Lung cancer tumors in mice are shrinking -- with the help of a hormone important in the control of blood pressure.

This new discovery, led by scientists at Wake University School of Medicine, suggests some drugs used to manage blood pressure might also prevent or treat lung cancer.

This all came about when it was noticed that lung cancer rates were lower among those treated for high blood pressure with angiotensin-converting enzyme, or ACE, inhibitors. These drugs, including Capoten and Lotensin, increase levels of angiotensin-(1-7) in the bloodstream.

In studies, the angiotensin-(1-7) hormone caused a 30 percent decrease in tumor volume in mice. Tumors in mice not treated with the hormone more than doubled.

This study, published in the journal Cancer Research, is the first demonstration of the effect in animals.

Researchers have made a stem cell discovery that may help treat pancreatic cancer -- one of the deadliest forms of the disease.

University of Michigan scientists have found cancer stem cells in pancreatic tumors that appear to drive cell tumor growth and could lead to the development of drugs to target and kill these cells.

Pancreatic cancer kills 97 percent of people diagnosed with the disease within five years. Half of all diagnosed patients die within six months of diagnosis, and this cancer -- that spreads quickly and is rarely detected at an early state -- kills 33,000 each year in the United States alone. So any improvement in the study of this disease is a true gift.

"The clinical implications of this work are significant," said Dr. Diane Simeone, director of the Gastrointestinal Oncology Program at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Centre and lead author of the study, published in the journal Cancer Research.

"We've made baby steps in improving the survival in these patients -- on the order of a few months (longer to live) -- over the past decade or so. But we really haven't had a major breakthrough in coming up with something that has the potential to provide a cure," she said.

Simeone says killing these cancer stem cells is like pulling out the root of a weed. And she says the best way to pull out the root is to target these stem cells instead of the traditional approach of shrinking tumors by killing as many cells as possible -- an approach that may be flawed because cancer stem cells tend to resist standard therapies.

Radioactive cancer patients attending this weekend's Super Bowl in Miami could be in for an alarming experience when they pass through radiation detectors designed to signal the presence of dirty bombs. Such cancer patients -- who have received treatment using radioisotopes and still may have tiny amounts of radioactive material in their bodies -- may want to come armed with letters from their doctors explaining their precarious set of circumstances.

The use of radioisotopes in medicine is growing -- and so is the use of radiation detectors in our security-conscious nation, which means patients are triggering alarms when they are not even aware they are being scanned, doctors and security officials say.

Nearly 60,000 people a day in the United States undergo treatment or tests that leave traces of radioactive material in their bodies, according to the Society of Nuclear Medicine. These traces are not enough to hurt anyone, but they are enough to trigger radiation alarms for up to three months.

Radioisotopes are commonly used to diagnose and treat certain cancers and thyroid disorders, to analyze heart function, and to scan bones and lungs. And many doctors already know to equip their patients with travel cards because of the problems they can encounter in public places.

Nearly 20 million nuclear medical procedures were performed in the United States in 2005 -- up 15 percent from 2001. Clearly, the number of people who could be mistaken for terrorists is quite large. So if you are one of these people -- with the power to create a buzz in a public setting -- get your papers in order so you can quickly confirm your identity as nothing more than a cancer patient.

Researchers from Dartmouth Medical School say they have a new way of identifying a deadly form of breast cancer that plagues 17 to 37 percent of all breast cancer patients and mostly premenopausal black women.

Identification comes in the form of locating the marker nestin -- a long filamentous protein indicating the presence of basal epithelial tumors -- which makes this type of cancer hard to diagnose and hard to treat. It also puts patients at high risk for recurrence, marked by a very short time between treatment and relapse.

"Ideally, a marker like nestin would enable clinicians to monitor these patients through frequent tests of a biomarker and, in doing so, detect the cancer before it has a chance to come back," says one professor.

Researchers must now find an effective means of detecting nestin in a clinical screening setting. It won't be as simple as a blood test -- but a non-invasive collection of mammary duct samples may enable the development of a screening tool for at-risk patients.

A new study sheds new hopeful light on pancreatic cancer survival -- for patients 65 and older.

The study, conducted at Thomas Jefferson University and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia, found patients in this age group who survive pancreatic cancer for at least five years have a better chance than patients not yet 65 at surviving another five years.

Researchers studied the records of 890 patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent the standard pancreaticoduodenectomy, or Whipple procedure. And lead researcher Charles Yeo reports that surgery can in fact extend and improve the quality of life for this population.

"Not too long ago, few lived for five years after diagnosis," he said. "Today, that not true. There's been a paradigm shift in the way we treat and think about this disease."

Additional details on this promising study can be found in the journal Surgery.

