Thursday, February 27, 2014

A Child Born After January 1, 2014 Should Not Die of Breast Cancer

Barron’s Medical Journal Reporting from Janelia Farm, the Virginia research campus of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Asburn County, Virginia USA

A Child Born After January 1, 2014 Should Not Die of Breast Cancer:

Get Ready 2014 Is The Year Of The Greatest Science Discoveries This World Has Ever Known.
Twenty fourteen is the year that we can say A child born after January 1, 2014 should not die of breast cancer. The reason we can make such a bold prediction is there is several things happening in the science communities that gives the entire science and medical communities the scientific facts to back up such a bold statement. President Obama has given the green light and $100 million for scientist to study the human brain; European Union’s has set aside $1 billion for the Human Brain Project, Genetically modify babies is now going to be a common practice and one of the United States greatest scientist is leaving Harvard University for the Allen Institute for Brain Science in Seattle Clay Reid.
$100 million in 2014, to invent and refine new technologies to understand the human brain, senior administration officials said Monday.
A senior administration scientist compared the new initiative to the Human Genome Project, in that it is directedBrought To You By Houston Ballet ALADDIN (AMERICAN PREMIERE)at a problem that has seemed insoluble up to now: the recording and mapping of brain circuits in action in an effort to “show how millions of brain cells interact.” It is different, however, in that it has, as yet, no clearly defined goals or endpoint. Coming up with those goals will be up to the scientists involved and may take more than year.
The effort will require the development of new tools not yet available to neuroscientists and, eventually, perhaps lead to progress in treating diseases like Alzheimer’s and epilepsyand traumatic brain injury. It will involve both government agencies and private institutions.
The initiative, which scientists involved in promoting the idea have been calling the Brain Activity Map project, will officially be known as Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies, or Brain for short; it has been designated a grand challenge of the 21st century by the Obama administration. European Union’s $1 billion, decade-long Human Brain Project, there are numerous private and public research efforts in the United States and abroad, some focusing on the human brain.
A map of brain connections would be helpful for interpreting measurements of the signals transmitted between neurons. In the human brain, these signals travel in a complex network of 100 billion or so neurons, each of which is connected to 10,000 others.
The function of neural circuits is an emergent property arising from the coordinated activity of large numbers of neurons. To capture this, we propose launching a large-scale, international public effort, the Brain Activity Map Project, aimed at reconstructing the full record of neural activity across complete neural circuits. Conrad said that\ in 1953 James Watson and Francis Crick proposed the double helix structure for DNA. The double helix consists of a long chain of repeated units called nucleotides, of which there are four types: A, C, G, and T. Hereditary information is written in DNA using this alphabet of four letters. In the human genome, the sequence of nucleotides is about one billion letters long. The reading of this sequence was finally completed by the Human Genome Project in 2003.
Roughly 1,000 to 4,000 children born in the United States each year will develop a mitochondrial disease, most by age 10, with symptoms that can range from mild to devastating. These diseases typically prevent mitochondria from converting food into energy and are the result of genetic abnormalities, although some cases can be caused by exposures to toxins. Disorders caused by mutations in the mitochondrial DNA are passed down from the mother.
Developers of these modification techniques say they are a way for women with mitochondrial disease to give birth to healthy children to whom they are related genetically. Some are also promoting their use for age-related infertility. These are worthy goals. But these procedures are deeply problematic in terms of their medical risks and societal implications. Will the child be born healthy, or will the cellular disruptions created by this eggs-as-Lego-pieces approach lead to problems later on? What about subsequent generations? And how far will we go in our efforts to engineer humans?
These sorts of concerns were first voiced decades ago, well before the human genome had even been “mapped.” Those were the days when our accelerating knowledge about genetics led to over-optimistic hopes for quick fixes to an array of afflictions and grandiose visions of designing genetically enhanced babies to be more intelligent, athletic, musically talented and the like. More recently, many scholars, scientists and policy makers have urged a different approach: We should carefully and thoughtfully apply the tools of human genetic engineering to treat medical conditions in people, but we should not use them to manipulate the genetic traits of future children. Genetic modifications of sperm, eggs and early embryos should be strictly off limits. Otherwise, we risk venturing into human experimentation and high-tech eugenics.
Unfortunately, there are now worrisome signs that opposition to inheritable genetic modifications, written into law by dozens of countries, according to our count, may be weakening. British regulators are also considering mitochondrial manipulations, and proponents there, like their counterparts in the United States, want to move quickly to clinical trials. There are many ways to map the brain and many kinds of brains to map. Although the ultimate goal of most neuroscience is understanding how human brains work, many kinds of research can’t be done on human beings, and the brains of mice and even flies share common processes with human brains.
The work of Dr. Reid, and scientists at Allen and elsewhere who share his approach, is part of a surge of activity in brain research as scientists try to build the tools and knowledge to explain — as well as can ever be explained — how brains and minds work. All these efforts start with maps and enrich them. If Dr. Reid is successful, he and his colleagues will add what you might call the code of a brain process, the language the neurons use to store, transmit and process information for this function.
Not that this would be any kind of final answer. In neuroscience, perhaps more than in most other disciplines, every discovery lead to new questions.
Barron’s Medical Journal has put it altogether; If you were born the Kennedy administration you are living in a era where you can add a extra twenty years to your life. No other group can make that claim.

