According to recent report in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, there were 20 experts appointed to the SAB’s asbestos panel, charged with evaluating the validity of the EPA’s plan to change how the toxicity of the six types of asbestos regulated by the government differ in danger. Its findings would be submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

According to the PI report, scientific advisors say the EPA used the asbestos panel to submit new studies that contradict longstanding research into the dangers of asbestos. The new studies say chrysolite, in particular, the most common type of asbestos, isn’t dangerous and doesn’t cause mesothelioma.

PI quotes Dr. David Egilman, an occupational medicine specialist, who testified at the public meeting, as saying the new study was financed by mining and other asbestos-related industries, and said the studies have no scientific credibility.

Another vocal spokesperson at the hearing was Sen. Patty Murray, who sponsored S. 742, the Ban Asbestos in America Act of 2007, which passed the Senate on Oct. 4, 2007. Currently, it is the companion bill to H.R. 3339, the Bruce Vento Ban Asbestos and Prevent Mesothelioma Act, sponsored by Rep. Betty McCollum, which currently is in committee in the House of Representatives.

Sen. Murray has long been an advocate for a total asbestos ban, calling for better worker protection. The PI quotes Sen. Murray as telling the committee, “I’d like the political appointees at the EPA to look into the eyes of a mesothelioma patient and say that asbestos isn’t dangerous. It appears that this administration is once again putting politics before public health.” Murray is currently chairwoman of the Senate Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee.

The EPA asserts the new system is needed to improve how asbestos-contaminated Superfund sites are evaluated. The organization can move forward with its proposal without approval from the OMB or the SAB, if it so chooses.

SOURCE: myMeso › Why is EPA proposing relaxed asbestos rules?

The buildings’ collapse released thousands of pounds of hazardous material into the atmosphere, which may have included a combination of glass, asbestos, fiberglass, pulverized concrete, lead, mercury, cadmium, dioxins and PCBs. Construction of the World Trade Center buildings was begun before the use of asbestos was banned in the U.S., and some estimates say as much as 400 tons of asbestos fiber was in the buildings.

People near Ground Zero could experience a number of medical problems as a result of their exposure to this toxic dust, including respiratory problems and asbestos disease including mesothelioma.

In an official release from the CDC, Christine Branche, acting director of the CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), said, “These public health dollars extend the reach of our efforts so that they help support the provision of the health care services to residents, students, an others who were in the vicinity of the attacks of September 11, 2001.”

The release says the NIOSH-administered grants provide up to $10 million per year for three years, and the money can be used to help cover gaps when individuals’ public or private insurance is insufficient to fully cover the costs associated with care or treatment.

Funding will be provided to one to three organizations, with the deadline for proposal submission set for Aug. 25, 2008. For more information about how to apply for one of these grants, visit www.Grants.gov. The CDC encourages health and medical care facilities to apply.

The CDC says it already has invested at least $925 million in programs to support responders to the 9/11 emergency.

SOURCE: myMeso › CDC grant for possible Ground Zero illnesses

According to the report, the study evaluated a regimen of Navelbine (vinorelbine) and Platinol (cisplatin) for the treatment of 54 patients with newly diagnosed non-resectable mesothelioma. The median number of cycles of chemotherapy administered was four. There were two complete responses and 14 partial responses.

The median survival was 16.8 months, and the median time to tumor progression was 7.2 months. The one-year survival was 61 percent, the two-year survival was 31 percent, and the three-year survival was 4 percent.

The authors of the study say these results are as good as or better than currently used combinations for treatment of mesothelioma.

SOURCE: myMeso › Chemo combo highly effective for mesothelioma

It is hoped the new treatment will replace or delay the need for the standard treatment in these cases, a pleural pneumonectomy, which involves removal of the lung and which can be extremely debilitating to patients.

According to a press release from the medical center, Dr. Robert Taub, the study’s principal investigator, director of the Mesothelioma Center at NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia and professor of clinical medicine at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, says, “Current surgical and chemotherapy treatments of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma are unsatisfactory, and have not been shown to significantly prolong survival. In this study, we will investigate whether a combination of chemotherapy and radiation targeted directly at the lung’s lining can improve outcomes while avoiding surgery. In addition, this approach has shown to have minimal toxic side effects compared to systemic chemotherapy.”

The Mesothelioma Center is the only one nationwide that is offering this experimental therapy to treat pleural mesothelioma.

The study is being conducted at the Mesothelioma Center within the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Medical Center. According to the release, participating patients will receive several rounds of targeted chemotherapy using the drugs cisplatin and doxorubicin via surgically implanted catheters. Some patients will be randomly selected to receive additional systemic (intravenous) chemotherapy using the drugs cisplatin and pemetrexed. All patients will receive targeted radiotherapy using the P-32 radioisotope.

Patients may elect to receive additional surgical treatment, including removal of the affected lung lining or lung. Subsequently, patients will be offered outpatient systemic chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed.

For more information, visit www.hiccc.columbia.edu.

SOURCE: myMeso › Clinical trial for mesothelioma at NY hospital

Senators Feinstein and Hagel were instrumental in authoring a policy resolution in 2007 to designate lung cancer as a public health priority, which was passed unanimously. The resolution called for research, better treatments, and early detection, with a goal of reducing lung cancer mortality by 50 percent by 2015.

This new bill would establish that comprehensive program under law and authorize funding, according to a release from the Lung Cancer Alliance, which today issued a call to action for its support.

“We have seen great advancements in prostate and breast cancer survival rates and we must commit ourselves to making the same progress with lung cancer,” Sen. Hagel said, noting that lung cancer currently accounts for 28 percent of all cancer deaths in the United States.

Each year, lung cancer kills more people than breast, prostate, colon, kidney, melanoma and liver cancer, combined.

Senator Feinstein said, “It’s time for the federal government to step up its efforts and make fighting lung cancer a national priority.”

Contact your Senator TODAY!

SOURCE: myMeso › Senate introduces lung cancer legislation

Some of you who are following Debbie on her journal have already heard the good news – on June 20, she learned that her tumor (which she wittily nicknamed Theo) has shrunk by 10 percent after the first of three scheduled chemoembolization treatments. She had her first treatment May 20, and the second June 20, when she learned Theo had gotten smaller.

According to www.radiologyinfo.org, chemoembolization is a combination of chemotherapy and a procedure called embolization to treat cancer, most often of the liver. According to the web site, catheter embolization is the deliberate introduction of foreign (“embolic”) material such as gelatin sponge or metal coils to stop bleeding or cut off blood flowing to a tumor or arteriovenous malformation.

Debbie traveled to Frankfurt, Germany, to have the procedure, which is still a trial, done by Dr. Thomas J. Vogl, Chairman, Department of Radiology, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology – University Hospital, Johann Wolfgang Goethe, University of Frankfurt am Main.

In this procedure, Dr. Vogl catheterizes the tumor and administers localized chemotherapy directly into the arteries feeding the tumor. Once the chemotherapy has been administered, other agents can be administered to block off the blood supply to the tumor.

Debbie’s description of the procedure is a little more colorful:

“A small incision will be made to expose the artery that feeds the tumour which is in the femour. A catheter is inserted and pushed up into the area affected. Embolization is a glue like substance which is put in to seal off the tumour and the chemo is then added and the whole area sealed off. The chemo is left to do its job. It is something like having a room with 2 doors, sealing off the back door and throwing in an explosive and sealing up the front door.”

One of the strangest things? The clinic where Debbie visits Dr. Vogl for these treatments is located on a street of the same name as her tumor’s nickname! Theodore Stern Kia 7. Visit Debbie’s blog to read all about her experiences with Dr. Vogl and this treatment. She even has photos of herself at the clinic.

Debbie points out that chemoembolization is not a cure for mesothelioma, but is thought to slow the growth of the tumor or reduce it, allowing the patient a longer life.

In conjunction with or following this treatment, Debbie will undergo a dendritic cell vaccine. According to the web site drugresearcher.com, dendritic cells – a part of the body’s immune system that detects foreign proteins in the body – can be used as vaccines by mixing them with genetic material from the patient’s tumour and infusing the treated cells back into the patient. The dendritic cells present the tumour antigens to the body’s white blood cells (T lymphocytes) for destruction.

SOURCE: myMeso › Debbie’s mesothelioma tumor shrinks!

Minnesota Public Radio reports that researchers and politicians will meet today to discuss progress in establishing the study. According to the report, the University of Minnesota School of Public Health is assessing the health of active and retired miners, reviewing death certificates, and delving into the 58 deaths from mesothelioma. The Natural Resources Research Institute is analyzing iron ore samples and dust in the air in Iron Range communities, to see how closely they match asbestos dust, says MPR.

According to the Iron Mining Association of Minnesota web site, the industry’s six iron mining and processing operations produce two-thirds of the iron ore used to make steel in the United States. Combined, they represent a $4 billion capital investment and employ nearly 4,000 men and women. These companies contribute over $1.5 billion each year to the state’s economy in the form of purchases, wages and benefits, royalties and taxes.These companies contribute over $1.5 billion each year to the state’s economy in the form of purchases, wages and benefits, royalties and taxes.

Taconite is an extremely hard rock that contains about 25 percent iron, according to an IMA fact sheet. It is found on the Mesabi Range in northeastern Minnesota, which extends 110 miles in a southwesterly direction. After World War II, when natural high-quality iron ore deposits were beginning to be depleted, two companies began making major investments in taconite, and began producing pellets in 1956 and 1957, and a decade later taconite was in production in all of the area’s six mines.

