No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation by Survivor ~ for Survivor Message Forum

Terms of Use

nosurrender — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:31:03 GMT

DISCLAIMER,TERMS OF USE, WARRANTIES,
PRIVACY POLICY, RULES OF CONDUCT

YOUR PRIVACY

We take the issue of your privacy seriously. We pledge to never make available to any third party your personal information. We will never sell your name or email address to anyone.

NoSurrenderBreastCancerHelp.com (NSBCH) and The No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation (NSBCF) does not collect, distribute, or display personally identifiable information about visitors to our site except when such individuals specifically provide such information on a voluntary basis. The only personal User information found on the NSBCH/NSBCF site is that which has been voluntarily submitted by the User. All personal information is submitted at your own risk.

Personal information supplied by Users will not be sold or otherwise transferred to third parties without the User's prior consent. NSBCH/NSBCF may use voluntarily submitted information for customizing our site according to User interest. It is not possible or feasible to delete all traces of a User of the site. We in no way guarantee that all requested messages will be deleted. Users may also request deletion of personal profile information from our Profile pages.

Voluntary disclosure of personal information on Message Boards, Chat Room, Profile Pages, and other Public Access Forums (hereafter referred to as Public Access Forums), is done at the User's own risk. Users should be aware that when they disclose personally identifiable information such as their name, home or email address, or phone number on publicly accessible areas such as the message board, profile pages, or chat areas, that information can be collected and used by third parties and may result in unsolicited contact. NSBCH/NCBCF accepts no liability or responsibility for third-party use of information voluntarily submitted by User to Public Access Forums. NSBCH/NSBCF makes no warranties about third-party access to and use of Users' personal information by methods beyond our control.

DISCLAIMER

No Surrender Breast Cancer Help (NSBCH) the website of the No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation (NSBCF) maintains this website to provide information of a general nature about breast cancer. The information is intended for information purposes only. The materials on this website are not meant to be used for self-diagnosis or to replace the services of a medical professional. NSBCH/NSBCF is not engaged in rendering medical advice or recommendations.

THE CONTENT IS NOT INTENDED TO REPLACE PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL ADVICE. ALWAYS SEEK THE ADVICE OF YOUR PHYSICIAN, OR OTHER QUALIFIED HEALTH CARE PROVIDER WORKING WITH YOUR PHYSICIAN, WITH QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE REGARDING ANY MEDICAL CONDITION. THE CONTENT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE RELIED ON FOR MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS OR TREATMENT. NEVER DISREGARD MEDICAL ADVICE, OR DELAY SEEKING TREATMENT, BECAUSE OF INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE READ ON THE NSBCH/NSBCF OR ANY OF OUR LINKS.

Any specific diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, or treatment modalities including, but not limited to surgeries, medications, or products that may be mentioned are neither endorsed nor recommended by NSBCH/NSBCF. Any opinions expressed on the site are the opinions of the authors and are not necessarily the opinions of NSBCH/NSBCF.

Any information in the publications, messages, postings or articles on the website should not be considered a substitute for consultation with a medical professional to address individual medical needs. Your particular facts and circumstances will determine the treatment which is most appropriate for you.

COPYRIGHT AND LIMITATIONS OF USE

All information contained within the NSBCH/NSBCF website is the copyrighted property of No Surrender Breast Cancer Support and Help and the No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation. Reproduction, redistribution or modification of the information for any purpose is prohibited without the express written permission of NSBCH/NSBCF.

Names, trademarks, service marks and logos of NSBCH/NSBCF appearing on this website may not be used in any advertising or publicity, or otherwise to indicate NSBCH/NSBCF sponsorship of or affiliation with any product or service without express written permission.

The Content displayed on the website ("Content") is the property of NSBCH/NSBCF and is protected by copyright and other intellectual property laws. This website and the Content may be used by you only for your personal and non-commercial use. You agree not to copy, reproduce, modify, display, perform, publish, create derivative works from, or store any Content from the website.

You may, on an occasional and irregular basis, reproduce, distribute, display or transmit an insubstantial portion of the Content, for a noncommercial purpose and without charge, to a limited number of individuals, provided you include all copyright and other proprietary rights notices with such portion of the Content in the same form in which the notices appear at the website, the original source attribution, and the phrase "Used with permission from nosurrenderbreastcancerhelp.com./The No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation"

This website includes facts, views, opinions and recommendations of individuals and organizations deemed of interest about breast cancer. NSBCH/NSBCF and its Content licensors and providers are not giving medical or other professional advice. NSBCH/NSBCF and its Content licensors and providers do not guarantee or warrant the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of, or otherwise endorse, these views, opinions and recommendations. You should always seek the assistance of a medical or other healthcare professional for medical and other health matters.

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIABILITY.

Due to the number of sources from which the Content is obtained, and the inherent hazards of electronic distribution, there may be delays, errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in such Content and the website. The content and the website are provided "AS IS", without any warranties use of or reliance on the content and graphics at this website is at the users own risk.

Links to Third Party Sites.
As a convenience to you, this website contains links to websites operated by persons or entities other than NSBCH/NSBCF. Such links are provided for your reference and convenience only. You agree not to hold NSBCH/NSBCF responsible for the content or operation of such websites. A link or hyperlink from NSBCH/NSBCF to another website does not imply or mean that NSBCH/NSBCF endorses the content on that website or the operators or the operations of that website. NSBCH/NSBCF specifically disclaims responsibility for materials posted or activities that occur on linked sites.