Saturday, February 15, 2014

What is Better Than A Mammogram

What is Better Than A Mammogram

What is better than a Mammogram and can Help The Obama Administration Health Reform Act (Obama Care) Robert Graham Ph.D. and Barron’s Medical Journal Reporting from GeorgeTown University February 12, 2014 


Washington DC ( AP )--- What is Genomics? Genomics is a new and fast expanding area of biology encompassing high throughput or large scale experimentation at the whole genome level, and the organization, analysis and interpretation of the huge amount of data emerging from genome projects. Major new technologies have evolved recently that enable experimentation at the whole genome level, and more novel technologies are currently being developed. This volume describes in detail the new technology necessary to study the entire genome in a holistic manner and all the high throughput and large-scale experimental methodologies currently being used in genomic science. In addition the authors describe the progress of the newest technologies that are currently being developed. Written by experts in the field, this concise yet informative volume covers all aspects of technology pertaining to genomic studies. It is an essential book for anyone involved in genomic science.
During the five year screening period, 666 invasive breast cancers were diagnosed in the mammography arm (n=44 925 participants) and 524 in the controls (n=44 910), and of these, 180 women in the mammography arm and 171 women in the control arm died of breast cancer during the 25 year follow-up period. The overall hazard ratio for death from breast cancer diagnosed during the Brought To You By The Houston Ballet Ball:screening period associated with mammography was 1.05 (95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.30). The findings for women aged 40-49 and 50-59 were almost identical. During the entire study period, 3250 women in the mammography arm and 3133 in the control arm had a diagnosis of breast cancer, and 500 and 505, respectively, died of breast cancer.Thus the cumulative mortality from breast cancer was similar between women in the mammography arm and in the control arm (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.88 to 1.12). After 15 years of follow-up a residual excess of 106 cancers was observed in the mammography arm, attributable to over-diagnosis.
Conclusion Annual mammography in women aged 40-59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer beyond that of physical examination or usual care when adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is freely available.Overall, 22% (106/484) of screen detected invasive breast cancers were over-diagnosed, representing one over-diagnosed breast cancer for every 424 women who received mammography screening in the trial.
Breast Cancer patients can aligning environmental science with regulation, Genomics in Regulatory Ecotoxicology: Applications and Challenges presents the first in-depth set of recommendations published in the open literature focused specifically on how genomics data could be used in regulatory ecotoxicology. The book develops a conceptual framework of how genomics data can most effectively impact current approaches for ecological risk assessments. It also identifies biomarkers of exposure and effects for both lab and field monitoring studies and provides a basis for the extrapolation of chemical effects across species. It explores exactly how data generated from new genomics technologies might impact or benefits risk assessment. Features: Identifies biomarkers of exposure and effects for use in both lab and field studies, Provides a basis for the extrapolation of chemical effects across species, Describes current and planned applications of genomic technologies to screening assays for use in ecotoxicology decision-making, including risk assessment, Focuses on the development and application of genomics to tiered testing, including how genomics may be used to support streamlining of current chemical testing programs, Highlights the application of genomic technologies to complex mixtures of contaminants in the environment, such as sites requiring remediation.
Breast Cancer Genomics in Regulatory Ecotoxicology: Applications and Challenges is one of many SETAC publications that offer timely, innovative, and critically reviewed perspectives on current topics relating to broad environmental toxicology and chemistry issues. SETAC assumes an active leadership in the development of educational programs and publishes the peer-reviewed, international journals Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry and Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management.
Dr. Kalager, an epidemiologist and screening researcher at the University of Oslo and the Harvard School of Public Health, said there was a reason the results were unlike those of earlier studies. With better treatments, like tamoxifen, it was less important to find cancers early. Also, she said, women in the Canadian study were aware of breast cancer and its dangers, unlike women in earlier studies who were more likely to ignore lumps.
“It might be possible that mammography screening would work if you don’t have any awareness of the disease,” she said.
Sam Houston Biotech has new technology to systematically quantify proteins within a small sample by coupling antibody-mediated protein binding with qPCR quantification. The assay probes are target-specific antibodies that are conjugated to two different oligonucleotides through a biotin-streptavidin linkage. When the antibodies bind their target, the oligos come in proximity of each other. Addition of a connector oligonucleotide and DNA ligase creates a DNA amplicon, which is amplified in a qPCR reaction. The qPCR results correlate with the amount of protein in a sample.
Often these are analyzed using immunohistochemistry, but that is much more labor intensive and much less quantitative. Thus, studies now can be conducted with greater ease and throughput with actual tumors. This will allow a better understanding of the protein profiles of cancers, and thus potentially identify new therapeutic biomarkers.
A nanometer is a billionth of a meter. It's difficult to imagine anything so small, but think of something only 1/80,000 the width of a human hair. Ten hydrogen atoms could be laid side-by-side in a single nanometer.
Sam Houston Biotech minuscule molecule that will be used to detect breast cancer is a quantum dot. Quantum dots are tiny crystals that glow when they are stimulated by ultraviolet light. The wavelength, or color, of the light depends on the size of the crystal. Latex beads filled with these crystals can be designed to bind to specific DNA sequences.
In the United States, about 37 million mammograms are performed annually at a cost of about $100 per mammogram. Nearly three-quarters of women age 40 and over say they had a mammogram in the past year. Ninety percent of women ages fifty to sixty nine years of age in several European countries have had at least one mammogram.

