Having problems with message search?
Here are two articles on breast cancer. The first one again confirms the idea that estrogen alone does not increase breast cancer.
It's kind of ironic that estrogen alone increases uterine cancer but not breast cancer, but when it's combined with a progestin it's the exact opposite -- it increases breast cancer but not uterine cancer. What was God thinking?
SABCS: Estradiol Alone Does Not Increase Breast Cancer Risk
By Charlene Laino
SAN ANTONIO, TX -- December 16, 2002 -- Hormone replacement therapy containing progestins significantly elevates breast cancer risk, but preparations containing estradiol alone do not, a large Swedish observational study suggests.
Teasing out the component of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) that increases breast cancer risk has taken on added urgency since the HRT arm of the prospective U.S. Women's Health Initiative was abruptly halted in July 2002. The trial showed that the risks of HRT, including breast cancer, were found to outweigh its benefits in a large cohort of women.
Compared with non-users, women who had used progestin-containing HRT for less than four years were 80 percent more likely to develop breast cancer. Women who used such preparations for four or more years had three times the risk of non-users.
In contrast, women who took estradiol-only preparations for less than four years were 20 percent less likely to develop breast cancer than non-users.
This next article from "The New York Times" describes some new and interesting research and conclusions about breast cancer.
Breast Cancer: Genes Are Tied to Death Rates
By GINA KOLATA
By GINA KOLATA
Researchers have found a genetic signature in breast tumors that seems to be a powerful predictor of whether the cancer will spread and kill or whether it can easily be cured by surgery, causing no further harm.
In the study, 5.5 percent of women whose cancers had a good genetic signature died within the next decade, as against 45 percent of those with bad genetic signatures.
The results are challenging some long-held beliefs. Doctors and patients have assumed, for example, that small tumors are more treatable. The idea was that as tumors grow, they acquire mutations that enable them to spread throughout the body. But the study and other studies indicate that tumor size may be beside the point. Most tumors, the studies indicate, appear to be potentially deadly or not from the very start.
The women whose cancer cells indicated a good prognosis had an 85.2 percent chance of remaining free of cancer over the next decade and a 94.5 percent of surviving the decade. Those whose cancer cells indicated a poor prognosis had a 50.6 percent chance of remaining cancer-free and a 54.6 percent of surviving that time. Dr. Golub put it bluntly: "The metastatic potential is hard-wired at the time of diagnosis." He said a tumor's fate could be sealed from the time it is detected, no matter how small it is. Dr. Larry Norton, a breast cancer expert at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, said he believed "this evidence really favors early diagnosis."
Best wishes and Happy Holidays. Dr. Rehert
Offline 
Send Email