Do eggs raise prostate cancer risk?

?Eating just three eggs a week increases chance of men getting prostate cancer,? reported the Daily Mail. The story went on to say that ?experts in the US claimed that men who consume more than two-and-a?half eggs on a weekly basis were up to 81% more likely to be killed by the disease?.

This research examined the association between eating red meat, poultry and eggs and the risk of developing lethal prostate cancer (which the researchers defined as either dying from the disease or having metastatic disease that had spread to other organs). The study was in a large group of 27,607 healthy men, of whom 199 developed lethal prostate cancer over 14 years of follow-up. The researchers calculated that the men who ate the most eggs were at significantly higher risk than those who ate fewer eggs. No significant association was found with any other food item.

This large cohort study has some strengths, such as its large size and the fact that information on the participants? diet was continually updated over the course of the study. However it also has several limitations, and only a small number of lethal cancers actually occurred, which could suggest that this association is due to chance. Furthermore, these results are inconsistent with previous research, which found no significant association between eggs and prostate cancer. The findings will need to be confirmed in more robust studies before any firm conclusions can be drawn.

�

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health, the University of California in San Francisco, Brigham and Women?s Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Funding was provided by the US National Institute of Health.
�
The study was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal, Cancer Prevention Research.

The media generally reported the study accurately. However, the Daily Mirror?s suggestion that ?a clear link between eggs and prostate cancer? has been found may be misleading, as the researchers say that their results contradict previous findings into the association and that more research is needed. But the Mirror does point out that men in the study who ate the most eggs differed from the rest of the participants in important ways, such as weight and smoking status.

�

What kind of research was this?

This was a prospective cohort study that investigated whether there is an association between eating red meat, poultry and eggs and the risk of developing lethal prostate cancer in healthy men. A subgroup analysis was carried out afterwards, in the men from this cohort who went on to develop prostate cancer. The researchers wanted to see whether eating habits after prostate cancer diagnosis were associated with the risk of the disease progressing and becoming fatal.

The researchers? theory was based on the findings from previous research, which found:

• an increased risk of developing lethal prostate cancer in healthy men who ate red meat
• an increased risk of progression to lethal disease in men with prostate cancer who ate eggs and skin-on poultry after their diagnosis

Participants were recruited from an ongoing cohort study that began in 1986. This study was comprised of American male health professionals, who were between the ages of 40 and 75 in 1986. Men in this study completed a questionnaire every two years with information on their medical conditions, physical activity, weight, medications and smoking status. They provided information regarding their eating habits every four years.

Prospective cohort studies are an appropriate design for answering this type of research question. Assessing eating habits at the beginning of a study reduces the risk that people will inaccurately recall their dietary habits, which can arise when you ask people to remember what they ate over a long period of time. It also ensures that the exposure (eating certain foods) precedes the outcome (developing and dying of prostate cancer).

�

What did the research involve?

In 1994, the researchers recruited 27,607 men from the existing cohort study in the US. The men did not have prostate or other forms of cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer [which are rarely aggressive]). They had also had a prostate specific antigen (PSA) test (PSA screening is not performed in the UK, as higher PSA levels can indicate cancer but are not specific for it. For example, raised levels can also occur with benign enlargement, infection or inflammation).

In this study:

• Information on the men?s eating habits was collected every four years.
• Information regarding prostate cancer diagnosis was collected every two years.
• From men who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer, information of treatment and disease progression was collected every two years.

The researchers defined lethal prostate cancer as disease that had spread to distant organs (metastatic cancer) or death due to prostate cancer during the study?s follow-up period (1994 to 2008).