To date, Minnesota mines have produced more than 1.2 billion tons of taconite pellets, IMA reports.

Information about taconite on the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources web site says “taconite saved Minnesota’s iron ore mining industry.”

How heartbreaking that Minnesotans are only now finding out the cost.

SOURCE: myMeso › Minnesota examines taconite meso danger

The article, which studied the cost of care for elderly cancer patients in the United States, used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare files to identify 718,907 cancer patients and 1,623,651 noncancer control subjects. Researchers estimated net costs of care for elderly cancer patients for the 18 most prevalent cancers and for all other tumor sites combined.

The study reports that costs of care were estimated for each phase by use of Medicare claims data from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2003. They found that costs to Medicare were highest for lung, colorectal and prostate cancers.

An article in HealthDay News examining this latest report says study co-author Robin Yabroff attributes rising costs to a growing population of seniors in the U.S., as well as the inclusion of more prescription drugs in Medicare coverage. Yabroff is an epidemiologist at the U.S. NCI.

The report states that the number of patients receiving chemotherapy for lung, colorectal and breast cancer rose from 1991 to 2002, and that those increasing costs do not even reflect many of the newest, most expensive drugs now in use.

The HealthDay report quotes Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deupty chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society, as saying that “the impact to Medicare is going to be substantial.” He goes on to say that the increasing costs for new drugs may actually prevent some patients from getting the treatment they need. Even if the drug is covered by Medicare, he says, the cost of the patient’s co-pay may be too high for them to afford it.

SOURCE: myMeso › Cancer treatment costs rise, affect Medicare

According to the company’s news release, available in its entirety on the Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation web site, the trial is moving forward after a favorable review of currently available safety and efficacy data from the Phase II portion of the study. This is an international study, expected to enroll 660 patients with testing centers in the United States, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. It will be an ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Information provided by Merck says the trial will examine the safety, tolerability and anti-tumor activity of oral vorinostat with best supportive care as compared to best supportive care plus placebo in patients with advanced mesothelioma who have failed or are intolerant to prior chemotherapy, icnlucing pemetrexed in combination with either cisplatin or carboplatin.

Primary endpoints of the Phase III trial include overall survival as well as characterization of the overall safety and toxicity of vorinostat in patients with advanced malignant mesothelioma.

Patients interested in more information about the trial and how to enroll should call toll-free 1-866-890-6619 (in the U.S.) and 1-888-577-8839 (outside the U.S.) or visit the Merck Cancer Trials web site.

Zolinza is currently approved in the U.S. for treatment of cutaneous manifestations in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) who have progressive, persistent or recrruent disease on or following two systemic therapies.

SOURCE: myMeso › Merck begins vorinostat Phase III meso trial

Results of the company’s late-stage trial of the drug showed that Onconase did not achieve significantly higher survival rates among patients with unresectable malignant mesothelioma when given in combination with doxorubicin, another cancer chemotherapy drug.

According to a report on Pharmaceutical Online, the preliminary results are based on 320 evaluable events that occurred in the clinical trial out of a total of 428 patients randomized. The analysis of the data did not show a statistically significant improvement for evaluable patients receiving Onconase plus doxorubicin. The median survival time (MST) for evaluable patients who received Onconase plus doxorubicin was 11.1 months as compared to 10.7 months for patients who received doxorubicin as a single agent.

However, there is a silver lining to the study. Pharmaceutical Online reports those patients who failed a previous chemotherapy regimen who received Onconase plus doxorubicin experienced a MST of 10.5 months compared with 8.7 months for those patients who received doxorubicin, which is considered a statistically significant result.

Reuters reports as a result of this secondary finding, Alfacell will now submit a marketing application to the Food and Drug Administration for use of the drug on those patients, with hopes to have it approved by the end of the year.

SOURCE: myMeso › Onconase fails in primary late-stage trial

Complementary medicine is used along with standard medicine, while alternative medicine is used in place of standard treatments.

Complementary and alternative medicine may include dietary supplements, megadose vitamins, herbal preparations, special teas, acupuncture, massage therapy, magnet therapy, spiritual healing, and meditation.

Not long ago, I shared Charlene Kaforey’s good news, when she discovered her mesothelioma mass had diminished by half after completing a first round of cancer vaccines, considered an alternative treatment.

Recent news has included reports of research ranging from the effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicines in combination with chemotherapy, to the use of Chinese mushrooms in homeopathic treatment, to a study indicating traditional chemotherapy might enhance the effectiveness of cancer vaccines, which are currently in clinical trials.

The problem, according to complementary medicine (CM) professor Edzard Ernst, in an editorial published recently in BMJ Clinical Evidence, is that “one side of the debate argues that there is no scientific evidence that can support CM, while the other side believes scientific evidence cannot be applied to CM.”

The danger, he says, is that waiting for absolute evidence might prevent someone from trying a therapy that could be beneficial, but siding with the idea that CAM simply cannot be proven may lead a patient into treatment that could cause more harm than good.

The National Cancer Institute’s Office of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (OCCAM), which coordinates the Institute’s research program in CAM, has established a goal of evaluating data from CAM practitioners with the same rigorous scientific methods employed in evaluating treatment responses with conventional medicine.

Major categories of CAM therapies, as determined by OCCAM, include alternative medical systems (built upon complete systems of theory and practice, like traditional Chinese medicine or homeopathy), energy and electromagnetic based therapies, exercise therapies (like yoga), manipulative and body-based methods, mind-body interventions (like hypnotherapy), nutritional therapeutics, pharmacological and biologic treatments (like vaccines), and spiritual therapies (healing, prayer).

OCCAM is developing the NCI Best Case Series (BCS) program based on its evaluations of CAM therapies, in which it provides an independent review of medical records and medical imaging from patients treated with unconventional cancer therapies.

But whether or not alternative and complementary medicine can be proven effective, people will still seek it out, says Professor Ernst. The “almost insatiable hunger of patients” for CM has driven its importance, he says, despite criticisms, praise or skepticism from the medical community, scientists or politicians, and in spite of the fact that more often than not health insurance does not cover the treatments.

Obviously, this topic – and its accompanying debate – needs much more examination. I will be exploring it more in the future. Do you have an experience with complementary or alternative medicine? Share it with us!

SOURCE: myMeso › Complementary, alternative medicine debate

Most people are familiar with the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug naproxen, which is found in their common pain relievers like Aleve.

Wikipedia defines a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug as “drugs with analgesic, antipyretic and, in higher doses, anti-inflammatory effects – they reduce pain, fever and inflammation. The term “non-steroidal” is used to distinguish these drugs from steroids, which (among a broad range of other effects) have a similar eicosanoid-depressing, anti-inflammatory action. As analgesics, NSAIDs are unusual in that they are non-narcotic. The most prominent members of this group of drugs are aspirin, ibuprofen, and naproxen partly because they are available over-the-counter in many areas.”

The NSAID used in this study is piroxicam.

The study used two mesothelioma cell lines, and explored the effects of piroxicam alone, as well as in conjunction with CDDP. The report says that “treatment with piroxicam or CDDP alone altered the cell cycle phase distribution as well as the expression of some cell cycle regulatory proteins in both cell lines” and that “these effects were increased, even if in a not completely overlapping manner, after treatment with the association of piroxicam and CDDP.”

The report notes that “the mechanisms through which NSAIDs regulate the cell cycle as well as the signal pathways involved in the growth inhibition, remain unclear” but says the findings from this recent study “hold promise in the treatment of mesothelioma.”

The study was orginally published in the Journal of Transitional Medicine.

SOURCE: myMeso › New mesothelioma treatment research promising

The results are based on a study of 409 patients, mostly from the United Kingdom, which set out to assess the potential benefits of combining active symptom control, which usually involves steroid drugs and radiotherapy, with chemotherapy. Results showed no real benefit from adding the chemotherapy drugs compared with just treating the symptoms of the disease.

The BBC quotes one of the authors of the study, Dr Richard Stephens from the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, as saying, “While thousands are and will be affected by this deadly disease, our trial, which is one of the few large trials ever conducted in this disease, emphasizes how difficult mesothelioma is to treat. This is mainly because mesothelioma forms in the lining of the lung. This makes it hard to target.”

One chemotherapy drug, vinorelbine, was shown by the study to have some promise, but researchers do not think blanket chemotherapy treatment is a promising direction for treatment of mesothelioma, according to the Lancet report.

Researchers do not necessarily consider these findings to be bad news, as a study that defines what does not help can be beneficial to patient health because it helps reduce the chance that patients will undergo stressful treatments that are ineffective.

Results of a completely different chemotherapy study conducted by researchers at Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center were released May 18, revealing that chemotherapy given in conjunction with cancer vaccines may actually boost the immune system’s response to the vaccines, according to a report by ScienceDaily.

The Duke study focused on a drug used to treat lymphoma, but could have implications for clinical trials with vaccines being used to treat many cancers including lung cancer, brain tumors and colorectal cancer.

According to the FDA, it is the goal of cancer vaccine clinical trials not to prevent cancer, but to treat existing tumors. The idea is to train the person’s immune system to recognize the living cancer cells and attack them.

In July 2007, the American Association for Cancer Research examined the issue of cancer vaccines and, according to a report by Medical News Today, they found that “ongoing therapeutic cancer vaccine trials have yet to show evidence of vaccines spurring a patient’s immune system to shrink tumors – yet patients who receive these vaccines in trials tend to live longer and respond better to subsequent treatment.”

The full study, titled Cancer Vaccines: Moving Beyond Current Paradigms is available to read online at Clinical Cancer Research.

