An ovarian cancer blog which includes quality resource materials: education, research, social networking, genetics and (some) healthcare politics.
“Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.”
Albert Einstein
| (Nanowerk News) A major complicating factor in the treatment of ovarian cancer is that malignant cells are often shed into the patient's abdominal cavity. These cells can then spread to other tissues, seeding new tumors that make effective therapy difficult. To overcome this problem, researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology created magnetic nanoparticles that can selectively bind to and remove ovarian tumor cells from abdominal cavity fluid. John F. McDonald led the research team that reported their work in the journal Nanomedicine ("Selective removal of ovarian cancer cells from human ascites fluid using magnetic nanoparticles"). | |
| Research by other investigators had identified a protein known as EphA2 as a highly selective marker for free-floating ovarian cancer cells. Dr. McDonald and his collaborators coated magnetic cobalt-iron oxide nanoparticles with a molecular mimic of the natural ligand for this protein, a molecule known as ephrin-A1, to serve as a trap for ovarian cancer cells floating in ascites fluid, the liquid found in the intestinal cavity. The idea behind this approach is that the nanoparticles could be added to ascites fluid and then trapped with a magnetic, removing any ovarian cancer cells that had bound to the eprhin-A1 mimic. | |
| They first tested their nanoparticles using ascites fluid from mice with human ovarian tumors and found that they could trap free-floating tumor cells using magnetic separation. They then repeated this experiment using ascites fluid obtained from four women with ovarian cancer, and again showed that they could remove all of the EphA2-positive cells from the intestinal fluid samples. The researchers suggest that these nanoparticles could be used in a system that removes ascites fluid from the intestinal cavity, using a relatively non-invasive method akin to dialysis, in conjunction with standard ovarian cancer therapy. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In this study, neuropsychological test performance did not differ significantly between ovarian cancer survivors who were in remission and patients with recurrent disease and receiving treatment. Cognitive impairment was evident in a subset of patients, although group means test scores were within the average range. Additional research using prospective longitudinal designs is needed to clarify the contribution of disease, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and other risk factors to cognitive outcome in this clinical population.
In this study, neuropsychological test performance did not differ significantly between ovarian cancer survivors who were in remission and patients with recurrent disease and receiving treatment. Cognitive impairment was evident in a subset of patients, although group means test scores were within the average range. Additional research using prospective longitudinal designs is needed to clarify the contribution of disease, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and other risk factors to cognitive outcome in this clinical population.
| Condition | Intervention |
|---|---|
| Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Breast Cancer Head and Neck Cancer Ovarian Cancer Esophageal Cancer Lymphoma |
Other: PET/CT scan |
"Managing clinical trials, of whatever size and complexity, requires efficient trial management. Trials fail because tried and tested systems handed down through apprenticeships have not been documented, evaluated or published to guide new trialists starting out in this important field. For the past three decades trialists have invented and re-invented the trial management wheel. The authors suggest that to improve the successful, timely delivery of important clinical trials, for patient benefit, it is time to produce standard trial management guidelines and develop robust methods of evaluation."
| 7 JUNE 2010 | ||
These Clinical Spotlight interviews, with accompanying eNewsflash and downloadable slides, discuss the topic of targeting angiogenesis in the treatment of ovarian cancer with a focus on the following data release: #LBA1: Phase III trial of bevacizumab (BEV) in the primary treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), primary peritoneal cancer (PPC), or fallopian tube cancer (FTC): A Gynecologic Oncology Group study The first interview is an expert analysis with Gini Fleming, MD, from the University of Chicago, Illinois in the United States, and Bradley Monk, MD, from the University of California Irvine, Orange, California, United States The second interview is a supplemental perspective and discussion with Bradley Monk, MD, from the University of California Irvine, Orange, California, United States, and Michael Birrer, MD, PhD, from the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts in the United States. View the Primary Expert Analysis with Gini Fleming, MD, and Bradley Monk, MD, and access downloadable slides  View the Supplemental Perspectives and Discussion with Bradley Monk, MD, and Michael Birrer, MD, PhD, and access downloadable slides |
| Commentary |  | |
|---|---|---|
| | Learning Accountability for Patient Outcomes JAMA. 2010;304(2):204-205. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.979
Each year, an estimated 100 000 patients die of health care–associated infections, another 44 000 to 98 000 die of other preventable errors, and tens of thousands more die of diagnostic errors or failure to receive recommended therapies.1-3 Physicians are overconfident about the quality of care they provide, believing things will go right rather than wrong, assuming they provide higher-quality care than the evidence suggests, and thinking they alone have sufficient knowledge and skills to provide care. Teamwork failures are common contributors to harmful errors. In many cases, someone knew something was wrong and either did not speak up or spoke up and was ignored. It is unclear how many teamwork and communication failures result from arrogance. Most clinicians have personal stories of arrogance causing patient harm. My own involved a patient who had classic signs of a latex allergy, but for whom the operating surgeon refused to Author Affiliations: Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine and Surgery, School of Medicine, and Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, and School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. | |||||||||||||
Insofar as Berwick is a radical, he's a radical in believing that vastly more power has to be devolved to the judgments, preferences and desires of patients. "An overarching aim for an ideal practice [is] that its patients would say of it, 'They give me exactly the help I need and want exactly when I need and want it,' " writes Berwick. He means it. When a patient wants someone in the room and the doctor doesn't, Berwick believes the patient should win.
| World Cancer Research Fund International First Floor 19 Harley Street London, W1G 9QJ, UK Tel: +44-20-73434200 | Fax: +44-20-73434220 http://www.wcrf.org/ |
American Institute for Cancer Research 1759 R Street N.W. Washington, DC 20009, USA Tel: 202-328-7744 | Fax: 202-328-7226 http://www.aicr.org/ |
, and c-kit
and -
