fordoctors

Like to eat meat? Consider this unappetizing truth: When you gulp down a nice juicy steak or hamburger, you are contributing to tumor-fueling inflammation in your body.In fact, eating a diet rich in red meat has long been linked to a host of ills including an increased risk of several types of cancer. But what is it about meat consumption that could impact cancer growth? Now scientists at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, have found a mechanism that explains how eating red meat, as well as milk, could spur the growth of malignancies. The new study, headed by Ajit Varki, M.D., suggests that inflammation resulting from a molecule introduced through eating these foods could make cancer grow. The research is set for upcoming publication in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).Dr.Varki, UC San Diego School of Medicine distinguished professor of medicine and cellular and molecular medicine and co-director of the UCSD Glycobiology Research and Training Center, and his research team studied a non-human glycan, or sugar molecule, known as N-glycolylneuraminic acid (Neu5Gc). Although this molecule is not produced naturally in the human body, it’s incorporated into human tissues if you eat red meat. The body then develops antibodies against Neu5Gc – and this immune response could potentially trigger a low-grade chronic inflammation, spurring the growth of cancer. In a statement prepared for the media, Dr. Varki explained it has been recognized by scientists for some time that chronic inflammation can stimulate cancer progression."We've shown that tumor tissues contain much more Neu5Gc than is usually found in normal human tissues. We therefore surmised that Neu5Gc must somehow benefit tumors,” Dr. Varki said in the press statement. So the scientists came up with this hypothesis: The fact that Neu5Gc accumulates in human tumors despite circulating anti-Neu5Gc antibodies suggests a low-grade, chronic inflammation has developed, and caused the tumor to grow. To test this idea, the researchers worked with specially bred mice. The animals lacked the Neu5Gc molecule , just as humans do before they eat red meat and the molecule is absorbed into their bodies, and they had tumors.Anti-Neu5Gc antibodies were given to half of the mice . In those animals, the antibodies induced inflammation and their cancers started growing faster. In the control group comprised of mice that were not treated with antibodies, their tumor growth was far less aggressive.Building on previous research that has shown that humans who take non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (commonly known as NSAIDs) have a reduced risk of cancer, the researchers tried giving NSAIDs to the mice with cancerous tumors fueled by anti-Neu5Gc antibodies. The result? The anti-inflammatory treatment blocked the effect of the Neu5Gc antibodies and the tumors became smaller."Taken together, our data indicate that chronic inflammation results from interaction of Neu5Gc accumulated in our bodies from eating red meat with the antibodies that circulate as an immune response to this non-human molecule – and this may contribute to cancer risk," Varki said in the media statement.For anyone interested in reducing inflammation through natural, non-drug methods, here are seven top strategies to incorporate into your lifestyle:1. Stop eating meat and dairy products.2. Concentrate on a Mediterranean flavored style of eating with lots of fruits, vegetables, whole grains , olive oils and nuts. Research has shown these foods lower inflammation levels.3. Don’t smoke and avoid those who do – second hand smoke can contribute to inflammation.4. Know your oils. Avoid all inflammation-causing trans-fats, hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated oils as well as saturated animal fats. Instead, add inflammation-fighting omega-3 oils like flaxseed, canola and walnut oil to your diet.5. Lose weight if you need to. Research has shown that a waist that measures over 40 inches in a man or over 35 inches in a woman is a sign of probable high inflammation.6. Don’t skimp on sleep. Previous studies have concluded less than six hours of sleep can result in inflammation .7. De-stress. Try yoga, meditation, walking and other forms of exercise. Staying continually stressed out means your body is releasing excess, inflammation-promoting stress hormones . Schedule a minimum of 20 minutes a day to let your worries go.

