tobacco

Be your own advocate

Source: www.wvnews.com
Author: Mary McKinley

The importance of dental care goes beyond cavities — it’s also about preventing cancer. The week of April 8 is National Oral, Head and Neck Cancer Awareness Week, and your dentist or dental hygienist may be your first line of defense against oral cancer.

More than 50,000 Americans are expected to be diagnosed with oral or oropharyngeal cancer (cancer of the back of the throat, including the base of the tongue and the tonsils) in 2018, and 350 will be diagnosed in West Virginia alone.

Routine dental exams can detect cancer or pre-cancers during the early stages. If you notice a persistent sore or pain, swelling or changes in your mouth, or red or white patches on the gums, tongue, tonsils or lining of the mouth, visit a doctor or dentist so they can examine your mouth more closely.

Some people diagnosed with oral cancer have no risk factors, so it’s important for everyone to keep those dental appointments.

If you use tobacco, drink alcohol in excess, or have the human papillomavirus (HPV), you have an increased risk for oral cancer. Oral cancer is more common in older adults, particularly men, but oropharyngeal cancer is on the rise in middle-aged, nonsmoking white men between the ages of 35 and 55. The majority of these types of cancer cases are caused by HPV.

Take charge of your health and reduce your risk of oral cancer. If you smoke or chew tobacco, quit now (it’s never too late). Moderate your alcohol consumption to no more than one drink a day for women or two for men.

If you have children, make sure they receive the HPV vaccine, which is recommended for all girls and boys ages 11 and 12; a “catch-up” vaccine is also available for young women up to age 26 and most young men up to age 21.

You can be your own best advocate. Check the inside of your mouth in the mirror each month, and speak up to your dentist or dental hygienist if you notice any changes that concern you.

Ask about cancer screenings when making your dental appointments. And to learn more about cancer prevention, be sure to visit www.preventcancer.org.

April, 2018|Oral Cancer News|

Management strategies for oral potentially malignant disorders

Source: www.medscape.com
Author: Joel M. Laudenbach, DMD

Oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) include oral leukoplakia (OL), oral erythroplakia, oral submucous fibrosis, oral lichen planus, proliferative verrucous leukoplakia, and actinic keratosis. Once an OPMD has been clinically diagnosed, execution of management strategy is critical. When formulating the strategy, healthcare providers should consider histopathology, lesion characteristics (ie, surface texture, unifocal, multifocal), lesion location in the mouth (ie, tongue, floor of mouth), patient risk factor assessment, and a detailed medical/cancer history.

In this newly published article, Nadeau and Kerr[1] detail various parameters surrounding evaluation and management of OPMDs. The authors make it clear that OPMDs are challenging, each with their own nuances regarding risk for malignant transformation. For example, when OL is unifocal, nonhomogeneous, nodular, or verrucous, there is a much higher chance of the OL becoming dysplastic (12.63-fold) or demonstrating a focus of carcinoma (8.9-fold) when compared with homogeneous types of OLs.[1]

Provider knowledge of these variables is critical when counseling patients about their diagnosis and management options and when selecting interventions along with follow-up care. Although progression to malignancy is difficult to predict with OPMDs, clinicians can account for multiple risk factors such as smoking/alcohol status, high-risk location in the oral cavity, and size of lesion (>200 mm2) to help formulate a tailored management plan for each patient. Consultation with an oral pathologist to discuss the histologic appearance in the context of specific patient history and lesion characteristics can provide additional perspective and/or recommendations.

Modifiable oral cavity cancer risks related to tobacco and heavy alcohol use should be communicated to patients with OPMDs so that they are able to make changes that may lead to regression/disappearance of certain lesions such as OL. Providers confronted with patients who use tobacco and/or heavy alcohol can integrate recommendations for cessation of tobacco[2] and alcohol[3] because they are both established, independent, causative agents for oral cavity cancer and OPMDs.

