Mesothelioma Blog

The number of cancer cases reported in the United States each year is expected to increase 45 percent by 2030, according to a new study performed at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Caner Center in Houston.

Leading the way in this near doubling of cancer cases will be a dramatic rise in the number of minorities and elderly contracting cancer. Based on the study, minority cases of cancer will double from 330,000 to 660,000 in the next 20 years. This rise is attributed to increased immigration and an accelerated birthrate when compared to Caucasian U.S. citizens. Furthermore, the number of elderly minorities is expected to increase, resulting in compounded chances for contracting cancer.

Dr. Benjamin Smith, a radiation oncologist who led the study, finds these minority figures troubling. According to him, “this population is particularly at risk for not receiving adequate cancer care and, as a result, having worse outcomes from their cancer.”

Backing Dr. Smith’s concern, are numerous previous studies that show uninsured Americans have a lower tendency to seek out cancer screenings, are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer at a later phase and less likely to be a cancer survivor. Historically, minorities are more likely to be uninsured.

The team at the Anderson Cancer Center reached their conclusions by analyzing data culled from both the U.S. Census Bureau and the largest U.S. cancer registry. As a whole, the U.S. population is expected to increase 19 percent by 2030 and cancer rates will rise 45 percent. Beyond the influx of minorities, the increase is attributed to a rise in the total number of elderly citizens living in America.

Population shift is expected to see 70 percent of all cancer cases diagnosed in elderly patients by 2030, as opposed to 60 percent today. Similarly, minority cancer rates will increase from 21 percent in 2010 to 28 percent in 2030. Additionally, instances of liver and stomach cancer are expected to increase at an accelerated rate compared to other forms of cancers. These two cancers are far more prevalent in minority populations and historically have a low survival rate.

Resource:
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20090430/how-many-people-will-have-cancer-in-2030?src=RSS_PUBLIC

Data culled from a 1988-to-1999 study performed under the EUROCARE 4 project has resulted in troubling findings for cancer patients in the United Kingdom. According to a newly released study, the countries of England and Scotland lag behind other European countries in terms of complete cancer cure rates.

Both UK countries fell below the average cancer cure rates for all European countries. Cure rates in England for all cancers between 1988 and 1999 were 34.5 percent for men and 49.8 percent for women. In Scotland, the numbers drop to 30.8 percent for men and 44.8 percent for women.

For comparison, Iceland ranked first among the countries studied, with a 47 percent cure rate for men and a 59 percent cure rate for women.

When looking at some cancers, the results for the UK are alarmingly pronounced. Cure rates for cancers such as stomach, ovary, prostate, thyroid and kidney are more than 5 percent below the European average. These results were taken from a more-recent study that concluded in 2004.

To their credit, the United Kingdom does outperform other European countries on average when it comes to beating certain cancers. These cancers include head, neck and larynx cancers, as well as malignant melanoma and testicular cancer.

Despite the underwhelming figures overall, experts are confident that current survival rates for cancer in the UK have improved. Many cancer researchers took issue with the UK’s poor investment practices into cancer services. This fact is likely the cause for previously unsatisfactory cancer survival rates. However, since the turn of the century, investment into the field has improved dramatically.

During the study, the UK invested six to seven percent of the Gross Domestic Product to cancer services. At the same time, many other European countries were devoting as much as 11 percent.

In addition to an increase in funding, the UK’s Cancer Plan of 2000 should also serve to bolster cancer cure rates. In current and future analysis of such data, cancer experts believe it is important to pinpoint the reasons for reduced cancer rates and then work out solutions so that future rates can be improved.

Resources:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7958585.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5040120/Half-of-women-survive-cancer.html

As most of us know, a laundry list of side effects have been linked to chemotherapy. And while many of these side effects drastically reduce the quality of life in the short-term, the good news is that most of these symptoms eventually subside once treatment concludes.

However, while fatigue, hair loss and other symptoms dissipate, many cancer survivors continue to complain about an overall clouded mental capacity months and years following treatment. Unfortunately, the cause of such spaced-out feelings may very well be the result of long-term damage accrued in the brain due to the chemotherapy process.

It has long been known that chemotherapy attacks normal healthy cells as well as cancer cells. It is this fact that leads to the majority of side effects felt from the treatment. While studies on the effects of chemotherapy of the brain are minimal, Dr. Jorg Dietrich of Massachusetts General Hospital believes the progenitor cells in the brain are the cause of “chemobrain” symptoms such as memory loss, problems multitasking and the inability to concentrate.

Progenitor cells are newly born cells that incubate deep in the brain. They are self-renewing, and are a necessary link in the chain when it comes to promoting memory and other brain functions. Unfortunately, these baby cells are also extremely susceptible to the damaging effects of chemotherapy drugs.

As Dr. Dietrich puts it, “If you stop or inhibit the generation of newborn cells in the brain, you will have to deal with the consequences years down the road.”

Of course, the ultimate goal of cancer treatment is to cure the disease with little or no side effects. Ultimately, this may mean identifying alternatives to chemotherapy that minimize the attack of healthy human cells. Until that time, further studies need to be made into the effects of chemo on the brain so that long-term symptoms may eventually be reduced.

