Triple-Negative BRCA Has Higher Mortality Risk

This report is part of a 12-month Clinical Context series.

By Michael Smith, North American Correspondent, MedPage Today

Published: May 03, 2012

Reviewed by Vandana G. Abramson, MD; Assistant Professor of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee and Dorothy Caputo, MA, BSN, RN, Nurse Planner

Take Posttest

Action Points

• Patients with stage I-III triple-negative breast cancer had a significantly higher risk of death (OR 8.3) in the first two years after diagnosis than women with ER+ or HER2+ disease.
• Patients with triple-negative disease were more likely to have metastases to the brain or lung, and less likely to have recurrence in the bones compared with ER+ or HER2+ patients.

Women with so-called triple-negative breast cancer had nearly three times the risk of death from the disease as women with the most common form of the disease, researchers reported.
And the risk was even higher in the first two years after diagnosis -- eight-fold compared with women with the most common form, they also had a markedly higher rate of death from any cause, according to Nancy Lin, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and colleagues.
They were also more likely to have distant metastases in the brain or lung, but less likely to see the disease recur in bone, Lin and colleagues reported online in Cancer.
The findings come from an analysis of 15,204 women who were diagnosed and treated for stage I through III breast cancer between January 2000 and December 2006 in eight major hospitals that are part of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers.
For the analysis, tumors were classified as:

• HR-positive/HER2 negative if they had an estrogen receptor, a progesterone receptor, or both but were negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)
• HER2-positive if they had HER2 and any hormone receptor status
• And triple-negative if they had none of the receptors

Analysis of the cohort showed that 17% of women had triple-negative cancers, 17% were HER2-positive, and 66% were HR-positive/HER2 negative.
The triple-negative subtype was nearly twice as common among African-American women, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.98 (95% CI 1.72 to 2.27, P<0.0001), Lin and colleagues reported.
Only 29% of women with triple-negative cancers were diagnosed as a result of an abnormal screening mammogram, compared with 48% of women with other types, a difference that was significant at P<0.0001.
In an analysis adjusted for age, disease stage, race, tumor grade, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, triple-negative tumors were associated with a greater risk of breast cancer death than receptor-positive tumors.
Specifically, the odds ratio for death over the whole six-year follow-up period was 2.99 (95% CI 2.59 to 3.45).
The odds ratio for death in the first two years after diagnosis, on the other hand, was sharply higher: 8.30 (95% CI 6.23 to 11.05).
The analysis also showed that, compared with women who had receptor-positive tumors, those with triple-negative disease had odds ratios of 2.17, 3.50, and 0.26 for recurrence in the lung, brain, and bone respectively. The differences were all significant at P<0.001.
The researchers cautioned that the analysis was limited to patients at the eight centers, whose median age was 55, younger than the national median.
They also noted that the six-year follow-up was relatively short for HR-positive/HER2 negative and HER2-positive cancers, and "it is likely that survival estimates will evolve over time in this subset."
On the other hand they argued, the picture of outcomes is likely to be accurate for triple-negative cancer, since recurrences were more frequent and earlier.

The study had support from the National Cancer Institute, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, a Berry Junior Faculty Award, and the Karen Webster and David Evans Research Fund.
The journal said the authors made no disclosures.

Primary source: Cancer
Source reference:
Lin NU, et al "Clinicopathologic features, patterns of recurrence, and survival among women with triple-negative breast cancer in the national comprehensive cancer network" Cancer 2012; DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27581.

---

View 1 comment or Add Your Knowledge ™

Michael Smith
North American Correspondent
North American Correspondent for MedPage Today, is a three-time winner of the Science and Society Journalism Award of the Canadian Science Writers' Association. After working for newspapers in several parts of Canada, he was the science writer for the Toronto Star before becoming a freelancer in 1994. His byline has appeared in New Scientist, Science, the Globe and Mail, United Press International, Toronto Life, Canadian Business, the Toronto Star, Marketing Computers, and many others. He is based in Toronto, and when not transforming dense science into compelling prose he can usually be found sailing.

=====================================================================
 01/03/2013.
This discussion occurred today at Tumor board at the El Paso University Medical Center under the Guidance of  DR Zeina Nahley, MD, FACP, Associate Professor, Chief Division of Hematology/Oncology
at the Paul L. Foster School of Medicine.
CRBCM was represented by DR Kankonde.

AND CONTROVERSY KEEPS ON COMING

Study: Being Slightly Heavy Aids Longevity

Tuesday, January 1, 2013 6:07 PM

inShare2

A new international analysis reveals a surprising pattern: while obesity increases the risk of dying early, being slightly overweight reduces it.

These studies included almost 3 million adults from around the world, yet the results were remarkably consistent, the authors of the analysis noted.

"For people with a medical condition, survival is slightly better for people who are slightly heavier," said study author Katherine Flegal, a senior research scientist at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics.

Several factors may account for this finding, Flegal added.

"Maybe heavier people present to the doctor earlier, or get screened more often," she said. "Heavier people may be more likely to be treated according to guidelines, or fat itself may be cardioprotective, or someone who is heavier might be more resilient and better able to stand a shock to their system."

The report was published Jan. 2 in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Read more: Study: Being Slightly Heavy Aids Longevity
Important: At Risk For A Heart Attack? Find Out Now.
CONTROVERSY KEEPS ON GOING!
FROM HEALTHNEWS!

AURORA KINASES,

A (like Australis)  is more important then B (like Borealis) because of  lack of therapeutic usefulness of the Borealis kind.

Mark my words, The Aurora Kinase inhibitors, by "disrupting centrosome function, spindle assembly, chromosome alignment" as reported by DR Roger Cohen, professor of Medicine at Perelman School of Medicine in a report by Devera Pine, are probably one of the most significant development target therapy.  These go to compromise of Mitotic division and growth inhibition.  These combine to Actin function (disruption of Microtubules) would trigger the second law of nature, triggering Cytochrome C realease and Caspases activation despite the presence of Bcl-2 presence.  And Alisertib could be the Agent to watch.  We believe a Taxane combination with Alisertib and an anti-kinesin will be a potentially  powerful combination to watch in Oncology!  These drugs certainly will make mitosis impossible and stop multiplying cancer cells in their tracks!   Neutropenia induced by the Aurora inhibitors is a concern in such a combination and growth factors will need to be used.  Cancer treatment is progressing by the day. The future is exciting and promising!   