Available treatment strategies for OPMDs include surgical removal/ablation, photodynamic therapy, and surveillance. The authors make a clear point with supportive studies that traditional surgical excision of dysplastic OPMDs may decrease malignant transformation (MT) risk, yet it does not fully eliminate that risk and, in some instances, has not changed the MT risk when compared with surveillance alone. Appropriate surgical margin identification for OPMDs is clinically challenging. The authors note that smaller excisional margin sizes (1-2 mm) without marginal histologic assessment are common surgical management goals for OPMDs.[1]

Viewpoint
Nadeau and Kerr carefully outline updated considerations for all OPMDs. Healthcare providers involved in screening, diagnosing, referring, and/or managing patients with OPMDs should be well versed in standards of care, including baseline biopsy goals, tobacco/alcohol cessation, currently available interventions, and surveillance care.

Clinicians should also develop a local team of practitioners who are experts in diagnosis and management of OPMDs to help patients obtain the best opportunity for positive outcomes. I encourage readers with interest to retrieve and review the full article by Nadeau and Kerr as a strategy to update your knowledge base and to continue to improve overall morbidity, mortality, and survival rates related to OPMDs.

References:
1. Nadeau C, Kerr AR. Evaluation and management of oral potentially malignant disorders. Dent Clin North Am. 2018;62:1-27.

2. US Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Tobacco smoking cessation in adults, including pregnant women: behavioral and pharmacotherapy interventions. September 2015. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/tobacco-use-in-adults-and-pregnant-women-counseling-and-interventions1 Accessed March 1, 2018.

3. US Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Alcohol misuse: screening and behavioral counseling interventions in primary care. May 2013. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document
/RecommendationStatementFinal/alcohol-misuse-screening-and-behavioral-counseling-interventions-in-primary-care Accessed March 1, 2018.

March, 2018|Oral Cancer News|

Non-smokers with oral precancerous lesions at increased risk of cancer

Source: www.eurekalert.org
Author: press release

Precancerous lesions in the mouths of non-smokers are more likely to progress to cancer than those in smokers, new research from the University of British Columbia has found.

Although tobacco use is still one of the strongest risk factors associated with mouth cancers, UBC dentistry PhD candidate Leigha Rock found that oral precancerous lesions in non-smokers are more than twice as likely to progress to cancer. Furthermore, lesions in non-smokers progressed to cancer faster than smoking-associated lesions. The study was published this week in Oral Oncology.

“This is the first published study where the main focus was to examine the difference in risk of progression to oral cancer between non-smokers and smokers with oral precancerous lesions,” said Rock, lead author of the study. “While other studies have also reported a higher rate of transformation among non-smokers, we looked at multiple risk factors including genetic markers.”

Rock and colleagues looked at case history of 445 patients with oral epithelial dysplasia (OED), a type of precancerous oral lesion, enrolled in the B.C. Oral Cancer Prediction Longitudinal study. One-third of the patients were non-smokers.

“As smoking rates decline, we are seeing an increase in the proportion of these types of lesions in non-smokers,” said Rock.

Among the scientists’ findings were that lesions on the floor of the mouth in non-smokers were 38 times more likely to progress to cancer than in smokers. The study is also the first to report on quicker progression to cancer in non-smokers: both three-year and five-year rates of progression were seven per cent and 6.5 per cent higher than smokers, respectively.

The researchers suggest that the marked difference in outcomes is due to a difference in the root causes of the lesions. In smokers, the OED is likely the result of environmental factors, whereas in non-smokers, genetic susceptibility or mutations are likely to blame.

“Our findings show that molecular genomic markers can identify high risk lesions, regardless of risky habits like smoking, and should be an important consideration in patient management,” said Rock.

The study’s results stress the importance of taking oral lesions seriously, especially when they occur in non-smokers: “If you see a lesion in a smoker, be worried. If you see a lesion in a non-smoker, be very worried. Don’t assume it can’t be cancer because they’re a non-smoker; our research indicates non-smokers may be at higher risk.”

March, 2018|Oral Cancer News|

Dentists may soon start asking about your sex life in a bid to control staggering HPV rates

Source: www.dailymail.co.uk
Author: Jaleesa Baulkman for DailyMail.com

Your dentist may be interested in more than just your flossing habits, but for a good reason. Dentists and dental hygienists are being encouraged to assess patients’ risk of developing oral cancers from HPV, the most common sexually-transmitted disease.