Online Communications

Certain areas of the website enable you to access an online message board, Board, where you can participate in online communications. Such communications occur in real time and are not edited, censored, or otherwise controlled by NSBCH/NSBCF. NSBCH/NSBCF cannot and does not screen content provided by you or other users. NSBCH/NSBCF does not endorse, and specifically disclaims any responsibility or liability for any content posted on the Board, whether the topic is first selected by NSBCH/NSBCF or a user. The Board is a free service provided to users of NSBCH/NSBCF. By posting a message in the Board, you agree to be bound by the following terms and conditions. If you do not want to be bound by these terms, you may not become a member of our message board.

When joining as a member of the message board you agree to be fully responsible for your own postings and agree to access and use the Board at your own risk on an "AS IS" basis. While NSBCH/NSBCF has no obligation to monitor the Boards, NSBCH reserves the right to monitor content and to remove content that NSBCH/NSBCF, in its sole discretion, determines to be harmful, offensive, unlawful or otherwise in violation of these Terms of Use and Rules of Conduct. NSBCH/NSBCF reserves the right to edit or abridge postings for any reason and to disclose any information as necessary to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request, or to edit, refuse to post or to remove any information or materials, in whole or in part, in NSBCH/NSBCFs sole discretion.

Use of the Message Board grants NSBCH/NSBCF perpetual, exclusive, royalty-free and irrevocable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, create derivative works from, transfer any such messages, files or communications.

Rules of Conduct

When joining this message forum you have agreed to abide by the following rules of conduct as described herewith:

1. You may not use the Public Access Forums for any purpose in violation of local, state, national, or international laws;

2. You may not post material that infringes on the individual rights or on the privacy rights of others;

3. You may not post material that is unlawful, obscene, defamatory, threatening, harassing, abusive, hateful, or embarrassing to another User or any other person or entity. You may not defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights of others.

4. You may not post advertisements, chain letters or any solicitations.

5. You agree not to upload files, or cause users to upload files, that contain viruses, worms, "Trojan horses", corrupted files, or any similar software or programs that may adversely affect the operation of another's computer

6. You may not impersonate someone else or allow any other person to impersonate you while posting on the Public Access Forums. You agree not to submit any personally-identifiable information about any person without their prior consent.

7. You may not violate the property rights of others, and you agree not to post any content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of any party.

8. You agree not to solicit anyone to buy or sell products or services, or to make donations of any kind, without our express written approval.

9. You agree not to advertise or promote any goods or services in the Message Board or Chat Room. "Junk mail", "spamming," "chain letters," "pyramid schemes" and similar activities are strictly prohibited.

10. You may not engage in conduct that inhibits any other person from using the Public Access Forums, or which, in the judgment of NSBCH/NSBCF exposes anyone else to any liability or injury.

NSBCH/NSBCF does not review communications in advance and is not responsible for monitoring material posted in our Public Access Forums. We retain the right to investigate any allegations of misuse or breach of agreed-upon Terms and Conditions and retains the right to remove posts which are abusive, illegal, disruptive, or that otherwise fail to conform with these Terms and Conditions.

In addition, NSBCH/NSBCF reserves the right to restrict access to any or all Public Access Forums upon breach of these Terms and Conditions. NSBCH/NSBCF reserves the right (but is not obligated) to edit or delete any material posted on this site at our discretion, regardless of whether such communication violates the aforementioned standards. Furthermore, NSBCH/NSBCF reserves the right to monitor or edit any posts in the Public Access Forums. NSBCH/NSBCF assumes no liability or responsibility for the performance or lack thereof of said monitoring. NSBCH/NSBCF does not represent or guarantee the truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any of the material posted in our Public Access Forums or endorse any opinions expressed by such users.

NO SURRENDER IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF THE NO SURRENDERBREAST CANCER FOUNDATION

The No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation is a
501 (c) 3 Not-for-Profit Organization

Contact Us: nosurrenderbreastcancerhelp@gmail.com

Copyright 2006-2009
The No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc.
Locust Valley, NY 11560

Forum: TERMS OF USE/PRIVACY POLICY/ DISCLAIMER

is Oxy Powder good for constipation post surgery

Sandy — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:00:20 GMT

I read in another site that after a mastectomy you get really constipated (due to anesthesia), and the pill Oxy Powder (which is a natural product) helps you like no other.

Any experience with this? I would like to take as many pain killers as needed but don't want to be constipated.. it's already hard for me to go... don't need extra constipation..

Thanks

Forum: YOUR SURGERY

Pics from DG at the 3rd Annual Women's Expo in South Jersey

k4katz — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:45:37 GMT

Hi everyone! I thought I would post a few pics from our day at the Women's Expo on Saturday, 11/14. We spent most of the day at the table telling women about DG and NSBCF. We had a steady stream of people who were interested in knowing more! And we met lots of survivors as well. It was really inspirational!

DG played 2 half-hour sets during the day. I don't have pictures of us performing (since I can't take them while playing!), but I think the woman who organized it took some, so I will see if I can get them from her. In the meantime, this is what I have:

*Hugs*
Kristin

Forum: EMOTIONAL RESCUE

Opiate based painkillers and the spread of cancer cells

muffy — Thur, 19 Nov 2009 16:55:14 GMT

Interesting article regarding the possible use of Methylnaltrexone and opiates.

This is from Science Daily and I have also put a link to ANSCO as well regarding MNTX Methylnaltrexone's current use in chronic opiate-induced constipation

ScienceDaily (Nov. 19, 2009) Although morphine has been the gold-standard treatment for postoperative and chronic cancer pain for two centuries, a growing body of evidence is showing that opiate-based painkillers can stimulate the growth and spread of cancer cells. Two new studies advance that argument and demonstrate how shielding lung cancer cells from opiates reduces cell proliferation, invasion and migration in both cell-culture and mouse models.

