Andover Forums - Cancer

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Admin

Admin Group

Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 24

Quote

Topic: Cancer
Posted: 04 Feb 2009 at 09:06

A drug which prolongs the life of kidney cancer sufferers has finally been cleared for use in England.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) has published revised guidance on the drug Sutent.

Similar advice published last year rejected Sutent for use on the NHS, alongside Avastin, Nexavar and Torisel.

Charities expressed outrage at that decision, saying it left patients only one treatment option - interferon - to which many people do not respond.

But Nice has now revised its guidance, saying Sutent should be approved on the NHS in England. It still rejected the other three drugs.

All the guidance is still in a draft stage and is subject to consultation although Nice hopes to issue final advice on Sutent in March.

The medicines do not cure advanced kidney cancer but they can extend a person's life by a matter of months.

Every year, up to 7,000 people in the UK are diagnosed with kidney cancer. Of these, around 1,700 patients will be diagnosed with advanced kidney cancer and at any one time around 3,600 people are living with the advanced form.

Earlier this month, the Welsh health minister Edwina Hart announced that all four drugs would be made available to people in Wales. It is thought prescribing the drugs will cost £600 a week per patient.

However, Mrs Hart made it clear she was making the decision subject to reappraisal of the drugs by Nice.

Andrew Dillon, chief executive of Nice, said Sutent was in the final stages of draft guidance whereas the other drugs were at an earlier stage.

He said: "Having decided that one of these treatments should be recommended for use in the NHS, we felt that it was in the interests of patients to get that advice out as quickly as possible.

"Although this final recommendation is subject to appeal we very much hope it will form the basis of our guidance to the NHS.

"The other three drugs we are looking at will be the subject of further consultation."

Rachel Rowson, policy manager at Macmillan Cancer Support, said: "This is a victory for kidney cancer patients and is long overdue."

johns

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Admin Group

Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 133

Quote

Posted: 07 Feb 2009 at 14:19

Taking aspirin or ibuprofen could guard against stomach cancer, even if only in very low doses, according to a British study published Friday.

People who had taken aspirin at least once in the last 12 months were 36 percent less likely to develop cancer in the middle or lower parts of the stomach, compared to those who had taken none.

Taking similar levels of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) such as ibuprofen reduced the figures by 32 percent, according to the study published in the British Journal of Cancer.

Protection against cancer increased with the dosage of painkiller taken, it found.

"We found that the risk of non-cardia (middle and lower) stomach cancer was lower in people who had taken aspirin, and this risk lowered the more regularly they took it," said Christian Abnet of the US National Cancer Institute.

"Interestingly, our results didn't show a significant cut in the risk of oesophageal or cardia (upper) stomach cancer, so it's important that we continue to review data that suggests otherwise," she added.

But Lesley Walker of Cancer Research UK warned that it was premature to make blanket recommendations. "It's far too early to recommend that people take aspirin to protect themselves from these cancers.

"In cancers where survival is low, understanding how to prevent the disease is crucial, but more research is needed to discover how side effects can be balanced with the benefits.

"Cancer Research UK would urge people to speak to their doctor before taking aspirin regularly," she said.

Abnet added: "The number of people who survive at least five years following a diagnosis of stomach or oesophageal cancer is low, so it's important to increase our understanding of ways to prevent the disease and to investigate aspirin as a possible preventative drug."

basil

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Forum Regular

Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 322

Quote

Posted: 07 Feb 2009 at 14:40

People who eat salty soups could be at risk of developing stomach cancer, a scientist has said.

Some leading brands are the "worst culprits" for hidden salt and can contain half the recommended daily intake, according to an expert at the World Cancer Research Fund.

The link between too much salt and high blood pressure, strokes and heart disease is well-known, but scientists also fear it can cause stomach tumours.

They suggest people cook low-salt alternatives and eat less salty foods such as some types of ham, sausages, ready meals, pizza and breakfast cereals.

Science programme manager Dr Rachel Thompson said: "Even taking small steps to reduce your salt intake, such as always checking food labels or even making your own soup from scratch rather than buying ready-made, is something positive you can do to help reduce your risk of cancer."

She said it was important shoppers check the label.

"Fresh vegetable-based soups tend to have less salt than tinned cream-based soups that include bacon or ham."

Keymaster

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Forum Regular

Joined: 27 Sep 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 291

Quote

Posted: 18 Feb 2009 at 01:29

A "danger receptor" that may kick-start an immune reaction to cancer in the body has been found by UK researchers.

It picks up signs of cell death caused by injury or tumours and mobilises the body's defences, Nature reports.

The finding may explain why some tumour-killing drugs partly work by setting off an immune response.

