Study: Moderate Drinking Ups Risk of Breast Cancer Return

THURSDAY, Dec. 10, 2009  (Health.com) — Breast cancer survivors who have just a few alcoholic drinks per week are more likely than women who drink little or no alcohol to see their breast cancer return, according to research presented today at an annual meeting of breast cancer specialists.

The study, which followed about 1,900 early-stage breast cancer survivors for eight years, found that women who consumed an average of at least three to four alcoholic drinks in a week had a 34% higher risk of breast cancer recurrence. (One drink equals a 5-ounce glass of wine, a 12-ounce beer, or a 1.5-ounce shot of liquor.)

The increased risk was more pronounced among breast cancer survivors who had gone through menopause and those who were overweight or obese, the study found.

Wine was by far the most common drink among women in the study, followed by liquor and beer, but no one type of alcohol was found to be significantly more or less associated with the risk of recurrence.

In all, there were 349 breast cancer recurrences and 332 deaths during the follow-up period. Alcohol use was not linked to the risk of death from breast cancer, however.

“More research should be done, but there is a growing body of evidence which suggests that women previously diagnosed with breast cancer should speak with their doctor about possibly limiting their consumption of alcohol,” says the lead researcher on the study, Marilyn L. Kwan, PhD, a staff scientist at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland.

Previous research has suggested that alcohol consumption may increase the risk of developing breast cancer in the first place. Kwan's research extends these findings to include the risk of recurrence among women who have already been diagnosed and treated for breast cancer, a population that numbers about 2.5 million in the United States, according to the American Cancer Society.

“Cutting back on alcohol represents a real step that a breast cancer survivor can take to reduce her risk of recurrence,” says Marisa Weiss, MD, the president and founder of the advocacy group Breastcancer.org. “You don’t have to give up alcohol, but use it more carefully and in moderation,” she says.

Limiting alcohol intake can improve the overall health of breast cancer survivors, according to Dr. Weiss, the author of the forthcoming book Living Beyond Breast Cancer. “Alcohol is liquid calories, and being overweight is a risk factor for breast cancer,” she says.  “If you consume a lot of alcohol, you tend to be less physically active and/or smoke. So, for a number of reasons, that one step of cutting back on alcohol does have a number of health benefits."

Exactly how alcohol consumption affects breast cancer risk is not fully understood, says Kwan, although estrogen, which fuels the growth of most types of breast cancer, is likely involved.

“It has been suggested that alcohol could increase the risk of breast cancer by increasing estrogen metabolism and circulating levels of estrogen, thus promoting growth of the tumor,” she says.  “A similar mechanism might be responsible for increasing the risk of breast cancer recurrence.”

Drinking-related weight gain could also play a role, Kwan adds. “Obesity may…promote estrogen production and breast cell proliferation, in addition to the direct effect alcohol can have on estrogen metabolism and levels in the body,” she explains.

The study, which was funded by the National Cancer Institute, was presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, an annual meeting for oncologists, surgeons, and other breast cancer specialists. The symposium is co-hosted by the American Association for Cancer Research and the Cancer Therapy & Research Center at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.

View the original article here

Study: Soy May Benefit Breast Cancer Survivors

TUESDAY, December 8, 2009 (Health.com) — Women with breast cancer who eat more soy are less likely to die or have a recurrence of cancer than women who eat few or no soy products, according to a new study.

In the past, physicians have often warned breast cancer patients not to eat soy. The new research represents "a complete turnaround" from the previous understanding about the link between soy consumption and breast cancer, says Sally Scroggs, a registered dietician and senior health education specialist at M.D. Anderson's Cancer Prevention Center in Houston.

"We have gone from saying, 'No soy for breast cancer survivors' to, 'It's not going to hurt,'" Scroggs says. "Now it looks like we can say, 'It may help.'"

The study followed more than 5,000 women in China who had undergone a mastectomy for about four years. The women who consumed the most soy protein (about 15 grams or more a day) had a 29% lower risk of dying and a 32% decreased risk of breast cancer recurrence compared to the women who consumed less than about 5 grams of soy protein a day, according to the study, which appears in the December 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. The National Cancer Institute and the U.S. Department of Defense's Breast Cancer Research Program funded the study.

Women who ate between 9.5 and 15 grams of soy protein saw nearly the same decrease in risk as the women who ate more than 15 grams. In fact, the researchers found no additional benefits to eating more than 11 grams of soy protein a day. (An 8-ounce glass of soy milk and a cup of shelled edamame contain about 7 and 14 grams of soy protein, respectively.)

In all, 534 women had a breast cancer recurrence or died from breast cancer during the study period.

Soy foods—such as milk, tofu, and edamame—are rich in naturally occurring estrogens (especially isoflavones) that can mimic the effects of estrogen in the female body. Because the most common types of breast cancer depend on estrogen to grow, experts once feared that soy isoflavones could stimulate the estrogen receptors in breast-cancer cells, even though the estrogens in soy are much weaker than those produced by the body.

