NEW VERSION OF TEST FOR CANCER-CAUSING AGENTS NEEDS NO ANIMALS

A new version of a popular test for cancer-causing agents is cheaper, more sensitive and, best of all, animal-free, thanks to a U of G researcher. Prof. David Josephy, Chemistry and Biochemistry, has developed a way of testing substances for cancer-causing potential without using animal tissue. Instead, his version of the Ames test involves gene splicing.

“Nobody has figured a way around using animals until now,” says Josephy. “We hope that no more animals will have to die for the sake of the Ames test.” Two decades ago, the Ames test (named after inventor Bruce Ames, a bacterial geneticist from the University of California at Berkeley) was heralded as a breakthrough in cancer research. Ames’s goal was to eliminate the use of animals in tests for cancer-causing or “mutagenic” agents.

In his efforts to put an end to animal use, Ames came up with a way to use animal tissue for his tests, rather than the whole animal. In animals, cancer-causing agents are inactive until they’re chemically changed or “metabolized” by certain enzymes. When they’re changed, they become dangerous because they’re converted into different forms of chemicals.

Ames chose rodent liver extracts for his test because the liver contains more metabolic enzymes than other organs do. In a test tube, he combined liver cells and bacteria. He used bacteria because they’re so small that billions of cells can be affected by the mutagen in one test, making results easier to observe. When a potential cancer-causing agent is introduced into the test tube, it’s metabolized by the enzymes in the liver and causes DNA damage or mutations to the bacterial cells. DNA damage mutates cells, which results in cancer in animals.

The test has enabled researchers to identify carcinogens such as the charring on burnt food and a chemical used to fireproof children’s pyjamas, which was banned after the discovery was made. The Ames test used only a portion of a rodent’s liver. That meant it reduced the use of animals needed to detect suspected mutagens because one liver provided enough material for hundreds of tests. With the Ames test, mutagen-detection laboratories need to use only a few dozen rodent livers each year instead of the thousands of animals that lifetime feeding tests would require.

Now Josephy has taken that a step further. He has completely eliminated the need for animals to be involved. In the last few years, researchers have identified the gene — called P4501A2 — that makes the enzyme needed to metabolize carcinogens so they become mutagenic. Different enzymes metabolize different carcinogens; the enzyme P4501A2 metabolizes one class of compounds called aromatic amines, the carcinogens in charred material.

Josephy spliced the P4501A2 gene into the bacterial cell responsible for producing the metabolizing enzyme that identifies it as a mutagen. By splicing the gene into the bacteria, he’s made it possible for the bacteria to produce the required enzyme, so that no rat liver is needed. As a result, when potential mutagenic chemicals are introduced, the bacteria are a complete mutagen-detecting package  in themselves.

Josephy has installed a clone of the human P4501A2 gene into the bacteria to make the test even more representative of human metabolism. The cloned human genes come from Peter Guengerich, a collaborator at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville. “It means we can do a much more sophisticated mutagen analysis than we could in the past,” says Josephy. “We’re fulfilling Ames’s goal.” This work is sponsored by the National Cancer Institute of Canada and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council.

 

Male breast cancers ‘more common’

More men are developing breast cancer – but most fail to spot tumours until they are at an advanced stage, a study has warned. University of Texas research found that, while men are far less likely to develop breast tumours than women, the numbers are increasing. Writing in an online edition of the journal Cancer, they warn men seem to be unaware they can develop the cancer.

UK experts said the cancer was rare, but men should be aware of changes. It is important to visit your GP straight away if you notice any change in your body that is not normal Henry Scowcroft, Cancer Research UK The researchers looked at a National Cancer Institute data on cancer incidence and survival in the US from 1973 to 1998. They found that, over the last 20 years, the incidence of male breast cancer had increased from 0.86 to 1.08 per 100,000 men. They then examined 2,524 cases of male breast cancer and 380,856 cases of female breast cancer on the database, diagnosed over that period. The researchers found that compared to female patients, men tended to be significantly older when they were diagnosed – 67 years versus 62 years of age.

They were also more likely to have later stage disease and had more spread of the cancer to their lymph nodes. ‘Easier to spot’ Professor Sharon Giordano, who led the research, said: “Male breast cancer is rare, accounting for less than one per cent of all breast cancer. “But she said: “Men should be alert to the possibility that the disease could affect them.” Professor Giordano added: “It’s perhaps ironic that tumours in men are easier to feel than they are in women, yet the disease is being discovered at a later stage in men than in women.” The researchers say that part of the reason for late diagnosis may be that men assume they are experiencing a benign condition called gynecomastia, or breast tissue growth, that affects about a third of males at some point in their lives.