The reports--to be presented November 18, 2009, at "Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics," a joint meeting in Boston of the American Association for Cancer Research, the National Cancer Institute, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer--highlight the mu opiate receptor, where morphine works, as a potential therapeutic target.

"If confirmed clinically, this could change how we do surgical anesthesia for our cancer patients," said Patrick A. Singleton, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center and principal author of both studies. "It also suggests potential new applications for this novel class of drugs which should be explored."

The proposition that opiates influence cancer recurrence, prompted by several unrelated clinical and laboratory studies, has gradually gained support. It started with a 2002 palliative-care trial in which patients who received spinal rather than systemic pain relief survived longer. Soon after that, Singleton's colleague, anesthesiologist Jonathan Moss, noticed that several cancer patients receiving a selective opiate blocker in a compassionate-use protocol lived longer than expected. Two recent retrospective studies found that breast and prostate cancer patients who received regional rather than general anesthesia had fewer recurrences. In February, 2009, the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation highlighted the issue.

Moss's palliative-care patients were taking methylnaltrexone (MNTX), developed in the 1980s for opiate-induced constipation by the late University of Chicago pharmacologist Leon Goldberg. Goldberg modified an established drug that blocks morphine so that it could no longer cross the protective barrier that surrounds the brain. So MNTX blocks morphine's peripheral side effects but does not interfere with its effect on pain, which is centered in the brain. It won FDA approval in 2008.

"These were patients with advanced cancer and a life expectancy of one to two months," Moss recalled, "yet several lived for another five or six. It made us wonder whether this was just a consequence of better GI function or could there possibly be an effect on the tumors."

So Singleton, Moss and colleagues, including Joe G.N. Garcia, MD, professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, began a series of studies looking at the many peripheral effects of opiates and the potential benefits of blocking those effects.

In laboratory studies, morphine can directly boost tumor-cell proliferation and inhibit the immune response. The researchers found that opiates also promote angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels, and decrease barrier function--effects that may exacerbate diseases involving vascular leakiness including acute lung injury in experimental models. In a surgical setting, decreased barrier function may make it easier for tumors to invade tissue and spread to distant sites. Increased angiogenesis helps cancers thrive in a new site.

In the studies to be presented Nov. 18, Singleton and colleagues focus on the mu opiate receptor as a regulator of tumor growth and metastasis and examine the ability of methylnaltrexone to attenuate these effects.

Using two different models of non-small cell lung cancer, the research teams showed that MNTX inhibited the tumor-promoting effects of opiates. In one study, using bronchioloalveolar carcinoma cells, MNTX blocked oncogenic signaling and prevented tumor-cell proliferation and migration.

In the other study, using Lewis lung carcinoma cells, mice without the mu opiate receptor did not develop the tumors that normal mice did when injected with cancer cells. The researchers further showed that MNTX reduced proliferation of cancer cells by 90 percent in normal mice. It also prevented invasion in cell culture and tumor growth and metastasis in mice.

The opioid receptor promotes Lewis lung cancer tumor growth, angiogenesis and metastasis, the authors conclude in a summary of the second study. "Methylnaltrexone attenuates these oncogenic effects."

"In conjunction with previous studies on opiate-induced angiogenesis by our laboratory and others, these experimental data suggest a plausible explanation for the epidemiologic observations," notes Moss, professor of anesthesiology and critical care at the University of Chicago. "If these laboratory studies are confirmed clinically, the selection of anesthetic technique used during the operative procedure and the possible use of opiate antagonists in the perioperative period may be important."

Additional contributors to the project include Frances Lennon, PhD, Biji Mathew, PhD, and Ravi Salgia, MD, all of the University of Chicago.

http://www.asco.org/ASCOv2/Meetings/Abstracts?&vmview=abst_detail_view&confID=16&abstractID=1501

Forum: BREAKING BREAST CANCER NEWS

PLEASE VOTE FOR US!

nosurrender — Thur, 19 Nov 2009 13:28:14 GMT

Help Support Before Forty by voting for us to win a grant from Chase!

Forum: THE BEFORE FORTY INITIATIVE

PLEASE VOTE FOR US!!!!!

nosurrender — Thur, 19 Nov 2009 12:44:38 GMT

Click on link and vote for the NSBCF!
We need the money to help our programs- ESPECIALLY BEFORE FORTY!!
Thank you!

Forum: PLEASE SUPPORT OUR FOUNDATION

JULIE HOW ARE YOU POST-OP?

nosurrender — Thur, 19 Nov 2009 01:48:53 GMT

Julie, hoping your surgery went well! I am thinking of you my friend!

Forum: YOUR SURGERY

parabens

MicheleS — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:09:05 GMT

Edge,
Would love to *hear* your thoughts on parabens in skin and hair products. I'm ER- but am attempting to eliminate them. However, it is difficult and expensive. I've managed to stop using skin products containing parabens but hair products are another story... I'm figuring that there's more absorption through skin lotions etc so that's why I started there... Thoughts? (especially relating to TN disease!)

Michele

Forum: THE CUTTING EDGE

No Surrender Takes on the White House

nosurrender — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:11:44 GMT

The White House Weighs In & No Surrender Responds

And now the White House weighs in. No Surrender takes them on, point by point. Put me on an enemy list. I've done chemo - twice, you don't scare me. Bring it on.