According to experts, they will likely skirt around the topic of their patients’ sex life and ask about potential symptoms of cancer like jaw pain and swelling.

But a new report published in the Journal of the American Dental Association insists it is imperative that dentists to play a more active role in detecting the disease, which is linked to seven types of cancer.

‘What we’re going to find over time is that HPV is going to be a more common cause of cancer over time,’ Ellen Daley, a public health professor at the University of South Florida, told Daily Mail Online. ‘We need to worry about how to prevent it.’

HPV is responsible for about 70 percent of oropharyngeal cancers in the US, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The most common sexually transmitted infection in the US, it affects more than half of American adults. In fact, Dr Daley says it’s as common as the common cold.

However, asking about a patient’s sex life isn’t necessary to preventing HPV-related oral cancers.

‘If [dentists] want to [ask patient’s about their sex life], they can, Dr Daley explained. ‘But that’s not relevant since HPV is so common. We need to get pass how it’s transmitted and worry about preventing cancers.’

There have been nearly 16,000 annual cases of oropharyngeal cancers — cancer of the tongue, tonsils and pharyngeal wall — between 2008 and 2012, with HPV being the cause of approximately 72 percent of those diagnoses, according to data.

For the study, Dr Daley and her team conducted four focus groups with a total of 33 dentists.

Research showed that most dentists knew HPV was a risk factor for oropharyngeal cancer, but several were not sure about what causes HPV-related oral cancer.

The study found that many dentists don’t know how to approach the subject of HPV and lack the communication skills needed to educate patients effectively.

Most dentists said they were concerned their patients would think they were judging their personal behaviors. In other words, asking patient’s about their sex lives is out of the question. However, dentists and dental hygienists are trained to screen for oral cancers.

Examining the area under the tongue and looking in the back of a patients’ mouth are ways dentists screen for oral cancer. However, HPV-related oral cancers are difficult to detect because they develop in the throat at the back of the tongue, or in the folds of the tonsils, according to the American Dental Association.

HPV oral and oropharyngeal cancers are harder to discover than tobacco related cancers because the symptoms are not always obvious to the individual who is developing the disease, or to professionals that are looking for it. They can be very subtle and painless

HPV, which is transmitted through vaginal, anal and oral sex, is the most commonly sexually transmitted infection in the US, according to the CDC, affecting more than 79 million Americans. There are more than 40 types of HPV that can affect the mouth and genitals, but HPV 16 and 18 are the two most common cancer-causing types. According to the CDC, HPV type 16 is responsible for 60 percent of all oropharyngeal cancers. Non-cancer types of HPV can cause warts in the mouth or throat.

Some symptoms to look out for include, a persistent sore throat, earaches, enlarged lymph nodes, unexplained weight loss and painful swallowing. However, some people have no signs or symptoms, according to the CDC.

The HPV vaccine, which is administered to children aged nine and 12 years old in the US and the UK, is a preventive measure against HPV and HPV-related cancers. The vaccine is offered as a three doses in the US, and two doses in the UK. Condoms and dental dams also serve as protective barriers against the disease.

January, 2018|Oral Cancer News|

Smokeless tobacco, snuff, chew not safe substitutes for cigarettes

Source: www.bnd.com
Author: staff

As many people are aware, the use of any type of tobacco can lead to major health risks. Many individuals think using smokeless tobacco or chew can be a safe substitute for cigarettes.

A mock model of how dangerous and destructive tobacco products, specifically smokeless tobacco, can be to someone’s health and well-being. Navy photo by Douglas H. Stutz, Naval Hospital Bremerton Public Affairs

Tobacco companies often lead people to believe this; however, this is not true. There is no proof that any smokeless tobacco products help smokers quit smoking.

Smokeless tobacco has four times the amount of nicotine than a cigarette and also contains 30 chemicals known to cause cancers.

A few of these cancers include mouth, tongue, cheek, and gum cancer. Additionally, cancer can be found in the esophagus and pancreas. Along with these health risks there are other problems, including mouth and teeth problems and tooth loss.