Better understanding of the receptor could help develop cancer treatments that harness the immune system, the London Research Institute team said.

Cell death is a normal process in the body which keeps growth and repair ticking over and keeps tissue healthy.

basil

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Forum Regular

Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 322

Quote

Posted: 25 Feb 2009 at 20:25

A glass of wine each evening is enough to increase your risk of developing cancer, women are being warned.

Consuming just one drink a day causes an extra 7,000 cancer cases - mostly breast cancer - in UK women each year, Cancer Research UK scientists say.

The risk goes up the more you drink, whether spirits, wine or beer, the data on over a million women suggests.

Overall, alcohol is to blame for about 13% of breast, liver, rectum, mouth and throat cancers, the researchers say.

They estimate that about 5,000 cases of breast cancer in the UK - 11% of the 45,000 cases diagnosed each year - can be attributed to women's consumption of alcohol.

The study looked specifically at women who consumed low to moderate levels of alcohol - defined as three drinks a day or fewer.

Over the seven years of the study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, a quarter of the 1.3 million women reported drinking no alcohol.

Keymaster

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Forum Regular

Joined: 27 Sep 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 291

Quote

Posted: 26 Feb 2009 at 19:45

Over 40% of breast and bowel cancer cases in rich countries are preventable through diet, physical activity and weight control alone, experts say.

Simple measures like cycling to work and swapping fatty foods for fruit can make all the difference for these and many other cancers, they say.

Globally, each year there are millions of these preventable cancer cases, the World Cancer Research Fund estimates.

Its report makes recommendations for "clean living" policies.

According to the report, about a third of the 12 most common cancers in high-income countries and about a quarter in lower income countries could be prevented through diet, exercise and weight control.

This include cancers of the throat, lung and bowel.

Blaze159

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Forum Regular

Joined: 27 Apr 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 448

Quote

Posted: 11 Mar 2009 at 16:42

Didnt that happen to Wendy Richards?

basil

Members Profile

Find Members Posts

Forum Regular

Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 322

Quote

Posted: 13 Mar 2009 at 20:56

Ministers are to review the age at which women in England are screened for cervical cancer.

An expert panel will report later this year on whether women aged 20-24 should be offered smear tests, as they are in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

In 2003, screening in England was moved to start at 25 as it was felt it did more harm than good in younger women.

There have been calls to lower screening age following the high-profile case of Jade Goody.

The reality TV star, 27, who was diagnosed with cervical cancer last year, has been told she has just weeks to live after the disease spread to her liver, groin and bowel.

Doctors have reported more women asking for smear tests after her diagnosis.

Under-25s have been excluded from such checks in England since 2003 because of relatively few cancers being detected, and concerns about unnecessary and invasive treatments.

This is not the first time the screening age in England has been questioned since the recommendations changed.

In 2008, UK researchers found the incidence of high-grade pre-cancerous lesions was increasing in younger women, prompting them to call for screening to be offered from the age of 20.

Evidence

The expert panel will review the latest evidence to determine whether women under 25 should be eligible for smear tests, health minister Ann Keen said.

They will look at trends in cervical cancer incidence in young women as well as the potential impact of HPV vaccination, which protects against a virus known to cause the majority of cervical cancers, on future rates of the disease.

Options being considered are whether asymptomatic women under 25 years should have formal access to cervical screening or through an "informed choice" scheme.

"Cervical screening saves around 4,500 lives every year and we want to ensure that our programme remains in the best interests of young women," Ann Keen said.

"Experts will review the latest available evidence in this area as well as consider how we can increase awareness of the importance of screening and encourage more women to decide to take up this important service."

Professor Mike Richards, National Cancer Director, added: "Currently in England we start to screen at 25 years, which is in line with international World Health Organization recommendations and is supported by leading scientists in this country.

"However it is important that we look at any emerging evidence so that we can be sure, and can assure young women, that this is still what is best for their health."

Emily James, spokeswoman for Marie Stopes International, said they wanted to see cervical screening standardised across the NHS in the UK.

"Cervical cancer, whilst rare for women under the age of 30, is a potential threat.

"Early detection and treatment can prevent around 75% of cervical cancers developing in women, so an about-turn from the government to offer screening from a younger age could save lives."

Dr Lesley Walker, Cancer Research UK's director of cancer information, said: "It's vital to consider any evidence that might suggest it's more appropriate to screen women under the age of 25 in England.

"The complexities of running a national screening programme mean that there are always hard decisions to make.

"So the evidence needs to be constantly reviewed, and acted upon, as it emerges."

Robert Music, director of Jo's Trust, the cervical cancer charity said: "It is vital that the review goes as wide and deep as possible to ensure many people are able to offer input."