2006 will forever be the year linking the decline in breast cancer cases to the decline in use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). This was big news on the cancer front, and while some argue other forces helped drive the breast cancer drop, there is still much speculation that the use of HRT somehow increases the risk of developing the disease. Even so, it is predicted that Wyeth's sales of hormone replacement drugs will have reached more than $1 billion as of yesterday, the last day of 2006.

Even more interesting is the prediction by analysts that revenue from the pills -- used to treat symptoms of menopause -- will rise five percent annually for the next several years.

It seems the sales growth, despite the overall decline in the HRT market, is primarily due to increased demand from wholesalers and price increases too.

It's hard to tell what will happen to the world of HRT in the year 2007 -- will women embrace what is considered the best therapy around for menopausal issues? Will they abandon the controversial treatment altogether? Will they find variations of HRT that meet their needs while minimizing risk for disease? Only time will tell.

Graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) is a complication that can occur after a stem cell transplant. GvHD occurs when infection-fighting cells from the donor recognize the patient's body as being different or foreign. These infection-fighting cells then attack tissues in the patient's body just as if they were attacking an infection. GvHD is often treated with steroids, though this does not always work. GvHD is a serious condition with a high death rate so researchers are constantly evaluating new ways to treat it or reduce the symptoms.

European researchers conducted a study to see if a certain type of stem cell, infused into patients with GvHD that are not responding to treatment, would be effective. Patients were treated with mesenchymal stem cells, that are specific types of stems cells that are collected from the bone marrow of a donor. These stem cells are thought to help suppress the donor's immune cells and reduce the risk of GvHD.

The researcher found that 68 percent of the patients responded, children having slightly better results. They concluded that treatment with mesenchymal stem cells appears to effectively treat recurrent GvHD that would otherwise have been fatal in a majority of patients.

The overall cure rate for the 20,000 children diagnosed with cancer in the United States each year is more than 75 percent. Sounds good -- especially when 50 years ago, most children diagnosed with cancer died. But considering that only one in three childhood cancer survivors remain healthy, perhaps this is not such good news.

Thirty years after diagnosis, about 40 percent of survivors have a serious health problem and one-third have multiple problems. Strokes, heart disease, and kidney failure are just a few of the major health concerns that plague many survivors who have entered adulthood.

Doctors have long known that cancer treatments can cause new cancers later in life. But the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study -- the largest ever childhood study of its kind -- shows there are other long-term health problems. Researchers studied 10,000 survivors -- past studies examined 200-300 survivors -- and found these survivors were eight times as likely as their siblings to develop severe and life-threatening conditions. They found survivors of bone tumors, nerve and brain cancer, and Hodgkin's disease faced the highest risk.

The source of these later-in-life health problems vary. Kidney failure may result from damage caused by chemotherapy or radiation or the infections children suffer when their immune systems are weakened. Drugs used to treat infections may also be to blame. Strokes may result from head and chest radiation.

Cancer treatment for people of all ages comes with a price. We buy time, we buy life in exchange for the unknown. But for children -- who stand to live longer than adults -- there is a greater unknown. Sadly, there is a dark side to surviving cancer.

The CyberKnife -- a powerful new weapon in the war on cancer -- involves no cutting, like the name implies. This robotic system instead uses hundreds of focused radiation beams to destroy a tumor. A robotic arm moves around the patient and an image-guided system tracks the targeted tumor. CyberKnife delivers small blasts of radiation from up to 200 angles and keeps the tumor in its sights at all times. CyberKnife treatments are completed in one to five days which is just one of the benefits of this therapy compared to traditional radiation therapy.

With traditional radiation, patients often endure treatment for five to eight weeks. And healthy tissue can be destroyed every time the patient shifts or breathes. The CyberKnife attacks the cancerous tumor only -- even while the patient breathes. CyberKnife therapy, available in only 50 hospitals in the United States, requires no mold to position patients, can treat anywhere in the body, and can help patients who no longer respond to traditional treatments.

CyberKnife is covered by insurance and approved by Medicare.

On Friday, I was full of anxiety and panic and worry -- all over a lump I feel in my left breast that my oncologist says is probably just scar tissue from my lumpectomy two years ago. I don't like the word probably and the more I thought about it, the more unsettled I became. Too many young women hear that the suspicious bumps and lumps they detect in their breasts are nothing to worry about -- and too many women go on to later discover that these same bumps and lumps are in fact cancer. Sometimes it's in enough time to treat the cancer -- and sometimes it's too late.

I am a young woman -- 36 years old -- and I have already had breast cancer. I do not wish to obsess for my entire life about cancer but when I feel a lump in my breast, I want to know it is definitely nothing to worry about. Or I want to know that it is definitely something to worry about -- so I can treat it early.

