Four in 10 get cancer - charity

14 July 2011 Last updated at 02:01 GMT By Adam Brimelow Health Correspondent, BBC News Cancer charity says four in ten will get the disease Rising cancer rates mean four in 10 people in the UK get the disease at some point in their lives, a health charity says.

Macmillan Cancer Support says the figure has risen significantly in the past decade.

The charity says the rise poses a "massive challenge" for the NHS.

Ministers in England say they are working to improve cancer survival rates and the quality of life after diagnosis and treatment.

Macmillan Cancer Support says a decade ago about a third of people, or 33%, developed cancer at some point in their lives. The charity says that figure has risen to more than 40%.

The estimates are drawn from projections published two years ago in the British Journal of Cancer, which concluded that at the end of 2008 there were two million cancer survivors in the UK and that the figure was rising every year.

Macmillan also looked at recent cancer incidence and mortality statistics for the UK, indicating that 310,000 people were diagnosed with cancer in 2008.

About 157,000 people died from the disease, and 89,000 who had been diagnosed with cancer died from other causes, making a total of 246,000 who died "with" cancer.

The charity says this accounted for 42% of total deaths in the UK - which stood at 580,000.

Macmillan says the increase is partly down to an ageing population - older people are more likely to develop cancer. It says lifestyle factors, such as diet and exercise, and improved diagnosis have also contributed to the rise.

'Massive challenge'

Continue reading the main story

We have a massive challenge ahead if we are to keep up with the relentless toll cancer takes on people's health, and the NHS must rise to it”

End Quote Ciaran Devane Macmillan Cancer Support The chief executive of Macmillan Cancer Support, Ciaran Devane, said the calculations had important implications for the health service.

"It is really alarming that the number of people who will get cancer is now well past one in three and that there are so many more people with cancer today than even 10 years ago," he said.

"There are currently two million people living with cancer in the UK and that number is doubling to four million over the next 20 years. Yet no-one thinks the country can afford to double its spending on cancer. We've therefore got to become twice as effective in how we spend that money."

The charity says there is growing evidence of the long-term health problems many cancer patients are experiencing long after initial diagnosis and treatment. It says there is a need for more services to help people stay well at home, rather than waiting until they require emergency hospital treatment.

Major issue

The Care Services Minister for England, Paul Burstow, said it was absolutely right for Macmillan to raise this as a major issue.

"We agree with Macmillan. That's why we are working to deliver more personalised care and more help to keep people well in their own homes. We are investing more than ?750m over four years to improve cancer outcomes," he said.

The chair of the Royal College of GPs, Dr Clare Gerada, said the figures highlighted the increasing impact of cancer on many people's lives.

"What is clear from this study is that cancer survival is not the whole picture. All healthcare professionals have a duty to see that patients receive the best possible care, and aftercare, following a diagnosis of cancer, and to ensure their patients are not just living, but living well," she said.

View the original article here

Gene link to 70% of breast cancer

14 July 2011 Last updated at 17:22 GMT By James Gallagher Health reporter, BBC News Some breast cancers are much harder to treat A gene has been linked to 70% of hard-to-treat breast cancers which are resistant to hormone therapies, in US research.

The study published in Nature used a new technique which tested hundreds of genes at once, rather than one at a time.

Scientists said there was "a lot of potential for significant impact" if drugs could be developed.

Cancer Research UK said it would be interesting to see where the study led.

Hormones can force tumour growth, so drugs which interfere with that process, such tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors, are used as treatments.

Up to a third of breast cancers, however, are not hormone driven, so these drugs do not work and there are fewer treatments available for these patients.

Turn off

The researchers at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, Massachusetts, used small, disruptive, snippets of genetic material which can turn off genes.

They injected cancerous cells with the snippets to investigate which genes were necessary for tumour formation and growth.

Continue reading the main story

It would be very premature to predict the response in the general population”

End Quote Dr Richard Possemato Lead researcher They found that the gene - PHGDH -was highly active, far more than usual, in 70% of tumours which did not respond to hormone therapies.

Over expression of the gene results in the chemistry of a cancerous cell changing and is involved in the production of an amino acid - serine.