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version
Admin Members Profile Find Members Posts Admin Group Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 24	Quote Reply Topic: Cancer Posted: 04 Feb 2009 at 09:06
	A drug which prolongs the life of kidney cancer sufferers has finally been cleared for use in England. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) has published revised guidance on the drug Sutent. Similar advice published last year rejected Sutent for use on the NHS, alongside Avastin, Nexavar and Torisel. Charities expressed outrage at that decision, saying it left patients only one treatment option - interferon - to which many people do not respond. But Nice has now revised its guidance, saying Sutent should be approved on the NHS in England. It still rejected the other three drugs. All the guidance is still in a draft stage and is subject to consultation although Nice hopes to issue final advice on Sutent in March. The medicines do not cure advanced kidney cancer but they can extend a person's life by a matter of months. Every year, up to 7,000 people in the UK are diagnosed with kidney cancer. Of these, around 1,700 patients will be diagnosed with advanced kidney cancer and at any one time around 3,600 people are living with the advanced form. Earlier this month, the Welsh health minister Edwina Hart announced that all four drugs would be made available to people in Wales. It is thought prescribing the drugs will cost £600 a week per patient. However, Mrs Hart made it clear she was making the decision subject to reappraisal of the drugs by Nice. Andrew Dillon, chief executive of Nice, said Sutent was in the final stages of draft guidance whereas the other drugs were at an earlier stage. He said: "Having decided that one of these treatments should be recommended for use in the NHS, we felt that it was in the interests of patients to get that advice out as quickly as possible. "Although this final recommendation is subject to appeal we very much hope it will form the basis of our guidance to the NHS. "The other three drugs we are looking at will be the subject of further consultation." Rachel Rowson, policy manager at Macmillan Cancer Support, said: "This is a victory for kidney cancer patients and is long overdue."


johns Members Profile Find Members Posts Admin Group Joined: 21 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 133	Quote Reply Posted: 07 Feb 2009 at 14:19
	Taking aspirin or ibuprofen could guard against stomach cancer, even if only in very low doses, according to a British study published Friday. People who had taken aspirin at least once in the last 12 months were 36 percent less likely to develop cancer in the middle or lower parts of the stomach, compared to those who had taken none. Taking similar levels of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) such as ibuprofen reduced the figures by 32 percent, according to the study published in the British Journal of Cancer. Protection against cancer increased with the dosage of painkiller taken, it found. "We found that the risk of non-cardia (middle and lower) stomach cancer was lower in people who had taken aspirin, and this risk lowered the more regularly they took it," said Christian Abnet of the US National Cancer Institute. "Interestingly, our results didn't show a significant cut in the risk of oesophageal or cardia (upper) stomach cancer, so it's important that we continue to review data that suggests otherwise," she added. But Lesley Walker of Cancer Research UK warned that it was premature to make blanket recommendations. "It's far too early to recommend that people take aspirin to protect themselves from these cancers. "In cancers where survival is low, understanding how to prevent the disease is crucial, but more research is needed to discover how side effects can be balanced with the benefits. "Cancer Research UK would urge people to speak to their doctor before taking aspirin regularly," she said. Abnet added: "The number of people who survive at least five years following a diagnosis of stomach or oesophageal cancer is low, so it's important to increase our understanding of ways to prevent the disease and to investigate aspirin as a possible preventative drug."

basil Members Profile Find Members Posts Forum Regular Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 322	Quote Reply Posted: 07 Feb 2009 at 14:40
	People who eat salty soups could be at risk of developing stomach cancer, a scientist has said. Some leading brands are the "worst culprits" for hidden salt and can contain half the recommended daily intake, according to an expert at the World Cancer Research Fund. The link between too much salt and high blood pressure, strokes and heart disease is well-known, but scientists also fear it can cause stomach tumours. They suggest people cook low-salt alternatives and eat less salty foods such as some types of ham, sausages, ready meals, pizza and breakfast cereals. Science programme manager Dr Rachel Thompson said: "Even taking small steps to reduce your salt intake, such as always checking food labels or even making your own soup from scratch rather than buying ready-made, is something positive you can do to help reduce your risk of cancer." She said it was important shoppers check the label. "Fresh vegetable-based soups tend to have less salt than tinned cream-based soups that include bacon or ham."