The condition, which is common in teenage boys, can come and go over a man’s lifetime. Professor Giordano said: “Men may think new growth of breast tissue is just another occurrence of this condition.” The team also found that men often had more larger tumours which had spread further and more aggressive forms of cancer when they were diagnosed.However, survival rates for men and women were no different. The researchers said men were more likely than women to have oestrogen-positive tumours. Professor Giordano: “We are not sure why this is so, but it may indicate some important differences in tumour biology.”In addition, this implies that use of tamoxifen in men may be as beneficial as it is to many women.” She added: “Now that we have a clearer understanding of the biology of breast cancer in men, further research is needed to determine the optimal treatment for men.”

‘Campaigns aimed at women’

Henry Scowcroft, Science Information Officer at Cancer Research UK said: “Breast cancer is very rare among UK men, and when it does occur, it tends to do so between the ages of 60 and 70.”Only about 300 men are diagnosed with the disease each year, compared with about 41,000 new cases in women. Because of this, most breast cancer awareness campaigns are aimed at women. “While Cancer Research UK does not recommend that men, especially young men, examine themselves regularly, it is important to visit your GP straight away if you notice any change in your body that is not
normal.”

 

Postage Stamp to Raise Money for Cancer Research

LOS ANGELES- the Postal Service unveiled the design of the Breast Cancer Research “Semipostal” Stamp, here, at the Revlon Run and Walk for Women on May 9th. A nationwide issuance of this  self-adhesive stamp begins in early August.

As a 40 cent “semipostal,” the Breast Cancer Research stamp will be deemed valid for postage at the prevailing First Class Rate, currently 32 cents, with the extra 8 cents going to fund medical research at the National Institutes of Health (70 percent) and Department of Defense (30 percent).

The background of the vertically formatted stamp design features blue,yellow, orange, and green washes of watercolor.  Along the top are the words, “breast cancer” in capital letters.  A black ink drawing of a female figure is the main element, while the phrases “fund the fight” and “find a cure” appear in capital letters flowing left to right into a clockwise, circular pattern.

The stamp was designed by Ethel Kessler, a breast cancer survivor, of Bethesda, MD, and illustrated by Whitney Sherman of Baltimore, MD. This is the first time in history that the U.S. Postal Service has issued a “semipostal” stamp.  It took an act of Congress after “grass roots” campaigning by several groups led by Dr. Ernie Bodai of Sacramento, CA, to get this unique postage stamp issued.

Among the thousands at the unveiling ceremony, was Mercy Davidchik of Yuba City, CA, who was one of the most active volunteer workers in raising public support and promoting legislation to issue the Breast Cancer Research Stamp.   It is hoped that through purchase of these stamps, millions of dollars will be raised for breast cancer research, which  is considered the most commonly diagnosed cancer among all women in the U.S.

 

Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamps

Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamps are subject to special limitations and conditions:
    a. Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamps provide a means for customers to make contributions toward breast cancer research. Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamps are offered for sale for a limited time as provided under 39 U.S.C. 414.
    b. The price of the Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamp is 40 cents. The postage value of the Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamp is the First-Class Mail Non automation Single-Piece first-ounce letter rate in R100.1.2 that is in effect at the time of purchase. The difference between the purchase price and the First-Class Mail Non automation Single-Piece first-ounce letter rate in effect at the time of purchase constitutes a contribution to breast cancer research, and cannot be used to pay postage. Additional postage must be affixed to pieces weighing in excess of one ounce, pieces subject to the nonstandard surcharge, or pieces for which special services have been elected. The postage value of Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamps is fixed according to the First-Class Mail Non automation Single-Piece first-ounce letter rate in effect at the time of purchase; the postage value of Breast Cancer Research Semi-postal Stamps purchased before any subsequent change in the First-Class Mail Non automation Single-Piece first-ounce letter rate is unaffected by any subsequent change in that rate.
    c. Contributions to breast cancer research made through purchase of Breast Cancer Research stamps are not refundable. The postage value of Breast Cancer Research stamps for purposes of exchange or conversion under P014 is determined by the First-Class Mail Non automation Single-
Piece rate in effect at the time of purchase

 

‘Green’ terrorists set back cancer research

What if the knowledge that scientists might have gained about the cancer-like tree disease referred to below could have led to a cure for human cancer?
As an environmentalist myself I know that the possibility that greater scientific knowledge of plants and their diseases may lead to breakthroughs in the treatment and even cures of many human and animal
diseases.

