Prostate cancer treatments are far less than ideal and can cause unnecessary suffering for patients who might not be at a high risk of succumbing to the disease. Researchers are constantly searching for new ways to provide diagnostic information to physicians attempting to provide patients with an accurate prognosis once the disease has been diagnosed. William Phelps, program director of translational and preclinical cancer research at the American Cancer Society, said – “If the treatments we had for prostate cancer were very tolerable or very safe you would probably treat everybody, but the treatments we have available today are less than ideal.”
A study1 team, led by Janet L. Stanford, co-director of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center’s program in prostate cancer research, has identified five inherited genetic variants play a role in prostate cancer progression and mortality. The team gathered blood samples from more than 1,300 prostate cancer patients living in the Seattle region and diagnosed with prostate cancer between the ages of 35 and 74. They then compiled DNA analyses of the Seattle samples and nearly 2,900 Swedish prostate cancer patients. The five single-letter mutations (or SNPs) were found to have a significant bearing on prostate cancer progression as measured by cell death, tumor growth, inflammation, androgen hormone levels, blood-vessel development and bone density. Patients found to have at least four out of the five SNP mutations seemed to face a 50 percent higher risk for dying from their disease as compared with those who carried two or fewer of the mutations.
The researchers hope that their findings will lead to the development of a simple blood test to screen for the mutations to help physicians assess the long-term risk faced by newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. Dr. Stanford hopes that – “The ability to distinguish patients at elevated risk for having aggressive, life-threatening prostate cancer at the time of diagnosis could improve care for the subset of cases most likely to benefit from aggressive therapy and help avoid over-treatment of patients whose tumors are likely to remain indolent.”
1 “Genetic Variants in the LEPR, CRY1, RNASEL, IL4, and ARVCF Genes Are Prognostic Markers of Prostate Cancer-Specific Mortality” – Daniel W. Lin, Liesel M. FitzGerald, Rong Fu, Erika M. Kwon, Siqun Lilly Zheng, Suzanne Kolb, Fredrik Wiklund, Pär Stattin, William B. Isaacs, Jianfeng Xu, Elaine A. Ostrander, Ziding Feng, Henrik Grönberg, and Janet L. Stanford – Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers – Published OnlineFirst August 16, 2011 – doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0236.
Who’s Craziest Now?
I’ve reproduced options trading demo account Jay Cost’s figures in the table below and then shown the percentages of each demographic (Moderate/Liberal, Somewhat Conservative and Very Conservative) in a chart. Bear in mind the fact that we’re talking about Republicans here, so “Moderate/Liberal” is probably a long way from what a Democrat would consider either Moderate or Liberal.
Surprisingly, Newt binary options trading demo account Gingrich’s claim that Santorum isn’t Conservative enough, at least so far, is born out by the fact that he reaps in the extreme right wing of the voters. It’s also noteworthy that Romney got two thirds of his votes from the Conservatives! It’s no wonder that the others are trying to characterize him as Moderate/Liberal.
It’s hard to categorize “crazy”, but it seems to me that Gingrich must win out on the sheer quantity of crazy statements and positions that he’s taken over the years, but Santorum is using every dog whistle that he can to pull in the uneducated, racist, rabid Christian extremist, Tea Party mob to support his cause. It doesn’t seem likely that he could pull many centrist Independents to his side in the real election. Given his positions on the environment, women’s rights, healthcare, education and the role of religion in government, that’s a good thing.
1 Morning Jay: Mitt Romney and Conservatives, Myths, and Realities.