Many studies have shown that high rates of leukoplakia in the mouth were found where individuals hold the chew.

Leukoplakia is a white patch in the mouth that could potentially turn into cancer. The white patches, sometimes called sores, within the mouth cannot be scraped off but usually do not cause pain. The longer the use of oral tobacco, the more prone an individual is to develop leukoplakia.

Stopping tobacco use usually allows leukoplakia to heal, however, treatment may be needed if there are signs of early cancer. Along with these issues, there are many others such as bad breath, teeth stains, receding gums, gum disease, cavities and tooth decay.

As well as the health risks one is providing for themselves, children, pets and animals can also suffer health risks from tobacco substances. Children, pets and animals often mistake these substances for candy, gum or something they should put in their mouth.

Ingesting smokeless tobacco can lead to nicotine poisoning and even death. Most children affected by this are under the age of 6 and more than 70 percent are under 1 year of age according to a study in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Smokeless tobacco affects everyone.

November, 2017|Oral Cancer News|

Penn surgeons become world’s first to test glowing dye for cancerous lymph nodes

Source: www.phillyvoice.com
Author: Michael Tanenbaum, PhillyVoice Staff

Surgeons at the University of Pennsylvania have achieved a global first with the use of a fluorescent dye that identifies cancerous cells in lymph nodes during head and neck cancer procedures.

The study, led by otorhinolaryngologist Jason G. Newman, seeks to test the effectiveness of intraoperative molecular imaging (IMI), a technique that illuminates tumors to provide real-time surgical guidance.

More than 65,000 Americans will be diagnosed with head and neck cancers in 2017, accounting for approximately 4 percent of all cancers in the United States, according to the National Cancer Institute. About 75 percent of these cancers are caused by tobacco and alcohol use, followed by human papillomavirus (HPV) as a growing source for their development.

Common areas affected by these cancers include the mouth, throat, voice box, sinuses and salivary glands, with typical treatments including a combination of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy.

Lymph nodes, which act as filters for the immune system, are often among the first organs affected by head and neck cancers as they spread or resurface. Initial surgeries may leave microscopic cancerous cells undetected in the lymphoid tissue, heightening the risk that a patient’s condition will return after the procedure.

“By using a dye that makes cancerous cells glow, we get real-time information about which lymph nodes are potentially dangerous and which ones we can leave alone,” Newman said. “That not only helps us remove more cancer from our patients during surgery, it also improves our ability to spare healthy tissue.”

With the aid of a fluorescent dye, surgeons are able to key in on suspicious tissue without removing or damaging otherwise healthy areas. Previously adopted for other disease sites in the lungs and brain, the practice now allows Newman’s team to experiment with indocyanine green (ICG), an FDA-approved contrast agent that responds to blood flow.

Newman explained that since tumor cells retain the dye longer than most other tissues, administering the dye prior to surgery singles out the areas where cancer cells are present.

The current trial at Penn will enable researchers to determine whether ICG is the most suitable dye for head and neck cancers and provide oncologists with a deeper understanding of how cancer spreads in the lymph nodes.

October, 2017|Oral Cancer News|

Alcohol industry ‘playing down’ risk of cancer by using tobacco industry tactics

Source: news.sky.com
Author: Paul Kelso, Health Correspondent

The alcohol industry is misleading the public by downplaying the risk of cancer through similar tactics to the tobacco industry, researchers say.

Liquor bottles in grocery store

A study led by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet found the industry is using “denying, distortion and distraction” strategies to minimise evidence.

Researchers analysed information relating to cancer on the websites and documents of 28 alcohol industry organisations between September and December last year, finding that most showed “some sort of distortion or misrepresentation” of evidence.

The industry most commonly presented the relationship between alcohol and cancer as highly complex, implying there was no evidence of a consistent or independent link, according to the study.

Other tactics included denying that any relationship existed or claiming that there was no risk for light or moderate drinking, as well as presenting alcohol as just one risk among many.

Alcohol consumption is an established risk factor for a range of cancers, including oral cavity, liver, breast and colorectal cancers, and accounts for about 4% of new cancer cases annually in the UK.

