Archive for the ‘Mesothelioma Clinic’ Category

Mesothelioma-incurable asbestos cancer

Mesothelioma-incurable asbestos cancer For more info visit: mesothelioma-clinic.blogspot.com
Video Rating: 1 / 5

Mean Durations of Asbestos Exposure and Chest Abnormalities

Mean Durations of Asbestos Exposure and Chest Abnormalities

One interesting study is called, “Radiological abnormalities among sheet-metal workers in the construction industry in the United States and Canada : relationship to asbestos exposure” – INIST Diffusion – 2, Allée du Parc de Brabois F-54514 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy Cedex.  Here is an excerpt: “Abstract – We investigated the possible adverse health effects to sheet-metal workers who had past exposure to asbestos. A cross- sectional medical examination of 1330 workers was conducted during 1986 and 1987 in seven clities in the United States and Canada. A total of 1016 workers had been employed for at least 35 y in the industry, and the mean duration from onset of asbestos exposure was 39.5 y (SD=7.41 y). Chest x-ray abnormalities were found in more than half of the group. Pleural fibrosis, the most frequently found abnormality, was present in 47.0% of the cases and was the only abnormality found in 27.8% of cases; parenchymal interstitial fibrosis, found in 33.1% of cases, was the only abnormality found in 16.2% of cases.”

Another interesting study is called, “Cancer Mortality Rate Among Workers in the Asbestos Industry of the Urals” by Kogan, F M, Guselnikova, N A, Gulevskaya, M R.  Here is an excerpt: “Based on a twenty year study of the mortality rate of workers in the mining of asbestos, it was found that the death rate was higher than among the rest of the population with reference to cancer of the lungs, stomach, intestines and cervix. A higher incidence of cancer was noted in the age group over 50; the mortality of women working with asbestos was found to be lower than the men in these areas, but considerably higher than among the female population. It is believed that a program of medical awareness should be instituted in work areas where people are employed in the mining, processing and use of asbestos, and that the achievement of low levels of dust in these areas would be a major factor in the lowering of cancer incidence of industrial workers.”

Another interesting study is called, “The Evaluation Of Airborne Asbestos Fibres Using A Scanning Electron Microscope” By S. T. Beckett – Here is an excerpt: “Abstract – Asbestos fibres sampled on Nuclepore filters can be directly examined by scanning electron microscope in much greater detail than is possible using the conventional optical microscope/membrane filter technique. Results obtained by the two methods for fibres  5 in length were in good agreement. The new technique could facilitate the development of automatic counting methods for asbestos fibres.”

Another interesting study is called, “Malignant vascular tumours of the pleura in “asbestos” workers and endothelial differentiation in malignant Mesothelioma” by R L Attanoosa, S K Suvarnab, E Rheadc, M Stephensc, T J Lockee, M N Sheppardd, F D Pooleyf, A R Gibbsa – Thorax 2000;55:860-863.  Here is an excerpt: “Abstract – BACKGROUND Three cases of diffuse malignant vascular tumours of the pleura are described which mimicked malignant mesothelioma clinically and pathologically (so called “pseudomesothelioma”). All had occupational histories of exposure to asbestos. The relationship of these tumours to mesothelioma and asbestos exposure is discussed.

METHODS To examine the histogenetic relationship between mesothelioma and these three tumours an immunohistochemical analysis of vascular marker (CD31, CD34, and Von Willebrand factor) expression was undertaken in 92 cases of pleural mesothelioma, in addition to these three tumours. Electron microscopic fibre analysis of lung tissue was performed on each of the three cases to assess asbestos fibre content.

RESULTS Diffuse pleural epithelioid haemangioendotheliomas may closely resemble malignant mesothelioma clinically and pathologically but, of the 92 pleural mesotheliomas tested, none showed expression of CD31, CD34, and Von Willebrand factor. Although all three cases had claimed exposure to asbestos, ferruginous bodies typical of asbestos were only seen by light microscopy in case 2, and only in this subject was the asbestos fibre content raised in comparison with the range seen in a non-exposed background population. The latent period in the pleural epithelioid haemangioendotheliomas ranged from 18 to 60 years.