The hope is that by identifying the gene which leads to some breast cancers, a drug can be developed which interferes with its activity.

Dr Richard Possemato told the BBC: "There is a lot of potential for a significant impact if a therapy targeting the serine pathway were found to be effective.

"However, as we do not treat any patients in our study, or develop any chemical inhibitors of the pathway, it would be very premature to predict the response in the general population."

The technique used allowed researchers to analyse large numbers of genes, they said "the technological advance is one of scale".

Cancer Research UK's Henry Scowcroft said: "The more scientists delve into cancer's inner secrets, the more clues to future treatments they discover.

"This early work has identified a possible new avenue for future research into a hard-to-treat form of breast cancer, and it will be interesting to see where it leads."

View the original article here

'Most lung cancer deaths' in city

12 July 2011 Last updated at 08:18 GMT Liverpool Primary Care Trust has the highest mortality rate for lung cancer in the country, a new report claims.

Both Manchester and Liverpool PCTs also have the highest incidences of the disease, the research by the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, shows.

It claims chances of survival are a "postcode lottery" with patients in Herefordshire three times more likely to survive than those in Liverpool.

The report will be launched at the House of Commons later.

The research, Explaining Variations in Lung Cancer in England, also found significant differences in how lung cancer patients are treated in different parts of the country.

Patient survival

Dr Rosemary Gillespie, chief executive of The Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, said: "Your chance of surviving lung cancer and receiving a treatment which could benefit you should not be decided by where you live in the country.

"Sadly, it is clear that this is indeed the case and there is significant geographical variation in patient survival and patient access to care and treatment."

The report found chances of seeing specialist nurses and the availability of different treatment such as surgery or chemotherapy or hospital admission times all varied depending on where a patient lives.

Dr Gillespie said it was hoped the report will help improve the standards and increase survival rates across the country.

Lung cancer is still the most common cause of cancer death in England.

One of the biggest problems was many people were diagnosed too late, it found.

Only 30% of lung cancer patients survived more than a year past diagnoses compared to 96% of those with breast cancer.

It claimed could be in part due to a long road to diagnoses with a third of patients reporting they saw their GP three times or more before eventually being diagnosed.

View the original article here

Phones 'unlikely' to cause cancer

2 July 2011 Last updated at 02:34 GMT By James Gallagher Health reporter, BBC News Are mobile phones safe? Mounting evidence suggests there is no link between mobile phones and brain cancer, according to a review by the Institute of Cancer Research.

It stated that despite near universal mobile phone use, there had been no jump in the number of tumours.

Its report, in Environmental Health Perspectives, also identified flaws in many studies investigating a link.

A few weeks ago the World Health Organization said mobiles were "possibly carcinogenic".

The decision by the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) put mobile phones in the same category as coffee, in which a link could not be ruled out, but it could not be proved either.

Heavy users

One of the biggest studies into a link was Interphone, a comparison of 2,708 patients with a brain tumour (glioma) with a similar number of people without.

The study concluded that mobile phone users were less likely to get brain tumours, but heavy users had an increased risk.

Professor Anthony Swerdlow, from the Institute of Cancer Research, said there was a risk of bias when patients with brain tumours answered questionnaires about their phone use.

Ten patients in the study said they were on the phone for more than 12 hours per day.

He added that in the space of 20 years, mobile phone use had gone from being rare to 4.6 billion users worldwide.

Yet evidence from many Western countries showed "no indication of increases in brain tumour incidence".

Professor Swerdlow said: "The trend in the accumulating evidence is increasingly against the hypothesis that mobile phone use can cause brain tumours in adults."

Childhood exposure

The report admits that there is still some uncertainty.

Studies have looked at a link associated with 10 to 15 years of mobile phone use and it remains a possibility that longer exposure could cause cancer.

However, Professor Swerdlow argues that if studies looking at longer exposure produce similar results, then a link will become "increasingly implausible".

He adds that "there is far less evidence of the effect of childhood exposure, but there is no reason to believe it causes tumours".

Cancer Research UK's Dr Joanna Owens said: "Although these researchers admit that we can't entirely rule out the idea of a link between mobile phones and brain cancer, they remind us that in most of the research, including their large international study, mobile phone users don't seem to be at increased risk.