The researchers followed up the cohort for 14 years and analysed the associations between eating different amounts of red meat, poultry and eggs and the risk of developing lethal prostate cancer. The researchers grouped each participant according to the average amounts of each type of food they ate per week. For red meat, the subgroups included less than three servings, 3 to 4 servings, 5 to 7 serving and over 8 servings per week. For poultry, the subgroups were defined as less than 1.5 servings, 1.5 to 2.5 servings, 2.5 to 3.5 servings, or over 3.5 servings for week. For eggs, the subgroups were less than half an egg, 0.5 to 1.5 eggs, 1.5 to 2.5 eggs, or over 2.5 eggs. To determine which subgroup each participate would be allocated to, the researchers averaged their responses from all of the dietary questionnaires the participants had completed up until their diagnosis, or until the end of the study (for those who were not diagnosed).

To determine the amount of each food eaten, they averaged the reported amounts over all of the questionnaires that were completed before diagnosis. During the analysis, the researchers controlled for possible confounding factors, such as age, amount of food eaten, body mass index (BMI, which is an indicator of obesity), smoking status and physical activity levels.

The researchers also analysed the risk of dying from prostate cancer in the men who were diagnosed with it during the course of the study, based on their eating habits after diagnosis. The researchers only included men who were diagnosed with localised cancer (cancer that had not spread beyond the prostate). During the analysis, they controlled for possible confounding factors such as age at diagnosis, time since diagnosis, disease stage, treatment type, BMI, activity level, smoking status and pre-diagnosis diet.

�

What were the basic results?

Of the 27,607 men included, 199 died of prostate cancer during the study. When the researchers analysed the association between eating habits and risk of lethal prostate cancer when using data up to the point of initial diagnosis, they found that:

• Men who ate an average of 2.5 or more eggs per week had an 81% higher risk of lethal prostate cancer compared to those who ate an average of less than half an egg per week (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.81, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.89, p=0.01).
• The association between average amount of eggs eaten per week and risk of lethal prostate cancer became non-significant when the researchers analysed data collected up to the point of development of a lethal form of the disease (that is, disease progression or death).
• There was no significant association between the average amount of red meat eaten and the risk of lethal prostate cancer.
• Men who consumed more red meat or eggs tended to exercise less and have a higher BMI, and were more likely to smoke and have a family history of prostate cancer.

Of the 3,127 men who developed prostate cancer during the course of the study, 123 died of it during follow-up. Further analysis of the men who died found no significant association between eating habits after diagnosis and risk of the disease progressing from localised prostate cancer to lethal prostate cancer.

�

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers conclude that: ?Eating eggs may increase risk of developing a lethal form of prostate cancer among healthy men,? and that although ?additional large prospective studies are needed, caution in egg intake may be warranted for adult men?.

�

Conclusion

This was a large prospective cohort study that examined the impact of lifestyle on the risk of developing and dying from advanced prostate cancer.

In addition to its large size, another strength of the study is that the information regarding exposure (eating habits) and possible confounders (medical conditions, activity levels, weight, medications and smoking status) were continually updated over the study?s course. However, updating information on eating habits every four years may still introduce a significant level of recall bias, and accurately remembering what you ate over the previous four years is likely to be difficult.

The study and data analysis also has several limitations. First, the number of deaths and cases of lethal prostate cancer were small (only 199 out of 27,607 men in the whole cohort, and 123 out of 3,127 in the case-only cohort [those who initially developed localised disease]). This small number increases the likelihood that the results are due to chance. Second, the researchers say that the group of men included in the study generally ate low amounts of the foods of interest, which limits the ?power? (or ability to detect a difference) of the analysis.

Furthermore, while the researchers controlled statistically for a number of possible confounders, it is difficult to say whether other factors could account for this relationship. The researchers say that men in the study who consumed more red meat or eggs tended to have a higher BMI, exercise less and were more likely to smoke and have a family history of prostate cancer. Additionally, it is probably difficult to control completely for other dietary effects and focus the analysis on a single component of a person?s diet.

This study points to possible associations between diet and risk of prostate cancer. The aforementioned limitations, however, weaken the strength of these conclusions, in addition to the fact that previous research has looked at this question and found no association. While an 81% increased risk sounds like a high and definitive figure, it is probably best to wait for more conclusive research before cutting eggs out of your diet. There are existing dietary and lifestyle guidelines for reducing cancer risk, such as limiting your consumption of energy-dense foods such as meat and increasing your consumption of fruits, vegetables and wholegrains.

