sexta-feira, 24 de abril de 2009
Glioblastoma em adultos responde melhor a doses altas de QT com RT
Imagem de PET/CT mostra resposta do tratamento oncológico após primeiro ciclo
Novidades da 100a Reunião da AACR
Nenhuma modificação dietética específica tem comprovadamente efeito na evolução e tratamento do câncer. Embora muitos trabalhos tenham mostrado influência de determinados hábitos alimentares e alimentos específicos na incidência e complicações do câncer de uma forma geral, os resultados de várias séries de relatos são inconclusivos ou conflitantes. Informações veiculadas como "verdadeiras" ainda são especulativas. Um caso é o efeito do consumo de carne vermelha bem passada ou torrada, possivelmente associada com aumento de incidência de vários tipos de câncer. Especialistas presentes à reunião declararam que, após 30 anos de pesquisas, nada foi definido. Outro caso é a controvérsia de que o consumo de vinho pode ter efeito benéfico no tratamento de vários tipos de câncer, especialmente linfoma não Hodgkin. Isso parece altamente improvável, especialistas dizem. Uma informação bem mais estabelecida, por outro lado, é o efeito do consumo do álcool de aumentar a incidência de câncer de mama e, talvez, de outros tipos de câncer, mesmo consumido em pequenas quantidades. Da mesma forma, não existe base para o efeito benéfico do consumo regular de frutas e verduras em geral na incidência de câncer de uma forma geral. A única unanimidade que a AACR endossa é o efeito da obesidade: manter-se o mais magro que a saúde permitir parece ser uma recomendação adequada para reduzir a incidência de câncer. Dados atuais associam a obesidade com a incidência de 30-35% de todos os tumores malignos, o que coloca esta patologia como o segundo fator relacionado a estilo de vida mais influente na incidência do câncer, atrás apenas do tabagismo.
Outro dado aparente nesta reunião da AACR foi a falta de evidência do efeito de qualquer tipo de vitamina, suplemento alimentar ou antioxidante na incidência ou tratamento do câncer. Os dados atuais não comprovam ou refutam efeito, assim como é o caso da dieta. Isso não quer dizer que um efeito leve a moderado não possa existir, mas é provável que efeitos importantes não existam.
Por outro lado, uma das novidades mais interessantes é o efeito benéfico dos exercícios físicos no tratamento do câncer, diminuindo mortalidade e morbidade e melhorando a qualidade de vida dos pacientes. Este efeito é importante. Exercícios físicos regulares podem reduzir a mortalidade de câncer em 40-45%, efeito de igual magnitude ao do tratamento médico atualmente existente. A AACR endossa a recomendação de exercícios físicos regulares a partir da data do diagnóstico, durante o tratamento e após o tratamento, indefinidamente, como forma de melhorar o tratamento de seus pacientes. Alguns oncologistas já estão referindo seus pacientes para fisioterapeutas especializados neste tipo de exercício físico.
Dessa forma, podemos resumir as recomendações sobre estilo de vida da AACR na sua última reunião: emagreça e faça exercícios físicos regulares para evitar câncer, se você tiver câncer continue com atividade física contínua para ajudá-lo a sobreviver, tenha uma dieta saudável para evitar obesidade e não gaste dinheiro com suplementos alimentares caros e de eficiência duvidosa!
Leia mais no Medscape: www.medscape.com
domingo, 5 de abril de 2009
Atenção gordos e modelos magrinhas!
March 17, 2009 — Body-mass index (BMI) above the ideal range may cause a large increase in mortality rates, according to the results of a collaborative analysis of 57 prospective studies reported in the March 18 Online First issue of Lancet.
"The main associations of...BMI with overall and cause-specific mortality can best be assessed by long-term prospective follow-up of large numbers of people," write Gary Whitlock, and colleagues from The Prospective Studies Collaboration at the University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. "The Prospective Studies Collaboration aimed to investigate these associations by sharing data from many studies."
The investigators analyzed the association of baseline BMI with mortality in 57 prospective studies enrolling a total of 894,576 participants, mostly in western Europe and North America, with median recruitment year 1979. Mean age at recruitment was 46 ± 11 years, 61% were men, and mean BMI was 25 ± 4 kg/m². The analyses were adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and study, and the first 5 years of follow-up were excluded.
Mortality rate was lowest with BMI at approximately 22.5 to 25 kg/m² for both men and women. At higher baseline BMI, there were positive associations for several specific causes and inverse associations for none. Absolute excess risks for higher BMI and smoking were approximately additive.
On average, each 5-kg/m² higher BMI was associated with approximately 30% higher overall mortality rate (hazard ratio per 5 kg/m² [HR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27 -1.32): 40% for vascular mortality (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.37 - 1.45); 60% to 120% for diabetic (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.89 - 2.46), renal (HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1·27 - 1·99), and hepatic (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1·59 - 2·09) mortality; 10% for neoplastic mortality (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.06 - 1.15); and 20% for respiratory (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07 - 1.34) and all other mortality (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.16 - 1.25).