"We don't yet have data on very long-term use of mobile phones, or for the effects on cancer risk in children, so it is probably wise to encourage children to limit their mobile phone call time."

Professor David Coggon, University of Southampton, said: "This is a carefully considered review, and the conclusions are justified.

"Mobile phones appear not to cause brain cancer in the first 10-15 years after people start using them.

"Continued research is needed in case there are harmful effects in the longer term, but the news so far is good."

View the original article here

Vaccine hope for prostate cancer

19 June 2011 Last updated at 17:13 GMT By James Gallagher Health reporter, BBC News Cancer vaccines make the immune system target tumours A new approach to developing cancer vaccines has been used to treat prostate tumours, an international team of scientists has said.

DNA from healthy cells was used to create a vaccine which cured 80% of mice, Nature Medicine reports.

The researchers believe the principle could be applied to other cancers and have begun studies on melanoma.

Cancer Research UK said it was a significant development, but human trials would be needed.

Cancer vaccines are not new. Unlike traditional vaccines which protect against infection, these work by making the immune system attack tumours already in the body.

Specifically they target markers on the surface of cancerous cells, known as antigens.

Professor Alan Melcher, of the University of Leeds, said: "The biggest challenge in immunology is developing antigens that can target the tumour without causing harm elsewhere."

Mobilising defences

Researchers in Leeds and at the Mayo Clinic, in the US, broke up chunks of DNA from healthy prostate cells and inserted them into a virus.

Continue reading the main story

This is an interesting and significant study which could really broaden out the field of immunotherapy research”

End Quote Professor Peter Johnson Cancer Research UK The mice were then repeatedly infected with the virus.

The prostate DNA made the virus produce a wide range of prostate antigens, so when the immune system battled the virus it learned to attack the cancerous prostate cells.

Crucially, healthy prostate cells and other parts of the body were not affected.

In the lab, a course of nine injections with the virus cured 80% of mice with prostate tumours.

Professor Melcher said human trials were years rather than months away.

"We have reason to be quite excited. It's not out-of-the-blue research, but based on immunotherpay and virus treatments which are looking very promising and that is what is really exciting," he added

Doctors recently claimed that the drug Ipilimumab, which stimulates the immune system to fight cancer, could increase life expectancy.

Researchers say using healthy DNA is a "proof of principle" which could have implications for vaccines for other cancers. They are trialing the same technique in mice with skin cancer.

Professor Peter Johnson, Cancer Research UK's chief clinician, said: "This is an interesting and significant study which could really broaden out the field of immunotherapy research.

"Although the vaccine didn't trigger the immune system to overreact and cause serious side effects in mice, it will need to be further developed and tested in humans before we can tell whether this technique could one day be used to treat cancer patients."

Dr Kate Holmes, research manager at the Prostate Cancer Charity, said the study provided "new hope".

"Although we are hopeful that the results of this study could help to form the basis of a new cancer vaccine in future, it is important to remember that the researchers have only investigated the potential of their vaccine in mice.

"Further research looking at its effect in men is needed. We look forward to the outcome."

View the original article here

'Benefit risk' to cancer patients

12 June 2011 Last updated at 23:04 GMT Macmillan says financial suppot is "crucial" for cancer patients Thousands of cancer patients could lose benefits under government proposals, a charity has warned.

Macmillan Cancer Support is attacking plans in the Welfare Reform Bill to remove the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) after a year.

It estimates 7,000 people could be affected - and could lose up to ?94 a week, even if they are not ready to return to work.

The government said people receiving treatment would not be affected.

The Welfare Reform Bill enters the report stage in the House of Commons on Monday.

ESA claimants are divided into two categories - those undergoing treatment are in the "support group" and there is no time-limit.

But those who are deemed able to perform "work-related activities" which might help them eventually return to work face means-testing after 12 months.

Anyone with savings of over ?16,000, or whose partner either works more than 24 hours or earns more than ?149 a week would lose all their ESA.

'Devastating impact'

Macmillan wants the bill amended so everyone who is eligible for ESA will receive it for as long as they need it, regardless of their financial circumstances.