CONCLUSIONS Endothelial differentiation does not appear to occur in mesothelioma and therefore should be clearly separated from it. No definite association between pleural epithelioid haemangioendothelioma and exposure to asbestos can be made from this small series but further investigation is warranted.”

We all owe a debt of gratitude to these fine researchers for their important work.  If you found any of these excerpts helpful, please read the studies in their entirety.

Monty Wrobleski is the author of this article, for more information please click on the following links:

Depuy ASR Recall

Depuy ASR Recall

Mesothelioma Lawyer

 


Article from articlesbase.com

Pulmonary Toxicity and Malignant Mesotheliomas

Pulmonary Toxicity and Malignant Mesotheliomas

Another interesting study is called, “Potential Role of Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors in Mesothelioma: Clinical Experience with Suberoylanilide Hydroxamic Acid
Clinical Lung Cancer” – Chest Surg Clin N Am. 1994 Feb;4(1):113-26 – Allen KB, Faber LP, Warren WH.  Here is an excerpt: “Abstract – Diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma is an uncommon, uniformly fatal malignancy. Controversy continues to surround the optimal surgical procedure, both extrapleural pneumonectomy or pleurectomy, which should be utilized in conjunction with post-operative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. This retrospective study reviews a single institution’s experience with extrapleural pneumonectomy and pleurectomy in the multimodality treatment of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Another interesting study is called, “Phase II trial of mitomycin in malignant mesothelioma.” By Bajorin, D, Kelsen, D, Mintzer, DM – CANCER TREAT. REP. Vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 857-858. 1987.  Here is an excerpt: “Malignant mesothelioma is a highly lethal neoplasm. Recent data noted in vivo antineoplastic effects of a combination of mitomycin and cisplatin (DDP) greater than either agent alone in human tumor xenograft mesothelioma. While DDP singly has some efficacy, mitomycin has not been systematically evaluated in this disease. A phase II trial was therefore conducted to determine the activity of mitomycin in malignant mesothelioma. Pulmonary toxicity was substantial. Two responding patients developed dyspnea and hypoxemia occurring at cumulative doses of 40 and 50 mg/m super(2), respectively. One patient had a transbronchial biopsy consistent with drug-induced pulmonary fibrosis and never achieved resolution of hypoxemia with corticosteroid therapy prior to death from progressive mesothelioma. The second patient responded to corticosteroid therapy with resolution of dyspnea and hypoxemia but relapsed after discontinuing mitomycin.”

Another interesting study is called, “Immunohistological staining of reactive mesothelium, mesothelioma, and lung carcinoma with a panel of monoclonal antibodies.” – J Clin Pathol 1987;40:19-25 by A K Ghosh, K C Gatter, M S Dunnill, D Y Mason.  Here is an excerpt: “Abstract – A panel of seven monoclonal antiepithelial antibodies of different specificities, including anticytokeratin, human milk fat globule membrane, C, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were used with the alkaline phosphatase-antialkaline phosphatase (APAAP) immunostaining technique to determine their value in the differentiation between benign and malignant mesothelial cells and lung carcinoma in histological preparations. The anticytokeratin antibody reacted strongly with all cases of reactive mesothelium, mesothelioma, and lung carcinoma. Antibodies to human milk fat globule membrane and the Ca antigen stained mesothelioma and carcinoma and 43% of cases of reactive mesothelium. Staining for carcinoembryonic antigen was not detected in reactive mesothelium or mesothelioma, but was present in most of the lung carcinomas. CEA seemed to be the single most useful marker in distinguishing carcinoma from mesothelioma in that a positive reaction for CEA would indicate carcinoma rather than mesothelioma.”