Full results of the Duke study will be presented May 31 at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting in Chicago, Ill.

SOURCE: myMeso › Mesothelioma and chemotherapy research

According to a release on MARF’s web site, the Virtual Bank, which was four years in development, is the first mesothelioma research resource of its kind. The NMVB provides mesothelioma tissue samples from a variety of institutions, clinically annotated in a readily accessible database, to researchers in all mesothelioma investigations.

The Meso Foundation is the national organization dedicated to eradicating mesothelioma as a life-ending disease by funding the highest quality and most promising research projects from around the world through our rigorous peer-reviewed process; helping patients connect with national meso experts and obtain the most up-to-date information on treatment options; and advocating in Washington, D.C., for federal mesothelioma research funding to stop this national tragedy.

The Foundation has funded more than $5 million in mesothelioma research projects around the world, to date.

According to the MARF release, the NMVB is a collaborative effort of multiple organizations, including the Center for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which together provided the initial $1 million grant for starting the tissue bank.

The release goes on to describe the NMVB as a bioinformatics system that combines assorted data from mesothelioma-related specimens into a single, annotated engine. The goal of the tissue bank is to expedite the discovery of preventive measures, novel therapeutic interventions and ultimately cures for mesothelioma.

For more information on the National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank, visit www.mesotissue.org.

The Meso Foundation will host its annual symposium to educate patients and families on the latest advances in meso research and treatment this year in Washington, D.C., June 26-28.

SOURCE: myMeso › National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank operational

According to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, there are currently 25 million living individuals who have served in the United States’ armed forces. It is believed that a great number of them were exposed to toxic asbestos-containing materials during military service.

Every ship and shipyard built by the Navy before the mid-70s was fitted with numerous asbestos-containing materials. These materials were extensively used in engine and boiler rooms and other areas below deck for fire safety purposes, as well as in other areas of the ship. In fact, virtually no portion of a naval ship was asbestos-free between the 1930s and mid-1970s.

Unfortunately, veterans have little recourse when diagnosed with mesothelioma they believe to be the result of asbestos exposure during their time of service. Because asbestos use was so widespread before the first bans in the 1970s, it is very difficult for veterans to prove that asbestos exposure occurred only in military service.

Veterans are not legally allowed to seek compensation for mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases from the U.S. government through the court system. Ailing veterans must file a claim against the asbestos manufacturer, and they also have the legal option to seek assistance through The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

The VA is a government-run benefit system that is responsible for administering benefit programs to veterans, their families, and survivors. It is an incredibly complex system that comprises the second-largest federal department, after the Department of Defense. A search of the organization’s web site turns up no information about asbestos or mesothelioma. However, there are some organizations, such as Veterans Assistance Network (www.va-claim-help.com), that can help veterans wade through the VA benefits system.

Lung cancer is usually an indolent cancer that takes years to develop, thus the burden of treatment is falling most heavily on the VA. Late stage lung cancer is twice as costly to treat as early stage.

In February the Lung Cancer Alliance (LCA) announced that for the second year in row a coalition of top veteran organizations is calling for a screening program for veterans at high risk of lung cancer, to be included in the Independent Budget for Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09). This highly regarded comprehensive alternative budget addresses the most urgent needs of veterans, and urges Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs to initiate a $3 million pilot screening program for veterans at high risk.

The AMVETS, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Veterans of Foreign wars are the four co-authors of this document. More than 50 organizations support the Independent Budget.

A research program carried out by the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program at 40 centers in 26 states and 6 foreign countries during the past 13 years indicates that CT screening can detect lung cancer at Stage 1 in 85 percent of cases, and those treated immediately had a 10-year survival rate of 92 percent. By partnering with these types of programs, the Veterans Administration could quickly implement a pilot screening program for veterans at high risk, with a broad geographic reach and significant cost savings.

Rear Admiral Philip J. Coady, USN, (Ret.), chairman of LCA’s Board of Directors said, “Lung cancer continues to kill more men and women every year than all the other major cancers – breast, prostate, and colon – combined, and our veterans are at even higher risk, especially those whose active duty service exposed them to Agent Orange, asbestos, spent nuclear fuels, propellant gases and other carcinogens.”

Admiral Coady, a 34-year Navy veteran who never smoked, was diagnosed with lung cancer three years ago.

“Because there are usually no specific symptoms, most people are diagnosed so late they die within a year,” he pointed out. “Yet advanced CT technology that can diagnose lung cancer at its earliest, most curable stage is available right now, and high-risk veterans not benefiting from this is wrong,” he said.

Sources: asbestos.com, VAWatchdog.org

SOURCE: myMeso › Complicated path for veterans with mesothelioma

Atkinson was selected from more than 56,000 entries, voted on by the magazine’s readers. Never a smoker, he was diagnosed with stage IV lung cancer a little more than a year ago at age 38. He hopes to use the golf event as an opportunity to raise awareness for lung cancer funding and research.

In a press release from the Lung Cancer Alliance, which urged its members and supporters to vote for Atkinson, he is quoted as saying, “The game of golf to me is living. I am going out there to enjoy the golf course, to play a great round and to give hope to those who are faced with life threatening illnesses. If I can beat America’s deadliest cancer, then I can definitely break 100 [at Torrey Pines]. It’s going to be a great day, an emotional day, and I can’t wait.”

Lung cancer is the nation’s leading cancer killer, taking more lives than breast, prostate and colon cancers combined.

To enter the contest, Atkinson submitted a 100-word essay describing why he could break 100 at Torrey Pines. Once being chosen as a finalist, he received more than 48,000 of the 117,000 votes cast in the first U.S. Open Contest, conducted by Golf Digest, the United States Golf Association, and NBC Sports. You can watch a video interview with Atkinson and read other features about the foursome at Golf Digest online.

SOURCE: myMeso › Lung cancer survivor to play on U.S. Open course

The American Lung Association explains that pulmonary fibrosis is also called interstitial pulmonary fibrosis or interstitial lung disease (ILD). These three terms are often used to describe the same condition.

ILD is not lung cancer; it is a chronic lung disorder. ILD involves a thickening of the lung tissue, which becomes stiff and makes breathing more difficult and demanding. ILD can take many forms, and may progress slowly or rapidly, depending on the individual and the nature of the ILD.

The Lung Association reports that the common link in ILD is that it begins with inflammation, which may affect different parts of the lung. Inflammation may lead to permanent scarring of the lung tissue, which is often called pulmonary fibrosis. The interstitum is the tissue between the lung’s air sacs. Scarring begins in this area, which lends the condition its formal name.

Known causes of pulmonary fibrosis include occupational and environmental exposures, including exposure to asbestos, which can damage the lungs and cause scarring (fibrosis).

Other possible causes include a disease called Sarcoidosis, side effects of medication, radiation, connective tissue or collagen diseases, or genetic predisposition, which is not as common. The familial form of the disease is often called familial idiopathic (of unknown origin) pulmonary fibrosis.

When I spoke with Admiral Coady, he mentioned that he did have a family history of pulmonary fibrosis. He knew that his family history, combined with his exposure to asbestos while serving in the Navy, put him at greater risk for the disease, and was vigilant about early screening. He did eventually develop the condition. Sadly, he also later developed lung cancer, although not mesothelioma.

Some ILD improves with medication if treated when inflammation occurs, and some people also need oxygen therapy as part of their treatment.

I hope this answers the questions and clears up any confusion. While pulmonary fibrosis is not related to mesothelioma, it could be considered an asbestos-related disease.

SOURCE: myMeso › Is pulmonary fibrosis linked to asbestos?

Following is the text of the open letter, along with information about how to contact Clinton’s office. The LCA is urging everyone affected by lung cancer, including mesothelioma, to join their voices in this effort to finally secure the funding that lung cancer has long deserved. It is time to make this a national priority!

An Open Letter to Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton

April 9, 2008

Yesterday you announced what you would do for breast cancer should you be elected president. When will you announce what you would do for lung cancer?

The $300 million plan you unveiled yesterday to find a cure for breast cancer should be at least doubled for lung cancer since it is killing nearly twice as many women each year as breast cancer. Most women do not even know this.

You do, Senator Clinton, and you specifically cited that fact as part of the justification for Senate Resolution 87, which you co-sponsored and supported and which was passed August 2, 2007. The resolution was a strongly worded policy statement by the Senate calling on the President to declare lung cancer a public health priority and to implement a comprehensive interagency program to reduce lung cancer mortality by 50% by 2015.

The Resolution contains a page and a half of the grim statistics justifying the demand for priority action and specifically notes the enormous under funding of lung cancer research, which receives only seven cents for every federal dollar spent on breast cancer.

Of course we would like to see a cure for breast cancer as we would for all cancers. Thanks to the billions in federal dollars alone that have been invested in breast cancer research and early detection, the 5-year survival rate for breast cancer is now 88%.

Having been massively under-funded, as the resolution notes, lung cancer’s 5-year survival rate is still only 15%. That will no longer be tolerated.

We are not asking for a cure at this point. Just a 50% reduction in the mortality rate for lung cancer, the most lethal cancer, which is now killing more men and women each year than breast, prostate, colon, kidney, melanoma and liver cancers combined.

One in five women being diagnosed with lung cancer now have never smoked at all and they seem to be getting diagnosed younger. Why aren’t women demanding more research? Because they do not know the facts.

You spell out the facts so eloquently in S. Res. 87 and you lay out in the resolution a comprehensive program for lung cancer that is actually quite similar to the one you proposed yesterday for breast cancer.