BMI less than 22·5 to 25 kg/m² was inversely associated with overall mortality rate, primarily because of strong inverse associations with respiratory disease and lung cancer. Although cigarette consumption per smoker varied little with BMI, these inverse associations were much
stronger for smokers vs nonsmokers.
"Although other anthropometric measures (eg, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio) could well add extra information to BMI, and BMI to them, BMI is in itself a strong predictor of overall mortality both above and below the apparent optimum of about 22.5–25 kg/m²," the study authors write. "The progressive excess mortality above this range is due mainly to vascular
disease and is probably largely causal. At 30–35 kg/m², median survival is reduced by 2–4 years; at 40–45 kg/m², it is reduced by 8–10 years (which is comparable with the effects of smoking). The definite excess mortality below 22.5 kg/m² is due mainly to smoking-related diseases,
and is not fully explained."
"In adult life, it may be easier to avoid substantial weight gain than to lose that weight once it has been gained," the study authors conclude. "By avoiding a further increase from 28 kg/m² to 32 kg/m², a typical person in early middle age would gain about 2 years of life expectancy. Alternatively, by avoiding an increase from 24 kg/m² to 32 kg/m² (ie, to a third above the apparent optimum), a young adult would on average gain about 3 extra years of life."
Lancet. Published online March 18, 2009.Selênio e vitamina E não evitam câncer, mas podem atrapalhar
Mais uma para os adeptos dos suplementos dietéticos, em especial aqueles que usam altas doses de certas vitaminas e micronutrientes sob a cara propaganda de pseudo-especialistas, como os "Terapeutas Ortomoleculares". Lembramos que esta "terapia", muitas vezes ministrada por não médicos sem o menor conhecimento do funcionamento do organismo e do mecanismo das doenças, não é reconhecida pelo Conselho Federal de Medicina nem pelo Ministério da Saúde do Brasil. Desta vez um trabalho tentou associar algum benefício do uso de suplementos de selênio e vitamina E no câncer de próstata, sem resultado. Para piorar, o selênio mostrou uma tendência a associar-se com mutações genéticas que indicam maior gravidade do câncer, com uma significância estatística limítrofe. Embora os autores do estudo tenham responsavelmente se abstido de conclusões precipitadas, fica óbvio que o uso não adequadamente testado de qualquer substância, mesmo suplementos alimentares, pode ser perigoso. Leia mais:
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Mar 13 - Gene expression profiles in prostatectomy specimens can provide insight into the effects of nutritional supplements taken by those patients preoperatively,
according to the results of a new study.
Dr. Jeri Kim of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and colleagues note that several major studies and secondary analyses have given contradictory results regarding whether selenium and/or vitamin E reduce the incidence of prostate or other cancers.
To investigate further, the researchers studied 39 men with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate, a life expectancy of at least 10 years and scheduled radical prostatectomy.The participants were randomly assigned to one of four daily oral regimens: 200 mcg of selenium, 400 IU of vitamin E, a combination of both, or placebo. These treatments were given for 3 to 6 weeks, between enrollment in the study and prostatectomy. Thirty-six participants were included in all parts of the study, including microarray analysis.
The researchers isolated and studied normal, stromal and tumor cells from the biopsy samples. They then identified differential gene expression based on treatment type and also on cell type and tissue zone.Among other results, an increase in the mean percentage of tumor cells positive for the tumor suppressor p53 in the selenium group (26.3%), compared with that in the placebo group (5%), showed borderline statistical significance (p = 0.051).
In an accompanying editorial, Dr. Eric A. Klein of the Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Ohio, reviews the findings of several major surveys that failed to find cancer-prevention benefits from selenium or vitamin E, and commented that such studies "do not always validate what we believe biology indicates."He concludes that "dietary or nutrient supplement prevention of cancer may be best achieved by lifelong healthy eating habits."
J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:283-285,306-320.
sábado, 4 de abril de 2009
Carne vermelha associada com mortalidade!
March 26, 2009 — Eating red and processed meat is associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality rates, according to the results of a large, prospective study reported in the March 23 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.
"High intakes of red or processed meat may increase the risk of mortality," write Rashmi Sinha, PhD, from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services in Rockville, Maryland, and colleagues. "Our objective was to determine the relations of red, white, and processed meat intakes to risk for total and cause-specific mortality."
The National Institutes of Health–AARP Diet and Health Study enrolled approximately half a million people aged 50 to 71 years at baseline. A food frequency questionnaire administered at baseline allowed estimation of meat intake, and Cox proportional hazards regression models allowed calculation of hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) within quintiles of meat intake.
Red meat included all types of beef and pork such as bacon, beef, cold cuts, hamburgers, hotdogs, steak, and meats in pizza, lasagna, and stew. White meat included chicken, turkey, and fish along with poultry cold cuts, canned tuna, and low-fat hotdogs. Processed meats could include either red or white meats in the form of sandwich meats or cold cuts as well as bacon, red meat and poultry sausages, and regular hotdogs and low-fat hotdogs made from poultry. The authors note that some of the meats may overlap in the 3 categories, but they were not duplicated or used in the same models in the study analysis.