Smoking strongly increases a person's risk of developing bladder cancer - a risk that the majority of the population seems to be unaware of, according to a new analysis conducted by researchers from the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center."The general public understands that cigarette smoking can lead to lung cancer, but very few people understand that it also can lead to bladder cancer," study co-author James E. Montie said.The researchers compiled data from all studies in the MEDLINE database that had been conducted on the connection between bladder cancer and smoking between 1975 and 2007. The correlation between smoking behavior and bladder cancer risk, they found, was strong. For example, one study found that a person's risk of developing bladder cancer goes down by 40 percent within the first four years of quitting smoking.Yet the general population remains unaware of this connection, the researchers also found, as are patients who have been diagnosed with bladder cancer. Only 22 percent of bladder cancer patients surveyed knew that smoking increases the risk of developing the disease."A big gap exists between patient knowledge and their actual risk," co-author Seth A. Strope said. "Our study suggests that physicians must do a much better job of communicating the risk to our patients, and directing them toward smoking cessation programs."Bladder cancer is one of the most expensive forms of cancer to treat. In the United States, it is the fourth most common cancer in men in the ninth most common in women, with more than 47,000 new cases diagnosed in men and 16,000 in women each year. The higher prevalence in men is believed to be due to the fact that male sex hormones play a role in the development of the disease.Other than smoking, risk factors include being African-American or Hispanic and having a family history of the cancer. Exposure to secondhand smoke is also a suspected risk factor.

Eating raw cruciferous vegetables can reduce the risk of bladder cancer, according to studies conducted by researchers from the Roswell Park Cancer Institute.The cruciferous vegetable family includes broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, arugula, Brussels sprouts, collard greens, daikon, garden cress, horseradish, kale, kohlrabi, mustard, radish, rape (canola), rapini, rutabaga, tatsoi, turnip, wasabi and watercress.In one study, Roswell Park researchers found that the risk of bladder cancer in rats decreased as the amount of freeze-dried broccoli sprout extract in their diets increased. In another study, people who ate as little as three servings of cruciferous vegetables per month had a 40 percent lower risk of bladder cancer than those who ate less. No benefit was found, however, in those who ate the vegetables cooked.Much of the vegetables' cancer-fighting effect is attributed naturally occurring plant compounds known as isothiocyanates. Isothiocyanates have been linked to decreased risk of both cancerous and noncancerous tumors, and at least one variety has been observed to induce cell death even in chemotherapy-resistant cancer lines.Cooking can destroy 60 to 90 percent of a meal's isothiocyanate content.Isothiocyanates and other components of cruciferous vegetables are believed to help regulate an enzyme response that helps the body protect itself against cancer. In addition to bladder cancer, cruciferous vegetables and their chemical components have been found to protect against cancers of the breast, cervix, colon, endometrium, liver and lung."When they are eaten raw, they induce a kind of enzyme that may detoxify carcinogens," said Roswell Park's James Marshall. A press release from the institute cited the case of Katie Herdlein, who boosted her intake of fruits and vegetables to help her get through chemotherapy.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is believed to be considering reversing its decision not to recommend four kidney cancer drugs for use on the NHS.
Although NICE has not commented on whether their final guidance will be different to that published in August, reports in several newspapers from unnamed sources suggest that it may recommend at least two of the medicines which were previously ruled cost-ineffective, early next year.
The health watchdog's preliminary guidance suggested that, as the advanced kidney cancer drugs Sutent, Nexavar, Avastin and Torisel were massively over their cost-effectiveness threshold, these should not be provided by the NHS.
However, the public uproar and media debate that followed the decision, and the subsequent publication of a review by Professor Mike Richards, the government 'cancer tsar', of how drugs are funded, is thought to have helped persuade the institute to reconsider - a move that experts estimate could extend the lives of up to 3,600 patients.
NICE has said that it is looking at the drugs again in light of new evidence about their effectiveness. The institute plans to hold a meeting in January with a view to publishing new guidance on all four treatments within four weeks of the meeting, with final guidance published in March 2009.
According to reports in the Daily Mail, the new evidence being considered is a US study which found that Sutent was more effective than first thought.
In addition, the Department of Health is revealed to have been in discussion with Pfizer and Roche, which manufacture Sutent and Avastin, about the cost of the drugs.
