly, compared the costs of 11 pricey cancer drugs. In the UK, seven are free to all patients, with no out-of-pocket costs. Four aren't because they aren't considered worth the limited benefit. If patients want those drugs, they need to pay up.

Here at home, people with insurance have some coverage of all 11 drugs--but the range of out of pocket costs are enormous, depending on the carrier.

Both systems involve a kind of rationing, concludes the study. And here's something that will make reform foes gasp: The issue isn't whether rationing is good or bad, argues the reports' author, Ruth R. Faden, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute for Bioethics. That's because no system can provide patients every medication or intervention to every patient all the time, she writes.

"The issue is what we should do about extraordinarily expensive treatments, some of which do very little to improve how well or how long people live," said Faden in a statement. At the same time, she adds, "there is no ethically defensible reason why some Americans have access to expensive cancer drugs and some do not."

Continue reading "Who gets expensive cancer drugs? And thoughts on rationing" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer, Health care reform
        

New research puts a number on the cancer risk that the growing number of CT scans can pose patients -- the latest evidence that the scans may be overused.

The 70 million CT scans done in 2007 -- a jump from just 3 million in 1980 (!) -- could ultimately cause 29,000 new cancer cases, according to estimates from the study, which appears in the latest Archives of Internal Medicine. 

Doctors like the scans because they provide super-clear pictures inside the body. Their use has transformed medicine, allowing earlier diagnoses and treatment. But the research, the latest among several papers of late to raise doubts about whether CT scans make people healthier, suggests the imaging can do more harm than good. 

We've written before about not only the potential dangers of excessive imaging -- but how it contributes to skyrocketing health care costs. Those scans are pricey and can bring in big money to doctors practices, hospitals and imaging centers.

At a time when the nation is trying to rein in health care costs, could more prudent use of CT scans help?

Continue reading "CT scans, cancer risk and health care costs" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer, Health care reform
        

Good news for men who enjoy a cup -- or more -- of coffee in the morning: avid coffee drinkers may lower their risk of developing prostate cancer, new research suggests.

Now, don't expect doctors to start prescribing morning lattes. The research is preliminary.

But in a federally-funded study of 50,000 men, those who drank the most coffee had a 60 percent less risk of aggressive prostate cancer than non-coffee drinkers, according to data presented at the American Association of Cancer Research conference taking place in Houston.

Well, why is that?

“Coffee has effects on insulin and glucose metabolism as well as sex hormone levels, all of which play a role in prostate cancer. It was plausible that there may be an association between coffee and prostate cancer,” said study author Kathryn M. Wilson, a postdoctoral fellow at the Channing Laboratory, Harvard Medical School in a statement.

Continue reading "Fight prostate cancer with a cup of joe" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

With the mammogram controversy showing no signs of simmering, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued a statement yesterday afternoon in an attempt to distance the administration from the guidelines that have sparked so much debate.

If you haven't heard, a federal panel of medical experts said Monday that women should delay mammograms until age 50 and doctors shouldn't bother teaching women to do breast self exams. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force said its goal was to reduce the harms of unnecessary treatment.

But critics are saying it's a glimpse of health care rationing soon to come under health reform. A group of Republican congresswomen said the guidelines are "a step back for women" and the beginning of rationing. The panel, critics fear, will influence policy and insurance companies won't cover the screens. Many of you expressed similar worries in my last blog post on this issue.

Sebelius tries to debunk this right away: The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations. They do not set federal policy and they don't determine what services are covered by the federal government. ... Indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action.

Continue reading "More mammogram debate -- administration distances itself from guidelines" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Cancer
        

A government panel's new recommendation that women start mammograms at age 50, not 40, is has sparked angst, confusion, and even anger -- among health advocates and medical experts alike.

As we told you in a story today, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force reversed existing recommendations that women get mammograms every one or two years starting at 40. Now, it says, start in your 50s, and do them every two years.

And remember how doctors have urged women to do breast self-exams? Well, skip those too. There's no evidence that teaching women to examine their breasts actually saves lives, the panel now says. 

So what's a woman in her 40s to think? That's the tenor of the emails I've been getting in response to this story. Women are confused. For years, doctors, patient advocates and every public service announcement with a pink ribbon on it has urged women to get annual mammograms and check their breasts for lumps. So, now what? Talk to your doctor, says the panel.

But many doctors are against the new recommendations, especially cancer specialists. CNN notes that the panel of 16 medical experts includes no oncologists.

There are no clear cut answers, even among doctors. One tells the WSJ health blog that there is no downside to breast self-exams, regardless of what the data show.

Another doc, who backs the guidelines, tells NPR that he tells is patients if they find lumps in their breasts to bring them to his attention. But then he says: The harm is twice as many women finding a lump, being anxious and having a surgical procedure to remove the lump or at least to put a needle into the lump. And if this doesn't result in any improvement in mortality, were not doing these women any favors.