The White House Blog

Reality Check: Beware What Critics Say on Reform and Mammograms

Posted by Dan Pfeiffer on November 17, 2009 at 11:52 PM EST

One of the hallmark tactics from opponents of health insurance reform has been to grab onto any convenient piece of information and twist it into some misguided attack on reform, no matter how unrelated it may actually be. The hope appears to be that some media outlet will give them unchecked airtime under the banner of covering the controversy. Today theyre going back to that playbook again, and Fox News obliges them with the headline Critics See Health Care Rationing Behind New Mammography Recommendations. The story refers to new recommendations from the independent U.S. Preventive Services Task Force:

"Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are blasting new guidelines from a government task force that recommends against routine mammographies for women under 50, questioning whether they are tantamount to health care rationing in the fight against the No. 2 cancer killer in U.S. women."

Theres only one problem: the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost. The USPTF would have no power to deny insurance coverage in any way. The line of attack is actually somewhat ironic, because one of the guiding principles of reform from the very beginning in March has been to invest in significantly increased effective preventive care, something these critics never seemed to care much about over the past 8 months.

Just so theres no ambiguity, here are the answers to about every question you (or critics) might have on the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force:

Will Medicare now stop paying for breast cancer mammography for women because of this recommendation?

Women who are currently getting mammograms under Medicare will continue to be able to get them. There are no plans to change that. The law states that in order to change Medicare coverage of mammograms a formal rule making process must be undertaken and that is not happening.

Isnt this the first step toward denying coverage for mammograms?

No. The Task force is an independent panel of experts in prevention and primary care that evaluates available evidence and makes recommendations about effective clinical preventive services based on scientific information. Under the health insurance reform legislation, the USPTF would have no power to deny insurance coverage in any way. Their recommendations would be used in health reform to identify effective clinical preventive services.

How will this recommendation affect private health insurance coverage?

The Task Force does not address insurance coverage and payment issues; it focuses on the science of the clinical services it evaluates. Each insurance company is different and makes its own coverage decisions. The Task Force recognizes that clinical and policy decisions involve more consideration that this body of evidence alone. Clinicians and policymakers should understand the evidence but individualize decision making to the specific patient or situation.

Tommy Thompson said the Task Force recommendations were the official position of the U.S. Government. Is that your position?

We have tremendous respect for the Task Force and the work they have done. They are an independent scientific body that makes recommendations based on scientific evidence; however they do not set official policy for the federal government. Under health reform, their recommendations would be used to identify preventive services that must be provided for little or no cost.

Wont the USPSTF be used to ration care under health reform?

Absolutely not. The USPSTF, an independent task force made up of some of the nations top doctors and scientists provides science-based recommendations regarding the most effective preventive, treatment and screening services. The Task Forces recommendations would be used to help determine the types of services that must be provided for at little or no cost and the Task Force would have no power to deny insurance coverage in any way..

What do these recommendations mean for the current health reform bills?

While the bills are still being drafted and debated in Congress, health insurance reform legislation generally calls for the Task Forces recommendations to help determine the types of preventive services that must be provided for little or no cost. The recommendations alone cannot be used to deny treatment.

######

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS

WH says: "One of the hallmark tactics from opponents of health insurance reform has been to grab onto any convenient piece of information and twist it into some misguided attack on reform, no matter how unrelated it may actually be."

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS: There is not one piece of information that can be twisted to look any other way than it already appears: The Task Force has decided to murder thousands of women a year with these recommendations.

WH says: Fox News is guiding critics. "the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost. The USPTF would have no power to deny insurance coverage in any way. The line of attack is actually somewhat ironic, because one of the guiding principles of reform from the very beginning in March has been to invest in significantly increased effective preventive care, something these critics never seemed to care much about over the past 8 months. "

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS: Fox News doesn't have to tell us anything. We are breast cancer survivors. We have heard the words that changed our lives forever. We are alive today because our cancers were found early enough to let us live for a few years. The USPTF will have a direct impact on insurance companies denying us coverage. It is giving fuel to any cost saving measures they can find. We already have to fight like hell to get a breast MRI or PET scans. To say that you are working to significantly increase preventative care then you obviously don't care about preventative care for anyone under the age of 50.

The WH Says: Women who are currently getting mammograms under Medicare will continue to be able to get them. There are no plans to change that. The law states that in order to change Medicare coverage of mammograms a formal rule making process must be undertaken and that is not happening.

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS: Of course women under Medicare will still get their mammograms... they are all over the age of 62 and fall into the screening guidelines. What about those of us who are under fifty with the most aggressive tumors?

The WH Says: Under the health insurance reform legislation, the USPTF would have no power to deny insurance coverage in any way. Their recommendations would be used in health reform to identify effective clinical preventive services.

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS: Do you think we can't read? Their recommendation is that women should stop baseline self exams, stop mammograms, and only start bi-annual screening after the age of fifty. If their recommendations "would be used in health reform" then you will be denying coverage to women under the age of 50.

The WH Says: The Task Force does not address insurance coverage and payment issues; it focuses on the science of the clinical services it evaluates. Each insurance company is different and makes its own coverage decisions.

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS: Under Health Reform, private insurance will be regulated by the government. They will also be competing with their own regulators. If their regulators are not covering mammograms for women under 50, so, too, will they follow.

The WH says: Under health reform, the task force's recommendations would be used to identify preventive services that must be provided for little or no cost.

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS: There is nothing "preventative" in denying screening to all women under the age of fifty. All you are focusing on is the cost saving of not having to pay for millions of mammograms any longer. The task force and their guidelines will be followed to the letter by insurance companies and their "regulators" also known as the Federal Government.