Links To The Headlines

Eating just three eggs a week 'increases chance of men getting prostate cancer'.�Daily Mail, September 30 2011

Prostate cancer linked to eggs, say researchers.�Daily Mirror, September 30 2011

Just 3 eggs a week ?raises the prostate cancer risk?.�Daily Express, September 30 2011

�

Links To Science

Richman EL, Kenfield SA, Stampfer MJ et al. Egg, red meat, and poultry intake and risk of lethal prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen-era: incidence and survival. Cancer Prevention Research, Published Online First September 19 2011

Source: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/09September/Pages/eggs-in-diet-prostate-cancer-risk.aspx

health care for women international mental health and women health fitness tips health tips for pregnant women

HIV vaccine passes phase 1 trial

The Daily Telegraph reported that a ?vaccine could reduce HIV to ?minor infection??. The news story reports on a phase I clinical trial that assessed the safety of a new HIV vaccine in a small group of people in Spain.

The researchers recruited 30 people who did not have HIV and gave 24 of them three injections of the new HIV vaccine, which was based on a smallpox vaccine. The other six people received placebo injections. The researchers followed the volunteers for 48 weeks.

The researchers found that the vaccine appeared to be well-tolerated over this time and there were no serious side effects. More than three-quarters of the volunteers had a detectable immune response to the vaccine. However, the primary aim of this preliminary study was to assess safety not effectiveness. It is not known whether the immune response caused by the vaccine would be sufficient to protect against HIV infection or to lower HIV levels in people who are already HIV positive. It is likely that further safety trials in a larger group of people will be performed before the effectiveness of this vaccine is assessed.

�

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from The Hospital Clinic-IDIBAPS, Barcelona, Spain, the CentroNacional de Biotecnologia, CSIC, Madrid, Spain and other Spanish, Swedish, Swiss and British research institutions. It was funded by three Spanish research foundations, FIPSE, FIS and HIVACAT.

The study was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal Vaccine.

The research was covered well by The Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail and the Daily Mirror, which all said that further tests would need to be carried out. The Daily Telegraph detailed what the researchers had said the next steps would be.

�

What kind of research was this?

This was a phase I clinical trial to assess the safety of an HIV/AIDS vaccine and how well it could provoke an immune response, which is a sign that a vaccine is having an effect. Phase I studies are studies that test the preliminary safety of a treatment in a small group of people. Often these types of studies do not have a control group. In this case, there were 24 people who received the vaccine and six who received a placebo. Importantly, this type of trial is not designed to test effectiveness and the researchers were not trying to assess how well the vaccine would protect people from contracting HIV. However, they did look at how strong the immune response to the vaccine was. Immune response is a marker for eventual success of the vaccine and a sign that the vaccine is having an effect.

The vaccine was based on a smallpox vaccine that had been adapted with HIV genes. The vaccine was called MVA-B. The idea was that the vaccine would prime the body to recognise HIV so that it would mount a rapid immune response. If used to treat people who have already contracted HIV, this would potentially allow the body to clear the HIV to levels that don?t cause disease. If used to prevent people from getting HIV, it would hopefully prevent the virus from entering cells in the first place.

�

What did the research involve?

The study was carried out in Spain. The researchers recruited 30 men and women who were free from HIV and at low risk of infection. The participants were between 18 and 55 years of age, and 24 were men. The participants had no history of a previous smallpox vaccination. The researchers randomly allocated six people to receive placebo and 24 people to receive the vaccine.

The 24 people received three injections of the vaccine into their muscle, and the control group received placebo injections. Both groups received these injections at the start of the study, after four weeks and after 16 weeks. The participants were then followed for 48 weeks.