So when I first got a mammogram and ultrasound appointment scheduled for a week from Friday, I accepted it and wrote it down in my calendar. And then panic set in. I realized I could not wait one week and that I should be able to demand a quicker response. So I called my doctor's office, spoke to the receptionist through uncontrollable tears, and somehow ended up with the doctor herself on the phone. "What's wrong?" she said. "I'm freaking out," I told her. "What do you want to do?" she asked. "Do you want to come in right now?" She told me she had a busy day, had a biopsy to perform that would take a while, but that I could come hang out in her office until she could get to me. Or I could come in on Monday, she said. I let myself calm down a bit and told her Monday would be good. She asked me what time I wanted to come -- she offered me any time that fit my schedule. I chose 9:00 AM.

So tomorrow morning, I will find out what exactly sits underneath the skin on my left breast, near my armpit -- what exactly it is that feels to me like a little mound of tissue that just doesn't seem right. Maybe it's scar tissue -- and I hope it is -- and maybe it's something else. I can only hope that at the end of my appointment I look foolish for pursuing something that doesn't deserve the attention I'm giving it. But if it does deserve attention, I will know I've done the right thing by vigorously pursuing an appointment I just couldn't wait one week for.

When I was first diagnosed with breast cancer almost two years ago, my greatest fear was losing my hair. The fear was consuming, painful, over-the-top. That was long ago -- and I survived. I can look back now and realize that the panic about losing my hair was such a small-scale fear -- compared to what I fear now. Now I fear a recurrence of cancer. And it's a whole lot more disabling than a little worry about being bald.

I have a few techniques for settling my fears when they get out of control. Sometimes I take deep breaths. Sometimes I distract myself and occupy my mind with something more pleasant than anxiety -- like writing, exercising, playing with my little boys. And sometimes I read about others who have come before me and have handled the same distress I sometimes feel about cancer taking up residence in my body again. Mostly I learn from stories of other women who have survived breast cancer. And I learn that I can handle the fear, that I can handle cancer if it does come back. And the women I find most inspiring are those who have had a recurrence -- or two or three -- and who still manage to happily tackle the life they have in front of them. They give me hope that if a recurrence comes my way, I too can conquer it. And here are seven snippets of hope from the book Hope Lives! The After Breast Cancer Treatment Survival Handbook -- from women who keep on surviving breast cancer.

Researchers will be using a synthetic version of a protein found in Giant Yellow Israeli scorpion venom in further clinical trials to treat glioma, one of the deadliest forms of brain cancer. In a two-pronged effect, the protein, called TM-601, has shown it can deliver radioactive iodine to the tumor and has cancer-fighting properties of its own in slowing tumor growth.

One of the challenges in treating brain tumors is the blood-brain barrier blocks chemicals from reaching the brain. While median length of survival for all glioma brain cancer patients is 27 weeks, the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center researchers reported two of the patients treated with the synthetic version of the scorpion venom protein were still living almost three years post-treatment. TM-601 did not show any toxicity, did not affect neighboring tissue or body organs and what the body did not use was eliminated by the body. Researchers will be looking to test the synthetic version of the protein found in Giant Yellow Israeli scorpion venom on other forms of cancer.

Herceptin -- a targeted breast cancer drug used to treat women who are Her2 positive -- has received rave reviews and has shown great promise in cutting down on recurrence of this aggressive form of breast cancer. Given over the course of 52 weeks, Herceptin is wondrous for its lack of short-term side effects. There is no hair loss, no compromise of blood counts, no significant sickness. For me, fatigue may have resulted from this treatment -- but it's unclear to me really whether it was the Herceptin or the two small boys I have living in my house that most contributed to my occasional exhaustion. Regardless, I functioned well while receiving Herceptin for the past year -- and I did not suffer anything more than a twinge of pain when my port was accessed for each treatment. In the short term, I have fared well. In the long term, the jury is still out.

No one wants to openly admit this is true but one of the reasons why lung cancer has not received the research dollars other cancers receive and why treatment for cancer seems to differ for lung cancer patients than treatment for patients diagnosed with other more acceptable cancers is, in part, because there is a widespread belief that lung cancer is directly tied to smoking. As a result, lung cancer has long been stigmatized. However, as Dana Reeve's death from lung cancer illuminated, lung cancer is not entirely the karmic consequence of bad health habits or from a willful lack of prudent decision-making in lifestyle. Sometimes lung cancer has nothing to do with smoking.

Overeaters, smokers and drinkers: the doctor won't see you now is a feature story Macleans magazine is running exposing a trend of some doctors who are refusing to treat patients with self-destructive vices. In a cherry-picking method of choosing patients the doctor deems worthy of treatment, others are being refused treatment. Yes, you heard that right. The patients are being turned away, or put on waiting lists that guarantees they will not be seen, often without being told the truth of why they cannot get in to see the doctor. According to the article, doctors defend the practice of patient selection by saying their decisions are pragmatic. Why spend thousands of dollars on futile procedures? Oh, I don't know -- because it is hippocratic oath humane and because you are not GOD so you do not get to decide who lives and who dies according to your personal likes and dislikes.