Resources:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2009/04/05/the_cloud_over_chemotherapy/

A new study concludes that elevated levels of phosphorus are necessary for adequate growth of some types of cancers. This rise in phosphorus, the team hypothesizes, is due to heightened requirements of protein synthesis needed during accelerated cell growth.

The findings, which pertain to lung and colon cancer, are important because they give researchers a new avenue for stopping the growth and metastasis of cancer. Ostensibly, drugs and other treatment measures that limit phosphorus production would result in decelerated growth rates and improved survival rates.

In the study, researchers examined malignant and healthy tissue from 121 cancer patients. The patients had previously been diagnosed with one of four cancers – lung, liver, kidney or colon. Though all types of tumors showed elevated levels of phosphorus, only the samples taken from the lung or colon were statistically significant. As such, it is believed that phosphorus-reduction treatment methods would not be effective on liver or kidney cancer.

The team hypothesizes that the reason for variations in phosphorus levels depends on the local environment of each organ. Specifically, increased cell division rates may be accommodated by one of two processes – selecting for neoplastic cells bearing mutations or selecting for reduced mortality rate. Those tumors that select for neoplastic cells bearing mutations (lung and colon) are the ones that should be targeted for treatments targeted at phosphorus reduction.

The study was the result of a joint partnership between researchers at Arizona State University, University of Kansas Medical Center and Scottsdale Community College.

Resource:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0001028

Cancer survivors and their doctors have differing views about expected patient care, according to a recent study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. The study, which surveyed patients, primary care physicians and oncologists, suggests that overall patient care is being hindered by this unfortunate disconnect.

Dr. Craig Earle, who led the study at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences in Toronto, reports that surveyed patients had higher expectations in relation to their oncologists on how much routine, non-cancer survivorship care was to be offered. Additionally, patients had lower expectations than their primary care physicians regarding how much cancer-related care was to be provided during general care appointments.

In total, 431 cancer survivors, 255 primary care physicians and 123 oncologists participated in the study. The study consisted of a survey that was intended to gauge oncology and primary care physician responsibilities related to the surveillance of cancer, screening for other cancers, general preventive health and continuing management of unrelated health issues.

The lack of clarity in the post-cancer treatment process raises concerns that survivors are receiving a lack of care. As such, Dr. Earle recommends the need for survivor ship care planning. Ideally, such a plan would clearly outline to cancer survivors the future role of general care physicians and specialized oncologists. Many experts on the subject, including Dr. Noreen Aziz, a senior program director at the National Cancer Institute, believe that such a plan will soon be available.

Resource:
http://www.cancer.gov/ncicancerbulletin/040709/page2

At a recent American Association for Cancer Research meeting in Denver, several new studies were discussed that showed promise in fighting prostate, brain and pancreatic cancer.

One of the most impressive studies was based on finding a new tactic for fighting prostate cancer. Prostate cancer, which kills approximately 3,000 men each month, has been historically difficult to treat. Chemotherapy has a low rate of success and hormone therapy is only effective in staving off tumor growth for one to two years.

To combat these hurdles, a team of researchers led by Dr. Richard Junghans of the Boston University School of Medicine found a novel way to attack prostate tumor cells. Rather then using manufactured drugs or hormones, the team modified each patient’s own immune system to better fight off the disease.

To accomplish this, the team modified normal human T-cells to “trick” them into attacking the cancer. Using a very low dose of the new tactic resulted in a 50 to 75 percent reduction in prostate-specific antigens present in participants. Now, larger studies are planned to go forward with higher doses that are hoped to completely eliminate these antigens.

A new tactic for treating brain cancer has also reported. Studies performed at the University of Southern California show that a modified version of Celecoxib (Celebrex) reduces toxic side effects and effectively inhibit the growth of new blood vessels necessary for tumor growth. Though proven promising for brain cancer, the new treatment may also be effective in breast cancer and other forms of cancer.

Two new agents have also shown promising results in the fight against pancreatic cancer. These two agents – a histone deacetylase inhibitor (LBH589) and a mTOR inhibitor (rapamycin) – have proven remarkably successful when used in combination. In the study, which was performed at the Mayo Clinic, cell death improved from 10 percent when rapamycin was used alone to 60 to 70 percent when used in combination.

Resource:
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/hscout/2009/04/19/hscout626220.html

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting continue to be one of the most maligned side effects among chemotherapy patients. Now, a new combination of drugs shows promising results that can reduce or eliminate nausea side effects within the first week following a chemotherapy treatment.

In a study performed at the Juntendo University Hospital in Tokyo, researchers investigated the effectiveness of palonosetron, a 2nd-generation 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, as a nausea treatment when used in conjunction with dexamethasone. The results, culled from more than 1,100 patients who underwent chemotherapy, indicate that the drug combination achieves a complete response (no vomiting and no use of rescue medication) in 76 percent of those in which it is administered. Furthermore, 74 percent of participants reported nothing more than mild nausea.