The current study suggests the exact opposite: Soy may actually reduce the amount of estrogen that's available to the body.

"Soy isoflavones may compete with estrogens produced by the body. Soy isoflavones may also reduce the body's production of estrogen, and increase clearance of these hormones from the circulation—all of which together reduce the overall amount of estrogen in the body," says the lead author of the study, Xiao Ou Shu, MD, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.

Dr. Shu says, however, that factors beyond estrogen may be at work. Other components of soy foods, such as folate, protein, calcium, or fiber (or some combination thereof) may also be responsible for the health benefits reported in the study, she says.

View the original article here

Study: Soy May Benefit Breast Cancer Survivors

TUESDAY, December 8, 2009 (Health.com) — Women with breast cancer who eat more soy are less likely to die or have a recurrence of cancer than women who eat few or no soy products, according to a new study.

In the past, physicians have often warned breast cancer patients not to eat soy. The new research represents "a complete turnaround" from the previous understanding about the link between soy consumption and breast cancer, says Sally Scroggs, a registered dietician and senior health education specialist at M.D. Anderson's Cancer Prevention Center in Houston.

"We have gone from saying, 'No soy for breast cancer survivors' to, 'It's not going to hurt,'" Scroggs says. "Now it looks like we can say, 'It may help.'"

The study followed more than 5,000 women in China who had undergone a mastectomy for about four years. The women who consumed the most soy protein (about 15 grams or more a day) had a 29% lower risk of dying and a 32% decreased risk of breast cancer recurrence compared to the women who consumed less than about 5 grams of soy protein a day, according to the study, which appears in the December 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. The National Cancer Institute and the U.S. Department of Defense's Breast Cancer Research Program funded the study.

Women who ate between 9.5 and 15 grams of soy protein saw nearly the same decrease in risk as the women who ate more than 15 grams. In fact, the researchers found no additional benefits to eating more than 11 grams of soy protein a day. (An 8-ounce glass of soy milk and a cup of shelled edamame contain about 7 and 14 grams of soy protein, respectively.)

In all, 534 women had a breast cancer recurrence or died from breast cancer during the study period.

Soy foods—such as milk, tofu, and edamame—are rich in naturally occurring estrogens (especially isoflavones) that can mimic the effects of estrogen in the female body. Because the most common types of breast cancer depend on estrogen to grow, experts once feared that soy isoflavones could stimulate the estrogen receptors in breast-cancer cells, even though the estrogens in soy are much weaker than those produced by the body.

The current study suggests the exact opposite: Soy may actually reduce the amount of estrogen that's available to the body.

"Soy isoflavones may compete with estrogens produced by the body. Soy isoflavones may also reduce the body's production of estrogen, and increase clearance of these hormones from the circulation—all of which together reduce the overall amount of estrogen in the body," says the lead author of the study, Xiao Ou Shu, MD, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.

Dr. Shu says, however, that factors beyond estrogen may be at work. Other components of soy foods, such as folate, protein, calcium, or fiber (or some combination thereof) may also be responsible for the health benefits reported in the study, she says.

View the original article here

Study: Moderate Drinking Ups Risk of Breast Cancer Return

THURSDAY, Dec. 10, 2009  (Health.com) — Breast cancer survivors who have just a few alcoholic drinks per week are more likely than women who drink little or no alcohol to see their breast cancer return, according to research presented today at an annual meeting of breast cancer specialists.

The study, which followed about 1,900 early-stage breast cancer survivors for eight years, found that women who consumed an average of at least three to four alcoholic drinks in a week had a 34% higher risk of breast cancer recurrence. (One drink equals a 5-ounce glass of wine, a 12-ounce beer, or a 1.5-ounce shot of liquor.)

The increased risk was more pronounced among breast cancer survivors who had gone through menopause and those who were overweight or obese, the study found.

Wine was by far the most common drink among women in the study, followed by liquor and beer, but no one type of alcohol was found to be significantly more or less associated with the risk of recurrence.

In all, there were 349 breast cancer recurrences and 332 deaths during the follow-up period. Alcohol use was not linked to the risk of death from breast cancer, however.

“More research should be done, but there is a growing body of evidence which suggests that women previously diagnosed with breast cancer should speak with their doctor about possibly limiting their consumption of alcohol,” says the lead researcher on the study, Marilyn L. Kwan, PhD, a staff scientist at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland.

Previous research has suggested that alcohol consumption may increase the risk of developing breast cancer in the first place. Kwan's research extends these findings to include the risk of recurrence among women who have already been diagnosed and treated for breast cancer, a population that numbers about 2.5 million in the United States, according to the American Cancer Society.