The models considered covariates of age, education, marital status, presence or absence of family history of cancer (for cancer mortality only), race, body mass index, smoking history, physical activity, energy intake, alcohol drinking, use of vitamin supplements, fruit consumption, vegetable consumption, and use of menopausal hormone therapy in women. Primary endpoints of the study were total mortality and deaths caused by cancer, cardiovascular disease, injury and sudden deaths, and all other causes.
During 10 years of follow-up, 47,976 men and 23,276 women died. Overall mortality risks were increased for men and women in the highest vs the lowest quintile of red meat intake (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.27 - 1.35; and HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.30-1.43, respectively) and processed meat intake (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12 - 1.20; and HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20 - 1.31, respectively). Men and women with higher intake also had increased risks for cancer mortality for red meat (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.16 - 1.29; and HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.12 - 1.30, respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06 - 1.19; and HR, 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 - 1.19, respectively).
Cardiovascular disease risk was increased for men and women in the highest quintile of intake of red meat (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.20 - 1.35; and HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.37 - 1.65, respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03 - 1.15; and HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.26 - 1.51, respectively). For the highest vs the lowest quintile of white meat intake for both men and women, there was an inverse association for total mortality, cancer mortality, and mortality from all other causes.
"Red and processed meat intakes were associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality," the study authors write. "In contrast, high white meat intake and a low-risk meat diet was associated with a small decrease in total and cancer mortality."
Limitations of this study include possible residual confounding by smoking; possible measurement error; and cohort predominantly non-Hispanic white, more educated, with less smoking, less fat and red meat intake, and more intake of fiber and fruit and vegetables than similarly aged adults in the US population, limiting generalizability.
"These results complement the recommendations by the American Institute for Cancer Research and the World Cancer Research Fund to reduce red and processed meat intake to decrease cancer incidence," the study authors write. "Future research should investigate the relation between subtypes of meat and specific causes of mortality."
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:543-545, 562-571.Ômega 3 reduz câncer de próstata
Atenção aos aficionados por produtos naturais e aos que desacreditam deles: consumir a partir de 500mg de ácidos graxos ômega 3 na dieta ou suplementos reduz a incidência de câncer de próstata e de câncer de próstata avançado. Foi o que um estudo publicado numa das mais prestigiadas revistas de cancerologia do mundo concluiu. A notícia completa segue abaixo:
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Mar 25 - Results of a case-control study suggest that a high intake of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids protects against advanced prostate cancer, and this effect may be modified by a genetic variant of COX-2, a key enzyme in fatty acid metabolism and inflammation.
"Previous research has shown protection (by omega-3 fatty acids) against prostate cancer, but this is one of the first studies to show protection against advanced prostate cancer and interaction with COX-2," Dr. John S. Witte of the University of California, San Francisco noted in a statement from the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
Dr. Witte and colleagues studied 466 men diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer and 478 age- and ethnicity-matched controls. They assessed diet using a food frequency questionnaire and genotyped the men for nine COX-2 single nucleotide polymorphisms.
In an online issue of the AACR journal Clinical Cancer Research, the researchers report that increasing intake of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids was strongly associated with a decreased risk of aggressive prostate cancer.
Men in the highest quartiles of long chain omega-3 fatty acid intake had a 63 percent reduced risk of aggressive prostate cancer (odds ratio, 0.37) compared to men in the lowest quartile.
"Importantly," Dr. Witte and colleagues say, this protective effect was even stronger in men who carried the COX-2 single nucleotide polymorphism rs4647310, a risk factor for prostate cancer.
Specifically, men with low intake of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and this particular variant had a more than fivefold increased risk of advanced prostate cancer (odds ratio, 5.49), whereas men with high intake of omega-3 fatty acids had a substantially reduced risk, even if they carried the COX-2 rs4647310 variant.
In other words, the increased risk of prostate cancer associated with the COX-2 rs4647310 variant was "essentially reversed by increasing omega-3 fatty acid intake by a half a gram per day," Dr. Witte said.
"If you want to think of the overall inverse association in terms of fish, where omega-3 fatty acids are commonly derived, the strongest effect was seen from eating dark fish such as salmon one or more times per week," he added.
Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:7.
Clique aqui!
Postagens populares
-
Malformações linfáticas (ML), também conhecidas como linfangiomas, são anomalias vasculares congênitas incomuns, representando muitas vezes...
-
Os tumores cerebrais em crianças são raros - em Fortaleza, CE pouco mais de 1 criança em cada 100 mil vai ter um tumor cerebral, algo em tor...
-
A prestigiada revista Lancet Oncology publicou recentemente o resultado de um ensaio clínico fase II que avaliou um novo tratamento em paci...
-
Essa aula de atualização em gliomas de crianças e adolescentes foi apresentada em 15 de setembro de 2011, dois anos atrás, na Liga do Cânc...
-
Em junho de 2008, um grupo de dermatologistas franceses publicou uma carta no New England Journal of Medicine , um dos mais prestigiados jo...