The participants were asked to use an effective method of contraception with their partner from 14 days prior to the first vaccination until four months after the last one.

The primary endpoints (the measures considered to be most important by the researchers) were serious side effects and how well the body mounted an immune response. They looked, in particular, at a type of immune cell called a T-cell. The researchers also took into account less severe side effects and how well the body produced antibodies against the vaccine.

Screening for side effects was performed throughout the study. Blood tests were performed at the study start and at weeks four, eight, 16, 20 and 48. The participants were given safe sex counselling and an HIV test at the screening interview and at weeks four, 16 and 48.

�

What were the basic results?

The researchers said that, overall, the vaccine was well-tolerated. A total of 169 adverse events were reported during follow-up. Five of these were grade-three adverse events, which would be considered serious. However, although the five serious adverse events were all in the vaccination group, these were not considered to be related to the study drug. For example, one volunteer had tonsillitis, one volunteer had a traffic accident, one volunteer had both pneumonia and two asthmatic attacks. Of the 145 reported milder adverse events (grade one and two), 52 were considered to be definitely related to the vaccination. The most common mild adverse events were pain at the site of the injection and headaches.

The researchers found that positive T-cell immune responses were detected in 75% of volunteers and that these were maintained until week 48 in 68% of the participants. The proportion of responders increased after the second dose. Ninety-five per cent of the participants had antibodies against the vaccine at week 18 and 72% had antibodies at week 48.

�

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers say that in this first phase I trial with the HIV/AIDS vaccine candidate MVA-B in healthy volunteers the vaccine was safe and well-tolerated and elicited strong and durable T-cell responses in 75% of volunteers. They say that their data support further exploration of MVA-B as an HIV vaccine candidate.

�

Conclusion

This phase I trial showed that this HIV vaccine was well-tolerated and did not lead to serious adverse effects in a small group of healthy volunteers. The vaccine was also shown to cause a T-cell immune response in 75% of the 24 participants and to cause antibody responses in 95%.

These results are encouraging and will probably mean that the researchers go on to look at safety and immune response to this vaccine in a larger group of people. There are two potential ways in which vaccines could be used to fight HIV. A vaccine may either be used as a prophylactic to stop people being infected with the virus, or therapeutically, to help the body to lower HIV levels once a person has already been infected. The aim of therapeutic use would be to reduce disease symptoms.

This study did not look at the effectiveness of the vaccine, including how well it could protect against infection with HIV or lower HIV levels in the body of people already infected.

Further research is needed to test the vaccine in these two areas - preventing HIV infection or reducing the number of virus particles in infected people. Also, other studies are looking at potential HIV vaccines, and research will be needed to test how well this vaccine compares to these.

Links To The Headlines

New HIV vaccine could turn deadly condition into 'minor infection like herpes'.�The Daily Telegraph, September 29 2011

Vaccine could reduce HIV to 'minor infection'.�The Daily Telegraph, September 29 2011

HIV vaccine could turn condition into "minor chronic infection" like herpes, experts claim.�Daily Mirror, September 29 2011

Links To Science

Garc�a F, L�pez Bernaldo de Quir�s JC, G�mez CE, et al.�Safety and immunogenicity of a modified pox vector-based HIV/AIDS vaccine candidate expressing Env, Gag, Pol and Nef proteins of HIV-1 subtype B (MVA-B) in healthy HIV-1-uninfected volunteers: A phase I clinical trial (RISVAC02). Vaccine 2011 [Available via ScienceDirect]

Source: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/09September/Pages/hiv-vaccine-phase-1-trial.aspx

health for women women health specialist health and women women health associates

Down Syndrome Brings Joy, Not Regrets, for Many Families

By Amanda Gardner
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, Sept. 30 (HealthDay News) -- Louise Borke learned that her infant son had Down Syndrome when he was just a few days old.

Her reaction? "Shock and surprise, trepidation and anxiety," she recalls.