“Cutting back on alcohol represents a real step that a breast cancer survivor can take to reduce her risk of recurrence,” says Marisa Weiss, MD, the president and founder of the advocacy group Breastcancer.org. “You don’t have to give up alcohol, but use it more carefully and in moderation,” she says.

Limiting alcohol intake can improve the overall health of breast cancer survivors, according to Dr. Weiss, the author of the forthcoming book Living Beyond Breast Cancer. “Alcohol is liquid calories, and being overweight is a risk factor for breast cancer,” she says.  “If you consume a lot of alcohol, you tend to be less physically active and/or smoke. So, for a number of reasons, that one step of cutting back on alcohol does have a number of health benefits."

Exactly how alcohol consumption affects breast cancer risk is not fully understood, says Kwan, although estrogen, which fuels the growth of most types of breast cancer, is likely involved.

“It has been suggested that alcohol could increase the risk of breast cancer by increasing estrogen metabolism and circulating levels of estrogen, thus promoting growth of the tumor,” she says.  “A similar mechanism might be responsible for increasing the risk of breast cancer recurrence.”

Drinking-related weight gain could also play a role, Kwan adds. “Obesity may…promote estrogen production and breast cell proliferation, in addition to the direct effect alcohol can have on estrogen metabolism and levels in the body,” she explains.

The study, which was funded by the National Cancer Institute, was presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, an annual meeting for oncologists, surgeons, and other breast cancer specialists. The symposium is co-hosted by the American Association for Cancer Research and the Cancer Therapy & Research Center at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.

View the original article here

Study: Alcohol, Energy Drinks Are Risky Combo

Researchers Say Drinkers of Alcohol and Energy Drinks Are Impulsive, Even if They Don’t Realize It

April 15, 2011 -- Drinking alcohol and energy drinks together has become trendy, but it can also be risky, a study suggests.

The combination makes drinkers feel more stimulated than alcohol alone. However, it has no effect on the impulsivity and lack of inhibitions that come with drinking, says study researcher Cecile Marczinski, PhD, an assistant professor of psychology at Northern Kentucky University.

''Even alcohol alone will make you feel stimulated and happy," she says. "Mixing in the energy drink makes that more pronounced. Energy drinks have tons of caffeine in them, more than mixing a soft drink in alcohol.''

As a result, those who drink alcohol and energy drinks in combination can be highly stimulated and highly impulsive, but feel like they are less impaired, Marczinski tells WebMD. So they are likely to have poor judgment of what they are capable of doing.

The study is published online in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research.

In the past few years, young drinkers in particular have been drawn to mixing alcohol with energy drinks, Marczinski tells WebMD.

Despite the trend, she says, very little laboratory research has examined the effects of the combination.

Research has shown the dangers of adding caffeine to alcoholic drinks and marketing them. In November 2010, the FDA warned companies that the caffeine added to some of their alcoholic beverages makes the products unsafe. As a result, some products were removed from the market. Other companies agreed not to make the beverages in the future. Energy drinks also have caffeine, as well as other ingredients such as plant-based stimulants, sugars, and herbs.

In the study, Marczinski and her colleagues assigned 56 college students, average age 24, to one of four groups. One group drank alcohol and an energy drink. Another drank alcohol alone. A third group had the energy drink alone.  A fourth group drank a placebo beverage.

The researchers gave all participants a behavioral test. For those in the alcohol groups, the researchers waited until the blood alcohol level reached the legal limit to give the test. "We tested their behavior on a computer task that measured their impulsivity," she says.

"We also gave them a questionnaire and asked them how intoxicated they felt," she says. Those who drank the combination said they felt less intoxicated that those drinking alcohol alone, she found.

"Their behavior, especially for impulsivity, which is what we worry about with drinking, was identical between the alcohol and the alcohol plus energy drink condition," she tells WebMD.

The stimulant effect, however, differed. She used a standard scale to measure stimulation. "The stimulating rating with alcohol and the energy drink was double [that of those who had alcohol alone]," she says.

Blood alcohol levels in the group drinking alcohol alone and alcohol and the energy drink were identical, she says.

View the original article here

Study: Drug-Resistant Bacteria in U.S. Meat

Researchers Find Superbugs in Raw Turkey, Pork, Beef, and Chicken Sold in Grocery StoresBy Brenda Goodman
WebMD Health News

April 15, 2011 -- There’s a new reason to be careful when handling raw meat at mealtimes.

Researchers testing raw turkey, pork, beef, and chicken purchased at grocery stores in five different cities across the U.S. say that roughly one in four of those samples tested positive for a multidrug antibiotic-resistant “superbug” bacterium.

“The findings were pretty shocking,” says study researcher Lance B. Price, PhD, director of the Center of Food Microbiology and Environmental Health at the Translational Genomics Research Institute in Flagstaff, Ariz.  “We found that 47% of the samples were contaminated with Staph aureus, and more than half of those strains were multidrug resistant, or resistant to three or more antibiotics.”

