Oral Cancer News – Page 126 – The Oral Cancer Foundation News Archive

Saving Mr. Disney: What Walt Taught Us

Source: Huffington PostPublished: January 15, 2014By: Cary A. Presant, M.D. Walt showed us in Mary Poppins that Mr. Banks could be saved from his work addiction, as demonstrated in Tom Hanks wonderful portrayal in Saving Mr. Banks. However, he could not save Mr. Goff (P. L. Travers' father) from his alcohol addiction, leading to his fatal infection (influenza, not TB). And Walt, unfortunately, could not save himself. Not portrayed in the film was the most important lesson Walt taught us. Walt Disney's fatal illness which shortened his life and deprived us all of his extraordinary imagination and creations was lung cancer directly caused by his life-long chain smoking. When he died at the young age of 65 from lung cancer only 1 month after it was diagnosed, he had left us with the record 59 Oscar nominations and 22 Academy Awards, a record that still has not been broken. But could Walt have been saved? Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in America. 392,000 Americans die every year from smoking, including deaths from smoking-induced heart and lung disease and also 160,000 deaths from smoking-related cancers. America's 43 million smokers have a shortened life, 13.2 years less for men and 14.5 years less for women. Smoking causes not only lung cancer, but also throat, larynx, esophagus, stomach, pancreas, colon, cervix, kidney, bladder and ovary cancer and also leukemia. And of course, Walt Disney is only one of the well-known celebrities to have died from smoking addiction and then cancer. [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-16T17:57:38-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

MD Anderson Research Shows More Targeted Form of Radiation Improves Survival in Patients With Head, Neck Cancers

Source: Bio News - TexasPublished: January 15, 2014By: Ayesha Khan Recent research conducted at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center suggests clinical outcomes in patients receiving intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancers is more effective when compared to patients who receive traditional radiation therapy, thanks to the advanced technology of IMRT. IMRT precisely targets malignant cells without affecting the normal surrounding tissue, thereby reducing the risk of adverse effects and improving therapy associated effects. The results of this study were published online in the peer-reviewed journal Cancer. What is IMRT? Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, or IMRT, limits the exposure of radiation to normal tissue by employing multiple beams of radiotherapy that helps in setting the dosage by radiologists in accordance with the site and size of tumor. Assistant professor at MD Anderson’s Radiation Oncology, Beth Beadle explained: “Previous studies indicated that patients treated with IMRT did better when it came to treatment-related side effects, however these studies were not designed to examine survival. The survival data was not well-known because IMRT is intended to spare normal tissues but still deliver radiation to the tumor so previous models assumed it was equivalent survival at best.” The technique was approved in 1999, and since then has become increasingly popular mainly because of the high benefits and low toxicity profile. The risk of several common but problematic complications (such as tissue fibrosis, dry mouth, dental issues and musculoskeletal flexibility) can be significantly reduced when compared to conventional radiotherapy. Details [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-16T18:00:40-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Anti-Tobacco Efforts Have Saved Millions of Lives Worldwide

A review of five decades of policies reveals success stories, but smoking rates are still increasing in some nations Source: Scientific AmericanPublished: January 9, 2014By: Ericak Check Hayden and Nature Magazine Half a century after the US government sounded an influential alarm about the health dangers of smoking, the global rate of adults who smoke has declined and millions of smoking deaths have been prevented, report a batch of studies released today. “Tobacco control has been an extremely successful public health achievement,” says biostatistican Theodore Holford of Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, who is first author of one of the papers published today. But there is still much work to do, he notes, particularly in countries and populations in which smoking is still popular. “With millions of deaths every year attributable to tobacco, we can and should do better,” adds global-health researcher Christopher Murray of the University of Washington in Seattle, leader of a group that is also publishing a paper today. These papers present research on smoking prevention and control as part of a special issue the Journal of the American Medical Association that marks the 50th anniversary of a landmark report on the health effects of smoking. The report, which was released on 11 January 1964 by US Surgeon General Luther Terry, concluded that the evidence that smoking causes lung cancer and other illnesses was overwhelming. The Surgeon General is a spokesperson for the US Department of Health. The Surgeon General's report helped to spur measures to [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-15T17:47:06-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Controversies in Treatment Deintensification of Human Papillomavirus–Associated Oropharyngeal Carcinomas: Should We, How Should We, and for Whom?