Continue reading "Controversial mammogram guidelines confuse even the experts" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (12)
Categories: Cancer
        

Breast cancer patients often struggle with persistent pain long after their treatments are completed, according to new research published in the latest Journal of the American Medical Association.

Nearly half of patients surveyed said they had lingering pain two to three years after their cancer treatment, according to the study by Danish researchers. The pain can be severe to mild, and for some women it doesn't simply come and go -- it endures. Of the 13 percent of women who reported severe pain, 77 percent said they experienced it every day.

The study, which examined chronic pain in 3,754 women ages 18 to 70, found women younger than 40 were more likely to suffer from it. Of women who had breast-conserving surgery, the highest risk of pain was in young women 18 to 39 -- much higher than those in their 60s.

The pain was due to surgery and subsequent nerve damage, as well as chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Women felt pain in their breasts, but also under their arms and on the sides of their body.

The issue demands more attention, according to an accompanying editorial, from doctors from the Lee Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla. ...

Continue reading "Chronic pain remains after breast cancer treatment" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Cancer
        

Last week, we discussed the American Cancer Society's guidelines on breast and prostate cancer and the notion that some cancer screenings may do more harm than good. It all comes from the idea that people can have certain cancers that may never hurt or kill them.

Some of you responded, well, how is that? We agree, it's a puzzling idea. Most of us have been taught that modern medicine exists to find our health problems and cure what ails us, fast and before it gets any worse. Shouldn't that be the same with cancer?

Well, a NYT story yesterday takes a look at how cancers detected early when they are very small can actually vanish and not cause a patient any harm in the future. Instead of growing worse, some of these cancers get smaller and cause the patient no problems.

Continue reading "An explanation of how cancers can disappear" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

We've had this conversation a lot here at Picture of Health when it comes to breast and prostate cancer: to screen or not to screen?

We've explored studies that expressed some doubts about the benefits of mammography, that some women overestimate the mortality reduction of breast cancer screening and that studies have shown that approximately 1 life is saved for every 1,000 mammograms given.

And we've discussed the debate over prostate cancer screening and whether the disease is being overdiagnosed, exposing men to potentially harmful treatment for cancers that may pose no harm to them in the long run. Another recent study showed that some men may not be getting the counseling from their doctors that they need to understand the risks.

So it didn't surprise us when an NYT story reported yesterday that the American Cancer Society is reconsidering its screening guidelines for breast and prostate cancer. And a new editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association raises similar doubts, finding that such screenings are turning up more cancers that may never hurt people.

We wondered, though, is this really a shift in philosophy?

Continue reading "Concerns raised about the benefits of cancer screening ... again. " »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 11:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Recently, we brought you some news on prostate cancer screening and how the blood test that detects the disease may in fact be leading to overtreatment of the illness. Some researchers think the screening test does more harm than good, exposing men to unnecessary treatment of cancers that will never harm them and never kill them. Others said the research was bogus and that the test saves lives.

Well, a new study raises more questions about the popular test known as prostate-specific antigen screening, or PSA, and is sure to intensify the debate. Men are not getting adequate counseling from their doctors on the risks of such testing, a new study published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association .

In a survey of 3,010 men 40 and older in 2006 and 2007, about 30 percent had not discussed the screening with their doctors before they had the blood test. About 45 percent said they weren't asked by their doctor about their preference for the test and 48 percent could correctly answer questions about prostate cancer risk and the accuracy of screening.

"Given the uncertain benefit for screening and known treatment risks, prostate cancer screening decisions should be guided by patient preferences," the reseachers write. "Indeed, most professional organizations recommend that the first step in screening should be a discussion between health care providers and patients about the risks and benefits of early detection and treatment so that patients can make informed decisions about whether to be screened."

Continue reading "More doubts about prostate cancer screening" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (13)
Categories: Cancer
        

A rising number of women are choosing to remove a healthy breast after being diagnosed with breast cancer -- even though there is little evidence that doing so improves survival, a new study found.

The research, which appears in Cancer, the journal of the American Cancer Society, examined data from 6,275 New York state women, who had prophylactic mastectomies -- removal of a non-cancerous breast as a preventive measure.

Researchers looked at women who had a healthy breast removed after the discovery of cancer in the other breast as well as woman without cancer who had both breasts removed, but had a strong family history of the disease or a gene making them more susceptible to it.

From 1995 to 2005, the number of women who had cancer in one breast and choose to have the other breast removed more than doubled. Those with no personal history of breast cancer who had both breasts removed also increased, but slightly.  

While the number of these kinds of mastectomies remains small, they're rising and such surgery comes with risks. Other studies reveal increases in overal mastectomies, raising concerns that some women are being treated too aggressively and whether doctors are doing the right thing for patients.