Cancer Survivorship Center in Dayton, Ohio

To Senator Sherrod Brown,
NEW Member of the Appropriation Committee
Ohio.

The Coalition for the Reversal of Breast cancer Mortality in African American women (CRBCM) would like to congratulate you for a successful electoral campaign, and take this opportunity to bring your attention to the plight of Breast Cancer and its reversible devastating effect in African American Community. 
Breast Cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death. One in 8 American will be diagnosed with this disease before age 85. And Approximately 40-50,000 women and men will die of this disease.  This number will include more than  6,000 African American women!

Ohio: Breast Cancer Deaths per 100,000 Women by Race/Ethnicity, 2009

---

Breast Cancer Deaths per 100,000 Women by Race/Ethnicity,
	OH	US
White	22.8	21.6
Black	30.0	30.5
Hispanic	NSD	14.8

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The above statistics points once again to the unfair burden carried by African American in the mortality rates from Breast Cancer.
As a matter of Facts, all epidemiologic studies have suggested that the incidence of breast cancer in African American communities is lower than that of white counterpart.  This well known dichotomy  is well established and even coined "Breast cancer paradox".  Significant and concerted Action against this paradox is bluntantly lacking however!   It is estimated that up to 3000 African Women could be saved YEARLY if such an action is undertaken.

The reasons for this unfair level of death are also well known:
1.  relatively poor rates of screening particularly in low income communities where lack of health education and insurance coverage are the main drivers to poor detection of the disease.   Here Vans outfitted with mammograms ("mammoVans")  have been the most successful venues to combat this problems.
2.  with poor screening and detection, comes the late stage of cancer at the time of diagnosis.  and furthermore, they appears to 
be a an increased rate of poor histology type of breast cancer in African American women.  This type is called Basal cell like Breast cancer which is triple negative, meaning lacking Hormone and Herceptin receptors, making current treatments  almost irrelevant.  New genetic studies have only now revealed this type to be closer to Ovarian cancer and new strategies are only now being devised.
3. Lack of leadership and meaningful comprehensive plan with exclusive focus on this PARADOX.   To date, this reversible fact has not been proclaimed a national emergency.  Despite our progress with Human genome, progress in radiology for early detection, expansion of our knowledge of various molecular targets, No politician has stood before the nation and asked that deaths we know to be reversible, be stopped.  It is an amazing and striking thing for a country with an ambitious incline!  Cure will not come without the Senate committment to a 10 year program.   In Texas, CPRIT is trying to do this.  Ohio should join the race! and create jobs!

The Breast Cancer Coalition, CRBCM, through our representative Amy Mccoulah, based in Greenville OH, is asking for funding to open a CANCER SURVIVORSHIP CENTER IN DAYTON OHIO.  The center is the best approach to offer a comprehensive plan to this problems because it will provide all phases of cancer preventions:

-Primary Prevention:  the Center  will conduct field investigation to detect risk factors predominant in local community and develop adjusted prevention programs to fit people of Ohio.  Reach people through Health Bus for health education.
-Secondary Prevention: have mammovans to meet people in churches, work place and civic centers.  And explore the issue of adequacy of current screening means as it is related to this rare histology (triple negative breast cancer). Is mammogram the best way forward to early detection for this population.
-Tertiary prevention:  which include treatment, patient navigation services, and survivorship programs.
The survivorship programs ultimately provide support services to survivors who are the 50-80 percent of breast cancer patients, these services include nutrition, mental health, fitness program, Lymphedema clinics, etc.   Most of these services are reimbursed by federal insurances, insuring the continuation of the center once created!   With further details of this program, it is easy to see that jobs will be created!

Dear Senator, These type of initiatives work in reducing Breast cancer mortality.   Stopping Hormone replacement therapy and work on BRCA have made a difference in mortality,  and have led to oncology practice changes. And it is in your power to make a difference.  The fiscal cliff has been averted, it is time to put Ohio back to work and this initiative will make a difference in African American communities of Ohio.  We call to your human side to act!

Sincerely,

Amy McCulah and DR Mutombo Kankonde MD, MPh (Oncologist).
The Coalition for the reversal of Breast cancer mortality in
African American Women (CRBCM)
Greenville, OH.

============================================================

MONO-TARGET THERAPY IN SOLID TUMOR, a first step in an actual treatment scenario

Time and again we have seen that targeting the membrane or cytosol individually leads to a 15-30% response.  This is very true in solid tumors. Because of phenotype and genetic heterogeneity, it is hard to break this "ceiling".  Mono-target therapy should serve as a proof of principle.  In actual therapy, the multikinase therapy has shown that hitting multiple targets is always better.  The cancer cell is redundant with loopholes that tend to deviate the negative forces toward survival trends.  The cancer cell produces growth proteins more than inhibitory proteins.  This is also why mutations that protect against protein degradation such as the MDM2 Mutation (12q14 location) are widely found in tough to treat cancers.
In actual treatment, hitting 2 driver Mutations in the same cell, or hitting upstream and downstream targets, would result in better response rates.
In Melanoma, the combination of Ipilimumab, an antibody against the Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte Antigen, and DTIC,or Dacarbazine, an Alkylating agent striking down stream Ipilimumab, has once again confirm this premise.  The experience of adding Everolimus to Tamoxifen in refractory metastatic breast cancer  ascertains this principle.
The key is to pick a combination that makes sense or "go nuclear", meaning attacking nuclear component in combination with the mono-target therapy.
Once again, in every cancer cell there are either Driver Mutation, or Driver pathways.  In some cases, the pathway is upregulated by regulator molecules and amplification of transcription genes.  knocking down these amplifiers (Hedgehog signaling) has proven a legitimate therapeutic target (basal cell cancer).
At CRBCM our focus has been to identify major tangible or non-tangible pathways to cellular destruction.  By non-tangible we mean almost reflex mechanisms.  They appear to be threshold that overwhelm cancer cells.  Threshold beyond which the death or apoptotic processes are immediately begun (we call these uncontrollable cell destruction forces LAW OF NATURE) .  Cancer cell death uses Caspase and non Caspase mechanisms.  This is were the crux of the cure is and anything or pathways leading to this, is our focus.  Time is of the essence, let's keep on progressing!