The WH Says: The USPSTF, an independent task force made up of some of the nations top doctors and scientists provides science-based recommendations regarding the most effective preventive, treatment and screening services. The Task Forces recommendations would be used to help determine the types of services that must be provided for at little or no cost

NO SURRENDER RESPONDS:

There is nothing "preventative" in these recommendations. The task force does not have a single oncologist on it. You admit you will be using these recommendations. You will be responsible for the murder of millions of women whose cancers are missed until they are found too late.

No Surrender Concludes:

With all due respect, you have no idea what in hell you are talking about. EARLY DETECTION IS OUR ONLY DEFENSE. Denying mammography to women until they are fifty will kill women. They won't die right away, they will suffer horribly first. Then they will die. If you want to represent the "hope and change" you promised, get insurance companies to start paying for mammograms BEFORE THE AGE OF FORTY. We are losing a generation of women. Women who were diagnosed with breast cancer before the age of forty. African American women will be effected the most by this murderous legislation since they develop a more aggressive form of breast cancer BEFORE FORTY. Without early detection, it cannot be controlled and it spreads rapidly and they die.

We may not be doctors... but we are warriors who have all fought on the front lines of breast cancer. We will not give up this fight. We will not let you murder our sisters. You have no idea what you are up against. To quote a truly great leader, we leave you with how we feel about this task force and the possibility it passes into legislation:

"We shall go on to the end, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight
with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our , whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; We shall never surrender." (Sir Winston Churchill)

Forum: THE BEFORE FORTY INITIATIVE

New info on Joint pain and AIs

SoCalLisa — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:14:08 GMT

http://www.medscape.com

From Medscape Medical News

Aromatase Inhibitors and Joint Pain: A Deeper Look

Nick Mulcahy

September 23, 2009 One third of postmenopausal women with breast cancer taking aromatase inhibitors (AIs) reported arthralgia either new onset or worsening, according to investigators of a new study published online September 14 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

This percentage of patients experiencing joint pain was "expected," according to an editorial accompanying the study.

However, the study authors did not stop at investigating the prevalence of AI-associated arthralgia.

Because "few studies" have investigated the morphologic changes in joints and tendons in patients with this pain, the study authors used sonographic and electrophysiologic measurements to take a look at the affected tissues.

Nevertheless, the new study does not authoritatively correlate the findings from sonography and electromyography with clinical findings, observes the editorialist, Rowan T. Chlebowski, MD, PhD, from the Los Angeles BioMedical Research Institute at Harbor UCLA Medical Center in Torrance, California.

For instance, patients in the study with AI-related arthralgia had more frequent electrophysiologic findings of carpal tunnel syndrome (46% vs 20%; P < .05) than those without arthralgia (including those taking and those not taking AIs).

However, this 49% incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome in patients with AI-associated arthralgia is much higher than when the syndrome is identified through clinical symptoms. In large clinical trials of AIs and tamoxifen, the incidence of carpel tunnel syndrome was less than 3% for patients taking the AIs, Dr. Chlebowski notes.

The authors of the new study acknowledge that "the real prevalence of carpel tunnel syndrome would have been different if the signs and symptoms been taken into consideration."

Very few patients discontinue treatment because of arthralgia.

AI-associated arthralgia is a "substantial problem" and one in need of "improved interventions," Dr. Chlebowski writes.

However, the editorialist and the study authors agree that most joint pain associated with AIs is mild to moderate and is best managed with analgesics. "Very few patients discontinue treatment because of arthralgia," the authors note.

More Findings

In the study, 120 postmenopausal patients with stage I to III breast cancer were evaluated for anatomic changes in the joints, and inflammatory markers were compared by Turkish investigators, led by Omer Dizdar, MD, from Hacettepe University Institute of Oncology in Ankara.

The team found that a range of markers of inflammation, such as C-reactive protein, were comparable in the patients taking AIs and the control subjects, and in the study participants with and without arthralgia.

The study supports previous reports that autoimmune disease "does not play a role in the etiology of AI-associated arthralgias," observes Dr. Chlebowski.

With regard to anatomic changes, the investigators found that the patients often had changes in their affected joints and tendons. Women taking AIs (n = 92) had increased tendon thicknesses, which is associated with the syndrome, compared with a control group of women (n = 28) with breast cancer not receiving the therapy (P < .01). Patients with AI-related arthralgia had more frequent joint and tendon effusions than those without pain (69% vs 42%; P < .05).

"These findings suggest that increased tendon thicknesses in patients on AIs may reflect some form of tendinopathy secondary to AI use. Further damage to the tendons and synovium results in effusions in tendon sheaths in a subgroup of patients, which is translated as arthralgia clinically," the authors write.

Anatomical matters aside, both Dr. Chlebowski and the study authors believe that arthralgia in this setting is also related to hormonal factors to some degree. Both note that joint pain is also a problem in postmenopausal women, even without breast cancer. In the landmark Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study, 74% of women without breast cancer reported joint pain, writes Dr. Chlebowski.

Notes on Managing Arthralgias

This study does not change the basic approach of clinicians to arthralgia, says Dr. Chlebowski.

At present, oncologists should carefully observe their patients for development of this problem.

"At present, oncologists should carefully observe their patients for development of this problem, clearly express to their patients the benefits of continued adherence , and provide the limited available therapies," he writes.

The limited therapies can include acupuncture; 1 small pilot study suggested benefit from a 6-week regimen, notes Dr. Chlebowski. Vitamin D supplementation is a question "considered open," he adds, explaining that 2 ongoing studies are evaluating high-dose supplementation for AI-associated joint pain. However, 2 other trials, including the WHI, did not show any benefit from the vitamin, he says.

Joint pain associated with AIs still does not have an "optimal management strategy," writes Dr. Chlebowski.