“This group is sick. They damaged a program that is for the good of everyone. We feel personally violated.” — Jud Isebrands, scientist at federal forestry research center near Rhinelander. Calling it “an attack against bio-engineering,” a group of radical environmentalists said it destroyed 500 research trees and spray-painted graffiti on vehicles at a federal forestry laboratory near Rhinelander, officials said Friday.

The Seattle-based North American Earth Liberation Front, an underground environmental activist organization, claimed responsibility for killing rare nursery stock worth $750,000 and vandalizing eight vehicles at a research station run by the U.S. Forestry Sciences Laboratory. Using saws and machetes to cut down the trees, and then trampling on them, the group short-circuited a 30-year project aimed at finding a cure for a cancer-like disease that attacks poplar trees, said Jud Isebrands, a scientist at the facility.

In the Thursday night attack, the group painted large green-and-black slogans on automobiles that warned: “ELF is watching the U.S. Forest Service.” The group also spread acid on windshields, Isebrands said. Damage to vehicles was estimated at $20,000, he said. The ELF, which has claimed responsibility for 13 attacks causing $31 million in damages over the last six years, opposes manipulating genetic matter in plants and animals, said Craig Rosebraugh, the group’s spokesman.

At least four separate anti-bio-engineering groups have carried out more than 30 attacks this year at facilities that included strawberry and sugar beet fields in California, cornfields in Maine and a grass field in Oregon. But researchers at the Rhinelander nursery had not used bio- engineering methods on any of the trees that were destroyed, said Isebrands, a member of a team working to find a cure for septoria canker, a disease that forms tumor-like swellings on poplar trees, causing millions of dollars in damage nationwide.

“This was not bio-technology,” Isebrands said. “All of our work was done using traditional plant-breeding techniques that have been around for years. We simply took a genetically superior tree and matched it with another tree. Then you just hope to get a better plant.” Besides poplars, the attackers destroyed young red oaks and other tree species.

“This group is sick,” Isebrands said. “They damaged a program that is for the good of everyone. We feel personally violated. We run this area like a public park. It’s open to everyone. We don’t want to put razor wire around here.” The attack set back the research project by 10 to 15 years, Isebrands said. About 10 members of the research team had been preparing stock that requires about 10 years for each generation to mature before scientists can move on to the next phase.

ELF has taken credit for six similar attacks this year, including a New Year’s Eve incident involving a suite of offices at the Michigan State University’s Agriculture Hall. “ELF is definitely stepping up its actions,” Rosebraugh said. Rosebraugh said he was not a member of the group, but he received information from members, who remained anonymous.

ELF members work in small cells, he said, and members do not know the identity of members in other cells. The Wisconsin attack probably identity of members in other cells. The Wisconsin attack probably was conducted by members from outside the state, he said. To avoid getting caught, members rarely conduct attacks in their home states, he said.

2000CRE1167C BREAST CANCER RESEARCH STAMP REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2000

Mr. LAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the bill entitled the Breast Cancer Research Stamps Reauthorization Act of 2000.
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women in the United States. More than 2 million American women are currently living with the disease, 1 million of whom have yet to be diagnosed. This year alone, 182,800 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer. Over 40,000 of them will lose their battle with this killer.
Breast cancer has taken an awful toll on the people of my home state. New York has the second-highest breast cancer mortality rate in the country. Between 1980 and 1994, the incidence of breast cancer in New York increased nearly 18 percent. Enactment of this bill will go a long way toward helping our effort to increase funding for breast cancer research. Only through the help of continued cancer research have more and more people become cancer survivors in recent years.
Since the issuance of the Breast Cancer Research stamp in the summer of 1998, 164 million Breast Cancer Research stamps have been sold rising over $12 million for breast cancer research. The stamp provides a convenient avenue for participation in the battle against this horrible disease. Unfortunately, without congressional intervention, the stamp will expire on July 28, 2000. Valuable research funds, as well as a mechanism to heighten public awareness of this horrible disease, will be lost.
This bill, The Breast Cancer Research Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2000 would extend the sale of the Breast Cancer Research stamp for an additional two years. The stamp would continue to cost 40 cents and sell as a first class stamp. The additional funds that are raised will go directly to breast cancer research at the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense.
I am pleased to report that this reauthorization bill has tremendous support throughout the health community. Supporters of the Breast Cancer Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2000 include the American Cancer Society, the American Medical Association, the Y-Me National Breast Cancer Organization, Leadership America, the National Association of Women’s Health, the American Cancer League, the American College of Surgeons, Friends of Cancer Research, and many others.
A Breast Cancer Research Stamp remains just as necessary today as it was when this authority was signed into law two years ago. According to the American Association for Cancer Research, 8 million people are alive today as a result of cancer research. To say that every dollar we continue to raise will save lives, can only underscore the importance of this legislation.
I urge my colleagues to join me in enacting this important legislation.