Another interesting study is called, “Podoplanin as a marker for Mesothelioma” by Noriko Kimura, Itaru Kimura – Pathology International – Volume 55, Issue 2, pages 83–86, February 2005.  Here is an excerpt: “Podoplanin is a specific marker for lymph vessel endothelial cells. It was noted that podoplanin is expressed in reactive mesothelial cells. The utility of podoplanin for the histological diagnosis of tumors was then investigated, especially for mesothelioma. Immunohistochemical study of podoplanin was carried out in five malignant mesotheliomas and 118 other tumors including 93 adenocarcinomas, four squamous cell carcinomas, six gastrointestinal stromal tumors and five endocrine tumors. Immunoreactivity for podoplanin was demonstrated on the cell membrane of tumor cells for all mesotheliomas. All other tumors were negative for podoplanin. Among the many antibodies used for differential diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma, podoplanin has the potential to be an excellent tumor marker in both specificity and sensitivity. The utility of podoplanin as a marker for mesothelioma will be confirmed by further studies.”

We all owe a debt of gratitude to these fine researchers.  If you found any of these excerpts interesting, please read the studies in their entirety.

Monty Wrobleski is the author of this article.  For more information please click on the following links

Depuy Hip Recall Attorney

Depuy Hip Recall Lawyer

Malignant Mesothelioma

 

 


Article from articlesbase.com

4 Major Factors to Consider When You Want to Participate in a Mesothelioma Clinical Trial

4 Major Factors to Consider When You Want to Participate in a Mesothelioma Clinical Trial

Clinical trials for new mesothelioma treatments give hope for the discovery of a possible cure for the deadly cancer. Mesothelioma is an aggressive form of asbestos related cancer with a very high mortality rate, most victims die within 1-2 years after the diagnosis. The patients currently involved in mesothelioma clinical trials will hopefully lead to the discovery of better and more efficient ways of treating the disease. Consulting with a physician about various available clinical trials should be considered at the initial diagnosis.

A clinical trial is a process that new treatment options and medications pass through before they are approved for use by the general population. Many patients with terminal diseases are advised to participate in clinical trials as a last hope for a cure. Many drugs and therapies that become the standard therapy of care for many diseases have gone through an extensive period of testing with clinical trials before they were approved for general use.

Factors to Consider Before Taking Part in a Clinical Trial There are a variety of factors to take into consideration when considering participation in a clinical trial.

1- The distance to the trial center and the financial implications of taking part in the clinical trial

Clinical trials most times take place in large metropolitan hospitals located in the major cities, some of the patients however live in smaller towns far from these major cities. It is important to know how often participants will need to see the physicians coordinating the trials and how long each visit will take, and how much the hotel and travel expenses will likely cost.

2- Selection criteria for the trial

Not everyone qualifies for a clinical trial ,the criteria for selection for a particular drug trial varies. Some clinical trials will want patients that have tried using some other medication which did not work, while other clinical trials require that the participating patients have not started any treatment for their disease.

3- The risk factor

Another factor when considering a clinical trial is the loss of control over medical treatment. In some clinical trials, referred to as randomized studies, patients receive the traditional treatment while others receive the experimental treatment. The patient does not choose which treatment they receive, nor do they likely know what treatment is being administered. There is no guarantee that a participant will receive the experimental treatment. There is always a risk involved in using experimental drugs and treatments, they might have unknown side effects that will only show up when they are used by human beings.

4- General state of health of the patient

A patient’s general health is also a major consideration when preparing to participate in a clinical trial. Patients with other pre-existing medical disease will not be allowed to participate in most clinical trials as well as patients on other major medications. The presence of other medical diseases might affect the accuracy and reliability of the results of the clinical trials. Some of those other major medications might also interact negatively with the actions of the drugs that are on trial.

Bello kamorudeen.For complete information on mesothelioma visit http://www.mesotheliomacorner.blogspot.com


Article from articlesbase.com

Categories