When will you announce your comprehensive plan for lung cancer? We thank you and look forward to hearing from you on behalf of all those with and at risk for lung cancer, their families, caregivers and friends.

Lung Cancer Alliance

To contact Clinton’s office:

Hillary Clinton General Campaign Headquarters

4420 North Fairfax Drive

Arlington, VA 22203

Ph: 703.469.2008

Fax: 703.962.8600

comments@hillaryclinton.com

press@hillaryclinton.com

SOURCE: myMeso › Ask Clinton about funding lung cancer research

In accordance with the statistical plan for the trial, the company has begun the process necessary to conduct the formal statistical analyses required to complete the final sections of the ONCONASE rolling New Drug Application (NDA).

The trial was designed to show a statistically significant improvement in overall survival for UMM patients who were treated with a combination of ONCONASE and doxorubicin as compared to UMM patients who were treated with doxorubicin as a single agent. Enrollment in the ONCONASE Phase IIIb clinical trial closed on Sept. 30, 2007. A total of 428 patients were enrolled in the trial.

Alfacell has licensed the U.S. commercial rights for ONCONASE to Strativa, the branded product division of Par Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Strategic marketing and distribution agreements for ONCONASE have been secured with BL&H Co. Ltd. for Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong, USP Pharma Spolka Z.O.O., an affiliate of US Pharmacia, for Eastern Europe, and GENESIS Pharma, S.A. for Southeastern Europe.

ONCONASE has been granted fast track status and orphan-drug designation for the treatment of malignant mesothelioma by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, ONCONASE has been granted orphan-drug designation in the European Union and Australia.

SOURCE: myMeso › ONCONASE on fast track for Meso treatment

The state Health Department in Minnesota has documented close to 60 deaths from mesothelioma in the Iron Range mining area.

According to the story published by The Globe, “The dean of the University of Minnesota’s School of Public Health [Professor John Finnegan, Jr.] is calling it ‘the best shot we’ve had in 25 years’ to find answers about a lung cancer that might be connected to mining taconite.”

If approved by the Minnesota legislature, the money would fund a combined study led by the University of Minnesota and including state health, natural resources and pollution control officials. The study would take about five years to conclude.

The Globe reports that the Senate bill has at least one more committee stop, and a House plan is also progressing. It says the plan faces some opposition from the business lobby, which is taking issue with the reliance on a workers compensation fund to pay for the research.

SOURCE: myMeso › Minnesota meso funding moving in Senate

Rear Admiral Phil Coady, U.S. Navy (Ret.), now serving as chairman of the board for the Lung Cancer Alliance, was never a smoker, and was surprised at the reactions of friends, family and co-workers when he told them he had lung cancer. They said he was brave for sharing the true nature of his illness.

“With lung cancer, there’s a real stigma attached to it. People don’t mention it in obituaries. There’s this perception that people with lung cancer brought it on themselves. I was never a smoker. Twenty percent of the women with lung cancer who are coming down with it every year have never been smokers.”

The stigma tends to inhibit discussion of lung cancer, Coady says, which impacts funding for research. If nobody is talking about it, the awareness just isn’t there, and it is treated as out of sight, out of mind. Meanwhile, lung cancer kills more people each year than breast, colon and prostate cancer combined. Ninety-two percent of people diagnosed with lung cancer die from the disease.

“I believe intently that the solution to lung cancer is making people aware that it is a public health problem and developing a public policy program. National priorities have not been adjusted to make this a national priority,” Coady says. “LCA’s first mission is to get before Congress to make this a national priority. Then, we go back to Congress and put some dollars behind it.

“The numbers we have all stated about the number of people who have died from lung cancer are compelling. It’s a half a million people every three years. There is no other cancer that comes close. But there’s almost no public funding.”

One current lobbying effort involves approaching state legislatures to gather support for an initiative that would donate 1 percent of tobacco tax revenue or tobacco liability settlements collected by state government for lung cancer research.

“Right now we’re using that money to build roads, schools, other infrastructure, but nothing to do with the cancer,” Coady said.

Next: Personal help for those with lung cancer

SOURCE: myMeso › LCA lobbies – Part 2 – the stigma of lung cancer

Chairman Coady’s story

Leading the charge for the organization is Rear Admiral Phil Coady, U.S. Navy (Ret.), who serves as chairman of the board of directors. A career Navy officer, Coady was diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer in early 2005. He underwent surgery to remove the affected lobe and went through chemotherapy. In late 2005, the cancer recurred with metasteses to his bones. Chemotherapy has been successful in slowing the advance of the cancer for the past two years, and Coady is fighting for other lung cancer survivors.

Although Coady doesn’t suffer from mesothelioma, he is very much aware of the risks posed by asbestos. His work during his time in the Navy very often put him in contact with the substance, he said, and seven of his friends died from mesothelioma since his retirement.

In addition, for 10 years following his retirement, Coady worked as president of the Navy Mutual Aid Association, a non-profit veterans benefit group and life insurance service, where he saw what he thought was a disproportionate amount of lung cancer deaths.

He notes that shipboard service in the Navy, particularly during the years he served, routinely involved exposure to asbestos, second hand smoke and other possible carcinogens. Veterans also were at risk from exposure to chemicals such as Agent Orange, sulfur mustard gas, and other battlefield combustion products.

“I had heavy exposure to asbestos in the Navy,” he says. “I spent a lot of my time as an engineer on ships. In the 1960s there were no precautions about asbestos that I recall at all. We tore out asbestos with hand tools. A dust mask might have been our most aggressive protection.”

With a family history of pulmonary fibrosis, a chronic scarring of the lungs, Coady always had his asbestos exposure in the back of his mind in relation to his health, and had regular CT scans to check for the disease, which he did eventually develop as a result of his exposure. Then, in 2005, the scans also showed lung cancer.

“Ironically, it was really my concern about asbestos that probably saved my life,” Coady said, crediting his regular screenings with catching his cancer early.

Next: The stigma of lung cancer

SOURCE: myMeso › LCA lobbies for lung cancer funding, awareness

Beginning in 2003, ACS started using the 2000 census for its age adjusted statistical analysis. Since that time, the incidence rate for lung cancer in men rose from 86 new cases per every 100,000 of population to 89, and incidence rates for women went from 51.4 to 55.2.

The LCA points out that in research dollars per death, lung cancer is receiving a fraction of the amounts given to breast, prostate and colon cancers.

The five-year survival rate for breast cancer now stands at 88 percent, prostate cancer 99 percent and colon cancer 65 percent, while lung cancer remains at 15 percent.

The ACS credits screening as a major component in achieving high survival rates. So, part of the problem, according to an article published in the Baltimore Sun Feb. 27, is that there is not yet any effective way to screen for lung cancer.

Reporter Stephanie Desmon found that neither physicians nor major medical societies advocate lung cancer screening at this time, because no one has proved that it saves lives.

Studies have shown that screenings find more cancer, but also more lesions and nodules that may or may not be cancer, Desmon’s report said. This leads to confusion about how to treat these spots, or whether to treat them at all. There also are concerns that lung screenings may lead to further tests, biopsies and surgeries, some of which may be unnecessary or harmful to a patient. Scans that produce “watch and see” results also lead to fear and anxiety, and emotional cost to the patient.

In 2002, the National Cancer Institute launched the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), which will compare two ways of detecting lung cancer – spiral computed tomography (CT) and the standard chest X-ray. By Feb. 2004, nearly 50,000 people (smokers or former smokers) had joined NLST at more than 30 study sites across the country.

The trial (now closed to further enrollment) is slated to collect and analyze data for eight years to examine the risks and benefits of each type of screening. The NLST is a randomized, controlled study and is large enough to determine if there is a 20 percent or greater drop in lung cancer mortality from using spiral CT compared to chest X-ray. The trial is scheduled to last until 2009.

SOURCE: myMeso › Lung Cancer Leading Cancer Killer

Treating Mesothelioma

Because this is such a rare cancer, it has been hard for doctors to compare the value of different treatments. Since many doctors have little or no experience treating this disease, you may be referred to a specialist at a large medical center.Treatment options include surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy.One problem with treating mesothelioma is that it does not grow as a single mass. Instead it tends to spread along surfaces, nerves, and blood vessels. This makes it hard for one or more types of treatment to get rid of all of the disease.While surgery is not likely to cure the cancer, it might extend the patient’s life.Depending on the type and stage of the cancer, chemotherapy may be given as the main treatment or along with surgery. Chemotherapy for this disease is given to relieve symptoms, not to cure the cancer.As a rule, radiation treatment doesn’t help much for mesothelioma, and the need to treat a large part of the lung leads to problems with lung damage. But radiation can be used along with surgery to kill small areas of cancer that cannot be seen and removed during surgery. It can also be used as a way to ease symptoms such as shortness of breath, pain, bleeding, or trouble with swallowing. If fluid builds up in the chest, radioactive drugs can be put into the space after the fluid is drawn out. This might help keep the fluid from coming back.

New in Mesothelioma Research

There is always research going on in the area of mesothelioma. Much of this research has focused on learning exactly how asbestos changes normal cells and their DNA to cause cancer. Understanding how these fibers produce cancer might help us find ways to prevent those changes.Now that we know about the dangers of asbestos, we can limit or stop its use in homes, public buildings, and the workplace. But rules to protect people from asbestos are much less strict (or they do not exist at all) in some other countries.Research is also going on to learn about the role (if any) of a virus (SV40) that has been linked to mesothelioma in some studies.Because chemotherapy drugs have not worked very well against advanced mesothelioma, several new ideas are now being studied. These include drugs which kill cancers by stopping their blood supply and drugs which interfere with the ability of some cancer cells to grow quickly.Doctors are always learning more about the best way to treat people with mesothelioma. Treatments that combine surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy are now being studied and may provide the most promising option for some patients.New drugs, along with other types of treatments, are now being tested in clinical trials.Another new approach is a type of gene therapy. This treatment uses special viruses that have been changed in the lab. The virus is injected into the space around the lungs where it infects the cancer cells. When this happens, the virus in turn injects a gene into the cancer that may help immune system cells to attack the cancer.

