Breast Cancer

Good morning- I have a very compliant patient with a history of breast cancer who has had an elevated fibrinogen level & lipoprotein a despite an aggressive supplement program including Endokinase 4/d, baby aspirin, EDD per weight, Vitamin C, proline-lysine, fish oil, wheat germ oil, a whole food multiple, and Udo's Blend. Is this a patient where rheological studies should be considered? Any other thoughts? Thanks

Dear Doctor:
This lipoprotein a seems to respond to NIACIN based therapies even the non-flushing inositol hexaniacinate and the fibrinogen tells me that we have not turned off the inflammation. I will give you odds that when she stops eating the foods she is sensitive to, that will help a lot. Then since this person has been suffering from the associated thick blood and associated relative anoxia, she also needs some OZONE / UVB to lower the total body burden of pathogens. This can also be accomplished with high enough blood levels of VITAMIN C (requires our Beyond C augmented with several closely spaced IV's of 60+ Gm given fairly rapidly).

This warrants a brief consultation on the phone with me and both of you where I record my thoughts and send to you. I heard the researcher for JAMA article below interviewed on PBS!! She sounded like ONE of US!!

Sincerely,
Garry F. Gordon, MD,DO,MD(H)

Study Shows Link Between Antibiotic Use and Increased Risk of Breast Cancer

Posted Date: Monday, February 16, 2004

A study published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)* provides evidence that use of antibiotics is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. The authors - from Group Health Cooperative (GHC) in Seattle; the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a part of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md.; the University of Washington, Seattle; and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, also in Seattle - concluded that the more antibiotics the women in the study used, the higher their risk of breast cancer.

The results of this study do not mean that antibiotics cause breast cancer. "These results only show that there is an association between the two," explained co-author Stephen H. Taplin, M.D., of NCI's Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences and formerly of the GHC. "More studies must be conducted to determine whether there is indeed a direct cause-and-effect relationship."

"This trial suggests another piece in the puzzle of factors that may potentially be involved in the development of breast cancer," said NCI Director Andrew C. von Eschenbach, M.D. "The NCI will continue to support research into underlying mechanisms of cancer risk."

The authors of this JAMA study found that women who took antibiotics for more than 500 days - or had more than 25 prescriptions - over an average period of 17 years had more than twice the risk of breast cancer as women who had not taken any antibiotics. The risk was smaller for women who took antibiotics for fewer days. However, even women who had between one and 25 prescriptions over an average period of 17 years had an increased risk; they were about 1.5 times more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer than women who didn't take any antibiotics. The authors found an increased risk in all classes of antibiotics that they studied.

"Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United States - with an estimated 40,000 deaths this year - and is the most common cancer in women worldwide," said first author Christine Velicer, Ph.D., of GHC's Center for Health Studies. "Antibiotics are used extensively in this country and in many parts of the world. The possible association between breast cancer and antibiotic use was important to examine."

To gather the necessary data, the researchers used computerized pharmacy and breast cancer screening databases at GHC, a large, non-profit health plan in Washington state. They compared the antibiotic use of 2,266 women with breast cancer to similar information from 7,953 women without breast cancer. All the women in the study were age 20 and older, and the researchers examined a wide variety of the most frequently prescribed antibiotic medications.

The authors offer a few possible explanations for the observed association between antibiotic use and increased breast cancer risk. Antibiotics can affect bacteria in the intestine, which may impact how certain foods that might prevent cancer are broken down in the body. Another hypothesis focuses on antibiotics" effects on the body's immune response and response to inflammation, which could also be related to the development of cancer. It is also possible that the underlying conditions that led to the antibiotics prescriptions caused the increased risk, or that a weakened immune system - either alone, or in combination with the use of antibiotics - is the cause of this association.

The results of the study are consistent with an earlier Finnish study of almost 10,000 women. "Further studies must be conducted, though, for us to know why we see this increased risk and the full implications of these findings," said Velicer. Studies are also necessary to clarify whether specific indications for antibiotic use, such as respiratory infection or urinary tract infection, or times of use, such as adolescence, pregnancy or menopause, are associated with increased breast cancer risk. Additionally, breast cancer risks could differ between women who take low-dose antibiotics for a long period of time and women who take high-dose antibiotics only once in a while.

Antibiotics are regularly prescribed for conditions such as respiratory infections, acne, and urinary tract infections, in addition to a wide range of other conditions or illnesses. In this JAMA study, for example, more than 70 percent of women had used between one and 25 prescriptions for antibiotics to treat various conditions over an average 17-year period, and only 18 percent of women in the study had not filled any antibiotic prescriptions during their enrollment in the health plan.

Over the past decade, overuse of antibiotics has become a serious problem. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), tens of millions of antibiotics are prescribed for viral infections that are not treatable with antibiotics, contributing to the troubling growth of antibiotic resistance. Efforts are underway such as the "Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work" campaign - unveiled last year by the Department of Health and Human Services" CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other partners - to lower the rate of antibiotic overuse.