Hilary Jackson, Cancer Research UK policy manager, said: "We were very disappointed with NICE's initial recommendation that none of these drugs would be available for patients on the NHS. We hope that the extra time taken by NICE to review new data provided by the pharmaceutical company, and the negotiations being led by the Department of Health to find a more appropriate price for these drugs, will mean that they are able to change this decision.
"We are also pleased that NICE has responded to our concerns and is drafting additional advice for its appraisal committees on how they are reviewing drugs for patients with rarer cancers. This should mean that more of these drugs will be available to patients on the NHS in future

New drug therapy may halt the spread of metastatic kidney cancer


NEW YORK, NY - New data from an international, multicenter Phase III clinical trial has found that the experimental targeted therapy everolimus (RAD001) significantly delays cancer progression in patients with metastatic kidney cancer whose disease had worsened on other treatments. The study was led by Robert Motzer, MD, an attending physician at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), who will present the findings on May 31 at the annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology."This study has given us a new and clearly useful tool for treating renal cell tumors, and everolimus is an important step forward in terms of disease management and quality of life for patients living with this disease," said Dr. Motzer.Kidney cancer is among the ten most common cancers in both men and women. The American Cancer Society estimates that there will be about 54,390 new cases of kidney cancer diagnosed in the US in 2008, and that about 13,010 people will die from the disease.Everolimus, a once-daily oral therapy, targets the mTOR protein, which acts as a central regulator of tumor cell division, cell metabolism, and blood vessel growth. It is currently being evaluated for the treatment of several other cancers including lymphoma and neuroendocrine tumors.
“This study has given us a new and clearly useful tool for treating renal cell tumors, and everolimus is an important step forward in terms of disease management and quality of life for patients living with this disease. -- Robert J. Motzer, MD”More than 400 patients participated in this study, all of whom had disease that had progressed with currently available targeted therapies sunitinib and/or sorafenib. Patients were randomized to receive everolimus or placebo. After six months, 26 percent of patients in the everolimus group had disease that had not progressed, compared to only 2 percent of the placebo group. The average difference in progression free survival was four months for everolimus, compared to 1.9 months for the placebo group. In February, 2008, an independent monitoring committee stopped the Phase III trial after interim results were positive and allowed researchers to offer everolimus to the patients receiving placebo."For almost 20 years, we made no headway in the management of advanced kidney cancer," notes Dr. Motzer. "Recently, the identification of several new angiogenesis- targeted agents has provided us with new treatment options and an improved outlook for patients with advanced kidney cancer. Based on the results of this trial, everolimus could become another tool in our armamentarium and, in the future, kidney cancer is likely to be managed as a chronic disease with these types of treatment advances."Everolimus was well tolerated by patients and the most common side effects were mouth ulcers, anemia, skin rash and weakness.In addition to Dr. Motzer, contributors to the study included researchers from Institut Gustave Roussy in Villejuif, France; Georges Pompidou European Hospital in Paris, France; San Matteo University Hospital in Pavia, Italy; US Oncology, Baylor-Sammons Cancer Center/TOPA in Dallas, Texas; Azienda Ospedaliera in Perugia, Italy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals in Florham Park, New Jersey; and Hôpital Saint André CHU in Bordeaux, France. The study was funded by grants from Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Kidney Cancer: New Drug Combination Shrinks Kidney Cancers