Research at UAB

The University of Alabama Birmingham (UAB) Comprehensive Cancer Center is a research and teaching hospital, and is currently conducting a number of studies on the treatment of mesothelioma.In 2005, UABs Spring/Summer magazine published information about ongoing studies being conducted by Katri Selander, M.D., Ph.D., a Cancer Center Associate Scientist, and Pierre Triozzi, M.D., about the effects of bisphosphonates on cancer cells.Bisphosphonates are drugs that are commonly used to treat and prevent osteoporosis. They also are used to treat metastatic breast and prostate cancers.The UAB article reported that Drs. Selander and Triozzi “have examined the effects of bisphosphonates on cancer cell cultures and in animal models, and have found that the drugs kill mesothelioma cells in both.” Further results of these studies were reported in the May 1, 2006 issue of Clinical Cancer Research, Vol. 12, 2862-2868; and in the European Journal of Pharmacology, Volume 559, Issue 1, dated March 15, 2007. Key points of the article in Clinical Cancer Research said that “the diagnositc use of radioactive bisphosphonates has revealed the accumlation of bisphosphonates in mesothelioma” and said that results of the studies “support further study of bisphosphonates in the management of mesothelioma.” The European Journal of Pharmacology report states that “Pre-clinical studies indicate that bisphosphonates also ihibit the growth of various cancer cells in vitro” and “in … mouse AB-12 mesothelioma cells.” For more information, visit UAB’s Comprehensive Cancer Center.

SOURCE: myMeso › Mesothelioma Treatment Options

What is Mesothelioma?

Mesothelioma cancer, or malignant mesothelioma, is an extremely rare disease generally affecting the lining of the lungs, and, more rarely, the abdominal cavity and/or the heart. Mesothelioma cancer is most strongly associated with exposure to asbestos, and can remain latent in those exposed for 30 to 40 years.

There are three types of mesothelioma cancer: pleural, in which the cancer affects the lining of the lungs/chest;  peritoneal, which affects the lining of the abdominal cavity; and pericardial, which affects the lining of the heart.

Pleural mesothelioma is the most common form of malignant mesothelioma, accounting for approximately three out of every four cases. The pleura is defined as the outer lining of the lungs and chest cavity. Pleural mesothelioma typcially has a latency period of 30-40 years or longer.

Peritoneal mesothelioma generally accounts for about 25 percent of maglignant mesothelioma cases diagnosed each year. It can have a shorter latency period than pleural mesothelioma, developing in 20-30 years or shorter. It affects the peritoneum, which is the lining of the abdominal cavity. Peritoneal mesothelioma generally occurs more often in males than females.

Pericardial mesothelioma, which affects the pericardium, the lining of the heart, is extremely rare. This form of malignant mesothelioma is usually fatal, due to its difficulty in diagnosis and treatment. It is generally diagnosed in a very late stage, and surgical or other treatment options are dangerous and difficult.

Mesothelioma in general is fairly rare in the United States. There are an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 new cases of mesothelioma each year in the United States. However, in European countries, especially the UK, as well as in Australia, the rate of mesothelioma is increasing.

For years, mesothelioma was thought to be  rare in people under age 55. Traditionally seen primarily in older men, usually with a background of working in a factory, shipyard, mine or other environment with heavy asbestos exposure, today more and more cases of secondary exposure are being diagnosed, and it is affecting greater number of women.

The average age for someone with mesothelioma used to be around 72, but each year it seems mesothelioma affects younger people, and a greater number of women. Last year, a 3-year-old girl was diagnosed with mesothelioma, stunning the physicians who were treating her.

Mesothelioma is a serious disease. By the time the symptoms appear and cancer is diagnosed, the disease is often advanced. The average survival time is about 1 year. The 5-year relative survival rate is around 10%, but this rate has been slowly improving.

The 5-year survival rate refers to the percentage of patients who live at least 5 years after their cancer is diagnosed. Many of these patients live much longer than 5 years after diagnosis, and 5-year rates are used to produce a standard way of discussing prognosis.

Five-year relative survival rates do not include patients dying of other diseases and are considered to be a more accurate way to describe the prognosis for patients with a particular type and stage of cancer. That means that relative survival only talks about deaths from mesothelioma. Of course, 5-year survival rates are based on patients diagnosed and initially treated more than 5 years ago. They may no longer be accurate. Improvements in treatment result in a more favorable outlook for recently diagnosed patients.

Symptoms of Mesothelioma

Early symptoms of mesothelioma can be very general. Thus, they are often ignored.

Symptoms of pleural mesothelioma (lining of the chest) can include:

* pain in the lower back or at the side of the chest

* shortness of breath

* trouble swallowing

* hoarseness

* cough

* fever

* sweating

* tiredness

* weight loss

* swelling of the face and arms

* muscle weakness

Symptoms of peritoneal mesothelioma (lining of the abdominal cavity) include:

* belly pain

* weight loss

* nausea

* vomiting

* fluid or a lump in the abdomen

Symptoms of pericardial mesothelioma (lining of the heart) include:

* constrictive pericarditis

* pericardial effusion

* cardiac tamponade

* heart failure caused by myocardial infarction

Of course, these same symptoms can also be caused by other minor ailments. But if you have worked with asbestos and you have any of these symptoms, you should see your doctor right away.

Diagnosing Mesothelioma

Diagnosing mesothelioma is often difficult, because the symptoms are similar to those of a number of other conditions.

Diagnosis begins with a review of the patient’s medical history, including any history of asbestos exposure. A complete physical examination may be performed, including x-rays of the chest or abdomen and lung function tests. As a rule, a chest x-ray is not useful in finding mesothelioma early.

One test being studied is a blood test. This test measures the levels in the blood of a certain protein that is higher in people who have lung damage due to asbestos. It is even higher if the person has mesothelioma.

A CT (or CAT) scan or an MRI may also be useful. A CT scan is a series of detailed pictures of areas inside the body created by a computer linked to an x-ray machine. In an MRI, a powerful magnet linked to a computer is used to make detailed pictures of areas inside the body. These pictures are viewed on a monitor and can also be printed.

A biopsy is needed to confirm a diagnosis of mesothelioma. In a biopsy, a surgeon or a medical oncologist (a doctor who specializes in diagnosing and treating cancer) removes a sample of tissue for examination under a microscope by a pathologist. A biopsy may be done in different ways, depending on where the abnormal area is located.

If the cancer is in the chest, the doctor may perform a thoracoscopy. In this procedure, the doctor makes a small cut through the chest wall and puts a thin, lighted tube called a thoracoscope into the chest between two ribs. Thoracoscopy allows the doctor to look inside the chest and obtain tissue samples.

If the cancer is in the abdomen, the doctor may perform a peritoneoscopy. To obtain tissue for examination, the doctor makes a small opening in the abdomen and inserts a special instrument called a peritoneoscope into the abdominal cavity.

If these procedures do not yield enough tissue, more extensive diagnostic surgery may be necessary.

If the diagnosis is mesothelioma, the doctor will want to learn the stage (or extent) of the disease. Staging involves more tests in a careful attempt to find out whether the cancer has spread and, if so, to which parts of the body. Knowing the stage of the disease helps the doctor plan treatment.

Mesothelioma is described as localized if the cancer is found only on the membrane surface where it originated. It is classified as advanced if it has spread beyond the original membrane surface to other parts of the body, such as the lymph nodes, lungs, chest wall, or abdominal organs.

New developments in Diagnosis of Mesothelioma

A recently published report in the Journal of the American Medical Association holds out hope for earlier detection of mesothelioma, a deadly cancer linked to asbestos exposure.

Researchers compared three types of endoscopic collection for accuracy in detecting cancerous cells in the lymph nodes to determine their accuracy.

Typically, doctors use several different techniques to diagnose lung cancers, including mesothelioma. Those techniques include physical exams, chest X-rays, CT scans and surgical biopsies to examine the cells in the lungs and the lymph nodes.

Lung cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide, and the outcomes are typically unpromising. The low survival rates for lung cancer are often attributed to the difficulty of diagnosing the disease early enough for effective treatment.

This is especially true of mesothelioma, a disease that affects the tissues of the lining between the chest wall and the lungs. Often, by the time mesothelioma is detected, the cancer has reached untreatable stages.

Because of this, researchers are increasingly turning to new methods of detection that may identify deadly cancers at earlier stages when chemotherapy, surgery and other treatments may be effective.

The most accurate methods of diagnosis to date involve collecting cell samples from the lungs or lymph nodes for examination under a microscope. The most common method for collecting these cells is a mediastinoscopy, which is an invasive surgery that involves anesthesia and incision. The surgeon makes an incision at the top of the breast bone and inserts a thin, lighted tube into the chest cavity to withdraw cell and fluid samples.

Mediatinoscopy is typically used to determine whether fluids in the chest cavity contain cancerous cells or asbestos fibers.

In the past few years, doctors have developed less invasive procedures to collect tissue samples from the chest. These procedures use an endoscope, a small medical device that consists of a camera mounted on a flexible tube. Ultrasound probes, needles and other instruments can be inserted through the tube to remove samples for biopsy. These endoscopic procedures are far less invasive than more traditional methods, reducing the risks to patients who undergo them.