Happy New Year 2013!

Ki-67 May Predict Renal Cell Carcinoma Progression

Lara C. Pullen, PhD

Related Articles

• Methylation-sensitive High-resolution Melting in the Context of Legislative Requirements for Validation of Analytical Procedures for Diagnostic Applications
• Advances in Molecular Imaging

Topic Alert

Receive an email from Medscape whenever new articles on this topic are available.

• Add Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) to My Topic Alert

Drug & Reference Information

• Renal Cell Carcinoma
• Grading of Renal Cell Carcinoma
• Radical Nephrectomy

October 9, 2012 (Chicago, Illinois) — Ki-67 expression is an independent predictor of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) progression and may serve as a valuable biomarker for patients with RCC, researchers reported at the American College of Surgeons (ACS) 98th Annual Clinical Congress.
Surgery is standard treatment for patients with RCC, yet approximately 1 in 5 patients will subsequently develop metastatic disease. Therefore, Kelvin Wong, MD, from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and colleagues used tissue microarrays to look for protein biomarkers that predict disease progression and might identify patients who need further adjuvant treatment.
The authors searched an institutional database to identify patients with RCC who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy with no lymph node or distant metastasis at surgery. The database included 223 patients with a median follow-up of 60.5 months. Of those, 40 (18%) patients developed metastatic disease.
The investigators constructed a tissue microarray from patient tumor samples and used immunohistochemistry to measure expression of 6 proteins: C-reactive protein, NFκB, CA 9, HIF1a, HIF2a, and Ki-67.
According to the authors, immunohistochemistry represents a straightforward and relatively cheap way to measure protein expression with automated quantification of fluorescent antibody signal intensity.
"What the computer can do is really separate spatially the different layers for us," Dr. Wong explained. "You can remove a lot of the inter-observer variability [using this type of system]." He acknowledged, however, that "the technology software needs a human element to tell the program what to recognize."
Ki-67 Correlates With Progression
Tumor size, grade, stage, subtype, sarcomatoid features, venous thrombus, perinephric fat invasion, and increased Ki-67 expression correlated with progression in a univariate analysis.
In a multivariate analysis, tumor size, level of thrombus, and Ki-67 remained independent risk factors for RCC recurrence. Of all of the factors identified, Ki-67 overexpression was most predictive of recurrence (hazard ratio, 8.4 [95% confidence interval, 3.8 - 19.0]).
David R. Byrd, MD, from the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance in Washington moderated the session and noted that the data suggest "that Ki-67 is something that should be routinely collected." Currently, physicians do not routinely request the test.
An estimated 65,000 new diagnoses of kidney cancer are expected in the United States in 2012. Kidney cancer is the eighth most common cancer in men and the sixth most common cancer in women. It is often difficult to determine who will progress.
Although to date adjuvant therapy has no known benefit, there may be a benefit if it became possible to predict who is at highest risk for progression.
Dr. Wong and Dr. Byrd have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
American College of Surgeons (ACS) 98th Annual Clinical Congress. Abstract NP2012-24333. Presented October 3, 2012.

US Cancer Screening Rates Fall in the Last Decade

Laurie Barclay, MD

Dec 28, 2012

• Ultrasound a Viable Screening Option for Breast Cancer
• FDA Panel Endorses New Breast Cancer Screening Option
• Task Force Says No to Routine Screening for Ovarian Cancer

Drug & Reference Information

• Prostate Cancer
• Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer
• Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Staging

In the last decade, the general US population did not meet Healthy People 2010 (HP2010) goals for cancer screening except for colorectal cancer, according to results from a US survey published online December 27 in Frontiers in Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. However, cancer survivors met goals for all cancer types except cervical cancer.
"There is a great need for increased cancer prevention efforts in the U.S., especially for screening as it is considered one of the most important preventive behaviors and helps decrease the burden of this disease on society in terms of quality of life, the number of lives lost and insurance costs," lead author Tainya C. Clarke, MPH, a research associate in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Florida, said in a news release.
"But despite this, our research has shown that adherence rates for cancer screenings have generally declined with severe implications for the health outlook of our society," Dr. Clarke said.
Despite earlier diagnoses and more effective treatments prolonging survival, cancer is still a leading cause of death and a highly prevalent chronic disease. In 2011, cancer-related deaths in the United States exceeded 570,000.
The objective of this study was to analyze 10-year trends in adherence to screening for site-specific cancers as recommended by the American Cancer Society, using the HP2010 goals as an adherence measure. Participants were 174,393 adults at least 18 years of age who completed the National Health Interview Survey between 1997 and 2010 for whom detailed cancer screening information was available.
The investigators also analyzed data from 7528 working cancer survivors representing 3.8 million US workers, as well as data from 119,374 adults representing more than 100 million working Americans with no history of cancer.
The US population slightly exceeded the HP2010 goal for colorectal screening, with 54.6% of the general public having colorectal screening compared with the HP2010 goal of 50%. However, the general US population surveyed failed to meet HP2010 goals for recommended breast, cervical, and prostate cancer screening.
Cervical cancer screening rate was higher in women aged 21 years and older than in those aged 18 years and older, suggesting that increasing human papillomavirus vaccination may contribute to decreasing Papanicolaou tests. The proportion of men older than 50 years receiving prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening decreased by nearly 20% from 1999 to 2010, which the investigators suggest might reflect questions being raised about the effectiveness of PSA screening.
In contrast to the overall population, cancer survivors met and maintained the HP2010 goal for cancer screening at all sites with the exception of screening for cervical cancer, which decreased to 78% during the last decade. Compared with the general population, cancer survivors had higher screening rates, but there was a decline among cancer survivors who took part in cancer screenings during the last 3 years. Screening rates among cancer survivors were higher for those employed in white-collar and service occupations than for those employed in blue-collar occupations.
Study Limitations and Implications
Cancer survivors report "higher screening rates than the general population," the study authors write. "Nevertheless, national screening rates are lower than desired, and disparities exist by cancer history and occupation. Understanding existing disparities, and the impact of cancer screening on survivors is crucial as the number of working survivors increases."
Limitations of this study include a reliance on self-report for the main outcome variables, that the sample size of cancer survivors employed in the farming sector was too small for analysis, and a lack of data on what type of Papanicolaou test (liquid-based or glass smear) was performed on women screened for cervical cancer.
"This declining trend foreshadows a future negative impact on mortality from cancers of the breast, and cervix as well as increased morbidity associated with a later diagnosis of prostate cancer," the study authors conclude. "Disagreements among the [US Preventive Services Task Force], the [American Cancer Society] and other recommending bodies over cancer screening guidelines may have contributed to the decline in screening throughout the decade. A decline in worker insurance rates over the decade under study could also be a contributing factor."
This study was supported by a National Cancer Institute fellowship at the National Institutes of Health and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
Front Oncol. Published online December 27, 2012. Full text
===========================================================