Continue reading "More women with breast cancer opt to remove healthy breast." »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

My story today about overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer reignites a controversial debate about whether men should be screened for the disease. 

In the two decades since a blood test became the prevailing screening tool for prostate cancer, more than 1 million men nationwide have been diagnosed with and treated for the disease—most of them unnecessarily, a new study finds 

The research, published in today's Journal of the National Cancer Institute, raises questions about whether the screening test -- known as prostate-specific antigen screening, or PSA -- does more harm than good. That may sound odd, since screening, on its face, seems beneficial. Catch cancer early and you'll live longer, right?

Well, not always. It's possible for people to have cancers that may never harm or kill them. When it comes to prostate cancer, many men are being diagnosed and referred to treatment that they don't need and that can actually cause harms such as incontinence and impotence, the study says.

Some urologists are pretty upset at the findings and think the study is misguided. They say it dismisses that PSA testing has helped doctors catch some cancers early and save lives.

With all the back and forth, men reading this are likely wondering: should I get a PSA test or not?

Well, that's a tough question to answer. The American Cancer Society and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force don't recommend the screening but the American Urological Association does. The study's authors aren't advising for or against the PSA test, but they do stress that patients become informed and have conversations with their doctors about the risks of screening and possible treatment. Knowledge is power.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Categories: Cancer
        

Hospitals have been sending me e-mails lately, telling me that "Prostate Cancer Awareness Month" is coming and touting free cancer screenings. We've all been told that early detection  saves lives.

A study published online late yesterday in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute suggests that these messages are getting through -- probably a bit too loud and a bit too clear. In fact, in the study of more than 10,000 Europeans, researchers found that 92 percent of women either overestimated the mortality reduction associated with breast cancer or didn't know what it was. They also found that 89 percent of men overestimated or didn't know the mortality reduction associated with prostate cancer screening.

The truth is that studies have shown that approximately 1 life is saved for every 1,000 mammograms given. The recommendation in the United States is to screen women with mammograms every year or two from the age of 40.

As for prostate-specific antigen (or PSA) screening, there is insufficient evidence that it saves lives and could instead lead to unnecessary treatment of cancers that might never develop into anything.

Continue reading "To screen or not to screen" »

Posted by Stephanie Desmon at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Studies have found many benefits to babies who are breastfed. But what about to their mothers? New research finds that women with a family history of breast cancer had a lower risk of developing the disease themselves if they breastfed.

The paper, published in the latest Archives of Internal Medicine, was based on questionnaires of 60,000 women who had given birth and took part in the long-running Nurses Health Study out of Harvard. Researchers followed them from 1997 to 2005 and found 608 cases of breast cancer from the group.

Women who had a mother or a sister with breast cancer and had breastfed were 59 percent less likely to develop breast cancer compared to women who had never breastfed. The study did not find a difference in risk for women without a family history of breast cancer.

Continue reading "Breastfeeding could lower cancer risk" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

Here's another interesting look at racial disparities in cancer. Researchers have wondered for years why black patients have worse survival from head and neck cancers than whites.

These cancers were once thought to be diseases of older men -- typically smokers and drinkers. But in recent years, experts have noticed a rise in younger men with such cancers and found that the sexually-transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause.  Head and neck cancers can be devastating and disfiguring and researchers have been paying close attention to the HPV link for clues to better understand the cancers and the racial disparity. 

Here's the latest effort: A new study from University of Maryland researchers finds that, surprisingly, cancer patients who also tested positive for HPV had better prognosis than patients without the virus. Blacks had very low rates of HPV, and therefore, far worse survival than whites, according to the study, published in the journal Cancer Prevention Research. Researchers think this might explain why blacks have traditionally had worse outcomes with head and neck cancers. HPV could make all the difference. 

Continue reading "HPV may explain racial disparity in head and neck cancers" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 3:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

My story yesterday on the racial disparity in breast cancer deaths highlighted the debate over whether biology or environment is the cause of the problem. A recent study suggests that access to care alone can't explain the disparity, reopening a long-brewing discussion about whether genetics is the reason black women are more likely to die of the disease than white women.

Using genetics to explain racial disparities in health is a touchy topic. When I spoke to Dr. Otis Brawley at the American Cancer Society, he said he worried that the issue hearkens back to the old argument about blacks and genetic inferiority.

Yet, others insist genetic research is key to unlocking the mysteries of racial disparities and, most importantly, finding a cure. There's a great piece in CNN's Black in America 2 series, about  Dr. Lisa Newman, an African-American female surgeon, who travels to Ghana searching for genetic clues to why black women are twice as likely to get a rare and aggressive form of breast cancer known as triple negative.

Continue reading "Can genetics explain triple negative breast cancer?" »

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)
Categories: Cancer