Today, 22 years later, Borke can look back at life with her son, Louis Sciuto, and say, "It's been fun. It's had its challenges -- I won't deny that -- but it's been fun. It's been rewarding and I have no regrets."

Borke is not alone in her views.

In a series of recently completed surveys, 96 percent of parents expressed no regrets about having a child with Down Syndrome and nearly eight out of 10 said the child had enhanced their lives by teaching them patience, acceptance and flexibility, among other things.

Siblings had similar feelings, with 94 percent feeling "pride" about their sibling and 88 percent saying the sibling had made them a "better person."

And virtually all people with Down Syndrome who were queried said they were happy with their lives and liked who they are.

"The voices we heard were very satisfied and very positive about their lives despite the fact that they have real challenges," said Dr. Brian Skotko, who conducted the surveys, which appear in the October issue of the American Journal of Medical Genetics.

Skotko, a physician with the Down Syndrome Program at Children's Hospital Boston, hopes the results will help families make decisions regarding their unborn babies, especially as prenatal tests become more widely available.

Right now, prenatal tests for Down Syndrome run the risk of miscarriage and only about 2 percent of women actually get tested.

But new, virtually risk-free blood tests are about to hit the market and Skotko wanted to make sure that parents grappling with this "complex, sensitive, difficult decision" had good information to go by.

No one knows exactly how many women who learn their baby will have Down Syndrome through prenatal testing opt to terminate their pregnancies. But small, selected studies suggest the numbers could be as high as 80 percent to 90 percent.

"Once everyone has the opportunity to learn prenatally with a simple blood test, what decisions will Americans make about pregnancies and will babies with Down Syndrome slowly start to disappear?" said Skotko. "People with Down Syndrome should be able to describe for Americans what it means to have the condition."

Julie Cevallos, vice president of marketing for the National Down Syndrome Society (NDSS), said, "This research is a great new development. What's particularly exciting is that you're hearing from families and siblings and self-advocates directly.

"The more information and the more accurate information coming straight from families [the better]. Sometimes there's inaccurate information out there, or just stereotypes," added Cevallos, who's 2-year-old daughter, Nina, has Down Syndrome.

Skotko, who is an NDSS board member, has a 32-year-old sister who has Down Syndrome. "She has an active and robust social life, more than I ever had," she related.

As for Louis Sciuto, Borke said that he has just landed a job at Target and also has an active social live, keeping up with the latest movies, playing sports and double-dating with friends.

What would she tell parents who have learned their child may have Down Syndrome? "I would tell them don't be afraid. It's different but it's not worse. Louis has had friends whose parents have told me that they believe their children are better people for having known Louis."

Copyright � 2011 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

SOURCES: Brian Skotko, M.D., physician, Down Syndrome Program, Childrens Hospital Boston; Louise Borke, North Andover, Mass.; Julie Cevallos, vice president, marketing, National Down Syndrome Society, New York City; October 2011, American Journal of Medical Genetics

Source: http://www.medicinenet.com/guide.asp?s=rss&a=150010&k=Womens_Health_General

www.womens-health.co.uk health forums for women www.womens-health-concern.org health care women

Glee Season Premiere Is Tonight! WH Talks to Lea Michele And Heather Morris

health:�blog�

GLEE SEASON 3

Susan Rinkunas

Attention Gleeks: Season 3 of Glee kicks off tonight at 8/7 central on Fox! In honor of the highly anticipated premiere, we revisited WH's interviews with two of the show's leading ladies!

The Broadway Veteran
Lea Michele plays Rachel Berry, the star singer of William McKinley High School's glee club, New Directions. Lea?a Broadway veteran whose credits include Les Mis�rables, Fiddler on the Roof, and Spring Awakening?appeared on our cover in June 2010 (left, above).

The Bronx native stays in shape with rock climbing, hiking, and yoga. She switches between vegan and macrobiotic diets, so she eats fish, but no other animal products. Her favorite indulgences? "I love organic wine and dark chocolate!"