Who believed we are better off now?
and who thought Prevention programs are no longer needed?
Prevention is the cheapest was to protect against cancer!  

OPEN ENDED MORATORIUM NOT GOOD FOR CPRIT AND RELATED BUSINESSES.

While it is imperative to stop the grant process in order to remove CPRIT leaders who have been embroiled in a succession of scandals from mismanagement, there is also the sense that a prolonged Moratorium may hurt this very important program.
The Moratorium is aimed at:
1. Stopping the cancer within CPRIT
2. Nominate new CPRIT leaders
3. To fully investigate what happened
4. To determine ways to improve on the experience at CPRIT
5. To formulate new legislation in order to boost policies and activities
6. To restart a new and improved CPRIT.

The cancer within CPRIT has been dealt a blow by the removal of CPRIT executives, and the rising sense at CPRIT that they cannot continue to do things the old ways.  More needs to be demonstrated and a full reevaluation of the CPRIT system is awaited by communities around Texas  (Particularly in El Paso which so far has received less than 0.5% of CPRIT grant allocations of the close to 1 billion dollars).

New interim leaders have been nominated. We applaud them for their courage to get involved.  We wish them well and only ask of them to broaden the foot print of CPRIT by reaching out to new cities, new companies, and new ventures to really make a difference in low income communities.  We wish to remind them that El Paso is under-served and here prevention and clinical research will have the highest reach and impact.  Inclusion of minority populations makes for a more meaningful research outcome.

Investigation into activities at CPRIT is two fold.  One involves the legislators who founded and framed CPRIT.  They have been outraged by questionable practices at CPRIT.  They are now investigating to see how new legislation brought to CPRIT may prevent the current undermining trends at CPRIT and how to build ways to protect against future abuses.   The second one is to review and ascertain the possibility that criminal conduct had occurred at CPRIT.  The District Attorney and relevant offices have opened necessary investigations.  These types of investigations could be exhaustive and lengthy!

With all this going on, a Moratorium on the grant allocation or distribution had to implemented while improving internal policies, implementing checks and balances, hiring needed people to replace the leaving, and putting in place mandates for the new legislation ( basically putting in place things the governor and the Lt Governor called for CPRIT to do prior to resumption of Grant allocation activities).

Despite this understanding, it is clear that if this moratorium is open ended and not further characterized, its toll may hurt CPRIT, businesses and communities waiting for CPRIT resurgence.   At CPRIT the morale may move from anxiety to numbness, the new leaders may lose their yearning to lead again, and new Business applicants already are in limbo!  Those who got funded continue their activities, but suffice is to say even they need a vibrant and alive CPRIT to monitor their progress.  The length of the moratorium cannot be linked to the criminal investigation which should not be rushed in order to be thorough.   Our legislators are busy.  It's good they complete this task before their attention is called elsewhere.   CPRIT has only 7 years to go.  Let's work in a timely fashion.  We believe in a time frame that may tell us how long we will wait.  CPRIT is too important in our lives in various ways.  Even if it is just the hope that it represents!

Medscape Medical News > Oncology

Major Cancer Agency Freezes New Grants

Nick Mulcahy

Dec 21, 2012

Drug & Reference Information

• Childhood Cancer Epidemiology
• Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Prostate Cancer
• Chemoprevention Strategies in Head and Neck Cancer