In the study reported in JAMA, researchers compared three different procedures using an endoscope, each of them considered minimally invasive:

• Transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA)

• Endobronchial ultra-sound guided fine needle aspiration (EBUS-FNA)

• Transesophegeal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNA)

In each procedure, an endoscope was used to remove tissues or fluids with a fine needle. The researchers then compared the findings among the three methods to determine which was the most sensitive for detecting the presence of cancerous cells in the lymph nodes of the chest.

The study consisted of tests taken on 138 patients in the U.S. who were believed to have lung cancer. Each patient underwent all three procedures in sequence.

The results of the study showed:

- 30% (42) of the patients had malignant lymph nodes

- EBUS-FNA detected 29 of the cancers. TBNA only detected 15

- EUS-FNA and EBUS-FNA used in combination detected 93% of the cancers.

The combination was also able to detect malignancies in patients who would not have been identified by CT scans of the chest. The results of the study suggest that the minimally invasive procedures may be a viable alternative to more invasive standard procedures for evaluation patients believed to have lung cancer.

The lower risks associated with the procedure will make the diagnostic process more comfortable for patients and provide for a shorter recovery time.

Reference: Wallace, M, Pascual, J, Raimondo, M, et al. Minimally invasive endoscopic staging of suspected lung cancer. Journal of American Medical Association. 2008. 299(5) 540-546. Source: www.asbestos.com

New System May Give Lung Cancer Patients Hope

The Associated Press Aug. 31, 2007 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20533486

Thousands more lung cancer patients each year could be offered surgery or other aggressive therapy under a new system that classifies many tumors as more treatable than in the past.

It is the first big overhaul of a decades-old method used to predict survival and help determine whether a lung cancer patient will have surgery, chemotherapy or be treated at all.

The new guidance is to be presented at a conference of lung cancer specialists in Seoul, South Korea, that starts Saturday. It is expected to be adopted by policy-making groups in the next year. Lung cancer is the world’s top cancer killer, claiming 1.3 million lives each year.

In the United States, 213,380 new cases and 160,390 deaths from the disease are expected this year. Nearly 60 percent of people die within one year of diagnosis, and nearly 75 percent die within two years, American Cancer Society statistics show.

In treating it, doctors use a formula called tumor staging. It is based on a tumor’s size, how far it has spread and other factors to predict a patient’s survival odds and to guide treatment.

More precise sorting

The current system was developed from about 5,000 tumor samples from University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston decades ago — before improved scanning technology was available to evaluate a cancer’s spread.

The new plan is based on 100,000 tumor samples from around the world including Asia, where lung cancer rates are projected to climb because of trends in smoking, unhealthy lifestyles and aging populations. It keeps four broad groupings but sorts people more precisely based on refined understanding of tumor characteristics.

The result: “There will clearly be shifting of patients from categories not operable to operable” — as many as 10,000 a year in the United States, said Dr. David Johnson, a lung cancer specialist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. He reviewed the plan, which was partly published in a medical journal recently.

The stage of the tumor at diagnosis is the best predictor of survival. Only 20 percent of cases are diagnosed in Stages 1 or 2, when tumors are small and confined to a lung, Johnson said. About 30 percent to 40 percent are found in Stage 4, after they have widely spread. The rest are in the middle.

Five-year survival rates are 47 percent for Stage 1 and 26 percent for Stage 2, but only 8 percent for Stage 3, and 2 percent for Stage 4, according to the American College of Surgeons.

Most lung cancers are the type called ”non-small cell,“ which is covered by the new staging system. The system was developed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, a group of lung cancer specialists from around the world.

Changing groupings

Dr. Peter Goldstraw, a surgeon at the Royal Brompton Hospital in London, led the project, and Canadian scientists independently validated the recommended changes by comparing survival across geographic regions.

Among the changes: creating more sub-stages for tumor size, reassigning some large tumors to a more advanced stage, reclassifying tumors that have spread into the fluid surrounding the lung, and recognizing that spread to certain lymph nodes is more dangerous than its spread to others.

“By changing some of these groupings, some patients will get moved to an earlier stage of disease for which we tend to be more aggressive” in treatment, said Dr. Joan Schiller, a lung cancer specialist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas .

“Before, a patient may have only been offered chemotherapy. They may now be offered chemotherapy and radiation,” or more intense radiation, she said. Conversely, some people thought to have earlier-stage tumors now will be grouped with those whose tumors have widely spread, and discouraged from undergoing therapies that have little chance of helping them.

“In some cases, patients were getting inappropriately aggressive treatment,” Schiller said.

Some people with very small tumors may get away with less therapy — taking out just a segment of lung instead of an entire lobe, said Dr. Stephen Swisher, a chest surgeon at M.D. Anderson.

The impact of the changes in Europe and Japan is unclear because doctors in those countries tend to remove whole lungs rather than lobes to treat lung cancer, Johnson noted. Doctors hope that ultimately survival will improve, but that won’t happen “unless we get patients into the right hands” and they get correct treatment, Johnson said.

Revising the staging system also will do little good if doctors don’t do the right tests to properly stage a tumor, said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society. Staging for lung and other types of cancer should become even more precise in the near future as biomarkers and gene tests are developed to better sort patients, he added.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Risk Factors for Mesothelioma

The main risk factor for developing mesothelioma is exposure to asbestos.

Asbestos refers to a family of fibrous minerals made of silicate. Asbestos was once used in many products such as insulation, floor tiles, door gaskets, soundproofing, roofing, patching compounds, fireproof gloves and ironing board covers, and even brake pads.

As the link between asbestos and mesothelioma has become well known, the use of this material has almost stopped. Most use stopped after 1989, but it is still used in some products. Experts have linked this drop in asbestos use to the fact that the rate of development of mesothelioma is no longer increasing [in the U.S.].

Still, up to 8 million Americans may already have been exposed to asbestos. Exposure to asbestos particles suspended in air and building materials is much less hazardous except when they are being removed.

Since asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral, it can also be found in dust and rocks in certain parts of the United States as well as the world.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as many as 733,000 schools and public buildings in the country today contain asbestos insulation. As many as 10% to 15% of schools in the United States may contain asbestos insulation.

People who may be at risk for occupational asbestos exposure include some miners, factory workers, insulation manufacturers, railroad workers, ship builders, gas mask manufacturers, and construction workers, particularly those involved with installing insulation.

Several studies have shown that family members of people exposed to asbestos at work have an increased risk of developing mesothelioma, because asbestos fibers are carried home on the clothes of the workers.

The incidence rate for mesothelioma in men is dropping, probably because they are no longer being exposed directly to asbestos in their work. But the incidence rate for mesothelioma in women is steady, which suggests that they are being exposed in a way that is not directly tied to work, but more to their environment either at home or work. One example would be asbestos in buildings where they work or live.

A study from California also links mesothelioma to naturally occurring asbestos deposits in mountains.

Another important point about asbestos and mesothelioma is that the risk of mesothelioma does not drop with time after exposure to asbestos. The risk appears to be lifelong and undiminished.

There are 2 main forms of asbestos — serpentine and amphiboles. Serpentine fibers are curly and pliable. Chrysotile is the only type of serpentine fiber and it is the most widely used form of asbestos. Amphiboles are thin, rod-like fibers. There are 5 main types — crocidolite, amosite, anthrophylite, tremolite, and actinolyte. Amphiboles (particularly crocidolite) are considered to be the most carcinogenic (cancer-causing).

However, even the more commonly used chrysotile fibers are associated with malignant (cancerous) mesotheliomas and should be considered dangerous as well.

When asbestos fibers are inhaled, most are cleared in the nose, throat, trachea (windpipe), or bronchi (large breathing tubes of the lungs). Fibers are cleared by sticking to mucus inside the air passages and being coughed up or swallowed. The long, thin, fibers are less readily cleared, and they may reach the ends of the small airways and penetrate into the pleural lining of the lung and chest wall. These fibers may then directly injure mesothelial cells of the pleura, and eventually cause mesothelioma.

Asbestos fibers can also damage cells of the lung and result in asbestosis (formation of scar tissue in the lung), and/or lung cancer.

The risk of lung cancer among people exposed to asbestos is increased by 7 times, compared with the general population. Indeed, asbestosis, mesothelioma, and lung cancer are the 3 most frequent causes of death and disease among people with heavy asbestos exposure.

Peritoneal mesothelioma, which forms in the abdomen, may result from coughing up and swallowing inhaled asbestos fibers. Cancers of the larynx, pancreas, esophagus, colon, and kidney may also come from asbestos exposure, but the increased risk is small.

The risk of developing a mesothelioma is related to how much asbestos a person was exposed to and how long this exposure lasted. People exposed at an early age, for a long period of time, and at higher levels are most likely to develop this cancer.

Mesotheliomas take a long time to develop. The time between first exposure to asbestos and diagnosis of mesothelioma is usually between 20 and 50 years.

Other Asbestos-Related Cancer

Asbestos Related Lung CancerLung cancer, or bronchial carcinoma, occurs in several forms. The most common causes of lung cancer are smoking and asbestos.

This web site has focused on the most lethal of the lung cancers – mesothelioma. Not every asbestos-related lung cancer, however, is a mesothelioma. Other thoracic carcinomas, such as adenocarcinoma, are also caused by exposure to asbestos.

The connection between asbestos exposure and lung cancer was noted as early as 1925, and confirmed over the next 70 years by many epidemiologic studies of asbestos-exposed workers.

