Awareness of symptoms/risk factors for colorectal cancer is low

A new study by Dr. Emily Power and colleagues, published in the journal BMC Cancer , indicates that awareness of the symptoms or risk factors for colorectal cancer is low.

Participants were asked to recall the symptoms of colorectal cancer (changes in normal bowel habit, rectal bleeding, blood in the stool, lump in the abdomen, or unexplained extreme tiredness) and risk factors for colorectal cancer (family history, high consumption of red/processed meat, increased body fat/obesity, or alcohol consumption).

Overall, respondents were able to recall just 1 symptom and 1 risk factor. Women faired better than men in ability to recall symptoms, while men outperformed women in the recall of risk factors. Older participants were more aware of symptoms and risk factors than young participants. While this study was conducted among participants only in the UK, this paper highlights the critical need for increased education of the symptoms and risk factors associated with colorectal cancer.

Clear here to read the paper.

n3 science communications, llc

Lung cancer rates decline in the US!

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) just released the results of a study assessing smoking rates and the incidence of lung cancer in the US. While the incidence of lung cancer has been steadily declining in men over the past few years, in women, a decrease in incidence was evident for the first time. This decline in lung cancer correlated with a decrease in smoking rates in both men and women, indicating a link between smoking and lung cancer.

According to the CDC, smoking costs $193 billion, $96 billion in health related costs and an additional $97 billion in productivity loss due to illness and premature death.

For more information and access to the report, visit the CDC Vital Signs Adult Smoking web page. (or click here).


n3 science communications, llc

Funding NIH grants

A group called the Traditional Values Coalition has just released an action alert asking their members/followers to contact their Congressmen. They want people to demand that Congress freeze funding of what they refer to as "bizarre" and "questionable" NIH research projects. It is unclear what constitutes a "bizarre" or "questionable" project or who will be the one to make such a decision, however, according to this group this type of work should be halted. This is a clear attempt to just push their agenda.

All NIH research projects are peer-reviewed. This means that the experts in the field have donated their time to review and critically assess each grant. In fact, each grant is read and critiqued by at least three researchers within a panel. After the initial review, these professionals then get together to debate the merits and limitations of each grant to decide which proposals are so exceptional that they are worthy of funding. Through this rigorous process only the best proposals are funded.

With the economy in such a weak state and funding for research at an all time low, competitiveness for grants has increased significantly. Therefore, only a small fraction of these meritorious projects are actually receiving money. Indeed, estimates are that less than 10% of all grants submitted per cycle are actually funded.

Why should those outside the field, those who are not experts on these topics, be able to stop these research projects? Please, leave the decisions about what science should be funded to the experts who are best able to judge the projects.

A new cancer vaccine

It has been a relatively long standing theory that an effective cancer vaccine can and will be created. Such a vaccine would infect and replicate only in cancer cells and would leave normal cells unscathed. A new publication in the journal Nature (477:99-102 at nature.com) demonstrates that researchers have conducted the first clinical trial demonstrating efficacy of just such a cancer vaccine.

Using vaccinia virus, the virus used to develop the small pox vaccine, Dr. Breitbach and colleagues engineered a virus that can seek out and infect cells that express the protein EGFR, a protein that is commonly elevated in cancers. In fact, the vaccinia virus can only live and replicate in cells with EGFR overexpression. Their data show that this engineered virus can be injected intravenously and can selectively infected cancer cells (but not normal cells). When the virus finds and infects these cancer cells, it can effectively kill them. Importantly, by using this vaccinia virus technique, researchers were able to produce high enough levels of vaccine to eliminate a significant amount of the tumor. This is a big step forward towards the development a new therapy in patients.

n3 science communications