Information courtesy of Duke University Medical Center News Office New Drug Combination Shrinks Kidney Cancers DURHAM, N.C. -- By using a new combination of two anticancer drugs, researchers at Duke University Medical Center have dramatically improved response rates of patients with metastatic kidney cancer, which is now generally considered incurable.The results suggest that combining the two drugs may slow the disease's progression in significant numbers of patients, although the drug combination is not a cure, said the researchers.In the study, 40 percent of patients who received the newly approved drug sorafenib together with the established drug interferon-alpha experienced "major shrinkage" of their kidney tumors and tumors that had metastasized, or spread elsewhere. A "major" response is generally is defined as 30 percent or greater shrinkage of all tumors in the body.In comparison, only 5 percent of patients who receive sorafenib alone show a major response, recent studies have shown. Similarly, just 10 percent to 15 percent of patients who receive only interferon alpha, considered the standard treatment for kidney cancer, show a major response."By combining the drugs, we are seeing more major responses in greater numbers of patients, but we don't yet know how long the responses will last," said Jared Gollob, M.D., associate professor of medicine and immunology at Duke. "There are great new drugs on the market with relatively low toxicity, but the question physicians now face is how to make them work better for patients."Gollob will present the findings, funded by the National Cancer Institute, June 3, 2006, at the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting in Atlanta.Kidney cancer, also known as renal cell carcinoma, strikes an estimated 40,000 patients in the United States each year, representing 2 percent to 3 percent of all cancers diagnosed annually. Most cases of kidney cancer arise from unknown causes, but smoking and high blood pressure are known risk factors of the disease.According to Gollob, cancer therapy has two main goals: shrinking tumors and delaying the disease's progression, with as few side effects as possible. Although the goals are seemingly congruent, they often are not attainable with the same drug, Gollob said."Sorafenib alone has been shown to delay progression of kidney cancer, but it induces major responses in only a small percentage of patients," he said. "Interferon alpha has a higher major response rate in kidney cancer, but it does not necessarily slow disease progression. By combining the two therapies, we will hopefully accomplish both goals."In the current study, Gollob and colleagues at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, used the new combination therapy on 31 patients with metastatic kidney cancer. Among patients who responded, the drug combination shrank both kidney tumors and tumors that had spread to the lungs, liver, pancreas and lymph nodes. The drug also shrank tumors in some patients who had failed to respond to interleukin-2, another drug commonly used for metastatic kidney cancer, the study showed.Conventional chemotherapy has proved to be a weak weapon against kidney cancer, because the very cells that the drugs attack are programmed to handle toxic substances, Gollob said. The job of renal "tubule" cells is to pump toxic substances from the body into the urine, so these cells are well-equipped to pump out chemotherapy before it can perform its task. Likewise, it is believed that the necessarily hearty constitution of renal cells – tough by nature, given their job -- also makes them resistant to anticancer drugs.Combined therapies have an advantage over individual therapies because the two drugs typically attack cancer from two angles at once, by targeting different cellular mechanisms, Gollob said. Sorafenib acts by inhibiting two proteins, one that boosts the growth of the cancer cells themselves and one that sustains blood vessels which nourish the tumors. The Food and Drug Administration approved sorafenib in December, 2005 for use in kidney cancer, and it is sold under the trade name Nexavar.Interferon alpha also acts in two ways -- by directly attacking cancer cells, and by stimulating the immune system to battle cancer. On the market for 20 years, the drug is used to treat a variety of cancers, including melanoma.The Duke study showed the combination of drugs can be given safely and on an outpatient basis, meaning patients receive treatment in the doctor's office without a hospital stay, he said. Sorafenib is a pill, while interferon alpha is an injection given under the skin three times a week.Patients in the Duke study experienced the same type and degree of side effects as would be expected among patients receiving either drug by itself, Gollob said. Sorafenib can cause fatigue, hair loss, diarrhea and skin rash. Interferon alpha can cause fatigue, weight loss, and periodic flu-like symptoms. Patients experienced varying degrees of these symptoms in the study.Gollob said the next step is to conduct a randomized clinical trial to determine if the drug combination extends progression-free survival, over and above the survival currently seen with sorafenib alone

Consuming Acrylamides Boosts Kidney Cancer Rate by 59 Percent