Continue reading the main story

It is crucial that patients are not forced to return to work before they are ready”

End Quote Professor Jane Maher Macmillan Cancer Support Ciaran Devane, chief executive of the charity, said: "Many cancer patients will lose this crucial benefit simply because they have not recovered quickly enough.

"The majority want to return to work as it can represent a milestone in their recovery and a return to normality, in addition to the obvious financial benefits."

He added: "This proposal in the Welfare Reform Bill will have a devastating impact on many cancer patients."

Professor Jane Maher, Macmillan's chief medical officer added: "In my experience one year is simply not long enough for many people to recover from cancer.

"The serious physical and psychological side-effects of cancer can last for many months, even years, after treatment has finished.

"It is crucial that patients are not forced to return to work before they are ready."

A spokeswoman for the Department for Work and Pensions said: "We are working closely with Macmillan to ensure that people with cancer get all the support from us they need.

"Those who are severely ill and are in the support group of ESA will see no change to their benefit entitlement. Nor will there be any change for those on income-related ESA."

She added: "We have recently amended legislation so that individuals awaiting or between courses of certain types of chemotherapy will automatically be placed in the support group."

View the original article here

Cancer patients 'to be worse off'

15 June 2011 Last updated at 14:04 GMT Are cancer patients losing ?94 a week?

Labour leader Ed Miliband has called for a halt to welfare changes for cancer patients, claiming 7,000 people will be ?94 a week worse off.

The government will take money from people "in need" by introducing means-testing for some patients 12 months after diagnosis, he told MPs.

But Prime Minister David Cameron disputed the figures.

He dismissed Mr Miliband's comments as a "smokescreen" for Labour's reluctance to back reform of the welfare system.

The row over proposed changes to the benefits system stems from the government's current reassessment of all those on incapacity benefit to see if they are able to work.

'Amazed'

Cancer charities argue that changes outlined in the government's Welfare Reform Bill - which is being debated in detail by MPs on Wednesday - would see some people being made worse off a year after being diagnosed with cancer.

Rather than receiving employment support allowance - the successor to incapacity benefit - as they do now, people recovering from a serious illness who are reclassified following a fitness-to-work test will see their benefits means-tested after 12 months.

Continue reading the main story Ben Wright Political correspondent, BBC News

No more Nasal Ed. Today saw the hatching of Angry Ed.

He shouts, he growls, he bangs his fist and jabs his finger.

When Miliband stood up, the Lib Dem and Tory benches erupted in cheers for Labour's leader.

They think he's a loser who'll help them win.

Certainly Ed Miliband's questioning of David Cameron last week fizzled out like many before.

The Labour leader has tended to skip between subjects each session and leave himself open to swift counterattack by Mr Cameron who tends to swat his opponent away.

Not today.

Ed Miliband drilled down into a technical but emotive welfare issue that the prime minister was clearly not expecting.

As if galvanised by the nameless critics muttering about his problems in the papers, Miliband grilled Mr Cameron with anger, focus and passion.

The arguments about the policy will go on through the day.

But when he sat down it was Mr Miliband's team who were cheering for the first time in weeks.

Today at least, he silenced his critics.

If their family income is more than ?150 a week, the charities say these people could lose ?94 a week in contributory allowance.

During a heated prime minister's questions session, Mr Miliband told MPs: "These are people who have worked hard all their lives, done the right thing, who have paid their taxes and when they are in need, the prime minister is taking money away from them.

"Britain's cancer charities have been making these arguments for months. I am amazed the prime minister does not know about these arguments. How can it be right that people with cancer, 7,000 people with cancer, are losing ?94 a week?"

But Mr Cameron said the same benefits would be available for the first 12 months, as under the last government and, for the most vulnerable, support could continue indefinitely.

"It is the same test as under the Labour government and it is put in place fairly," he said.

"The whole point about our benefit reforms is that there are proper medical tests so we support those who cannot work, as a generous and tolerant and compassionate country should, but we make sure that those who can work have to go out to work so that we don't reward bad behaviour."

The prime minister accused his counterpart of using the issue as a "smokescreen" to hide the fact his party was "divided" over welfare reforms - a claim that drew an angry response from the Labour leader who said the claim was a "disgrace".