The presence of drug-resistant staph bacteria, a category that includes methicillin-resistant Staphylococccus aureus (MRSA), in farm animals and food has been a closely watched problem in Europe, where it has been traced to outbreaks of human disease.

But less has been known about its prevalence in the U.S. food supply.

“We haven’t looked at this before in the United States,” says Price. “What we don’t know is whether people can pick it up through meat. This is the first time that we’ve even recognized that it’s there.”

“We don’t know where these are coming from, and it’s really something that we have to understand,” he says.

Food producers say their products are safe.

“Staphylococcus aureus is a very common bacteria found in the environment, and is one of the most common found on human hands. It rarely causes any health problems,” says Hilary Thesmar, PhD, RD, director of scientific and regulatory affairs for the National Turkey Federation in Washington, D.C., in a statement.

“Contamination by human hands is a likely source of contamination of the products in this study,” Thesmar says. “The most important message for consumers is to follow proper food safety methods, such as washing your hands and cooking meat and poultry thoroughly. Following good food safety practices will ensure that consumers continue to enjoy safe, high-quality, and nutritious turkey products.”

Others agree with that assessment.

“Staph aureus is common in everything. It’s common in people. Something like 30% of people carry it in their nasal passages, and it’s on your skin. Finding that in food products wouldn’t have been anything out of the usual,” says Dave Warner, director of communications for the Pork Producers Council in Washington, D.C.

For the study, researchers collected 136 meat and poultry samples from 26 grocery stores in five cities: Chicago; Washington, D.C.; Fort Lauderdale, Fla.; Los Angeles; and Flagstaff, Ariz.

DNA testing confirmed the presence and specific types of S. aureus bacteria. The bacteria were exposed to antibiotics from different classes to determine which drugs could kill the germs and which could not.

View the original article here

Study: Memantine Doesn’t Work in Early Alzheimer’s Disease

Analysis Finds No Evidence of Benefit

April 11, 2011 -- A drug that is widely used, but not approved, for the treatment of mild Alzheimer’s disease shows little evidence of benefit in these early-stage patients, according to a new research analysis.

Memantine, sold as Namenda in the U.S., was approved by the FDA in 2003 for moderate to severe Alzheimer’s, but two years later agency officials rejected an application to expand its indication to include patients with mild disease.

Nevertheless, the drug is often prescribed for this indication, either alone or in combination with drugs that are approved for mild Alzheimer’s disease (AD), such as Aricept (donepezil), Exelon (rivastigmine), and Razadyne (galantamine).

In a nationally representative survey of neurologists published in 2010, 40% reported that they sometimes prescribed memantine to their Alzheimer’s patients with mild cognitive impairment. In clinical trials involving patients with mild to moderate AD from 2003 to 2009, as many as 63% of patients were taking the drug.

In the newly published analysis, Alzheimer’s disease specialist Lon S. Schneider, MD, and colleagues examined research reviews, registries, and other data on the use of memantine for mild to moderate AD from Forest Laboratories, which markets the drug in the U.S.

The researchers identified three placebo-controlled trials that included 431 patients with mild disease and almost 700 patients with moderate disease.

They analyzed the drug’s impact on four key Alzheimer’s outcomes and found no significant differences between the memantine- and placebo-treated patients with mild disease when the trial data were assessed alone or together.

Likewise, no significant differences in outcomes were seen in patients with moderate AD in individual trials. But a significant effect was seen when data from the three trials were combined.

The researchers conclude that their findings “provide insight into why the FDA did not approve the manufacturer’s application to market the drug for mild AD.”

Schneider says the findings do not mean the drug should never be used in patients with mild cognitive declines due to Alzheimer’s disease.

He says properly designed studies with longer follow-up are needed to determine if memantine is effective, either alone or with other AD drugs, for the treatment of mild to moderate disease.

Schneider directs the University of Southern California Alzheimer’s Disease Research and Clinical Center.

“These results point to the need for adequate and well-controlled trials,” he says. “And in view of the small effects seen in patients with moderate disease, questions remain about this drug’s use in these patients.”

Bill Thies, PhD, who is chief medical and science officer for the Alzheimer’s Association, says memantine probably has clinical meaningful benefits in some patients with mild Alzheimer’s.

“Unfortunately, we can’t say who these patients are ahead of time,” he tells WebMD. “I would say that trying any of the Alzheimer’s drugs in people with a new diagnosis is a reasonable thing to do. But clinicians need to be watching closely to see if the drugs are making a difference.”

Thies says none of the available AD drugs have more than a modest effect on AD symptoms, adding that researchers are working to identify the next generation of drugs with the aim of slowing disease progression.

When contacted by WebMD, a spokesman for Forest Labs declined to comment on the study.

View the original article here