As of this week, one of the largest funders of cancer research in the United States has temporarily stopped awarding grants, according to news reports.
The move by the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT), which is a state-sponsored taxpayer-funded agency, was in reaction to pressure and requests from Texas officials, including Governor Rick Perry.
The grant freeze is the latest development in an ongoing battle about questionable funding operations at the agency.
CPRIT reportedly hands out more cancer-related research dollars than any organization in the United States other than the National Institutes of Health.
Since 2007, CPRIT has channeled $1 billion in appropriations from the Texas legislature to fund cancer-related academic research projects, public prevention initiatives, and biotech cancer start-ups. These latter "commercialization" projects are a major source of agency turmoil.
Much of the controversy revolves around 2 large commercialization grants, both of which reportedly did not undergo the agency's standard review process. The awards total about $30 million.
The first controversial grant, for $18 million, was awarded to the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and Rice University in Houston, Texas, for a research–business incubator project. It was the largest award ever granted by CPRIT, as reported by Medscape Medical News.
The M.D. Anderson–Rice proposal was handled in a suspicious manner; the higher-ups at CPRIT hastily processed the grant application, circumventing CPRIT scientific reviewers, according to a Houston Chronicle investigative report published earlier this year. The grant's principal investigator is Lynda Chin, MD, a physician at M.D. Anderson and the wife of Ronald DePinho, MD, who is president of the cancer center.
In the past couple of weeks, it was reported that a second major grant, of $11 million, to Peloton Therapeutics (Dallas, Texas) also skirted the agency's review process.
Two weeks ago, the embattled executive director of CPRIT, Bill Gimson, finally resigned as questions abounded about his leadership. In addition, a Texas state office that investigates public corruption and criminal activity opened an inquiry into the agency.
Accusations of insider deals and cronyism have dogged the agency in the past year, as CPIRT's top scientists resigned in protest and made accusations on their way out the door.
Nobel laureate Phillip Sharp, PhD, quit his job as chair of the CPRIT Scientific Review Council in October. In his resignation letter, Dr. Sharp, who is also on the faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston, wrote that some of CPRIT's funding decisions have a "suspicion of favoritism." Another departing member of the scientific staff warned about "politically driven" funding and the subversion of scientific enterprise, according to press reports.
But the sharpest criticism came from the organization's former chief scientific officer, Alfred Gilman, MD, PhD.
Dr. Gilman, who is also a Nobel laureate, resigned from his CPRIT post in May to protest the aforementioned M.D. Anderson grant. He suggested that some grant recipients are "vultures."
"A friend of mine experienced in these matters told me this is the way it always works when you put a large amount of money on the table," Dr. Gilman said in an article published in the Houston Chronicle. "The vultures lie low for a couple years, figuring out how the system works. Then they come in for the feast. The M.D. Anderson grant was the first course of that feast."

Latest in Hematology-Oncology

MEDSCAPE JOINS THE CPRIT CHORUS!

(updated) FROM SYNAPSE: EL PASO IS FOURTH CITY IN TEXAS.

"El Paso is the fourth most populous city in the state of Texas with a population of more than 700,000. With such an immense population, this region has been federally designated as a medically underserved area.
“A health sciences university in El Paso will provide an outstanding education for the culturally diverse communities in this area, promote crucial research related to Latino and other underserved populations, and serve as a nationally recognized primary and specialty referral center for quality patient care,” said Jose Manuel de la Rosa, founding dean of the Paul L. Foster School of Medicine."
 
FROM CPRIT, WE RECEIVED a MERE 0.7% OF ONE BILLION DOLLARS GIVEN IN CANCER PREVENTION AND  RESEARCH FUNDING TO DATE! AND THAT IS ALL FAIR, BELIEVE ME!

The truth is that some of Organizations who benefited from CPRIT fundings for El Paso, are actually not based in El Paso.  Texas Tech and UTEP are reportedly not EL Paso based.   It is CRBCM's understanding from SYNAPSE sources that our Congress Representative is planning legislation to sever EL PASO dependency from Lubbock,Texas!

What is Lubbock? A small town which has succeeded to highjack a larger town. CRBCM will stay away from this controversy!  Suffice is to say, money destined to El Paso is actually managed by Lubbock.  THE TRUE PART OF CPRIT MONEY FOR EL PASO IS MOST LIKELY 0.1-0.2% SO FAR AFTER A THIRD OF CPRIT MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT!

Lubbock (pron.: /ˈlʌbək/)^[4] is a city in and the county seat of Lubbock County, Texas, United States.^[5] The city is located in the northwestern part of the state, a region known historically as the Llano Estacado, and is home to three universities: Lubbock Christian University, Texas Tech University, and Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. According to a 2011 Census estimate, Lubbock had a population of 233,740,^[1] making it the 83rd most populous city in the United States of America and the 11th most populous city in the state of Texas.^[6] The city is the economic center of the Lubbock metropolitan area, which had an estimated 2011 population of 290,002.^[7]
Lubbock's nickname is the "Hub City", which derives from it being the economic, education, and health care hub of a multicounty region commonly called the South Plains.^[8] The area is the largest contiguous cotton-growing region in the world^[9][10] and is heavily dependent on irrigation water drawn from the Ogallala Aquifer. Lubbock was selected as the 12th best place to start a small business by CNNMoney.com.^[11] They mentioned the community's traditional business atmosphere, less expensive rent for commercial space, and its central location and cooperative form of city government. Lubbock High School has been recognized for three consecutive years by Newsweek as one of the top high schools in the United States. Lubbock High School is home to the only international baccalaureate (IB) program in the region. The IB program is one of the criteria examined by Newsweek in formulating their list of top high schools.^[12] (Wikipedia)"

THE FUTURE AT CRBCM IS SPOKEN IN THE SIGNS!

2013: Sagittarius Career

Sagittarius
2013 promises to bring you a slew of helpful alliances to further your career aims. This is the year when social networking pays off in spades. The more you put yourself out there and socialize, the more contacts you'll make. Never underestimate the power of who you know because you're about to find out just how powerful it is to be connected. You're also learning about the power of delegating responsibilities. You of all people have a tendency to load your plate so full that you cannot possibly keep up with your own exciting life. Getting the right people to support you is essential to keep your career flourishing. Without the proper team behind you, how can you safely continue to grow? Saturn in Scorpio is reminding you that you must have a rock-solid foundation and infrastructure to prevent your bigger-than-life plans from toppling over at a moment's notice.
Uranus continues to give you the rebellious spirit you need to maximize your creative potential for ultimate gain. The fearlessness and initiative sparked by this radical influence propels you forward with an immediacy that is palpable. You know more than ever that the time is right now. No longer will you bide your time or put important plans on the back burner. It's now or never in 2013, and you'll show others the way to jumping into the unknown with total abandon. Others look to you for wisdom, inspiration and guidance more than ever now, so be ready to heed the call.
Saturn is camping out in your sector of retreat, dreams and imagination. You're being asked to make time to give structure to your fantasy life. No longer shall reality and fantasy be compartmentalized. If you can dream it, you can manifest it in the real word. All that is required is that you write everything down and make a solid plan around the images and dreams that come to you. Don't let them pass like clouds because they may just be your meal ticket, darling. It's all about implementing and making them concrete. Taking time off proves to be highly lucrative, as you will use this time for research, inspiration and reflection. Solitude and reflection become a necessity rather than a luxury in 2013.