'Pragmatic'

Labour MPs also called on Mr Cameron to apologise for his "smokescreen" comment.

Asked about the 7,000 figure, employment minister Chris Grayling said it was "pure guesswork".

But he told the BBC that the government was having to make "difficult" decision on welfare due to the size of the deficit it had inherited.

"We can't afford to continue to provide, in difficult times financially, support for people through the welfare state who have got other financial means to depend on. That is one of the pragmatic realities of life today."

Macmillan Cancer Support, which has lead the campaign against the changes, said the government's position was "hard to understand" and it would take about ?34m a year to change it and restore the assistance.

The charity said those affected were not the most seriously ill, who would continue to receive indefinite support, but those who were on the road to recovery and who were expected to take steps to prepare themselves for a return to work - such as preparing a CV.

"We're very hopeful that the government will look at this again, that they can't possibly be trying to penalise cancer patients, right at the point when they're trying to return to work," the charity's Mike Hobday, a former Labour candidate, said.

Are you affected by the issues in this story?

View the original article here

Frog-skin drug could treat cancer

7 June 2011 Last updated at 05:52 GMT A protein from the waxy monkey frog can inhibit the growth of blood vessels Scientists at Queen's University Belfast have won an award for work on frog and toad skins which could lead to treatments for over 70 major diseases.

The researchers received the commendation at the Medical Futures Innovation Awards in London on Monday.

The research, led by Professor Chris Shaw at Queen's School of Pharmacy, has identified two proteins which can regulate how blood vessels grow.

The team are the only entry from NI to win at this year's awards.

They discovered that a protein from the waxy monkey frog can inhibit the growth of blood vessels and could be used to kill cancer tumours.

Professor Shaw said that most cancer tumours can only grow to a certain size before they need blood vessels to grow into the tumour to supply it with vital oxygen and nutrients.

"Stopping the blood vessels from growing will make the tumour less likely to spread and may eventually kill it," he said.

"This has the potential to transform cancer from a terminal illness into a chronic condition."

The team have also discovered that the giant firebellied toad produces a protein which can stimulate blood vessel growth and could help patients recover from injuries and operations much more quickly.

Serendipity

"This has the potential to treat an array of diseases and conditions that require blood vessels to repair quickly, such as wound healing, organ transplants, diabetic ulcers, and damage caused by strokes or heart conditions," Professor Shaw said.

According to the professor, scientists and drugs companies around the world, despite an investment of around $4-5bn, have yet to develop a drug that can effectively target, control and regulate the growth of blood vessels.

"The aim of our work at Queen's is to unlock the potential of the natural world - in this case the secretions found on frog and toad skins - to alleviate human suffering. We are absolutely convinced that the natural world holds the solutions to many of our problems, we just need to pose the right questions to find them.

"It would be a great shame to have something in nature that is potentially the wonder drug to treat cancer and not aim to do everything in our power to make it work."

Commenting on the work of Professor Shaw and his colleagues, Professor Brian Walker and Dr Tianbao Chen, the judging panel said they wanted to encourage the researchers to take their work to "the next level".

"Many of the great discoveries have been through serendipity and Professor Shaw's idea is indeed very innovative and exciting in an area of much unmet need," the panel said

"It is important to realise that the innovation is at an early stage and much work needs to be done to turn this in to a clinical therapy."

View the original article here

Brisk walks fight prostate cancer

24 May 2011 Last updated at 16:07 GMT By Michelle Roberts Health reporter, BBC News Walks must be brisk to have an effect, the experts believe Men who have been recently diagnosed with prostate cancer can help keep their disease at bay by taking brisk walks, claim researchers.

Based on their observations, men who power walk for at least three hours a week can halve how much their cancer will grow and spread over the next couple of years.

Strolling does not have the same effect, Cancer Research journal warns.

Experts say it shows that keeping active can improve health.

But they say the findings should be interpreted with caution because the men who did more walking also tended to be younger, leaner, and non-smokers, which could also explain some of the differences seen.

Leg work

The University of California San Francisco study looked at the outcomes of 1,455 men, mostly in their 60s, who were diagnosed with "localised" prostate cancer, meaning it had not yet started to spread.

