Recent Comments:
Fat Bastard supports cancer
The Cancer Blog
Sep 14th 2007 7:57PM It doesn't bother me, but......I found this interesting concerning the amounts of alcohol.
Scientist Finds First Evidence Of Alcohol-Cancer Link
Libraries
Medical News Keywords
ALCOHOL CANCER RESEARCH JIAN-WEI GU CONSUMPTION TUMOR
Contact Information
Available for logged-in reporters only
Description
Dr. Jian-Wei Gu, an assistant professor of physiology and biophysics at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, has done what many scientists before him have failed to do: describe the mechanism by which alcohol consumption causes tumor growth.
Newswise — Dr. Jian-Wei Gu came to Mississippi to study the cardiovascular system with a special interest in the process of blood vessel growth.
So how does a cardiovascular physiologist attract national headlines about his research in cancer?
According to Gu, assistant professor of physiology and biophysics at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, it was completely by accident.
Reports of Gu’s research have appeared in USA Today, Science News, the New Scientist and on CBS News. It was big news because Gu has done what many scientists before him have failed to do: describe the mechanism by which alcohol consumption causes tumor growth.
“Scientists have known for a hundred years that there was a strong association between alcohol consumption and several types of cancer,” Gu said. He cites a study from Paris in 1910 that showed that 80 percent of patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastric track were alcoholics.
More recently, epidemiological studies show a strong correlation between alcohol consumption and cancer of the mouth, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, liver, and large bowel. Alcohol consumption seems to be a risk factor even for breast cancer. But experiments in the lab have failed – until now – to show the effects in animals that observers knew to be true in humans.
The problem, it turns out, was that investigators were using too much alcohol.
“Most all the previous studies used alcohol concentrations of 20 percent, far more than the equivalent human consumption,” Gu said. The animals wasted away but they didn’t show abnormal tumor growth, he said.
Gu used alcohol concentrations of one percent, about the equivalent of one or two drinks a day in humans, or moderate alcohol consumption. Using what he terms “physiologically relevant” levels of alcohol, he stimulated tumor growth in both chick embryos and in mice.
Gu came to Mississippi in 1995 to work on angiogenesis, or blood vessel growth, and what stimulates or controls it. Seven years ago, working in the lab, he and his colleagues noticed that the growth factor that stimulates vessel growth (vascular endothelial growth factor or VEGF) increased “unexpectedly” in certain cell cultures.
They determined that it was the alcohol they used as a solvent, in very low concentrations, that caused the increase in the growth factor.
That serendipitous finding by Gu in 2000 led to the study in chick embryos and, most recently, to a study showing that melanoma cancers in mice grew significantly faster and larger in the mice who consumed the equivalent of one or two alcoholic drinks a day than the mice that received no alcohol.
The mice used in the most recent study were given drinking water that had an alcohol concentration of one percent for 12 hours. The next 12 hours, they received water with no alcohol. Another group of mice received no alcohol in their water.
After a week, Gu and his colleagues inoculated all the animals with mouse melanoma cells. Three weeks later, the tumors were removed to be analyzed. All the mice had tumors, but the mice given alcohol had tumors that had progressed much more rapidly than the mice that had no alcohol. The larger tumors also had more blood vessel growth.
Dr. Thomas Adair, professor of physiology and biophysics and Gu’s mentor when he came to Mississippi, said that Gu’s findings have been confirmed by other scientists.
“When he presented his findings at a FASEB (Federated Societies for Experimental Biology) meeting, someone from a group in San Diego came up to me afterward and told me they had found the same thing in their lab and didn’t know what to make of it. They went back and did a study on rats and found the same thing.”
Angiogenesis is an area of keen interest for its application to cancer therapy. Right now, Adair estimates there may be as many as 40 drugs that act by controlling angiogenesis in clinical trials.
But angiogenesis isn’t necessarily pathological, according to Adair. Stimulating angiogenesis would be helpful in repairing heart tissue damaged by a heart attack or in wound healing.
Gu’s research is funded by the National Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of NIH and the American Cancer Society.
On the hunt for vitamin D
The Cancer Blog
Jul 27th 2007 7:22PM Sorry the end was clipped off.
Consumption starting at two or more servings of dairy products per day was likewise inversely associated with risk (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95; P(trend) = 0.002, compared with
On the hunt for vitamin D
The Cancer Blog
Jul 27th 2007 7:03PM I don't think the jury is out on dairy just yet.
An example:
1: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Dec;14(12):2898-904. Links
Dairy, calcium, and vitamin D intake and postmenopausal breast cancer risk in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort.McCullough ML, Rodriguez C, Diver WR, Feigelson HS, Stevens VL, Thun MJ, Calle EE.