Keymaster Members Profile Find Members Posts Forum Regular Joined: 27 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 291	Quote Reply Posted: 18 Feb 2009 at 01:29
	A "danger receptor" that may kick-start an immune reaction to cancer in the body has been found by UK researchers. It picks up signs of cell death caused by injury or tumours and mobilises the body's defences, Nature reports. The finding may explain why some tumour-killing drugs partly work by setting off an immune response. Better understanding of the receptor could help develop cancer treatments that harness the immune system, the London Research Institute team said. Cell death is a normal process in the body which keeps growth and repair ticking over and keeps tissue healthy.

basil Members Profile Find Members Posts Forum Regular Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 322	Quote Reply Posted: 25 Feb 2009 at 20:25
	A glass of wine each evening is enough to increase your risk of developing cancer, women are being warned. Consuming just one drink a day causes an extra 7,000 cancer cases - mostly breast cancer - in UK women each year, Cancer Research UK scientists say. The risk goes up the more you drink, whether spirits, wine or beer, the data on over a million women suggests. Overall, alcohol is to blame for about 13% of breast, liver, rectum, mouth and throat cancers, the researchers say. They estimate that about 5,000 cases of breast cancer in the UK - 11% of the 45,000 cases diagnosed each year - can be attributed to women's consumption of alcohol. The study looked specifically at women who consumed low to moderate levels of alcohol - defined as three drinks a day or fewer. Over the seven years of the study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, a quarter of the 1.3 million women reported drinking no alcohol.

Keymaster Members Profile Find Members Posts Forum Regular Joined: 27 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 291	Quote Reply Posted: 26 Feb 2009 at 19:45
	Over 40% of breast and bowel cancer cases in rich countries are preventable through diet, physical activity and weight control alone, experts say. Simple measures like cycling to work and swapping fatty foods for fruit can make all the difference for these and many other cancers, they say. Globally, each year there are millions of these preventable cancer cases, the World Cancer Research Fund estimates. Its report makes recommendations for "clean living" policies. According to the report, about a third of the 12 most common cancers in high-income countries and about a quarter in lower income countries could be prevented through diet, exercise and weight control. This include cancers of the throat, lung and bowel.

Blaze159 Members Profile Find Members Posts Forum Regular Joined: 27 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 448	Quote Reply Posted: 11 Mar 2009 at 16:42
	Didnt that happen to Wendy Richards?

basil Members Profile Find Members Posts Forum Regular Joined: 28 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 322	Quote Reply Posted: 13 Mar 2009 at 20:56
	Ministers are to review the age at which women in England are screened for cervical cancer. An expert panel will report later this year on whether women aged 20-24 should be offered smear tests, as they are in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In 2003, screening in England was moved to start at 25 as it was felt it did more harm than good in younger women. There have been calls to lower screening age following the high-profile case of Jade Goody. The reality TV star, 27, who was diagnosed with cervical cancer last year, has been told she has just weeks to live after the disease spread to her liver, groin and bowel. Doctors have reported more women asking for smear tests after her diagnosis. Under-25s have been excluded from such checks in England since 2003 because of relatively few cancers being detected, and concerns about unnecessary and invasive treatments. This is not the first time the screening age in England has been questioned since the recommendations changed. In 2008, UK researchers found the incidence of high-grade pre-cancerous lesions was increasing in younger women, prompting them to call for screening to be offered from the age of 20. Evidence The expert panel will review the latest evidence to determine whether women under 25 should be eligible for smear tests, health minister Ann Keen said. They will look at trends in cervical cancer incidence in young women as well as the potential impact of HPV vaccination, which protects against a virus known to cause the majority of cervical cancers, on future rates of the disease. Options being considered are whether asymptomatic women under 25 years should have formal access to cervical screening or through an "informed choice" scheme. "Cervical screening saves around 4,500 lives every year and we want to ensure that our programme remains in the best interests of young women," Ann Keen said. "Experts will review the latest available evidence in this area as well as consider how we can increase awareness of the importance of screening and encourage more women to decide to take up this important service." Professor Mike Richards, National Cancer Director, added: "Currently in England we start to screen at 25 years, which is in line with international World Health Organization recommendations and is supported by leading scientists in this country. "However it is important that we look at any emerging evidence so that we can be sure, and can assure young women, that this is still what is best for their health." Emily James, spokeswoman for Marie Stopes International, said they wanted to see cervical screening standardised across the NHS in the UK. "Cervical cancer, whilst rare for women under the age of 30, is a potential threat. "Early detection and treatment can prevent around 75% of cervical cancers developing in women, so an about-turn from the government to offer screening from a younger age could save lives." Dr Lesley Walker, Cancer Research UK's director of cancer information, said: "It's vital to consider any evidence that might suggest it's more appropriate to screen women under the age of 25 in England. "The complexities of running a national screening programme mean that there are always hard decisions to make. "So the evidence needs to be constantly reviewed, and acted upon, as it emerges." Robert Music, director of Jo's Trust, the cervical cancer charity said: "It is vital that the review goes as wide and deep as possible to ensure many people are able to offer input."