======================================================================
FROM YAHOO

IF YOU FEEL GOOD BECAUSE YOU HAVE SUCCESSFULLY HINDERED PROGRESS AGAINST CANCER, GOOD FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT BE MENTIONED ANYWHERE IN HISTORY.   IF YOU FEEL YOU HAVE SUCCEEDED TO STOP CRBCM MARCH TO BECOME WHAT IT SHOULD BE FOR JOBS IN EL PASO, FOR HELPING IN LOW INCOME AREAS, FOR THE FIGHT AGAINST BREAST CANCER.  A BIGGER HAT FOR YOU.  YOUR EFFORTS WILL NEVER BE KNOWN BUT TO YOU AND CLOSE ACCOMPLICES.
EVEN THE DEVIL WINS SOMETIMES!  BUT HIS WINS ARE MET WITH DISDAIN FROM THE COMMON FELLOW!

BE A POSITIVE FORCE, SUPPORT CRBCM'S MISSION!
CALL 915-307-3354 AND OFFER YOUR HELP!

Let's make 2013 more wholesome AND delicious

	Dear Peggy, Some of the best things in life start small. Like the garlic cloves I plant. Buried about three inches into the fragrant earth, warmed by the late-Autumn sun, and protected from smothering weeds with the strength of my own hands. Unfortunately, not all food we eat is treated with such care. Food that is convenient and cheap has overshadowed food that is healthy and fresh for far too long, and in every corner of the globe. These foods aren't just fast. They favor efficiency over safety. Profit over health. Cheap labor over workers' rights. Mass production over the environment. In running our own farm, my wife and I have chosen to support a different kind of food and farming. So have you – simply by receiving this email from Slow Food! You can play an integral role in effecting the change we need to build this system. Making a tax-deductible $8 donation now means you'll be a part of a movement that demands more from our food producers. With time, the garlic I planted last month will grow into fragrant bulbs, ripe with promise for a satisfying and flavorful meal. Supporting Slow Food offers a similar promise to farmers like me, who have boycotted unethical food production practices in order to make foods that are better for everyone. And Slow Food supporters are not just advocating for small farms. We're also demanding better working conditions and quality products from large-scale food producers. We're building community gardens that provide educational opportunities and a good source of food for community members. We're ensuring that the plants we value so highly, from Harrison Cider apples to Burbank tomatoes, do not face extinction when confronted with waning biodiversity. You've helped make this progress possible, and we need your help to continue these programs, and to establish new ones. Additional funding is critical – Slow Food must raise $80,000 in these last two days before the New Year to ensure we have the resources we need to do our work, and we're still $25,000 away from our goal. Your tax-deductible $8 donation today will do so much to guarantee that Slow Food programs can stay strong in 2013 and beyond. From cooking, to serving as a Slow Food governor, to growing food for my family and my community, I have spent my life working toward a more sustainable method of producing food. And I've seen firsthand the impact advocates like you can have. You're the ones demanding more of your grocers, of your growers and of your government. You're the ones coming home every night to enjoy a meal with the people you care about. You're the ones making our food practices better for your families and for generations to come. Let's help everyone enjoy that same right. Whether we're serving up a slow-roasted garlic soup or a handful of just-cracked pecans, we know a small thing can make a big impact. Sincerely, Greg Boulos Mid-Atlantic Regional Governor, Slow Food USA P.S. I just want to take a moment to thank the current and past staff of Slow Food USA. Leadership in a movement like ours takes tireless dedication and a personal commitment that extends far deeper than any paycheck can inspire. Their passion is deep and it is in this spirit that we prepare the next generation of Slow Food leaders. © 2012 Slow Food USA privacy policy | unsubscribe | slowfoodusa.org 68 Summit Street, 2B, Brooklyn, NY 11231 718.260.8000 | membership@slowfoodusa.org
	.....

IT IS ALL POLITICS, AN INTERESTING READING BUT THE SUPREME COURT WON'T BUY

Political News From NPR

Conservatives Invoke NAACP Case In Fight For Secret Donors

by Peter Overby

December 30, 2012 5:10 AM

Audio for this story from Weekend Edition Sunday will be available at approximately 12:00 p.m. ET.

Enlarge image

Republican strategist Karl Rove, shown at the Republican National Convention in August, is arguing for continued secrecy for the new class of million-dollar political donors.