Epidemiology and Surveillance Research, American Cancer Society, 1599 Clifton Road Northeast, Atlanta, GA 30329-4251, USA. marji.mccullough@cancer.org
BACKGROUND: Calcium, vitamin D, and dairy products are highly correlated factors, each with potential roles in breast carcinogenesis. Few prospective studies have examined these relationships in postmenopausal women.METHODS: Participants in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort completed a detailed questionnaire on diet, vitamin and mineral supplement use, medical history, and lifestyle in 1992 to 1993. After exclusion of women with a history of cancer and incomplete dietary data, 68,567 postmenopausal women remained for analysis. During follow-up through August 31, 2001, we identified 2,855 incident cases of breast cancer. Multivariate-adjusted rate ratios (RR) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models.RESULTS: Women with the highest intake of dietary calcium (>1,250 mg/d) were at a lower risk of breast cancer than those reporting < or =500 mg/d [RR, 0.80; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.67-0.95; P(trend) = 0.02]; however, neither use of supplemental calcium nor vitamin D intake was associated with risk. Consumption starting at two or more servings of dairy products per day was likewise inversely associated with risk (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95; P(trend) = 0.002, compared with
Grilled meat and cancer: connected?
The Cancer Blog
Jul 19th 2007 2:23PM It sure is a wonder our ancestors ever made it this far.
Sunday Seven: Seven top cancer myths
The Cancer Blog
Jul 15th 2007 7:34PM In regards to Myth#2, you say, "the consensus among most research is that there is no consistent association between the two.".....does that mean there is some association between the two. And if there is why shouldn't we be concerned until the jury has firmly made a decision.
Myth#3: "The truth, however, is that doctors have long known how to safely take biopsies and remove tumors without causing any spread". While I am sure they take every precaution there is still quite a bit of concern about seeding. For instance, this was taken from doing a google search about tumour seeding.
"The Journal of Urology : TUMOR SEEDING IN UROLOGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ...Tumor seeding was reported in 13 cases (0.1%), including 3 nephroureterectomies for transitional cell carcinoma, 4 nephrectomies (incidental transitional".......so, while the %age might be small it certainly may be a reasonable concern for those having a biopsy.
Myth#5: "Cancer diagnoses and deaths have been decreasing since the early 1990s -- and less than half of those diagnosed with cancer today will die of the disease."
According to the Canadian Cancer Society: "Current new cases and deaths in Canada
An estimated 159,900 new cases of cancer and 72,700 deaths from cancer will occur in Canada in 2007. This is 6,800 more new cases and 2,300 more deaths than 2006"
I could be wrong, but I don't think there is probably a great difference between U.S. stats and Canadian stats. Personally, I think quackwatch is a "quack". :)
Genentech's Avastin cancer drug selling like crazy
The Cancer Blog
Jul 12th 2007 7:42PM Susan, I am so sorry. My heart goes out to you and your family. It just doesn't seem right.
jan
Medical marijuana bill vetoed by cancer survivor Governor
The Cancer Blog
Jun 27th 2007 10:28PM You don't have to smoke anything.
When my mother-in-law was on morphine for breast cancer mets I made a tincture (strong very strong tea) for her and it alleviated her pain without making her high. The morphine had been causing her problems. This is medicine. And for those that cannot see that a plant can be medicine, please look around. Foxglove/digitalis, white willow bark/asperin, dandelion root/potassium sparing diurectic........very sad indeed that this has been taken off the shelf. The opioids cause numerous problems and that is what is usually used for pain.
Challenges in cancer prevention
The Cancer Blog
Jun 27th 2007 2:34PM "For most of the cancers we treat, there exists a heterogeneous mix of genetic changes and numerous potential environmental influences that challenge the development of simple prevention strategies
Perhaps if we look after the "potential environmental influences", the genetics will look after themselves.
Example: I am the first person on either side of my family as far back as anyone can remember to get cancer. Now my son and his children will have to use the "G" word.
Plant-based diets key in breast cancer survival?
The Cancer Blog
Jun 15th 2007 3:49PM How very nice of you to share the links to the original research with us, however, the blogger was not summarizing the abstract but merely summarizing an article upon which did not reveal the information you shared with us. There was no responsibility on the part of the blogger to track down the original research and summarize that.
I'm fairly certain blog readers are not depending on this site to dictate how they respond to their cancer. If the topic is interesting or we think it has merit we can look further into it ourselves.
Plant-based diets key in breast cancer survival?
The Cancer Blog
Jun 14th 2007 9:30PM "~30 min of exercise per day, 6 days per week showed a barely significant change in mortality rate. And,exercise without dietary change also showed a barely significant benefit." is not in the article and therefore is an inaccurate interpretation of the article. Or did you mean this:
"Women coping with breast cancer deserve to know that plant-based diets and regular exercise can spell the difference between life and death."
Nope, can't find any info on Tamoxifen in the the summarized article either.
How about: "Also, the survival benefit was no greater for ER-negative tumors."
Would anyone know this from the article???
And actually, ONE can say what they want if it is
their blog and those with pompous, condescending attitudes purporting themselves to be experts while hiding behind initials should perhaps get their own blog instead of "marking" everyone else's.