Nevertheless, he cites a recent expert panel's recommendation to use "high-dose nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or selective COX-2 inhibitors as initial short-term therapy . . . to address initial pain relief, with subsequent titration to minimum effective dosage" (Ann Rheum Dis. 2007; 66:377-388).

Dr. Chlebowski reports being a consultant to AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Pfizer, all of which market AIs, and receiving honoraria from AstraZeneca and Novartis. The study authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

J Clin Oncol. Published online before print September 14, 2009. Abstract, Abstract

Authors and Disclosures

Journalist

Nick Mulcahy

Nick Mulcahy is a senior journalist for Medscape Hematology-Oncology. Before joining Medscape, Nick was a freelance medical news writer for 15 years, working for companies such as the International Medical News Group, MedPage Today, HealthDay, McMahon Publishing, and Advanstar. He is also the former managing editor of breastcancer.org. He can be contacted at nmulcahy@medscape.net.

Medscape Medical News 2009 Medscape, LLC
Send press releases and comments to news@medscape.net.

Forum: HORMONAL TREATMENT

WHAT IS BEFORE FORTY?

nosurrender — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:43:20 GMT

The Before Forty Initiative

Women are told that they should get their first mammogram at the age of forty. For the woman whose cancer is present before the age of forty, this recommendation could have deadly consequences. Young women have more aggressive cancers that grow at a rapid rate and can spread beyond the breast before they are detected. This is particularly true for African American women who have a higher rate of developing a type of breast cancer known as triple negative.

Triple Negative breast cancer does not respond the hormones estrogen and progesterone, and is not fueled by the HER2/nue protein. It also is a more rapidly growing disease. There are certain subtypes of TNBC that are basal, or luminal A, which are so deadly, they have the same survival rate as pancreatic cancer. These subtypes are most often found in the African American community and in women who carry the gene variant BRCA1 and BRCA2. Women of Ashkenazi heritage are carriers of this gene variant.

These cancers are very difficult to control. The only defense a woman has is by finding it before it grows and spreads. A woman does not have that chance if she waits until the age of forty to get her first mammogram. It will be too late. What could have been a rescue mission turns into a recovery mission, offering only palliative care.

This does not have to be. The founder of the No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation was given baseline mammograms starting at the age of 35. At age 39, a triple negative tumor was found in a follow-up mammogram. An abnormality had been detected because there was a change from her earlier mammograms. Had this been her first mammogram, it would have been considered normal tissue. Because her tumor was found early, she was able to have it removed, do a six month course of chemotherapy followed by radiation, and has been free of triple negative disease for eight years.

Since the inception of the website, many women, members of the NSBCF Support Forum, have died because their tumors were found too late. One woman was Ferne Dixon. She was a young, vibrant African American woman who never had a baseline mammogram. She was told she was too young to worry about the lump she had found. When the lump was larger, she finally went for a mammogram and her triple negative cancer was found. It was too late. Even though she endured months of chemotherapy and radiation, her disease spread and took her life. She said that if she had not had the lump she would not have gone for the mammogram, even though she knew that it was recommended. She was 41 when she was diagnosed. She discovered that many African American women have a false sense of security because most breast cancer is found in Caucasian women. This statistic is true, however, most of the deadly, triple negative breast cancers are found in young, African American women and women who carry the BRCA1 gene variant.

The No Surrender Breast Cancer Foundation's Before Forty Initiative is dedicated to promoting the importance of early, baseline screening for all young women, before the age of forty. If a woman is African American or in a high risk group, we will become the leading advocate for comprehensive screening before the age of 35.

Simple mammography is often not enough. Young women have dense breasts and many doctors tell them it is too difficult to accurately read a mammogram. Young women need more than mammograms. They may need a breast ultra-sound and, if necessary, breast MRIs. This is particularly true if there is an abnormality detected. The NSBCF seeks to change the standard of care so that these types of screening techniques are not only offered, but covered by insurance.

The second phase of this standard of care is to put an end to the Watch and Wait practice of medicine. Most young women are told, when an abnormality is found, that they have dense breasts and they should watch and wait and reevaluate the lump in six months. During this time, a triple negative tumor can triple in size and spread to the lymph nodes and distant organs. Watching and waiting for cancer to become deadly must stop. Making women aware of the danger of this practice will save lives. The NSBCF is making this a major part of the Before Forty Initiative.

The Before Forty Initiative:

Increase awareness to young women about the risk of breast cancer. Inform them of the better prognosis and treatment options if their cancer is found early.

Make the age of 35 be the standard for baseline mammogram. Make the age of 30 the standard for high risk groups.

Get insurance companies to cover baseline mammograms and subsequent follow-up diagnostic tests if warranted, including ultra-sound and breast MRI.

Increase awareness for African American women about Triple Negative Breast Cancer. Educate young women that African American women are at a higher risk of TNBC and have a poorer prognosis. The only way they can beat the disease, should they get it, is if it is found early.

Never Watch and Wait. Teach women the deadly consequences of waiting for a cancer to grow in six months.

We have lost too many young women before the age of forty to let this continue any further. We seek to save lives. We will not stop until the standard of care is Before Forty.

Forum: THE BEFORE FORTY INITIATIVE

WHY BEFORE FORTY NEEDS YOU NOW!!!

nosurrender — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:18:03 GMT

Why The Before Forty Initiative Is Needed NOW more than EVER

A task force has declared that women no longer require mammograms at the age of 40. Rather, women should wait until 50... and that is only it they have the breast cancer gene.