The four main types of commercially used asbestos, chrysotile, amosite, anthophyllite, and mixtures containing crocidolite, have all been associated with an increased risk of lung cancer. About one in seven people who suffer from asbestosis, a lung disease resulting from high exposure to asbestos, eventually develop lung cancer.

Asbestos is estimated to account for 3,400 to 8,500 new lung cancer cases in the United States each year. Like mesothelioma, the latency period between asbestos exposure and the development of asbestos related lung cancer may be two, three, four, or even more decades.

Very often, asbestos-related cancer victims also suffer from asbestosis, a scarring of the lung tissue caused by asbestos exposure. About one in seven people with asbestosis will eventually develop lung cancer.

Although commonly associated with lung cancer, adenocarcinoma is a type of cancer that develops in cells lining glandular types of internal organs, such as the lungs, breasts, colon, prostate, stomach, pancreas, and cervix.

Another type of adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, accounts for only 10-15% of all adenocarcinomas and is particular to aggressive carcinomas that are comprised of at least sixty percent mucus. Non-small cell lung cancers make up over three quarters of all new lung cancer cases in the United States.

While there is only one type of small cell lung cancer, there are three types of non-small cell lung cancer. The three types of non-small cell lung cancer are squamous carcinoma, large cell carcinoma, and adenocarcinoma. When adenocarcinoma develops in the lung’s air sacs, it is called bronchioalveolar adenocarcinoma. About forty percent of all lung cancer cases diagnosed today are adenocarcinoma.

The progression of adenocarcinoma is quite unpredictable. In most cases, adenocarcinoma spreads slowly and causes very few lung cancer symptoms. But it can also be extremely invasive, aggressively spreading through the body and causing death before it can be treated. Given the disease’s variability, the five-year prognosis for patients with adenocarcinoma is dim: most are given only a 10 percent chance of survival.

Sometimes, tumors spread to the liver, adrenal glands, and bones, making adenocarcinoma much more difficult to treat. Symptoms of adenocarcinoma lung cancer may include shortness of breath, the coughing up of blood, fatigue, chest pains, and unexplained weight loss. Adenocarcinoma is usually treated with surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy.

SOURCE: myMeso › What is Mesothelioma?

Asbestos is Leading Risk Factor for Mesothelioma

The main risk factor for developing mesothelioma is exposure to asbestos. Asbestos refers to a family of fibrous minerals made of silicate. Asbestos was once used in many products such as insulation, floor tiles, door gaskets, soundproofing, roofing, patching compounds, fireproof gloves and ironing board covers, and even brake pads. As the link between asbestos and mesothelioma has become well known, the use of this material has almost stopped. Most use stopped after 1989, but it is still used in some products.

Experts have linked this drop in asbestos use to the fact that the rate of development of mesothelioma is no longer increasing [in the U.S.]. Still, up to 8 million Americans may already have been exposed to asbestos.

Exposure to asbestos particles suspended in air and building materials is much less hazardous except when they are being removed. Since asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral, it can also be found in dust and rocks in certain parts of the United States as well as the world. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as many as 733,000 schools and public buildings in the country today contain asbestos insulation. As many as 10% to 15% of schools in the United States may contain asbestos insulation.

People who may be at risk for occupational asbestos exposure include some miners, factory workers, insulation manufacturers, railroad workers, ship builders, gas mask manufacturers, and construction workers, particularly those involved with installing insulation. Several studies have shown that family members of people exposed to asbestos at work have an increased risk of developing mesothelioma, because asbestos fibers are carried home on the clothes of the workers.

The incidence rate for mesothelioma in men is dropping, probably because they are no longer being exposed directly to asbestos in their work. But the incidence rate for mesothelioma in women is steady, which suggests that they are being exposed in a way that is not directly tied to work, but more to their environment either at home or work. One example would be asbestos in buildings where they work or live. A study from California also links mesothelioma to naturally occurring asbestos deposits in mountains.

Another important point about asbestos and mesothelioma is that the risk of mesothelioma does not drop with time after exposure to asbestos. The risk appears to be lifelong and undiminished. There are 2 main forms of asbestos — serpentine and amphiboles.

Serpentine fibers are curly and pliable. Chrysotile is the only type of serpentine fiber and it is the most widely used form of asbestos.

Amphiboles are thin, rod-like fibers. There are 5 main types — crocidolite, amosite, anthrophylite, tremolite, and actinolyte. Amphiboles (particularly crocidolite) are considered to be the most carcinogenic (cancer-causing). However, even the more commonly used chrysotile fibers are associated with malignant (cancerous) mesotheliomas and should be considered dangerous as well.

When asbestos fibers are inhaled, most are cleared in the nose, throat, trachea (windpipe), or bronchi (large breathing tubes of the lungs). Fibers are cleared by sticking to mucus inside the air passages and being coughed up or swallowed. The long, thin, fibers are less readily cleared, and they may reach the ends of the small airways and penetrate into the pleural lining of the lung and chest wall. These fibers may then directly injure mesothelial cells of the pleura, and eventually cause mesothelioma.

Asbestos fibers can also damage cells of the lung and result in asbestosis (formation of scar tissue in the lung), and/or lung cancer. The risk of lung cancer among people exposed to asbestos is increased by 7 times, compared with the general population. Indeed, asbestosis, mesothelioma, and lung cancer are the 3 most frequent causes of death and disease among people with heavy asbestos exposure.

Peritoneal mesothelioma, which forms in the abdomen, may result from coughing up and swallowing inhaled asbestos fibers. Cancers of the larynx, pancreas, esophagus, colon, and kidney may also come from asbestos exposure, but the increased risk is small. The risk of developing a mesothelioma is related to how much asbestos a person was exposed to and how long this exposure lasted. People exposed at an early age, for a long period of time, and at higher levels are most likely to develop this cancer.

Mesotheliomas take a long time to develop. The time between first exposure to asbestos and diagnosis of mesothelioma is usually between 20 and 50 years.

Asbestosis

asbestosis – Asbestosis is a breathing disorder caused by inhaling asbestos fibers. Prolonged accumulation of these fibers in your lungs can cause scarring of lung tissue and shortness of breath. Asbestosis symptoms can range from mild to severe, and usually don’t appear until years after exposure.

According to information provided by the Mayo Clinic, symptoms of asbestosis include shortness of breath, initially only with exertion but eventually even while resting; decreased tolerance for physical activity; coughing, chest pain, and even finger deformity (clubbing) in some cases.

Asbestosis may cause such a reduced flow of oxygen as to be disabling or even fatal. It can also lead to complications like high blood pressure in the lungs, heart problems, lung cancer, other lung damage including those affecting the lining of the lungs and chest cavity, the pleura. These include pleural thickening and hardening (pleural plaques), and abnormal accumulation of fluid between the layers (pleural effusion).

Asbestosis itself does not increase your risk of developing mesothelioma, but it indicates that you were exposed to asbestos and therefore are also at risk for developing malignant mesothelioma.

Adenocarcinoma

adenocarcinoma (A-den-oh-KAR-sih-NOH-muh) – Cancer that begins in cells that line certain internal organs and that have gland-like (secretory) properties.

Although commonly associated with lung cancer, adenocarcinoma is a type of cancer that develops in cells lining glandular types of internal organs, such as the lungs, breasts, colon, prostate, stomach, pancreas, and cervix. Another type of adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, accounts for only 10-15% of all adenocarcinomas and is particular to aggressive carcinomas that are comprised of at least sixty percent mucus.

Non-small cell lung cancers make up over three quarters of all new lung cancer cases in the United States. While there is only one type of small cell lung cancer, there are three types of non-small cell lung cancer. The three types of non-small cell lung cancer are squamous carcinoma, large cell carcinoma, and adenocarcinoma. When adenocarcinoma develops in the lung’s air sacs, it is called bronchioalveolar adenocarcinoma. About forty percent of all lung cancer cases diagnosed today is adenocarcinoma.

Like other cancers, adenocarcinoma is the growth of abnormal cells. These cancerous cells multiply out of control and form a tumor. In the lung, as the tumor grows, it destroys parts of the lung. Eventually, the tumor’s abnormal cells can spread (metastasize) to other parts of the body, including the local lymph nodes in the chest and the central portion of the chest, called the mediastinum; the liver; the bones; the adrenal glands; and other organs, including the brain.

Adenocarcinoma is more likely than other types of lung cancer to be contained in one area of the body. If it is truly localized, it may also respond better than other lung cancers to treatment, especially surgical removal of the tumor and draining lymph nodes.

Adenocarcinoma is the most common form of lung cancer. Most of this type of cancer is found in smokers. However, it also is the most frequent type of lung cancer seen in nonsmokers. It is the most common form of lung cancer seen in women and people younger than 45.

As with other forms of lung cancer, you are more likely to get adenocarcinoma if you:

• Are exposed to asbestos. Asbestos is a fibrous mineral that is used in home insulation, fireproofing, tiles for floors and ceilings, automobile brake linings, and other products. It is believed that asbestos fibers can cause lung cancer. People at risk of lung cancer include workers who are exposed to asbestos on the job (miners, construction workers, shipyard workers and auto mechanics who work with brakes), and people who live or work in buildings in which building products that contain asbestos are deteriorating. In addition to the adenocarcinoma type of lung cancer, individuals who have been exposed to asbestos, and particular types of asbestos, are also at a significant greater risk of developing a specialized type of lung cancer called mesothelioma.