Source: Journal of Clinical OncologyPublished: 2013By: American Society of Clinical Oncology (Harry Quon and Arlene A. Forastiere) Corresponding author: Arlene A. Forastiere, MD, Department of Oncology and the Sydney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1650 Orleans St, Rm G90, Baltimore, MD 21231-1000; e-mail: [email protected]. It has been little more than a decade since the recognition of the epidemiology, distinct molecular biology, and profile of risk factors, patient demographics, and tumor characteristics of human papillomavirus (HPV) –associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). From prospective and retrospective studies, we know that patients with locally advanced, stage III/IV, HPV-associated OPSCC who are treated with standard cisplatin-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy have significantly better overall survival and reduced risk of recurrence compared with patients with HPV-negative OPSCC. More than 80% will likely be cured of their cancer. That said, it is also evident that a subset of patients demonstrate an aggressive phenotype with the development of distant spread and death as a result of their cancer. Given that the typical patient with HPV-associated OPSCC is younger (age 40 to 60 years) and without major comorbidities, increasing discussion has been focused on deintensification of treatment in the hopes of minimizing treatment-related morbidity without compromising the current cure rates. In particular, attention has been focused on reducing the morbidity of severe late swallowing complications that result in the need for enteral nutritional support, because this has been shown to substantially affect patient quality of life. Historically, typical rates [...]

Charlotte Parker2017-03-29T19:07:14-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

50 Years After Landmark Warning, 8 Million Fewer Smoking Deaths

Source: npr.orgPublished: January 7, 2014By: Richard Knox Last Saturday marked an important milestone in public health – the 50th anniversary of the first Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health. Few if any documents have had the impact of this one — both on the amount of disease and death prevented, and on the very scope of public health. An analysis in the JAMA, the American Medical Association journal, estimates that 8 million Americans avoided premature death as a result of tobacco control efforts launched by the 1964 report. Those efforts range from cigarette warning labels to escalating taxes on cigarettes to proliferating restrictions on where people can smoke. They were augmented by a series of high-profile surgeon general reports detailing the dangers to smokers, unborn children and bystanders. But the impact of the 1964 report is even broader than that, according to Harvard historian Allan Brandt. "If we look at the history of public health – from the safety of cars and roads, other dangerous products, the environment, clean air, the workplace – all of these issues really have their origins in a moment 50 years ago around the first surgeon general's report," Brandt tells Shots. He's the author of a 2007 history, The Cigarette Century. But all that impact unfolded over decades, and for many years it didn't appear the report would launch such a revolution. In the 1970s, when Joanne Iuliucci of Staten Island, N.Y., started smoking at age 12, she says she had no idea that [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-15T17:17:56-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

The global battle over e-cigarettes

Source: SALONPublished: December 26, 2013By: Lynette Eyb, GLOBALPOST FILE - In this Feb. 10, 2013 file photo made with multiple flash exposures, a model pulls on an electronic cigarette backstage before the Chado Ralph Rucci fashion show in New York. New York City is considering legislation that would include electronic cigarettes in the city's ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and other indoor public spaces. (AP Photo/John Minchillo, File) (Credit: AP) BORDEAUX, France — As more smokers take to electronic cigarettes, the debate about the impact “vaping” — as using the products is called — could have in the fight against tobacco smoking is becoming more acute. On one side, the head of one of Europe’s leading electronic cigarette industry groups has slammed the World Health Organization (WHO) for its lack of support for the booming e-cigarette market. Katherine Devlin, president of the Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association, whose members represent some 60 percent of the British market, said the WHO’s reluctance to endorse e-cigarettes is putting millions of lives at risk. “WHO has led a campaign against smoking which has led to the denormalization not only of smoking, but also of smokers, many of whom now feel like social pariahs,” she said in an interview. Vaping, she said, is a cleaner way of ingesting nicotine. “Our hope is that by normalizing vaping, we can help to further underline the message that smokers need to stop setting fire to tobacco sticks and inhaling [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-15T17:00:20-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

The Trouble With ‘Scientific’ Research Today: A Lot That’s Published Is Junk

Source: ForbesPublished: January 8, 2014By: Henry I. Miller and Stanley Young Many non-scientists are confused and dismayed by the constantly changing advice that comes from medical and other researchers on various issues. One week, coffee causes cancer; the next, it prevents it. Where should we set the LDL threshold for taking statins to prevent cardiovascular disease? Does the radiation from cell phones cause brain tumors? Some of that confusion is due to the quality of the evidence, which is dependent on a number of factors, while some is due to the nature of science itself: We form hypotheses and then perform experiments to test them; as the data accumulate and various hypotheses are rejected, we become more confident about what we think we know. But it may also be due to current state of science. Scientists themselves are becoming increasingly concerned about the unreliability – that is, the lack of reproducibility — of many experimental or observational results. Investigators who perform research in the laboratory have a high degree of control over the conditions and variables of their experiments, an integral part of the scientific method. If there is significant doubt about the results, they can repeat the experiment. In general, the more iterations, the more confidence about the accuracy of the results. Finally, if the results are sufficiently novel and interesting, the researchers submit a description of the experiments to a reputable journal, where, after review by editors and expert referees, it is published. Thus, researchers do the work and, in theory at least, they are [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-13T18:07:18-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Are e-cigarettes dangerous?

