|
Former Fremonter writes articles, blogs and a book on fatherhoodFremont TribuneFive years ago, Higley, then 44, was diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer. "They caught it by accident. I had zero symptoms," he said, adding, "I was extremely lucky. My oncologist and surgeon said I probably would have been dead within a year …
|
Continue Reading
March 5th, 2011
Continue Reading
March 2nd, 2011
Continue Reading
February 3rd, 2011
Continue Reading
January 13th, 2011
Continue Reading
January 11th, 2011
Colorectal cancer is usually called as the bowel cancer or the colon cancer. It affects the final section of a person’s digestive system, which is normally the colon or the rectum. The cells which are present in the bowel’s lining begin to grow in an abnormal manner causing the development of polyps, which are usually called the malignant tumours. Colon cancer affects both women and men.
Continue Reading
December 8th, 2010
In recent years, several large studies have shown that quicker and cheaper “virtual colonoscopy†is a viable alternative to traditional colonoscopy. Although still considered “experimental†and not covered by most insurance for routine screening, the noninvasive X-ray procedure is available for those willing and able to pay the $1,100 cost. Traditional colonoscopy, the “gold standard†for many years, costs roughly $3,000.
Colonoscopy is recommended for persons 50 and over, but most don’t get them unless they are symptomatic. Instead, a sigmoidoscopy may be offered which checks only the lower bowel or intestine by inserting a flexible tube. Perhaps the most unpleasant part of any technique to explore the colon for polyps is drinking laxatives or using enemas to purge the bowel before the procedure.
Colon cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the U.S. and is largely avoidable by detecting and removing small polyps before they grow and become cancerous. Each year about 52,000 Americans die of the disease.
The latest study compared two groups of approximately 3,000 persons in each group. One group received traditional colonoscopy and the second one the virtual procedure. Approximately the same number of advanced polyps were found in each group (123 compared to 121).
With virtual colonography, a CT scanner takes a series of X-rays of the colon and creates a computerized 3-D image. A small tube is inserted in the rectum to inflate the colon for better viewing. There is no sedation or recovery time. If polyps are seen, they cannot be removed using this technique. Any significant polyps are then removed the same day using a traditional colonoscopy.
In traditional colonoscopy, a gastroenterologist uses a flexible, thin tube and snakes it through the large intestines. Any polyps spotted are removed in the process. There is a tiny risk of a perforated colon using the traditional procedure, and prompt surgical repair is needed.
The virtual colonoscopy avoids sedation and the risk of colon perforation, but the patient is exposed to radiation. In addition, small, benign polyps cannot be removed. They must be watched and will need to be removed if they grow significantly or become malignant.
If colon cancer screening guidelines are changed as is expected, virtual colonoscopy may be covered by insurance companies in the future. The less invasive procedure may encourage more patients to get checked when they should. Usually, intervals of ten years between examinations are recommended if no polyps are found.
Source:Â MSNBC
October 8th, 2007
Genentech’s new drug Lucentis is the first proven treatment to restore sight in a number of patients with the “wet†form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). This disease affecting nearly 1.2 million Americans over age 40 is the major cause of blindness in the elderly. Leaking of blood vessels in the back of the eye invade the retina and erode vision. Thus, the term “wet†is used for this particular form of sight deterioration.
Other treatments have been shown to slow the rate of vision loss, but no other drug in clinical trials has proved to restore or improve a portion of eyesight. Lucentis helped 95% of clinical trials subjects to preserve the sight they had remaining. One-third of patients in clinical trials were able to read three more lines on an eye chart after treatment with Lucentis. For those already experiencing major vision loss, the new drug will be too late to be of benefit.
Two drugs, Macugen and Visudyne, produced by other companies are currently used to slow or prevent further vision loss. The biggest competing drug, Avastin, is also produced by Genentech, but it was primarily designed to treat colon cancer. Its “off-label†use has been effective in treating some patients with AMD. However, Avastin has not been through the rigors of clinical trials as a treatment for sight loss. The company will not block its off-label use, but emphasizes that Lucentis is the preferred drug for treatment of this condition.