• Are exposed to other carcinogens in the workplace. These include uranium, arsenic, vinyl chloride, nickel chromates, coal products, mustard gas, chloromethyl ethers, gasoline, diesel exhaust and high levels of talc dust.

• Smoke cigarettes. Smokers have 13 times more risk of developing lung cancer than nonsmokers. Cigarette smoke is associated with most cases of adenocarcinoma. Smoking is by far the leading risk factor for lung cancer, substantially more significant than all the other risk factors combined.

• Breathe cigarette smoke. Nonsmokers who inhale the cigarette fumes of smokers have an increased risk of lung cancer.

• Are exposed to radon gas. Radon is a colorless, odorless radioactive gas that is formed in the ground. It seeps into the lower floors of homes and public buildings and can contaminate drinking water. Radon exposure is the second leading cause of lung cancer. It’s not clear whether elevated radon levels contribute to lung cancer in nonsmokers. However, research has shown that radon exposure contributes to increased rates of lung cancer in smokers and in people exposed to higher levels of radon, such as miners. You can test the levels of radon in your home and surrounding area by using commercially available radon testing kits.

Your doctor will ask you whether you smoke or whether you live with a smoker. If you smoke, your doctor will ask you how much you smoke and how long you have smoked. Your doctor also will ask whether you have worked in an industry where you may have been exposed to asbestos or other carcinogens.

Call your doctor promptly if you have any of the symptoms of lung cancer, especially if you are a smoker or you have worked in an industry with high exposure to asbestos.

The outlook depends on the stage of the cancer and the overall health of the patient. In general, the prognosis is poor, especially if the lung cancer has spread to areas outside of the chest wall or has involved the lymph nodes of the mediastinum. This cancer can only be cured when surgery or radiation therapy can completely remove the tumor. However, many lung cancers are diagnosed at a stage when this is not possible. About 17 percent of people with adenocarcinoma survive more than 5 years after diagnosis.

Asbestos exposure increases the risk of lung cancer by nine times. A combination of asbestos exposure and cigarette smoking raises the risk to as much as 50 times.

A person who has had lung cancer is more likely to develop a second lung cancer than the average person is to develop a first lung cancer.

Repeated respiratory infections, such as bronchitis or pneumonia, can be a sign of lung cancer.

Asbestos Information

Asbestos and asbestos containing materials are responsible for causing asbestos cancer and asbestos disease cases around the world. Two of the most dangerous forms of asbestos disease are mesothelioma and asbestosis. Asbestos has been used in thousands of products for more than a century because it is highly versatile, abundant, and relatively cheap. Since asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral, it requires no manufacturing. Instead, asbestos only has to be mined, crushed, and added into products during the manufacturing process. Since asbestos is basically a rock, it is highly impervious to heat. It also happens to be chemically inert. Since its basic mineral structure is shaped in long, thin fibers, it can be broken down into these fibers to add strength and flexibility to nearly any product. A characteristic of asbestos is what is known as tensile strength. It allows products to be flexible yet strong while not adding excessive weight. Asbestos is one of few minerals that can actually be woven. Asbestos was commonly woven into materials that made excellent insulators, but were too brittle to be used by alone because they would crumble. Asbestos made insulation products flexible and durable since it was not affected by heat. Asbestos is not a very effective insulator by itself. All these qualities add up to a very useful and inexpensive product but some of them also make asbestos toxic to those that inhale asbestos fibers. There are six forms of asbestos characterized by differences in structure and color. Asbestos is also divided into two categories: serpentine and amphibole asbestos. Serpentine asbestos is made of curly fibers and amphibole asbestos is made of long, straight fibers. Both types of asbestos are considered dangerous, though it is thought amphibole asbestos forms, including crocidolite and amosite, may be more dangerous to humans.

Asbestos Exposure

Unfortunately, there are many opportunities for asbestos exposure since asbestos was used so abundantly in both industrial and consumer products. Most people that develop asbestos cancer and other asbestos diseases, including mesothelioma and asbestosis, usually have a history of chronic exposure to asbestos. Mesothelioma is somewhat unique in this respect, as mesothelioma cases have developed in people with limited asbestos exposure. As a result, there is no established “safe” level of asbestos exposure. Workers are exposed to asbestos when the substance or products containing asbestos are cut, crushed, sanded, drilled or otherwise disturbed. When left undisturbed, asbestos-containing materials can be relatively safe. In cases where asbestos materials are mined, installed, removed, demolished, or serviced, exposure can be a risk unless strict asbestos abatement techniques are employed. When inhaled, microscopic asbestos fibers can make it past the body’s natural defenses and deep into the lungs causing asbestos disease. Once within the lungs, the fibers can irritate lung tissue leading to asbestos cancer. If asbestos fibers make their way to the alveoli or air sacs in the lungs where oxygen and carbon dioxide exchange takes place, they can cause irritation and scarring called asbestosis. Asbestos fibers that pass through the alveoli and into the pleural mesothelium, can eventually lead to asbestos cancer in the form of tumors and malignant mesothelioma.

Asbestos Products

The following is a list of products that commonly contain asbestos:Roofing shinglesFelt and tar joint compoundCement pipesWall boardCeiling tilesSiding gasketsLaboratory hoodsMastics and sealantsBrake liningsFire doorsInsulation on some wiringCooling towersPaintTaping compound (thermal)Flexible duct connectorsGreenhouse materialsAppliance insulationSheet vinyl floor coveringPlaster sprayed-on fireproofingRefractory cement chalk boardsInsulation on steam pipesHeat resistant gloves and suitsAsbestos blankets Cork Board

Asbestos History

Asbestos was first discovered to be dangerous at the beginning of last century. It has been known as a carcinogen since the 1960s and was subsequently banned in more than 30 countries under grounds that there is no safe level of asbestos exposure. Mining and manufacture of most asbestos products has been ceased in the U.S., yet we continue to import more than 30 million pounds of asbestos in foreign products each year. A new recommendation by an EPA-sponsored panel of asbestos industry members and other experts on the topic called for a ban of all importation, manufacture, and mining of asbestos and asbestos containing products in the U.S. Although this may be a good sign, it also means that new risks of asbestos exposure are still developing. Since asbestos cancer and asbestos diseases take years and even decades to develop, many more cases of asbestos disease will be diagnosed.

Asbestos Legislation

On March 1, 2007, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) introduced S. 742: Ban Asbestos in America Act of 2007 to the 110th Congress. This is an act to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce the health risks posed by asbestos-containing materials and products having asbestos-containing material, and for other purposes. The bill is an effort to ban all production and use of asbestos in America , launch public education campaigns to raise awareness about its dangers and expand research and treatment of diseases cause by asbestos. Murray’s legislation, which was first introduced in the 107th Congress, will also authorize additional studies to determine which commercial products today still contain asbestos, increase funding for asbestos-related diseases, and call for a national mesothelioma registry to help public health professionals track this deadly asbestos-related disease. Studies estimate that during the next decade, 100,000 victims in the United States will die of an asbestos related disease – equaling 30 deaths per day. The bill passed in the Senate on Oct. 4, 2007 by Unanimous Consent.

Currently, the companion to this bill, H.R. 3339, the Bruce Vento Ban Asbestos and Prevent Mesothelioma Act of 2007, is in committee in the House of Representatives. The House bill toughened the legislation, under the direction of the Environment and Hazardous Material Subcommittee of the House’s Energy and Commerce Committee, eliminating an exception for asbestos present at 1 percent or less by weight, making the ban a matter of federal statute rather than EPA regulation, and adding enforcement provisions. The bill must pass committee to make it before the full House for a vote.

Critically needed medical research funding provisions from Sen. Murray’s and Congresswoman McCollum’s legislation have not yet been added to the Committee Print. Supporters are urged to contact their Representative in Washington, DC, to urge inclusion of the research funding and swift passage of the complete bill once the funding is in place.

SOURCE: myMeso › Mesothelioma and Asbestos

One of the difficulties in diagnosing mesothelioma is that it affects the tissues of the lining between the chest wall and the lungs. As a result, often, by the time the mesothelioma is detected with more traditional methods such as physical exams, x-rays, CT scans and surgical biopsies, it’s in advanced and untreatable stages.

But three new, less invasive, endoscopic procedures are proving to have better results at identifying mesothelioma. The report explains that each of these new procedures uses an endoscope to remove tissues or fluids with a fine needle. The three procedures are listed as transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA), endobronchial ultra-sound guided fine needle aspiration (EBUS-FNA), and transesophegeal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNA).

Studies are now being done to compare the findings among these three methods to determine which is the most sensitive for detecting the presence of cancerous cells in the lymph nodes of the chest. The journal says tests involved 138 patients in the U.S. believed to have lung cancer, all of whom underwent all three procedures in sequence. According to the report, the results of the study show the following:

• 30 % (42) of the patients had malignant lymph nodes
• EBUS-FNA detected 29 of the cancers. TBNA detected 15.
• EUS-FNA and EBUS-FNA used in combination detected 93% of the cancers! The combination also was able to detect malignancies in patiens who would not have been identified by CT scans of the chest.

In addition to the better results, the less-invasive procedures tend to better overall for patients, presenting less risk than more traditional surgical methods.

This study is referenced under Wallace, M, Pascual, J, Raimondo, M, et al. Minimally invasive endoscopic staging of suspected lung cancer. Journal of American Medical Association. 2008. 299(5) 540-546

To read the article in its entirety, visit http://www.asbestos.com/news/endoscopy-shows-promise-for-detecting-mesothelioma.html

SOURCE: myMeso › New Tests for Earlier Detection of Mesothelioma