 

Run for breast cancer research

I am not sure if you have or haven’t heard about this.  Next summer there will be a cross-Canada run that will be in the fund-rasing spirit for fighting breast cancer.  Janet Blades proposed thata similar venture be taken in the US as well, at the same time as the Canada run.  I responded, but alas I am inundated with school and cannot be of any use it seems.  So I will pass the word on, and any brave souls wishing to take up this cause may do so.  Please email me or Janet (I don’t think she’ll mind – if she does blame me) about any questions, but Janet’s the one to really turn to for answers.

I imported my proposal that I sent to the Canadian Cancer Society to the E-Mail, however, it’s tabs are out of whack, but you can get the idea. Try contacting a breast cancer research place, or the American Cancer Society or whoever, with a proposal of your own. Basically our accommodations are with the van (motor home thing) and food I will cover as I have to eat anyway!

There is a lot of work to be done, including trying to find sponsorship for the event, believe me, this is difficult.  However, you have a lot going for you.  You are in University; therefore you have a lot of people you can approach for help.  Try to form a committee as no-one can do it all alone. Decide on a route, find State Coordinators, who will in turn find county coords, who will in turn find runners, you hope.

There has been some interest through the rec.running.  If you decide that you can do this, post it.  If you decide that you’d love to help somebody else coordinate it, post that too, you never know, someone may want to do it but is scared of all of the responsibility/time etc. it would take.  Team work is the best thing to go for.  Because you’re in university, you could contact Universities in each state that you plan on going through for help.

See what you want to do before you go ahead it’s a big undertaking, but would look fantastic on a resume!!!! If you post your interest in the rec.running, you not only get potential coordinators, you get folks who want to run for a full day, I even got a guy who wants to be the sole runner for the whole event.  This is nice, but it defeats the purpose of reaching out to people, uniting the country in a common goal, spreading the word on breast cancer.

 

Prostate Cancer – DO THIS!!

Help Make Prostate Cancer Research a National Health Priority!

Congress is back in session.  Right now, you’re Representative and Senators are starting consideration of critical legislation that will determine the level of funding for prostate cancer research.  Tell them it’s time to dramatically increase the federal commitment to prostate cancer research.

Prostate cancer research is critical to the health of millions of American men.  Since this year 40,000 men will die from prostate cancer and 200,000 will be diagnosed with the disease, prostate cancer research is more important than ever.  While 20 percent of all non-skin cancers diagnosed in the U.S. are for prostate cancer, less than 4 percent of federal cancer research funds go to prostate cancer.

The Clinton Administration has proposed to increase federal funding for cancer research by 65 percent over the next five years.  Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has also called for major increases in biomedical research.  Vice President Gore recently commented that scientists are “right on the verge” of major breakthroughs in cancer research.  But Congress needs to pass legislation that boosts federal spending for cancer research — and needs to provide significant increases specific to prostate cancer research.  We need your help make sure Congress gives prostate cancer research its fair share.

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among American men and the leading cause of cancer for all Americans. Prostate cancer accounts for 30 percent of all cancers among American men and — last year alone — more than 200,000 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer and 41,800 men died from this disease.

It is clear the federal commitment to prostate cancer research must be increased. Even though prostate cancer accounts for approximately 20 percent of all new non-skin cancers, it receives less than four percent of all federal cancer research dollars. In 1997 more than $250 million in worthwhile prostate cancer research was not conducted simply due to lack of resources.

Research for all diseases must be increased, but particularly research specific to prostate cancer. Although the number of annual deaths are about the same, the federal research commitment to prostate cancer is less than 1/15 that for AIDS and 1/6 that for breast cancer.