The latest British government advice on alcohol, issued last year, makes an explicit link between cancer and alcohol.

It states: “The risk of developing a range of health problems (including cancers of the mouth, throat and breast) increases the more you drink on a regular basis.”

During the consultation phase the alcohol industry challenged the link with cancer.

The authors of the report, published in the Drug and Alcohol Review journal, said it was important to highlight that those who drink within the recommended guidelines – not more than 14 units a week for both men and women – “shouldn’t be too concerned when it comes to cancer”.

Mark Petticrew, Professor of Public Health at the LSHTM and the study’s lead author, told Sky News: “The information, on balance, across organisations we looked at seems to be quite extensively inaccurate or misrepresents the evidence.

“The evidence linking alcohol consumption and cancer is reasonably clear and has firmed up over recent years. The information on these websites, given out by alcohol bodies, appears to be not representing that evidence base, which is quite consistent.

“We know the tobacco industry attempted to confuse the relationship between lung cancer and smoking and put out a lot of very distracting information. We see similar types of argument use in these alcohol industry websites.”

Institute of Alcohol Studies chief executive Katherine Brown said: “This report shows that, like the tobacco industry before them, alcohol companies are misleading consumers about the evidence linking their products to cancer.

“We cannot rely on a profit-driven industry to promote public health. Consumers have a right to know the truth about alcohol and cancer, so they can make fully informed decisions about their drinking.”

The alcohol industry denied the report’s findings.

Glasses of light and dark beer on a pub background.

Drinkaware, a charitable trust funded by drinks manufacturers, said: “Its recent review of Drinkaware’s cancer information, which is extensive, has confirmed that the information we are providing accurately reflects the most recent research evidence.”

Henry Ashworth, president of the International Alliance for Responsible Drinking, said: “We do not agree with the conclusions reached in this paper. We believe in sharing the current state of the scientific evidence and stand by the information that we publish on drinking and health.”

Chris Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: “This is a diatribe disguised as a study that seeks to create a false narrative in which businesses always lie and anti-alcohol campaigners always tell the truth.

“We need to have sensible and evidence-based information about the risks of alcohol. The risks associated with cancer are not the biggest risks when it comes to drinking, the bigger risks are to do with violence, drink-driving and liver cirrhosis.

“It’s not cancer, so I’m not convinced that actually people understood fully what the risks associated with drinking are in terms of cancer when it doesn’t have an effect on people’s consumption of it at all.”

September, 2017|Oral Cancer News|

Smoking Scenes in Movies Have Increased … Why?

Source: www.healthline.com
Author: Shawn Radcliffe

After several years of decline, tobacco use depicted in movies is on the rise again. Does it matter? Where there’s smoke, there’s … probably a PG-13 rated movie.

A new study shows that tobacco incidents depicted in top-grossing movies in the United States are once again on the rise, breaking an earlier decline. This is true despite public health efforts outside theaters to reduce smoking by children and teens.

“If the progress that we had seen between 2005 and 2010 had continued, all of the youth-rated films would have been smoke-free in 2015,” said study author Stanton Glantz, PhD, professor of medicine, and director of the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.

The July 7 study in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) found that the total number of tobacco incidents in top-grossing movies increased 72 percent between 2010 and 2016. It also increased 43 percent in PG-13 movies. Tobacco incidents are defined as use or implied use, by an actor, of cigarettes, cigars, pipes, hookah, smokeless tobacco products, or electronic cigarettes. This increase comes as the number of movies showing tobacco declined — meaning fewer movies account for a greater number of tobacco scenes.

In 2016, 41 percent of the top-grossing movies had tobacco incidents, down from 45 percent in 2010. In addition, 26 percent of youth-rated movies had tobacco incidents in 2016, a decline from 31 percent in 2010. Tobacco incidents in top-grossing movies peaked in 2005. The lowest number of tobacco incidents on record occurred in 1998. Tobacco depictions are now rare in PG and G movies — only four of these films in 2015 included tobacco use.

The study was a collaboration between UCSF, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Breathe California of Sacramento-Emigrant Trails, which provided the data.