Friday, February 7, 2014

Women Are Now Able To Not Pass Down Their Breast Cancer Genes To Their Kids

Barron’s Medical Journal Reporting from Colombia University New York City USA 

Women Are Now Able To Not Pass Down Their Breast Cancer Genes To Their Kids

New York City (AP ) Barron’s Medical Journal has discovered more and more breast cancer patients are using genomics to ensure that the gene’s associated with breast cancer is Brought To You By Honored to be hosting this retrospective on African American fashion at 2 pm. Saturday at Macy's (near Nordstrom).not passed down to their kids. Genomics and Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is what’s new for breast cancer patients. Genomics is a discipline in genetics that applies recombinant DNA, DNA sequencing methods, and bioinformatics to sequence, assemble, and analyze the function and structure of genomes.Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD or PIGD) refers to genetic profiling of embryos prior to implantation (as a form of embryo profiling), and sometimes even of oocytes prior to fertilization. Genetic testing of embryos has been around for more than a decade, but its use has soared in recent years as methods have improved and more disease-causing genes have been discovered. The in vitro fertilization and testing are expensive — typically about $20,000 — but they make it possible for couples to ensure that their children will not inherit a faulty gene and to avoid the difficult choice of whether to abort a pregnancy if testing of a fetus detects a genetic problem.
Some history on genomics, breast cancers progress through accumulation of genomic ( Albertson et al., 2003; Knuutila et al., 2000 ) and epigenomic (Baylin and Herman, 2000; Jones, 2005) aberrations that enable the development of aspects of cancerpathophysiology such as reduced apoptosis, unchecked proliferation, increased motility, and increased angiogenesis (Hanahan and Weinberg, 2000 ). Discovery of the genes that contribute to these pathophysiologies when deregulated by recurrent aberrations is important to understanding mechanisms of cancer formation and progression and to guide improvements in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Electronic Medical Records Gennxeix is also key in a cure for breast cancer. What the fust is all about is scientist recognized something call Luminal subtypes. Luminal subtypes had the lowest overall mutation rate, but by contrast, had the largest number of genes observed to be significantly mutated. This suggests that each of the genes identified as significantly mutated in the Luminal subtypes is more likely to be important in fueling cancer progression.
But the procedure also raises unsettling ethical questions that trouble advocates for the disabled and have left some doctors struggling with what they should tell their patients. When are prospective parents justified in discarding embryos? Is it acceptable, for example, for diseases like GSS, that develop in adulthood? What if a gene only increases the risk of a disease? And should people be able to use it to pick whether they have a boy or girl? A recent international survey found that 2 percent of more than 27,000 uses of preimplantation diagnosis were made to choose a child’s sex.
Newborn screening is performed in newborns on a public health basis by the states to detect certain genetic diseases for which early diagnosis and treatment are available. Newborn screening is one of the largest public health activities in the United States. It is aimed at the early identification of infants who are affected by certain genetic, metabolic or infectious conditions, reaching approximately 4 million children born each year. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), approximately 3,000 babies each year in the United States are found to have severe disorders detected through screening. States test blood spots collected from newborns for 2 to over 30 metabolic and genetic diseases, such as phenylketonuria, hypothyroidism, galactosemia, sickle cell disease, and medium chain acyl CoA dehyrogenase deficiency. The goal of this screening is to identify affected newborns quickly in order to provide treatment that can prevent mental retardation, severe illness or death.
The Luminal subtypes are