As those of you who are familiar with Before Forty, you know, that the most deadly of cancers, Triple Negative disease, is found in African American women under the age of 40. Without early screening, BEFORE FORTY, the chance of fighting the disease is much harder if the tumor is not found at its earliest stages. Also, as the women of the No Surrender Women know, you dont know if you carry genes that cause breast cancer unless you are diagnosed with it in the first place.

The article clearly states that this measure is to reduce costs. The article blatantly disregards the thousands of lives of women who die because they were diagnosed too late, after their cancer has spread to other organs.

This is the Premeditated Murder of thousands of women.

To save money, to reduce insurance costs and to reduce "Anxiety" a panel that guides the ACS has declared that women should skip mammograms until the age of 50, and then only have them every other year or so... because they don't do any good.... they cause too much anxiety....they cost too much.

Not having screening and having your cancer found too late costs a lot of money, too. It causes anxiety that is beyond all compare. And they can't do any good because your cancer is already spreading.

This blog post is dedicated to the women we have lost, only very few had the genetic cancer link that is exempt from this murderous recommendation. Most of these women were diagnosed before the age of 40 or in their early 40s. None of them are alive today.
Stephanie
Lisa
Amy
Denise
Mena
Susan
Susie
Lani
Lori
Deb
Ferne
Kay
Dawn
Annie
Julie
Twilah
Helen
Jodi
Kari Lynn
Cindy
Erin
Kathy
Cheryl
Lisa
Laura
Mary Ellen
Mabel
Donna
Marge
Jacque
Kathy
Fran
Vicky
Carla
Chris
Shelley
Julie
Leah
Connie
Shelli
Jayne
Ruth
Elena
Jen
Peggy
Kelly
Stacey
Diane
Bev
Theresa
Luann
Donna
Kathy
Diane
Roza
Kelly
Felicia
Stacy
Mildred
June
Sadie
Ann
Emmaline
Sprite
Breezy
Kay
Kathleen
Lanie
Charlotte
Tine
Annette
Janie
Frances
Bluekitten
Momcasey
Janell
Jane
Shirl
Mary
Andee
LuAnn
Theresa
Linda
Faye
Marie
Roza
Linda
Flo
Kathy
Kat
Karen
Mavy
Raven
Cherieboop
Ann
Pam
Nancy

The news release
In Reversal, Panel Urges Mammograms at 50, Not 40

By GINA KOLATA

Most women should start regular breast cancer screening at age 50, not 40, according to new guidelines released Monday by an influential group that provides guidance to doctors, insurance companies and policy makers.
The new recommendations, which do not apply to a small group of women with unusual risk factors for breast cancer, reverse longstanding guidelines and are aimed at reducing harm from overtreatment, the group says. It also says women age 50 to 74 should have mammograms less frequently every two years, rather than every year. And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis.
Just seven years ago, the same group, the United States Preventive Services Task Force, with different members, recommended that women have mammograms every one to two years starting at age 40. It found too little evidence to take a stand on breast self-examinations.
The task force is an independent panel of experts in prevention and primary care appointed by the federal Department of Health and Human Services.
Its new guidelines, which are different from those of some professional and advocacy organizations, are published online in The Annals of Internal Medicine They are likely to touch off yet another round of controversy over the benefits of screening for breast cancer.
Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chairwoman of the task force and a professor of biomedical informatics at Arizona State University, said the guidelines were based on new data and analyses and were aimed at reducing the potential harm from overscreening.
While many women do not think a screening test can be harmful, medical experts say the risks are real. A test can trigger unnecessary further tests, like biopsies, that can create extreme anxiety. And mammograms can find cancers that grow so slowly that they never would be noticed in a womans lifetime, resulting in unnecessary treatment.
Over all, the report says, the modest benefit of mammograms reducing the breast cancer death rate by 15 percent must be weighed against the harms. And those harms loom larger for women in their 40s, who are 60 percent more likely to experience them than women 50 and older but are less likely to have breast cancer, skewing the risk-benefit equation. The task force concluded that one cancer death is prevented for every 1,904 women age 40 to 49 who are screened for 10 years, compared with one death for every 1,339 women age 50 to 74, and one death for every 377 women age 60 to 69.
The guidelines are not meant for women at increased risk for breast cancer because they have a gene mutation that makes the cancer more likely or because they had extensive chest radiation. The task force said there was not enough information to know whether those women would be helped by more frequent mammograms or by having the test in their 40s. Other experts said women with close relatives with breast cancer were also at high risk.
Dr. Petitti said she knew the new guidelines would be a shock for many women, but, she said, we have to say what we see based on the science and the data.
The National Cancer Institute said Monday that it was re-evaluating its guidelines in light of the task forces report.
But the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiology both said they were staying with their guidelines advising annual mammograms starting at age 40.
The cancer society, in a statement by Dr. Otis W. Brawley, its chief medical officer, agreed that mammography had risks as well as benefits but, he said, the societys experts had looked at virtually all the task force and additional data and concluded that the benefits of annual mammograms starting at age 40 outweighed the risks.
Other advocacy groups, like the National Breast Cancer Coalition, Breast Cancer Action, and the National Womens Health Network, welcomed the new guidelines.
This is our opportunity to look beyond emotions, said Fran Visco, president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition. The task force is an independent body of experts that took an objective look at the data, Ms. Visco said. These are the people we should be listening to when it comes to public health messages.
Some women, though, were not pleased. I know so many people who had breast cancer and survived, and what saved their lives was early detection, Janet Doughty, 44, of San Clemente, Calif., said in a telephone interview. She said she had had an annual mammograms since her late 30s and would not stop now.
The guidelines are not expected to have an immediate effect on insurance coverage but should make health plans less likely to aggressively prompt women in their 40s to have mammograms and older women to have the test annually.
Congress requires Medicare to pay for annual mammograms. Medicare can change its rules to pay for less frequent tests if federal officials direct it to.
Private insurers are required by law in every state except Utah to pay for mammograms for women in their 40s.
But the new guidelines are expected to alter the grading system for health plans, which are used as a marketing tool. Grades are issued by the National Committee for Quality Assurance, a private nonprofit organization, and one measure is the percentage of patients getting mammograms every one to two years starting at age 40.
That will change, said Margaret E. OKane, the groups president, who said it would start grading plans on the number of women over 50 getting mammograms every two years.
The message for most women, said Dr. Karla Kerlikowske, a professor in the department of medicine, epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco, is to forgo routine mammograms if they are in their 40s.
Starting at age 50, Dr. Kerlikowske said, the message is to get 10 mammograms in a lifetime, one every two years. That way they get the most benefit and the least harm from the test. If women are healthy, she added, they might consider having mammograms every two years until age 74.
Nearly two-thirds of all women in their 40s had mammograms within the last two years, as did 72 percent of women age 50 to 65, according to an editorial by Dr. Kerlikowske that accompanies the report.
In order to formulate its guidelines, the task force used new data from mammography studies in England and Sweden and also commissioned six groups to make statistical models to analyze the aggregate data. The models were the only way to answer questions like how much extra benefit do women get if they are screened every year, said Donald A. Berry, a statistician at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center and head of one of the modeling groups.
We said, essentially with one voice, very little, Dr. Berry said. So little as to make the harms of additional screening come screaming to the top.
The harms are nearly cut in half when women have mammograms every other year instead of every year. But the benefits are almost unchanged.
The last time the task force issued guidelines for mammograms, in 2002, the reportwas announced by Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary of health and human services. When the group recommended mammograms for women in their 40s, some charged the report was politically motivated. But Dr. Alfred Berg of the University of Washington, who was the task force chairman at the time, said there was absolutely zero political influence on what the task force did.
It was still a tough call to make, Dr. Berg said, adding that we pointed out that the benefit will be quite small. In fact, he added, even though mammograms are of greater benefit to older women, they still prevent only a small fraction of breast cancer deaths.
Different women will weigh the harms and benefits differently, Dr. Berg noted, but added that even for women 50 and older, it would be perfectly rational for a woman to decide she didnt want to do it.
Researchers worry the new report will be interpreted as a political effort by the Obama administration to save money on health care costs.
Of course, Dr. Berry noted, if the new guidelines are followed, billions of dollars will be saved.
But the money was buying something of net negative value, he said. This decision is a no-brainer. The economy benefits, but women are the major beneficiaries.

