risk of cancer

  •  

    Cellular Aging and the Development of Cancer

    With: Kaumudi Bhawe, PhD

    Cancer is so often a disease of older people that a whole medical field, “oncogeriatrics,” exists to address the topic. Deeper understanding of the links between cancer and aging could lead to better treatments. Here, our Curious Dr. George asks Cancer Commons Clinical Scientist Kaumudi Bhawe, PhD, about the relationship between cancer and aging processes that occur in individual cells in our bodies—throughout our… Read more »

  •   Lola Rahib, PhD

    Article from Let’s Win! Pancreatic Cancer: Learn about eReach, a study investigating whether telehealth can provide improved access to genetic testing for people at risk for cancer.

    .

  •  

    Rankings of Most Common and Deadly Cancer Types Will Shift Over Next Two Decades

    In the next two decades, rankings of incidence and death across cancer types will undergo important changes in the U.S., according to new research led by Lola Rahib, PhD, Director of Scientific and Clinical Affairs at Cancer Commons, as well as the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN) in collaboration with The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Published today in JAMA Network Open,… Read more »

  •   George Lundberg, MD

    Research paper from Cureus curated by Editor in Chief George Lundberg, MD, who notes: 

    Breast cancer in men is unusual but important. This academic paper outlines the case of a specific patient who was found to have a genetic mutation that could explain why he was diagnosed at a relatively younger age.

    Go to full paper published in Cureus.

    If you’re wondering whether this story applies to your own cancer case or a loved one’s, we invite you to get support from Cancer Commons.

  •   George Lundberg, MD

    A Q&A with Alan Blum, MD, who founded the Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society in 1999 at The University of Alabama, where he serves as Professor and Gerald Leon Wallace, MD, Endowed Chair in Family Medicine. Email: ablum@ua.edu

    Q: Inhalation of carcinogens and other harmful chemicals in tobacco smoke is responsible for more American deaths—especially from cancer—than any other one factor. Nicotine addiction is central to that pathologic process. The relatively recent invention of the e-cigarette seemed to offer great hope as an alternative nicotine-delivery device that most likely did not cause cancer, and could prevent nicotine addicts from having to smoke. Yet, the “unintended” consequence of masses of new young nicotine addicts produced by unregulated for-profit vaping companies has created a new public health disaster. How might the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have better managed this threat?

    A: In 2009, Congress passed a bill giving the FDA the authority to regulate tobacco products. When the treacly named Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was signed by President Obama, the bill’s proponents—notably, the Washington lobbying group Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids—touted it as a long-awaited defeat for Big Tobacco. When it was revealed that the Campaign had secretly co-written the bill with Altria, maker of the top-selling cigarette Marlboro, we realized that the brand’s iconic cowboy wouldn’t be riding off into the sunset just yet.

    But few could have predicted that the efforts to protect Americans from the harmfulness of tobacco would become more confused and convoluted by adding it to the FDA’s portfolio.

    Because the FDA is the nation’s watchdog over medications and medical devices, a provision in the 2009 bill distinguishes drugs and devices from tobacco products, in order to prevent duplicative regulation by different centers within the FDA. And therein lies the origin of the unfettered explosion of vaping—the inhaling of a heated, flavored nicotine solution from an e-cigarette or other device: in their eagerness to get the FDA bill passed, Senate Democrats rejected a Republican amendment to regulate e-cigarettes as tobacco products and deliberately left them out of the bill. After all, proponents reasoned, e-cigarettes were new and expensive, and they were manufactured by just a handful of companies. The proponents also counted on using a provision of the bill in which the FDA could “deem” as tobacco products both e-cigarettes as well as future nicotine-containing products that regulators couldn’t yet envision.

    But a not-so-funny thing happened. While the FDA hemmed and hawed about these new-fangled electronic nicotine delivery systems (now called ENDS), hundreds of manufacturers entered the market, costs dramatically dropped, and e-cigarettes could be purchased at any convenience store for the price of a pack of Marlboros.

    Finally, in 2016, the FDA issued its deeming rule that included e-cigarettes as tobacco products subject to the agency’s regulatory authority. In July 2019, a U.S. District Court in Maryland upheld the FDA’s rule. Meanwhile, products such as the Juul e-cigarette, craftily designed to resemble a USB drive and promoted through social media to the wired generation, became an essential accoutrement of high school and college students. That Juul was also engineered to deliver nicotine more rapidly than any previous e-cigarette—and came in appealing flavors such as mango and mint—contributed to its capturing 75% of the e-cigarette market just three years after it was introduced in 2014.

    In December 2018, Altria paid $12.8 billion for a 35% stake in Juul Labs, Inc. At the same time, the vape shop industry burgeoned, as did online sellers of e-liquids and paraphernalia aimed at a counter-culture that rejected commercial products. The legalization and commercialization of marijuana by several states also led to the proliferation of e-cannabis with THC-containing e-liquids. This in turn has resulted in an outbreak of vaping-related pulmonary illness in 2019, causing more than 40 deaths and sickening more than 2100 users of electronic vaping devices.

    Thus, the FDA lost a full decade in which it could have required manufacturer registration and ingredient-reporting, inspected e-liquid-making facilities, and acted against adulterated or misbranded products. Lost, too, was the opportunity to slow the introduction of e-cigarettes, to temper so-called harm reduction health claims about these products compared to cigarettes, to verify their value in smoking cessation, and to thwart their marketing to young people.

    ***

    Copyright: This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

  •   George Lundberg, MD

    Research paper from EClinicalMedicine curated by Editor in Chief George Lundberg, MD, who notes: 

    People who survive after treatment for childhood cancers have a greatly increased likelihood of developing a second cancer, with younger patients at greatest risk.

    Go to full paper published in EClinicalMedicine.

    If you’re wondering whether this story applies to your own cancer case or a loved one’s, we invite you to get support from Cancer Commons.