David Goldman/AP

Here's a question: What do Republican uber-strategist Karl Rove and civil rights icon Rosa Parks have in common?
The answer: A landmark Supreme Court ruling from 1958 protecting the First Amendment rights of dissident groups.
The case is rooted in the Montgomery bus boycott initiated by Parks in 1955. And it's likely to loom large in 2013 as Rove and other conservatives demand continued secrecy for the new class of million-dollar political donors.
A Wave Of Secret Money
This election year, secret money played a bigger role than in any other presidential campaign since Richard Nixon's. The nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation says that secretly funded groups spent well over $200 million. And four-fifths of it helped Republicans.
So it's not surprising that conservatives want to keep donors' identities secret. They say it's essential to safeguard donors from harassment and intimidation.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell once favored sweeping transparency for political money. Not anymore.
In a major speech this year, he brought up the plight of a million-dollar donor to a superPAC supporting Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
"People were digging through his divorce records, cable television hosts were going after him on the air, and bloggers were harassing his kids," McConnell said.
'Intimidation And Harassment'
Rove's group Crossroads GPS was a leader in the secret fundraising. He says that the disclosure advocates have a hidden agenda.
"They want to intimidate people into not giving to ... these conservative efforts," he said on Fox News.
And here is where Rove and Parks cross paths: In defending secret money, Rove invokes that Supreme Court case, NAACP v. Alabama. He lines up Crossroads GPS on the same side as Parks and the NAACP, and he says the transparency advocates make the same argument as the segregationists.
"I think it's shameful," Rove said. "I think it's a sign of their fear of democracy. And it's interesting that they have antecedents, and the antecedents are a bunch of segregationist attorney generals trying to shut down the NAACP."
To elaborate on this argument, aides to Rove recommended Heritage Foundation legal fellow Hans von Spakovsky.
"You look at the kind of intimidation and harassment that has occurred in the past year or two towards conservative political donors, and it makes you realize that the Supreme Court got it right," von Spakovsky says.
A 'False Symmetry'?
But the question is whether the two situations are similar.
A few months after the bus boycott began, Parks told Pacifica Radio how she had refused to give up her seat on the bus: "The time had just come when I had been pushed as far as I could stand to be pushed, I suppose," she said. "They placed me under arrest."
That was just the beginning. Montgomery law enforcement brought charges against Martin Luther King Jr. and other leaders. Arsonists firebombed their homes and churches. Across the state, rioters blocked an NAACP bid to desegregate the University of Alabama. A mob chased the one African-American student, chanting "Let's kill her."
The university acted. It suspended the black student — and then expelled her.
Meanwhile, state Attorney General John Patterson subpoenaed the NAACP's membership records. "The NAACP is the biggest enemy that the people of this state have," he said.
When the case finally reached the Supreme Court, the justices ruled in favor of the NAACP. They said the group faced attacks — both from government officials and from law-breakers — and that revealing its members would endanger their First Amendment rights.
"One of the reasons why the NAACP required special protections at that time [is] they were a minority group that law enforcement couldn't or wouldn't protect," says Dale Ho, a lawyer at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.
He says conservatives are creating a "false symmetry" between those civil rights activists and today's millionaire donors. "In none of these recent cases that I'm aware of in the past five years has anyone ever alleged that law enforcement couldn't protect them adequately," Ho says.
A Right To Secrecy?
At the University of Chicago Law School, constitutional scholar Geoffrey Stone scoffs at the conservative argument, calling its proponents "a bunch of overly sensitive, thin-skinned billionaires who want to be able to have profound influence on the political process without being in any way accountable."
In the years since the NAACP v. Alabama decision, courts have never extended it to cover donors in the usual conservative-liberal, Republican-Democratic debates.
A related case did go to the Supreme Court in 2010. Challenging a state disclosure law, it sought to withhold the names of people who had petitioned against gay marriage.
The court said they had no right to secrecy. Justice Antonin Scalia was scathing: "Running a democracy takes a certain amount of civic courage. And the First Amendment does not protect you from criticism, or even nasty phone calls."
But von Spakovsky says that politically generous billionaires today need protection, just like civil rights workers 60 years ago.
"I don't think that a constitutional right like freedom of association should depend on how much money you have," he says.
It's an argument that seems sure to stir passionate debate this coming year as the disclosure battles take shape in Congress and the courts.

Congressional Leaders Hopeful As Fiscal Cliff Deadline Nears December 29, 2012 Massachusetts Freshman Brings Kennedys Back To Capitol HillDecember 30, 2012

 

Political News From NPR

About

It's All Politics covers political news from the nation's capital and its many states. It's hosted by Frank James, with contributions from the NPR politics team. You can reach Frank and the team via our contact form.

Texas cancer-fighting agency has benefited Perry, Dewhurst donor

 52  7

 

comments (0)

By Sue Goetinck Ambrose
sgoetinck@dallasnews.com
11:48 am on November 19, 2012 | Permalink

Caliber Biotherapeutics received a $12.8 million grant from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. (Sue Goetinck Ambrose)

The state’s $3 billion program to fight cancer has come under increased scrutiny after its chief scientist and dozens of advisers stepped down this year, alleging that methods for awarding grants have been compromised.
In our new investigation of The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, we report that millions from the agency flowed to two firms founded by political contributor and Dallas businessman David Shanahan.
A month after Texas voters in 2007 approved the state’s 10-year, $3 billion program Shanahan and several of his associates began to pour tens of thousands of dollars into the campaign funds of Gov. Rick Perry and Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst.
The $13 million in awards came on top of more than $8 million Shanahan’s firms previously had received from funds controlled by Perry’s office. Those funds: the Texas Enterprise Fund, a little-known fund to assist communities with military bases, and the state’s Emerging Technology Fund. (Read The News’ previous coverage on the tech fund’s awards to political contributors here.)
CPRIT said the largest of its awards to Shanahan’s companies, $12.8 million to Caliber Biotherapeutics, was given based on recommendations from experts who reviewed the grants. The News’ Austin bureau reporter James Drew and I reported yesterday that reviewers gave Caliber the lowest science score of all companies receiving such awards.
CPRIT told us political connections had nothing to do with the awards to David Shanahan’s companies.  Aides to Perry and Dewhurst, who along with the House Speaker make appointments to CPRIT’s Oversight Committee, said the elected officials are not involved in the agency’s operations, including which applicants get funded.
Our full coverage includes a 2-minute video on Shanahan’s connections.

SUTENT FOR METASTATIC RENAL CELL CANCER!     

Are you interested in information to help you better manage your patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)?
	Dear Dr. Kankonde, Come explore patient support strategies, patient management, and other relevant issues. Discover for yourself how SUTENT may be appropriate for your mRCC patients.
START SESSION
	Upon conclusion of this session, you will have the opportunity to download a medically relevant educational item. This is a non-CME, promotional program sponsored by Pfizer. A portion of this program features the opportunity to share your thoughts and treatment practices. This information is shared in aggregate with Pfizer Inc.
	SUTENT is indicated for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Important Safety Information Hepatotoxicity has been observed in clinical trials and post-marketing experience. This hepatotoxicity may be severe, and deaths have been reported. Monitor liver function tests before initiation of treatment, during each cycle of treatment, and as clinically indicated. SUTENT should be interrupted for Grade 3 or 4 drug-related hepatic adverse events and discontinued if there is no resolution. Do not restart SUTENT if patients subsequently experience severe changes in liver function tests or have other signs and symptoms of liver failure. Women of childbearing potential should be advised of the potential hazard to the fetus and to avoid becoming pregnant. Cardiovascular events, including heart failure, myocardial disorders, and cardiomyopathy, some of which were fatal, have been reported through post-marketing experience. Monitor patients for signs and symptoms of congestive heart failure (CHF) and, in the presence of clinical manifestations, discontinuation is recommended. Patients who presented with cardiac events, pulmonary embolism, or cerebrovascular events within the previous 12 months were excluded from clinical studies. SUTENT has been shown to prolong QT interval in a dose-dependent manner, which may lead to an increased risk for ventricular arrhythmias including torsades de pointes, which has been seen in <0.1% of="" patients.="" monitoring="" with="" on-treatment="" electrocardiograms="" and="" electrolytes="" should="" be="" considered.=""></0.1%>

CRBCM, A SURVIVAL STRATEGY.