THIS IS WHY BEFORE FORTY NEEDS YOU NOW MORE THAN EVER. Lift up your voices and fight for the women who are coming after us. Do not become an accessory to this murder.

Forum: PLEASE SUPPORT OUR FOUNDATION

New GuideLines for Mammos

Mainsailset — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:39:49 GMT

Hint, I'm gonna bet you're not going to like them
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2398452/health_news_new_mammogram_guidelines.html?cat=5

Forum: BREAKING BREAST CANCER NEWS

MARY'S GARDEN

nosurrender — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:16:43 GMT

Keep in touch with how well our dear Mary is doing here!

Forum: CHEMOTHERAPY ~ MEDICATED & MOTIVATED

A Triple Negative for 3 days - Help!

StrongGirl — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 04:13:05 GMT

Hello all you awesome ladies of this answer-to-prayer forum! I found out I was triple negative on Wednesday, and it is now Saturday. I was just getting my mind around having breast cancer, caught early - "oh, you're so lucky!" Now I know it will not be a simple mastectomy next month and back to normal life by the month after. Chemo was not even a possibility in my mind on Monday! Now I'm voraciously reading everything I can on this site until my eyes burn and I can't process any more. Help!

During these past three days, I also made the momentous decision to switch from my first surgeon (he never discussed genetic testing or anything about ER/PR/HER2 and my triple negative status with me) to my second opinion surgeon who did. She explained to me the how's and why's of genetic testing and what the ER/PR negative status meant, and waited by the fax machine until the pathologist sent over my HER2, which turned out to be negative. I had not intended to switch care, just get a second opinion, but her whole approach and great staff changed my mind. Everything this Triple Negative (TN?) forum talks about was touched upon by this surgeon, and I really need a physican who will share the whole gamut of information with me so I can make an informed choice about my care. Then I got the next sucker punch (how many am I going to get?)

My insurance company said, "Sorry, you cannot self-refer for a second opinion and you will be out of pocket for this. You have to stick with your first surgeon, because he's in your network." I fell into a black hole at that point. With the encouragement of my sister, a nurse friend, and a long-time mentor and breast cancer survivor of 30+ years, I figured out a way to outsmart my insurance company and get the surgeon I really want for my care - since I had not yet started treatment (only diagnostic testing) I could still switch primary care networks (both are covered under my plan). I have to wait until the first of the month for it to take effect, and I am setting myself back by about 2-3 weeks (is this going to effect my outcome?!?). I did this yesterday morning, and last night I found No Surrender. Friday the 13th my butt! I am so grateful to have found all of you and look forward (yes, look forward!) to all of you helping me navigate this journey I have just joined you on. I am still getting my head around a lot of this information. Any help for a three-day-old newbie would be most welcome. I already feel at home and I haven't even talked with any of you yet! Your help is much appreciated already.

Forum: TRIPLE NEGATIVE DISEASE