Video: Go behind the scenes with Lea Michele at her WH cover shoot!

The Dancing Queen
Heather Morris, who graced our June 2011 cover, plays Cheerio [cheerleader] Brittany Pierce. Fun fact: As a former backup dancer for Beyonce, Heather was initially called in to teach the cast the "Single Ladies" choreography, only to be hired for a small role on the show.

"Between takes, Heather would do these hysterical impersonations," recalls Zach Woodlee, Glee coproducer and choreographer. "The writers began to latch on to her, and that's how [Brittany] came to be a speaking part."

Heather, who grew up in Scottsdale, Arizona, still takes dance classes, mostly because they keep her mentally tough. She also loves piloxing, a turbo-charged interval program that combines Pilates, boxing, and dance moves. "I went to Piloxing before the Golden Globes because I'm crazy!" she explains with a laugh. "I was wearing a skintight dress, and I wanted to look hot."

Video: Go behind the scenes with Heather Morris at her WH cover shoot!

Tell us: Which female cast member of Glee would you like us to interview next?

RELATED: Get the Dancer's Body Workout!

Last Updated: September 20, 2011 - 5:11pm

• Average User Rating:
• *
• *
• *
• *
• *

Source: http://www.womenshealthmag.com/health/glee-season-3

women reproductive health issues women health check up women to women health care women health and fitness

[CDC, Office of Women's Health, Health Matters for Women] September is Gynecologic Cancer Awareness Month

In the United States in 2007,* 80,976 women were told that they had a gynecologic cancer, and 27,739 died from a gynecologic cancer.? CDC provides information and educational materials for women and health care providers to raise awareness about the five main gynecologic cancers (cervical, ovarian, uterine, vaginal, and vulvar).

*Latest year for which statistics are available. ?Source: USCS.

Features

Free or Low-Cost Pap Tests
The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program offers low-cost breast and cervical cancer screening to low-income, uninsured, and underinsured women.

New Educational Materials
The Inside Knowledge campaign has developed new fact sheets, posters, a comprehensive brochure, and more.

Gynecologic Cancer Research

?Be Brave? Video with Jenny Allen

You need the Flash plugin to view this video.

Source: http://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/download.asp?af=h&f=8620933

health and fitness women health clubs for women pregnancy health issues health and fitness for women

New radiation drug for cancer tested

Several newspapers reported today on a new cancer treatment. The reports said that trials of the new radioactive treatment have been so successful they have been stopped early as it would have been unethical not to offer all the patients the treatment.

The news stories are based on a phase three trial, the results of which have been presented at a conference in Stockholm. The results show that giving a drug called alpharadin to patients with advanced prostate cancer that had spread to their bones, increased the average survival (median) from 11.2 months to 14 months.

Alpharadin is made of a substance called radium 223-chloride and emits alpha particles of radiation - an extremely damaging type of radiation. Alpharadin travels to areas of high bone growth: in this case, the cancer growing in bones.

The increase in survival of the patients treated with alpharadin is significant. This was a phase 3 trial, a stage at which researchers test the safety and efficacy (how well it works)�of a drug�in a large population.

Importantly, these results are yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, and the treatment has not yet been approved by any regulatory authority so it is difficult to say when alpharadin might be available.

�

What are these news reports based on?

This article is based on a press release from Algeta ASA the pharmaceutical company that makes alpharadin. The trial is called the ALSYMPCA trial (Alpharadin in Symptomatic Prostate Cancer patients), the results of which were presented at the 2011 European Multidisciplinary Cancer Congress on September 24.

The treatment is being developed by Algeta ASA in collaboration with another pharmaceutical company Bayer Pharma AG, as well as researchers from the Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital. The story was covered by a number of news sources, including the BBC, The Telegraph and The Mail.

�

What is alpharadin and what is it for?

Alpharadin is the name for radium-233 chloride, and is a radioactive substance developed for the treatment of bone tumours. It admits alpha particles of radiation, which are damaging but cannot penetrate very far into the body (only a few cells deep). This means that they cause a lot of damage but only to a small area.