The potential harm:
Like on-screen violence, tobacco depicted in youth-rated movies can have a profound effect on children and teens.

“It’s very concerning because five years ago in 2012 the surgeon general concluded that exposure to smoking on-screen in movies causes kids to start smoking,” Glantz told Healthline.

There’s also a dose-response — the more often kids see tobacco use depicted in movies, the more likely they are to pick up the habit. According a National Cancer Institute (NCI) report, youths who are heavily exposed to smoking depicted in movies are two to three times more likely to start, compared with kids who have little exposure.

“An increase in the amount of exposure means that more kids are going to be smoking and dying from tobacco-induced diseases,” said Glantz.

Tobacco use is linked to lung cancer, mouth cancer, emphysema, and other diseases. The NCI report also cited studies showing that cigarette smoking in movies can influence adults’ and teens’ beliefs about smoking. For example, when stars are shown smoking, or when the health consequences of tobacco don’t show up in the film, viewers may develop pro-smoking beliefs and intentions.

What’s causing the increase?
The increase in the number of on-screen tobacco incidents since 2010 runs counter to overall smoking trends in the United States. According to the CDC, overall smoking rates in adults have been falling for decades, and in high school students since the late 1990s. The researchers write that starting in 2001 public health officials became more concerned about tobacco use in movies. This might account for the decline of tobacco incidents in youth-rated movies between 2005 and 2010.

So what has shifted in recent years?
Some public health experts put the blame squarely on the motion picture companies that continue to produce youth movies depicting smoking.

“I think the [public health] messaging is fine,” said Glantz. “It’s been the recalcitrance on the part of the media companies to act responsibly and protect kids.”

The major studios have policies to help reduce the amount of smoking in movies that they release, but all of the polices have what Glantz calls “loopholes.” Paramount Pictures “discourages” depiction of tobacco use in youth-rated films, but also takes into account the “creative vision of the filmmakers.” Universal Pictures “presumes that no smoking incidents should appear” in youth-rated films, but leaves it as an option if there is a “substantial reason for doing so.”

Modernizing movie rating system:
Currently, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), which rates movies in the United States, has a smoking “rating descriptor” that is supposed to alert viewers and parents to tobacco use in a film. However, this descriptor was missing from 89 percent of top-grossing, youth-rated movies that depicted tobacco use, according to a 2015 report by the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.

Public health experts are calling for a more consistent approach.

“The six studios that control the rating system through the MPAA need to modernize the rating system to reflect the science,” said Glantz, “and give an R-rating for smoking, which would get it out of all the youth-rated movies.”

A 2012 study in the journal Pediatrics estimated that this could reduce the number of teen smokers by 18 percent. A related CDC fact sheet estimated that this change would save the lives of a million youth. Advocacy group Smokefree Movies recently ran a two-page statement in The Hollywood Reporter and Variety demanding that MPAA update the rating system by June 1, 2018. The statement was signed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Heart Association, and other health organizations.

So far, the major studios have been unwilling to update the rating system to take into account on-screen tobacco use. Some health experts have proposed running anti-smoking messages before movies to counteract the effect of on-screen tobacco use. These are somewhat effective but would require much more effort than reducing children’s on-screen tobacco exposure.

“It would cost nothing to [update the rating system],” said Glantz. “There’s no public health intervention that would be cheaper and have a bigger effect.”

House Committee Looks to Dilute Tobacco Control Act

Source: www.medpagetoday.com
Date: July 12, 2017
Author: Salynn Boyles

The U.S. House Appropriations Committee made a move Wednesday to greatly weaken the FDA’s authority to regulate tobacco products, including flavored cigars and electronic cigarettes, and health advocacy groups were quick to condemn it.

The committee approved a rider to the agriculture funding bill that would exempt certain cigars from FDA’s authority and weaken its regulatory oversight over e-cigarettes, little cigars, and hookah tobacco.

Prior to the vote, the House committee defeated an amendment by Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) to remove language from the bill that will effectively eliminate FDA’s authority to review the health hazards of thousands of tobacco products.