"These study results do not mean that women should stop using antibiotics to treat bacterial infections," stressed Taplin. "Until we understand more about the association between antibiotics and cancer, people should take into account the substantial benefits that antibiotics can have, but should continue to use these medicines wisely."

My website has my entire PowerPoint presentation on early cancer diagnosis. This article is a reminder to all who have not heard the talk or looked at my PowerPoint presentation that the world of cancer diagnosis is ready for big changes. This study is just the beginning but allows women to know whether or not their breast cancer really warrants the chemo and radiation or if they are in the almost 80% where that is a waste of time and money.

The low risk group surely might decide to do some of the alternatives that we may all soon decide to follow periodically ourselves. This means perhaps 2-4 weeks twice a year we really ramp up the Immuni-T 2 and 3 intake, something like 3 bid of each, and take something like Artemisinin, 10 caps twice daily because we know that at ALL times ALL of us have SOME cancer!

This is not unlike worming our horses and dogs periodically just to be on the safe side! Meantime keep your eyes out for newer and important CANCER SCREENING tests that will validate the life's work of Dr. Kobayashi (see Kobayashi on my website to understand this). He has shown that if we use tests to get people to take simple preventive actions like cleaning up the diet, detoxification, using some immune support etc., apparently no one needs to develop clinically detectable lumps and bumps. Cancer is never diagnosed until 1 billion cells are there, and that took TEN YEARS to occur!

Sincerely,
Garry F. Gordon, MD,DO,MD(H)

Breast-Cancer Test May Better PredictRecurrence Levels
By DAVID P. HAMILTON Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

A new genomic test appears to be highly effective in predicting the recurrence of breast cancer in previously treated women, leading a biotechnology startup to announce it will introduce the test for clinical use early next year.The test, developed by closely held Genomic Health Inc., Redwood City, Calif., is one of the first of a new class of genomic diagnostics to approach the market.

Such tests, which identify patterns in the gene activity of tissue sample, can be used to "fingerprint" the genetic characteristics of tumors. By examining those fingerprints, scientists hope to tell which tumors are most likely to grow aggressively, spread throughout the body, or respond to particular treatments.Researchers headed by Norman Wolmark at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh used the Genomic Health test on tissue samples taken from 668 breast-cancer patients treated in the years 1982 to 1988. They restricted their study to women who had undergone surgery, received hormone therapy and whose cancers hadn't spread to their lymph nodes, a primary channel for metastasis. Such individuals account for about half of newly diagnosed breast-cancer patients.

The Genomic Health test uses a fingerprint of 21 genes, many known to play roles in cancer-cell growth or division. After measuring the activity profile of those genes in a tumor sample, the company calculates a "recurrence score" related to the likelihood that cancer will return after treatment.Once the diagnostic analysis of the samples was complete, the researchers matched the patients' clinical records to their recurrence scores. Patients classified as "low risk" by recurrence score had only a 6.8% chance of seeing their cancer return. By contrast, women in the "high risk" group had a nearly 31% chance of recurrence -- roughly as high as women whose cancer had already spread to the lymph nodes.The group reported those results Thursday in San Antonio, Texas.

Several oncologists hailed the results, saying that the test could help them better advise breast-cancer patients of this type whether to endure the rigors of additional chemotherapy. Such treatment can reduce the likelihood of recurrence, but generally only by a few percentage points. Currently, cancer specialists are forced to rely on crude measures such as the size of the surgically removed tumor and the age of the patient to assess the risk of recurrence.

A more precise measure such as the recurrence score could allow oncologists to steer the patients least at risk away from chemotherapy, while potentially identifying dangerous cancers that might otherwise be considered less risky. Cancer experts who have conducted trials of the Genomic Health test, including Dr. Wolmark and Melody Cobleigh of the Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, said they would begin using such a test immediately.

Other specialists, however, were more cautious. Clifford Hudis at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, a member of Genomic Health's scientific advisory board, said he thought more data was necessary before the test could be incorporated into clinical practice. In particular, no one has studied the consequence of withholding chemotherapy from patients with low recurrence scores. Because breast-cancer death rates have been falling for 13 years, Dr. Hudis said, "we should be very cautious about denying people therapy.

"Genomic Health, however, plans to offer the test, called OncotypeDX, starting early next year. Most such diagnostic tests require lengthy review by the Food and Drug Administration, but company officials say they can sidestep FDA review by offering OncotypeDX as a laboratory service in which Genomic Health conducts all testing itself instead of selling test kits to other laboratories.

Steven Gutman, head of FDA's diagnostic-device office, declined to comment specifically on Genomic Health, but said that in general, such "homebrew" diagnostic tests don't require FDA review.Despite the clear results, Dr. Wolmark said he considered them only an "incremental step" toward using genetic information to personalize medical treatment.

For complex medical questions, we advise that you make an appointment for a personal, recorded, telephonic consultation with me. Each consultation is recorded and provided to you on audio CD. To schedule an appointment, call (928) 472-4263, Monday through Friday, during standard business hours.