Source: CNN Published: January 7, 2014By: Harold P. Wimmer http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=EqvlxEQaQnE Editor's note: Harold P. Wimmer is the president and CEO of the American Lung Association. (CNN) -- For the makers of electronic cigarettes, today we are living in the Wild West -- a lawless frontier where they can say or do whatever they want, no matter what the consequences. They are free to make unsubstantiated therapeutic claims and include myriad chemicals and additives in e-cigarettes. Big Tobacco desperately needs new nicotine addicts and is up to its old tricks to make sure it gets them. E-cigarettes are being aggressively marketed to children with flavors like Bazooka Bubble Gum, Cap'n Crunch and Cotton Candy. Joe Camel was killed in the 1990s, but cartoon characters are back promoting e-cigarettes. Many e-cigarettes look like Marlboro or Camel cigarettes. Like their old-Hollywood counterparts, glamorous and attractive celebrities are appearing on TV promoting specific e-cigarette brands. Free samples are even being handed out on street corners. A report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows the promotion of e-cigarettes is reaching our children with alarming success. In just one year, e-cigarette use doubled among high school and middle school students, and 1 in 10 high school students have used an e-cigarette. Altogether, 1.78 million middle and high school students nationwide use e-cigarettes. The three largest cigarette companies are all selling e-cigarettes. Because tobacco use kills more than 400,000 people each year and thousands more successfully quit, the industry needs to attract and [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-08T17:59:22-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Why Everyone Seems to Have Cancer

Source: The New York TimesPublished: January 4, 2014By: George Johnson EVERY New Year when the government publishes its Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, it is followed by a familiar lament. We are losing the war against cancer. Half a century ago, the story goes, a person was far more likely to die from heart disease. Now cancer is on the verge of overtaking it as the No. 1 cause of death. Troubling as this sounds, the comparison is unfair. Cancer is, by far, the harder problem — a condition deeply ingrained in the nature of evolution and multicellular life. Given that obstacle, cancer researchers are fighting and even winning smaller battles: reducing the death toll from childhood cancers and preventing — and sometimes curing — cancers that strike people in their prime. But when it comes to diseases of the elderly, there can be no decisive victory. This is, in the end, a zero-sum game. The rhetoric about the war on cancer implies that with enough money and determination, science might reduce cancer mortality as dramatically as it has with other leading killers — one more notch in medicine’s belt. But what, then, would we die from? Heart disease and cancer are primarily diseases of aging. Fewer people succumbing to one means more people living long enough to die from the other. The newest cancer report, which came out in mid-December, put the best possible face on things. If one accounts for the advancing age of [...]

Charlotte Parker2014-01-07T17:34:51-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|

Researchers and drug companies are ganging up for a new push against cancer

Source: www.economist.com Author: staff “There is no treatment.” This is the conclusion of an Egyptian papyrus, written around 3000BC, that is the oldest known description of the scourge that is now called “cancer”. And so, more or less, it remained until the 20th century, for merely excising a tumour by surgery rarely eliminates it. Only when doctors worked out how to back up the surgeon’s knife with drugs and radiation did cancer begin to succumb to treatment—albeit, to start with, in a pretty crude fashion. Now, however, that crudeness is rapidly giving way to sophistication, as a new wave of cancer treatments comes to market. In 2012 more than 500 potential cancer drugs were under investigation, according to a survey by IMS Health, an American research group—over five times as many as were being developed in the next biggest category, diabetes. Three trends are helping to fill this cancer-drug cornucopia. One is the increase in demand as people live longer, and thus become more likely to develop cancer. According to the World Health Organisation, there were 14m new cases of cancer around the world in 2012. In 2030 there will be nearly 22m. The second trend is the rising price of cancer drugs, particularly in America, the biggest market. More expensive drugs increase profitability. The third is a rapid expansion of scientific knowledge about cancer, the result of both the plummeting cost of genetic sequencing (see chart) and a better understanding of how to recruit the immune system to attack [...]

Oral Cancer Foundation News Team - A2014-01-05T13:21:25-07:00January, 2014|Oral Cancer News|