A second rider would exempt from FDA authority certain cigars, including many that are cheap, flavored and are most likely to appeal to children, said American Lung Association (ALA) President Harold Wimmer.

“These dangerous riders were added to this bill for the benefit of the tobacco industry and come at a time when e-cigarettes are the most commonly used tobacco product among kids,” Wimmer said in a written press statement.

The riders are similar to those passed by the House Appropriations Committee last year, but the language restricting FDA’s authority under the Tobacco Control Act was dropped from the final FY2017 bill later in the appropriations process. New language in the FY2018 bill does require the FDA to develop standards for the flavors added to e-cigarettes.

ALA spokesperson Erika Sward told MedPage Today that it is not clear if the riders will suffer the same fate this time around.

“Last year there was a President committed to the Tobacco Control Act in the White House,” she said. “This year not only do you have the House attempting to undermine the Tobacco Control Act, but you also have the FDA delaying the deeming rule.”

Nancy Brown, CEO of the American Heart Association, said the cigar rider exempting certain cigars from FDA regulation was particularly troubling.

“Our association strongly believes that the FDA should regulate all products, since tobacco in any form presents health risks. Further, we are particularly concerned that this could create a loophole that would allow tobacco manufacturers to manipulate their products to evade the agency’s oversight,” she said in a written statement.

Brown noted that the tobacco product grandfather rider could allow thousands of tobacco products to skip FDA review.

“While we appreciate that House members included a requirement that the FDA develop a product standard for flavors in e-cigarettes, changing the grandfather date puts e-cigarette users’ health at risk,” she said.

Chris Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Action Network, charged that the legislation would benefit the cigar and e-cigarette industries at the expense of the nation’s public health.

“Congress made a commitment to protect the health of the American people when it passed the Tobacco Control Act. Today’s committee action is a serious breach of that promise,” he said.

July, 2017|Oral Cancer News|

Novel vaccine therapy can generate immune responses in patients with HPV-related head and neck cancer

Source: www.news-medical.net
Author: staff

A novel vaccine therapy can generate immune responses in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCCa), according to researchers at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The treatment specifically targets human papillomavirus (HPV), which is frequently associated with HNSCCa, to trigger the immune response. Researchers will present the results of their pilot study during the 2017 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting in Chicago (Abstract #6073).

HNSCCa is a cancer that develops in the mucous membranes of the mouth, and throat. While smoking and tobacco use are known causes, the number of cases related to HPV infection – a sexually transmitted infection that is so common, the Centers for Disease Control says almost all sexually active adults will contract it at some point in their lifetimes – is on the rise. The CDC now estimates 70 percent of all throat cancers in the United States are HPV-related. Sixty percent are caused by the subtype known as HPV 16/18.

“This is the subtype we target with this new therapy, and we’re the only site in the country to demonstrate immune activation with this DNA based immunotherapeutic vaccine for HPV 16/18 associated head and neck cancer,” said the study’s lead author Charu Aggarwal, MD, MPH, an assistant professor of Hematology Oncology in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.

The vaccine is delivered as an injection of antigens – which leads the immune system to start producing antibodies and activate immune cells. At the time of injection, physicians use a special device to deliver a pulse of electricity to the area, which stimulates the muscles and speeds the intake of the antigens. Aggarwal noted that this study represents a multidisciplinary approach involving the lab and the clinic.

“This is truly bench-to-bedside and shows the value of translational medicine within an academic medical center,” Aggarwal said.

Penn researchers treated 22 patients with the vaccine. All of the patients had already received therapy that was intended to be curative – either surgery or chemotherapy and radiation. When doctors followed up an average of 16 months later, 18 of those patients showed elevated T cell activity that was specific to HPV 16/18. All of the patients in the study are still alive, and none reported any serious side effects.

“The data show the therapy is targeted and specific, but also safe and well-tolerated,” Aggarwal said.

Because of the positive activity, Aggarwal says the next step is to try this therapy in patients with metastatic disease. A multi-site trial will open soon that combines the vaccine with PD-L1 inhibitors, which target a protein that weakens the body’s immune response by suppressing T-cell production.