The men were asked to say how much exercise and of what type they took in the average week.

During the 31 months of follow up, the US researchers recorded 117 events, including disease recurrence, bone tumours and deaths specifically caused by prostate cancer.

And they found that men who walked briskly for at least three hours a week were far less likely to have one of these events.

The brisk walkers had a 57% rate of progression of disease than men who walked at an easy pace for less than three hours a week.

Lead researcher Erin Richman said: "It appears that men who walk briskly after their diagnosis may delay or even prevent progression of their disease.

"The benefit from walking truly depended on how quickly you walked. Walking at an easy pace did not seem to have any benefit.

"Walking is something everyone can and should do to improve their health."

The scientists believe power walking might affect prostate cancer progression by changing blood levels of certain proteins that have been shown in the lab to encourage cancer growth.

Dr Helen Rippon, head of research management at The Prostate Cancer Charity, said: "Although this research will need to be repeated to make sure the results can be applied to all men with prostate cancer, we would certainly advise men diagnosed with prostate cancer to ensure that their lifestyle includes a good amount of physical activity - and walking is often the easiest way of achieving this."

Liz Woolf of Cancer Research UK said: "We know there are many benefits to exercise and that it can help people to recover more quickly after cancer treatment but it's difficult to set specific levels of exercise as everyone's needs and abilities are different.

"Just to be safe, it is important that people with cancer check with their doctor before taking up any new form of exercise."

View the original article here

Coffee 'cuts risk of male cancer'

17 May 2011 Last updated at 20:33 GMT Could coffee contain an anti-cancer agent? Coffee has been linked to a reduced risk of dying from prostate cancer in a study of nearly 50,000 US men.

Those who drank six or more cups a day were found to be 20% less likely to develop any form of the disease - which is the most common cancer in men.

They were also 60% less likely to develop an aggressive form which can spread to other parts of the body.

But charities say the evidence, reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, is still unclear.

They do not recommend that men take up coffee drinking in the hope of preventing prostate cancer.

Unknown compounds

The study looked at about 48,000 men in the US who work as health professionals.

Every four years between 1986 and 2006, they were asked to report their average daily intake of coffee.

During this 20-year period, 5,035 of the men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, including 642 fatal cases.

Continue reading the main story Each year about 37,000 men are diagnosed with prostate cancer in the UKSome 10,000 die from the diseaseSymptoms include problems passing urine but they may be mild or non-existentNo difference was seen between caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee, suggesting caffeine itself was not the cause.

But even relatively small amounts of coffee - one to three cups per day - were found to lower the risk of lethal prostate cancer by 30%.

The researchers think there may be unknown compounds in coffee that protect against the disease.

Lead researcher Dr Kathryn Wilson, from the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, said: "At present we lack an understanding of risk factors that can be changed or controlled to lower the risk of lethal prostate cancer.

"If our findings are validated, coffee could represent one modifiable factor that may lower the risk of developing the most harmful form of prostate cancer."

Commenting on the study, Dr Helen Rippon of The Prostate Cancer Charity, said other studies had not shown the link and the research evidence was still unclear.

She added: "Although this study is a welcome addition to our knowledge, it is far from definitive and we would not recommend men who are not already habitual coffee drinkers to become so in the hope of preventing prostate cancer.

Continue reading the main story Previous studies have shown no clear link between coffee and prostate cancer riskMen who drank six or more cups of coffee per day had a slightly lower risk of any form of prostate cancer and a substantially lower risk of lethal prostate cancer compared with non-coffee drinkers, according to the researchersBoth caff and decaff were associated with similar risks"Heavy caffeine intake is associated with other health problems and men with benign prostate problems might well make urinary symptoms worse."

Yinka Ebo, senior health information officer at Cancer Research UK, said: "There's no need for men to start drinking gallons of coffee in an attempt to lower their prostate cancer risk.

"A number of other studies looking at coffee and prostate cancer have found that drinking coffee does not affect the risk of the disease, and this study only found a lower risk of advanced prostate cancer in men who drank more than six cups a day.

"We would need to see these results repeated in other large studies before we can be sure whether coffee consumption affects the risk of prostate cancer."

View the original article here