characterized by the specific expression signature of multiple so-called transcription-factor genes, including ESR1, GATA3, FOXA1, XBP1 and cMYB. These genes have a complex interaction, cooperating in an orchestrated series of activations. GATA3 and FOXA1 are frequently mutated, but those mutations are mutually exclusive, meaning that mutations were observed in eitherGATA3 or FOXA1 but never in both. However, ERS1 and XBP1 are highly expressed but infrequently mutat. With Genomics we can separate breast cancer genes and break in to categories the different types of breast cancers. 1 Hormone receptor-positive disease, or tumors that have receptors for hormones on the surface of their cells, meaning those tumors can be treatedwith hormone-targeted therapy. 1 HER2-positive, referring to the over-expression of the gene HER2, a type of protein that can also be targeted. 1 "Triple-negative" disease, which lacks the hormone receptors - estrogen and progesterone - as well as the HER2 genes that are targeted by some of the newest, most successful treatments. Gennxeix discovered that some patients with HER2-positive breast cancer tended not respond to HER2-targeted therapies. Also, some patients with triple-negative breast cancers responded to therapies while others didn't. "We have been lumping things together that shouldn't be lumped together
The new classifications - four types called HER2 "enriched," luminal A, luminal B and basal-like - categorize breast cancers by their genomic structure using a dizzying array of data points not previously available that have identified new pathways for the cancer to do its damage, making it possible for researchers to identify new places to target disease.
It is possible that somatic cell nuclear transfer (cloning) techniques could eventually be employed for the purposes of reproductive genetic testing. In addition, germline gene transfer is a technique that could be used to test and then alter the genetic makeup of the embryo. To date, however, these techniques have not been used in human studies. Ethical Issues
Any procedure that provides information that could lead to a decision to terminate a pregnancy is not without controversy. Although prenatal diagnosis has been routine for nearly 20 years, some ethicists remain concerned that the ability to eliminate potential offspring with genetic defects contributes to making society overall less tolerant of disability. Others have argued that prenatal diagnosis is sometimes driven by economic concerns because as a society we have chosen not to provide affordable and accessible health care to everyone. Thus, prenatal diagnosis can save money by preventing the birth of defective and costly children. For reproductive genetic procedures that involve greater risk to the fetus, e.g., preimplantation diagnosis, concerns remain about whether the diseases being averted warrant the risks involved in the procedures themselves. These concerns are likely to escalate should cloning or germline gene transfer be undertaken as a way to genetically test and select healthy offspring. Policy and Regulation.
Because insufficient accuracy of genetic tests used for reproductive purposes could have dire consequences (i.e., unexpected birth of a critically ill child or termination of a normal pregnancy), the regulation of such tests has been the focus of several agencies. Four Department of Health and Human Services agencies participate in overseeing genetic tests: the CDC, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Office for Human Research Protections.
All laboratory tests performed for the purpose of providing information about the health of an individual must be conducted in laboratories certified under the Clinical Laboratory Improvements Act. CDC has a role in addressing the public health impact of advances in genetic research, furthering the collection, analysis, dissemination, and use of peer-reviewed epidemiologic information onhuman genes and coordinating the translation of genetic information into public health research, policy and practice. All laboratory tests and their components are subject to FDA oversight under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Under this law, laboratory tests are considered to be diagnostic devices, and tests that are packaged and sold as kits to multiple laboratories require pre-market approval or clearance by FDA. However, according to the Secretary¿s Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing, most new genetic tests are being developed by laboratories and are being provided as clinical laboratory services. These tests are referred to as in-house tests or ¿home brews.¿ The current administration is examining whether FDA has authority, by law, to regulate such tests.