Alpharadin behaves in the body in a similar manner to calcium in the bone, and therefore accumulates in areas of high bone turnover, such as in the growth of a tumour. This means�it can be used to target bone tumours while only causing minimal damage to surrounding tissue.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the UK, and is the second most common cause of cancer death in men after lung cancer. Hormonal therapies are initially effective in 80% of men with metastatic prostate cancer, but after about 18 months, the disease usually doesn?t respond to hormone treatment and progresses.

The majority of men with unresponsive prostate cancer have cancer that has spread to their bones, where it can cause bone pain, fractures and other complications. Tumours in the bone are the main cause of disability and death in patients with prostate cancer resistant to hormonal therapy.

�

What did the trial involve?

This international study was a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial at 138 centres in 19 countries. All the participants had advanced prostate cancer that was no longer sensitive to hormonal therapy (the current first line of treatment for advanced prostate cancer). The patients also couldn?t be given docetaxel (the current treatment used when hormonal therapy has failed) as they were ineligible or had been found to be insensitive to it.

In all patients, the cancer had spread to their bones and was causing pain. The patients were split into two groups, and either given alpharadin in addition to standard care (615 individuals) or placebo and standard care (307 individuals).

�

What did the trial find?

The main result of the trial was the improved overall survival of patients in the alpharadin group. The median overall survival was 14 months for the alpharadin group and 11.2 months for the placebo group. The researchers say that the study met its primary endpoint by significantly improving survival by 44% (hazard ratio (HR)=0.695; p=0.00185).

The overall incidence of side effects was lower with alpharadin than with placebo, and patients receiving alpharadin had less bone pain (43% versus 58% on placebo). Following analysis of the results at a planned mid-point of the trial, the trial was stopped and unblinded on ethical reasons, and all participants offered alpharadin.

�

When might alpharadin be available?

The manufacturers will have to submit the complete results of the trial to the regulators (the Europeans Medicine Agency) before alpharadin can be approved for marketing. The efficacy and safety of alphradin will have to be assessed in detail. Until further information is available, it is difficult to say when alpharadin might be available.

The spread of cancer to bone occurs frequently in certain late-stage cancers, such as prostate (eventually affecting 75-90% of patients), breast (affecting up to 75% of patients) and lung (affecting up to 40% of patients). This treatment, if approved, may be able to improve survival, and decrease the decline in health and quality of life. However, this study only investigated the effect in men with advanced prostate cancer that had spread to their bones.

Links To The Headlines

Early success in cancer drug trial gives patients 'promising' future.�The Daily Telegraph, September 26 2011

Hope for prostate cancer patients as pioneering drug proves so successful they have already stopped the trials.�Daily Mail, September 26 2011

Alpha radiation treats prostate cancers.�BBC News, September 26 2011

Source: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/09September/Pages/alpha-radiation-drug-prostate-cancer.aspx

health care for women womens-health.co.uk black women health male health issues

[CDC, Office of Women's Health, Health Matters for Women] September is Gynecologic Cancer Awareness Month

In the United States in 2007,* 80,976 women were told that they had a gynecologic cancer, and 27,739 died from a gynecologic cancer.? CDC provides information and educational materials for women and health care providers to raise awareness about the five main gynecologic cancers (cervical, ovarian, uterine, vaginal, and vulvar).

*Latest year for which statistics are available. ?Source: USCS.

Features

Free or Low-Cost Pap Tests
The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program offers low-cost breast and cervical cancer screening to low-income, uninsured, and underinsured women.

New Educational Materials
The Inside Knowledge campaign has developed new fact sheets, posters, a comprehensive brochure, and more.

Gynecologic Cancer Research

?Be Brave? Video with Jenny Allen

You need the Flash plugin to view this video.

Source: http://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/download.asp?af=h&f=8620933

women and health journal womens health products women health club health questions for women