Both of these figures are an improvement over the current go-to medication for chemotherapy-induced nausea, granisetron.

Additionally, the new drug combination was found to positively affect appetite and caloric intake of chemotherapy patients. This is welcome news, as nausea and vomiting that result from chemotherapy can often lead to reduced eating habits and unhealthy weight loss.

Palonosetron is an FDA-approved drug developed by Helsinn Healthcare SA of Switzerland. In America, Aloxi® is the most-prescribed brand of the drug. Onicit® and Paloxi® are also marketed versions of the drug.

Resources:
http://sev.prnewswire.com/biotechnology/20090320/3859955en_iCrossing20032009-1.html
http://www.oncologynursingnews.com/New-Drug-Combination-Benefits-Postchemo-Lifestyle/article/128456/

According to a new study released by Dr. Edward J. Stepanski and colleagues in Memphis, TN, poor sleep exacerbates a number of side effects felt by cancer patients. These side effects include fatigue, pain and depressed mood.

While it would be simple to advise patients to simply get a better night sleep, the high levels of pain and other symptoms often make sleep difficult. The study concluded that more than 50 percent of the 11,000 cancer patients reported difficulty sleeping. Moreover, 26 percent reported moderate to severe difficulty sleeping. As a whole, this segment of patients also reported significantly higher levels of fatigue, pain and depressed mood.

Unfortunately, lack of sleep seems to be only one link in a recurring cycle of symptoms. Based on the study, sleep leads to pain, which hinders future sleep patterns and increases feelings of depressed mood and fatigue. Compounded, it can only be expected that poor sleep will continue and pain will continue to increase.

Younger participants in the study and those who had received recent chemotherapy treatments were more likely to report difficulty sleeping. This is likely because younger patients typically receive more aggressive chemotherapy regiments and are therefore exposed to higher levels of toxicity.

To circumvent the sleep/pain cycle, Dr. Stepanski suggests that cognitive behavioral therapy may serve to improve sleep. Additional studies are required to validate this theory.

Resources:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090415075046.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE53T6M820090430

The number of cancer cases expected to be diagnosed in 2030 will be 45 percent higher than present numbers, a new study at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center suggests. Specifically, an estimated 2.3 million Americans are projected to be diagnosed with cancer in 2030, as opposed to 1.6 million Americans in 2010.

The dramatic increase in future cancer cases can be attributed to demographic changes. Certainly, a larger total population of United States citizens is partly to blame for the increased instance of cancer. However, demographic changes in age and minorities will serve to exacerbate the number of cancer cases.

By analyzing demographic trends, the study concludes that the number of cancer diagnoses in adults over the age of 65 will increase by 67 percent. An influx of minorities will also see a doubling of cancer cases among non-white adults – jumping from 330,000 to 660,000. It total, 70 percent of all cancer cases in 2030 will be attributed to the elderly and 28 percent will be attributed to minorities.

While cancer rates (as a percentage of the total population) are expected to stay relatively constant, the report does raise serious concerns in terms of treatment. This surge in cancer cases could put a tremendous strain on the health care infrastructure.

According to studies performed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 40 percent of all U.S.-based oncologists are over the age of 55. This means that a good number of cancer specialists will be retiring in the next decade. Couple this with the reduced rate of new oncologists entering the field, and a shortage of approximately 3,800 cancer doctors is expected by 2030.

Resources:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/healthNewsMolt/idUKTRE53S7PL20090429?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0
http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/JCO.2008.20.8983v1
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=58283

An increasing number of cancer research programs are focusing on identifying individual cancer genes that cause resistance to traditional medications. While this field of study possesses vast potential, effective applications have proven difficult. This may change soon, however, as a new interest in RNA is showing enticing possibilities.

As a whole, the division of personalized cancer treatment is designed to counter treatment-resistant cancers by counteracting individual gene defenses and minimizing negative side effects. Now, new RNA technologies, such as non-protein-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) and RNA interference (RNAi), are offering new ways to attack individual gene expression.

RNA has already been linked to resistance in a number of cancers. Of particular interest are tumors that prove resistant to inhibitors of anti-apoptotic proteins. Recent studies indicate that a specific ncRNA can be manipulated to increase drug resistance in cancer cells by reducing the level of apoptosis. Apoptosis is the clinical term for programmed cell death.

Additionally, the prevalence of specific small strains of ncRNA, known as microRNAs (miRNAs), has been linked to cancer resistance. As a result, researchers are now looking for a way to manipulate miRNA levels to reduce cancer resistance and improve treatment processes.

Hypothetically, interfering with RNA processes can silence virtually any gene, and early attempts at doing so have proven effective. In preclinical trials, RNAi technology was markedly successful in reversing resistance to cancer drugs.

While promising, RNA manipulation still has many hurdles to overcome. For one, effective delivery processes and specificity have proven difficult. Additionally, the long-term health hazards of these new treatment processes are still unknown. Until further research is conducted on the topic, the correlation between RNA and cancer treatment will remain unavailable to the general public.

Resources:
http://www.dddmag.com/Article-Conquering-Cancer-Resistance.aspx