It is critical that there be a dramatic increase in prostate cancer research funding that is commensurate with the toll it takes on men and their families.  Support equity for federally funded prostate cancer
research.

 

 

Prostate cancer research 10years behind breast cancer research

Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital has been selected to take part in what doctors said is a promising 10-year national study on whether vitamin supplements can help prevent prostate cancer, the second leading cause of death for men.

The research project is funded as part of a National Cancer Institute study that involves tracking the health of 32,000 men, some of whom will be taking supplements of Vitamin E and selenium, a sulfur-like chemical that occurs naturally in fresh produce. It will be the largest ever study of prostate cancer prevention. “This is the way we make progress against cancer,” said Tish Murphy, a nurse and research program manager.

The cancer research center is currently conducting about 60 other clinical trials involving lung, breast, colon and lymphoma cancer. However, officials say this one is intriguing because prostate cancer is regarded as one of the most preventable and treatable of all cancers. “In prostate cancer research, we are 10 years behind the level where we are today in breast cancer research,” said Dr. Wayne Keiser, an oncologist and principal investigator of program research.

After lung cancer, prostate cancer is the leading cause of death among American men. Cancer of the prostate gland, which controls the flow of urine, has been found to be more common in men over 55, in families with histories of prostate cancer, among blacks, and among heavy smokers and drinkers.

About 200,000 new cases of prostate cancer are diagnosed every year, and more than 30,000 prostate cancer deaths are reported annually. There is increasing evidence from less extensive clinical trials that Vitamin E and selenium reduce the incidence of prostate cancer. In addition, an increasing number of urologists are prescribing supplements such as Vitamin E, selenium and saw palmetto to men concerned about prostate health. The cancer research program run by Santa Rosa Memorial is looking for about 40 men to participate in the study. The cancer center advertised last October for clinical trial participants and received about 100 inquiries. However, only 11 turned out to be eligible because many were excluded for various reasons, including the fact that they were already taking the dietary supplements and did not wish to stop.

Keiser said the proliferation of health information – particularly that available over the Internet – has made it more difficult for research programs like theirs to recruit participants. Clinical trials involve long-term commitments to taking prescribed dosages, including placebos, and medical information often supersedes trial results. “Doctors and patients want to have the best possible things, but there are times that things turn out to be the opposite of what we think,” Keiser said. “The truth is that we don’t know that Vitamin E or selenium work.”

Keiser cited the example of the weight-loss supplement ephedra, which was in common use long before clinical trials deemed it to be harmful. The Memorial Hospital cancer center on Round Barn Boulevard operates about 60 clinical trials and a dozen pharmaceutical trials under contract with the Redwood Regional Medical Group. The group of 30 oncologists and radiologists perform much of the cancer treatment in Sonoma, Marin, Mendocino and Lake Counties. Ann Lowry, cancer center research coordinator, said the program intends to place new advertisements for participants and seek help from local doctors.

 

INTEL AND SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY ANNOUNCE CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

I’m all for philanthropic efforts, but any problem in biotech or medicine which is solved (including the ones above) represents a source of profit for somebody. How are they going to pay back all those people who’ve donated their computer time? Is everybody involved truely going to pledge to pursue any answers which come this way, as a completely non-profit venture?  Who says so? Who guarantees so?

There has been a great deal of discussion on this point.  The upshot is that UD are doing this as a business, and are making a profit out of it in the usual way of business.  Oxford University et. al. are doing this as a research project with funding from charity.  They are buying the service from UD using voluntary contributions of computer time because this is a lot cheaper to them and their charities than buying big computer time.  UD are pretty strong on keeping commercial interests and non-profit apart, so there
is little risk of the resources provided for charity finding their way into commercial use.  I do not see this level of commerce as a reason not to contribute.  The level of profits made by UD is really a matter between them and the buyers of their service.  If Oxford thinks it’s OK then I’m happy enough.

I’m living with cancer and a participant in the UD/Intel project. I don’t care if the folks at UD make a few bucks.  I just hope the project is successful and lives are improved. Personally, I think the UD project is the beginning of a great new era in computing. Supercomputing has just become democratic (small d) and cheap.  The guys with the best ideas get the most MIPS. I was part of seti till the cancer project came along.  Now we have 100s of thousands of people donating MIPs to help someone they don’t know.  It makes me proud. It restores my faith that people actually care about others.