The major drawback for Lucentis is its high cost – about $1,950 per injection. To be effective, a patient will need five to seven injections in the first year of treatment. Avastin, at $50 a dose, is a bargain and for some patients may work almost as well.
Genentech has set up programs to provide Lucentis free to uninsured patients and to cover Medicare co-payments for qualified patients.
The injection in the eyes carries a risk of discomfort, inflammation and increased pressure. A topical drug may be developed to avoid these potential side effects, making Lucentis even more appealing for use by doctors for their patients.
Lucentis will not completely restore vision or reverse the aging process, but for some, timely treatment may enable them to continue driving and living independently. Lucentis was recently approved for use by the FDA.
Sources:Â San Francisco Chronicle, Bernadette Tansey staff writer, July 1, 2006; Oakland Tribune, Eve Mitchell, business writer, July 1, 2006
Technorati Tags: Eye Care
July 10th, 2006
A study of 48,000 women ages 50 to 79 on a low fat diet and who were followed for eight years showed little statistical benefit in reducing their risks of heart disease and cancer. The study was published in the Journal of the American Association (JAMA) in early February.
 The conclusion, women who limited fat intake had basically the same rates of breast cancer, colon cancer, heart attacks and strokes as those who ate any foods they liked. However, a statistically insignificant decline in breast cancer was seen in women with lower fat intake.
Some, such as Dr. Dean Ornish — founder of the Preventive Medicine Research Institute in Sausalito, CA — disputed the study results. Dr. Ornish expressed the idea that the women failed to reduce their fat intake to low enough levels or eat enough fruits and vegetables. Eight years was insufficient time to be a true test, he said.
Other prominent physicians reacted by saying that controlling the diet a woman eats is not enough. We must examine how much they eat, whether they smoke, and if they are too inactive. Genetics or family history also plays a big role in a woman’s risks for heart disease or cancer.
Although all study participants were women, the results should also apply to men’s risk of heart disease (www.Americanheart.org), according to Dr. Jacques Rossouw, project officer for the Women’s Health Initiative.
The highly reputable study was carried out under the auspices of the National Institutes of Health. (The NIH’s Women’s Health Initiative study on hormone replacement therapy) also found that HRT after menopause might have more risks than benefits.
Cardiologist Nanette Wenger, on staff at Emory University, concluded that a modest reduction of fat and a substitution with fruits and vegetables did little for prevention of heart disease, stroke, breast cancer or colorectal cancer. She added, “It doesn’t say that this diet is not beneficial.â€
Most medical researchers agree that it makes good sense to eat well, control weight and exercise regularly. The lesson is that simply reducing your total dietary fat is not enough.
Dr. Dean Edell’s take on the subject was that women’s health habits before the age of 50 may have more significance for developing or preventing disease than what they do later in life. He also pointed out that the types of fat that women consumed were not clearly delineated in this study. Apparently, the study was conceived before evidence pinpointed the chief dietary hazards leading to heart disease – transfats and saturated fats.
Saturated fats found in dairy products and meat and the transfats in processed foods — such as doughnuts, pastries, cookies, and fries — are thought to be problematic. Monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats in vegetable oil and fish oil may be beneficial or less harmful. Another long-term study is needed to separate out the types of fats consumed, according to Margaret Warner’s guests appearing on PBS’ The News Hour.
Sources:Â New York Times (2/8/06) (www.nytimes.com); San Francisco Chronicle (2/8/06; 2/12/06) (www.sfgate/chronicle.com); Dr. Dean Edell broadcasts on ABC (2/7/06 and 2/8/06) (www.healthcentral.com); The News Hour, Margaret Warner, on PBS (2/8/06) (www.pbs.org)Â Â Â
March 22nd, 2006