The holidays have brought new wind at CRBCM/Greaster East Cancer Center.  As some physicians took off for the holidays.  We, at CRBCM, fill the gap increasing our share of patients.  Already it seems that our efforts provide an opportunity to live another day for sure.  We are not going to be distracted. The cause is just and lingering, the call is alive and keeps inviting to action.  Women keep facing the devastation of Breast cancer.  My own dear mother died of complications and progression of Breast cancer.  We will not surrender.  People are dying every day while our leaders are distracted by political fights.  Some of our leaders actually believe more in politics than in the work at end.  All day they stay on the phone building political alliances for their own survival.  It is good to survive so you can speak another day.  But surviving because of the alliances you have built is not enough.  Survive to make a difference, survive to advance the human condition, survive to leave a legacy, survive to show you are the best of us by representing some idea or philosophy that should drive communities to rise to better conditions or understanding of us, the people of the world.  To do this you have to fight.
Part of the fight is to raise your voice. And words can hurt when the confront awkward politicians who forget they acts are being watched!  when you speak the truth, cheaters are genuinely hurt.  And to show their power, they lash at you with their venom.  They work hard at isolating you even though the realize your cause is just.  That you come from a forgotten city.  That you come from forgotten minorities.  politicians and large Institutions use minorities to show they are kind, compassionate and thoughtful.  They don't think of us as equal people in need of intervention.  Only a fringe of the majority is genuinely interested.  politicians and large institutions will dismiss you as soon as they know they can get away with it.  Blood is thicker than water, the say goes.
For low income population, only those leaders who have risen from them can really fight for them.  if you have faced the desperation of an empty refrigerator with kids looking at you for answers to their needs, you will find it in you to give 5 dollars to a begger instead of a dime.  The feeling of desperation will return to your stomach.  You will understand how this lonely begger should be feeling when he is now alone! Are we suckers? May be!  But you do a good deed because you believe in what it is for the world we live in!  There is no better judge of when something is right but your own conscience!

The inherent component to being a coalition is to take on a fight.  And in any fight you can win or lose.  But no matter the outcome, you will learn to fight better another day.  In some fight, losing the first round is part of the process.  Hold your ground until the opponent understand you are a parallel "friend" in the fight for a better country! WE,AT CRBCM, HAVE RAISED OUR VOICE AGAINST ELEMENTS IN CPRIT. WE ARE BRACING OURSELVES FOR THE REVENGEFUL DISMISSAL OF 3 OF OUR SUBMISSIONS.  But every day we wake up people are dying of cancer.  We will be coming back to the doors of CPRIT because we must!  

CRBCM- Reflections 
Just as you feel everything is collapsing on you,  new wind boost you back -up.
Mostly because you are prepared and therefore a new opportunity comes from the horizon.  You got to take it! and to do so you got to qualify to do so.  Nothing comes to you when you are unprepared and unqualified.  So prepare yourself while you wait for friendly waters!

We live in a community of people, someone knows someone with a new need. and here we go,  you take on the new opportunity!  life has this way of throwing you a bone, you got to be hungry and ready to do a good job for things to stick.  We are ready to unveil some details of our many projects.  The survivorship program appears to be the most detailed so far.  We wait for funding in Dayton,Ohio and (on Chester Blvd) Richmond Indiana to be secured.

Even your enemies are under pressure to perform and meet objectives as they are judged by tertiary independent forces.  They may offer you a bone to keep themselves afloat.  You just take the opportunity because you too have to stay afloat. The world goes on this way!  At CRBCM we take care of business with attention because one good performance lead to another.  Our cause is here and just, someone somewhere will here our call and answer soon.  We will keep the fight because the cause is a good one!  New good signs have emerged today, let's keep on working hard!

News at CRBCM/ ANNUAL GOALS/

-Final touch on New year's Party;  The CRBCM owns a studio
and some of our spare time is spent composing Music.  Some of the music is posted on UBETO under CLEMENT ALBERT!
The plan is, once the health prevention program is developed, to use this vehicle for people motivation messages.  In this Hispanic culture of El Paso, Texas, Music is in the heart of the people.  The success of Zumba lays in the Music driving the dance-exercise!  CRBCM has invested in this.   The party is a free run of the original Music.
-Final touch on Annual Goals and objectives given unfriendly waters.
New privileges in local hospital being renewed,  expanding coverage of hospitals, writing new proposals
-Final shipment on contractual obligation/ work completed in Houston and Greenville ( IN): finding new contract with Insurers for independent work
-final decisions strategy on Asset management. where to cut our losses.
actively sell assets in NY, MD, IN and VA.
-decisions on CRBCM Marketing and push for further exposure as positive signs point to survival of CRBCM.
-Knowing our weaknesses and actively work on ways to manage them.  this is called RISK MANAGEMENT for better positioning.
-Increasing presence in local Hospitals
-Identifying new local opportunities for ventures
-Increasing political alliances.
- work expansion in swing states where economic opportunity is greatest. (IN and OH)
-Sale Assets in various states/restructuring
-Fitness 

THE CRBCM GOT TO STAY ON THE MOVE, dying appears to not be an option anymore! things are shaping up for an exciting 2013.