According to a new study conducted by researchers from the Netherlands, consuming high levels of acrylamide increases people's risk of kidney cancer by 59 percent, Kidney cancer is the tenth most common cancer in the world. According to Marji McCullough, a nutritional epidemiologist for the American Cancer Society, smoking and obesity are well-known risk factors for the disease."It's best not to smoke and to maintain an ideal body weight," McCullough said. "One way to maintain a healthy body weight is a healthy diet."But increasing evidence is emerging that dietary factors may also play a role.Acrylamide is found in coffee and in starchy foods like grains and potatoes that have been baked, fried, roasted or toasted. It has been classified as a probable human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer since 1994, due to its documented genotoxic and carcinogenic effects in laboratory animals.In the most recent study, researchers looked directly at the effects of dietary acrylamide on cancer risk by studying data from the Netherlands Cohort Study on diet and cancer, which includes more than 120,000 adult female and male participants between the ages of 55 and 69. Researchers from Maastricht University, the Dutch Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority, and TNO Quality of Life calculated the dietary acrylamide intake of 5,000 random participants, based on food frequency questionnaires filled out when the cohort study began.The results are presented in the article "Dietary acrylamide intake and the risk of renal cell, bladder, and prostate cancer" by J.G. Hogervorst, L.J. Schouten, E.J. Konings, R.A. Goldbohm, P.A. van den Brandt, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (May 2008, Volume 87, Number 5, pp. 1428-1438).The researchers found that after 13.3 years, those who had the highest dietary acrylamide intake experienced a 59 percent higher risk of renal cell carcinoma than those with the lowest intake. Renal cell carcinoma is responsible for more than 80 percent of kidney cancer cases. "We found some indications for a positive association between dietary acrylamide and renal cell cancer risk," the researchers wrote. A total of 339 cases of kidney cancer, 1,210 cases of bladder cancer and 2,246 cases of prostate cancer were observed among study participants. The researchers did not observe any connection between acrylamide intake and cancer of the bladder or prostate. The highest average acrylamide intake was 40.8 micrograms per day, while the lowest was 9.5 micrograms per day. Average intake was 21.8 micrograms per day, or slightly less than the amount found in a 2.5-ounce serving of French fries. Every 10 microgram increase in daily intake appeared to increase a person's risk of kidney cancer by 10 percent. Among smokers, the effect of dietary intake was even stronger.Coffee was the biggest source of dietary acrylamide for the study participants. Among participants in the group with the highest average intake, however, the biggest source was a popular baked snack called Dutch spiced cake.Prior to 2002, acrylamide was known only as an industrial chemical that consumers might be exposed to through cigarette smoke, cosmetics or the breakdown of certain environmental contaminants such as the herbicide glyphosate (Roundup). Then researchers from the Swedish Food Administration discovered that the chemical also formed at high levels in many popular foods, such as potato chips and bread. Since then, research has suggested that it may also form in dried fruit.Although acrylamide is generally accepted to pose health risks in humans, some researchers have questioned whether typical dietary intakes are actually high enough to have an effect. The recent study is only one of the latest to suggest that dietary intake is indeed a significant source of exposure to the chemical.In earlier research conducted by the same team of scientists, also using data from the Netherlands Cohort Study, dietary acrylamide was found to increase women's risk of ovarian cancer by 78 percent and their risk of endometrial cancer (in the lining of the uterus) by 29 percent. Among women who had never smoked, the increase in risk was much higher: 122 percent for ovarian cancer and 99 percent for endometrial cancer.Researcher J.G. Hogervorst recommended that people limit their acrylamide intake, including from their diet."In preparing food at home, fry potatoes at temperatures below 175 degrees Celsius [347 degrees Fahrenheit] and fry them to gold-yellow, not dark brown," Hogervorst said. "The same goes for making toast and cookies."The darker a food is fried or baked, the more acrylamide it contains. Foods that are steamed or boiled do not contain acrylamide.Sources for this story include: www.washingtonpost.com, www.foodnavigator-usa.com ;
yahooBuzzArticleHeadline = "Consuming Acrylamides Boosts Kidney Cancer Rate by 59 Percent";yahooBuzzArticleCategory = "health";yahooBuzzArticleType = "text";yahooBuzzArticleId = window.location.href;