"With better knowledge of this protein, we can better determine a patient’s prognosis and see who needs more aggressive treatment immediately and who can be given a milder treatment without a risk to their life. We can see at an early stage which patients are in the risk zone for cancer recurrence," said Karolina Boman, a doctoral student at the Division of Pathology at Lund University…
Emergence of new influenza strains, such as the recent avian influenza (H5N1) and swine influenza (H1N1 2009), can lead to the emergence of severe pandemics that pose a major threat to the entire world population. Recently, the concern regarding the emergence of such a pandemic arose when a new and deadly avian influenza strain (H7N9) was discovered in China, causing the death of six people in only one month. The body’s immune system can fight influenza infection. Natural killer (NK) cells, which are an essential component of this system, can recognize and eliminate influenza-virus-infected cells and inhibit the spread of the virus in the respiratory system…
The Obama administration says more doctors and hospitals are embracing technology as adoption of computerized medical records reaches a “tipping point” in America. A report Wednesday from Health and Human Services says more than 50 percent of doctors' offices and 4 in 5 hospitals have transitioned from paper to electronic records, thanks partly to more than $14 billion in government incentive payments. The hope is that electronic records will make caring for patients safer and less costly, by helping avoid mistakes and cutting down on duplication. But others say there's still a long way to go. An outside group's report last year found little progress in getting medical computers in different offices to talk to each other. Concerns have also surfaced about patient privacy and vulnerability to fraud.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/more-doctors-hospitals-using-electronic-records/
Kathrin Jansen is a microbiologist with at least two breakthrough vaccines to her name: she brought the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil to market for Merck and helped develop the $4 billion a year pneumonia and meningitis vaccine Prevnar 13 for Pfizer. Jansen's next vaccine success could come by taming the superbug MRSA, a drug-resistant bacterium that she has seen ravage a healthy man up close and personally. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infects an estimated 53 million people globally and costs more than $20 billion a year to treat. In the United States alone, MRSA kills 20,000 Americans each year, exceeding annual deaths from AIDS. Jansen watched the infection unfold two years ago when visiting her stepfather, who was in the hospital for a hip replacement. The man in the bed next door died soon after MRSA attacked the vascular graft in his leg. “He went in healthy and died very quickly,” recalls Jansen, senior vice president of vaccine research and early development at Pfizer Inc, the world's largest drug maker. She says the experience steeled her resolve to develop an effective vaccine that could prevent such deaths. But Staphylococcus aureus has proven a tenacious adversary. In the past decade, vaccine candidates by Nabi Biopharmaceuticals and Merck & Co Inc failed in costly, late-stage clinical trials. Now, led by Jansen, Pfizer is taking a shot. Competitors, including vaccine giants GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and Sanofi, are, too. And while the race could lead to a viable vaccine, potentially worth billions in sales, critics say companies may be risking costly failure with so much work on a bacterium that is still barely understood. 'Bag of trouble' Staph has been living in and on its human hosts for centuries. At any given time, 25 to 35 percent of individuals will test positive for staph, often with no symptoms. But the bacterium can cause a range of diseases from boils and impetigo to raging blood infections and deadly bacterial pneumonia. The discovery of penicillin in 1928 gave doctors a way to defeat staph infections, but overuse and misuse gave rise to drug-resistant staph. Methicillin was developed to overcome drug-resistance, but by the 1960s, staph evolved new defenses to overcome this more powerful version of penicillin. Thus began the decades-long battle against methicillin-resistant staph, now the most common cause of hospital-acquired infections that is increasingly spreading into army barracks, prisons and daycare centers. Dr. Bill Gruber, a Pfizer senior vice president who led clinical trials for Prevnar 13 and is running the company's Staph aureus trials, thinks of the bacterium as “a little bag of trouble.” “Basically, it has a number of different toxins and defenses to try to defeat you.” That may explain why vaccines from Nabi and Merck failed. Both tried to defeat this bug by attacking on just one front. The vaccine by Nabi, now Biota Pharmaceuticals, focused only on the sugar capsule the bacteria make to hide from the immune system, while Merck's focused on a single protein that helps staph gets its nutrition. Neither lived up to expectations. “We've learned that just focusing on one target of Staph aureus might not be sufficient,” said Dr. Buddy Creech, an infectious diseases expert at Vanderbilt University. It takes stamina Jansen has been working on a Staph aureus vaccine for the past decade, first at Merck, then at Wyeth, and now at Pfizer. The East German-born scientist - who fled to the West in 1960 and earned her PhD in biology at Philipps University in Marburg - says it takes stamina to develop a successful vaccine, a process that can take 15 years or more. With the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, which had 2012 sales of $1.6 billion, it took 14 years from lab bench to government approval. “That's actually a fast development program,” she said. With Staph aureus, it took eight years from the first experiments to human safety trials. Now, it could take another seven to 10 years to wind up clinical trials, putting the team about midway through the process. Pfizer's initial vaccine targeted three mechanisms key to staph's survival and ability to cause disease. Two of those focused on sugar capsules. The third attacks a mechanism called “clumping factor,” which allows bacteria to stick to proteins when they enter the body. But Jansen's team wanted one more point of attack. They added a fourth antigen, a protein that allows the bacterium to steal manganese - a key nutrient - from host cells. The result is a four-antigen vaccine that generates antibody responses at distinct points of the life cycle of the bug. The company is testing this in Phase 1/Phase 2 trials in healthy adults in the United States. If Pfizer gets the results they hope for, likely later this year, the company expects to meet with regulators to iron out a plan for larger trials involving thousands of individuals. Initially, the vaccine would be aimed at preventing infections in millions of people globally who need elective procedures such as a hip replacement. Ultimately, it could be used to protect people at risk in the broader community. Rival vaccines Pfizer is furthest along, but the large, untapped market, estimated to be worth $3 billion to $4 billion a year, has drawn interest from several companies. GlaxoSmithKline has been quiet about its approach. The drugmaker had been partnering with Nabi's failed StaphVax candidate, and in 2009 bought another Nabi candidate called PentaStaph for $46 million. Company researchers declined to discuss their program, but Glaxo spokeswoman Melinda Stubbee confirmed the company has a four-component vaccine in Phase 1 development. “We are still evaluating the data and haven't yet announced plans to present the data or to pursue further development,” she said. NovaDigm Therapeutics, a private company based in Grand Forks, North Dakota, is developing a single-antigen vaccine that targets both staph and yeast infections caused by the fungus Candida. Other rivals with early-stage programs include Novartis, which has a vaccine in Phase 1 trials, and Sanofi, which is partnering with privately held biotech Syntiron. Although academic researchers applaud these efforts, they say companies may be rushing into trials too soon, especially when so much is unknown about how staph interacts with people. “Our development of Staphylococcal vaccines has predated an adequate understanding of the human response to infection,” Creech said. For instance, it is still not clear whether a Staph aureus vaccine that protects against skin infections will also protect individuals from bloodstream infections. It may be that instead of preventing infection, some vaccines will merely blunt infection. Dr. Robert Daum, who leads the MRSA Research Center at the University of Chicago Medical Center, doubts any of the current candidates will make it into widespread use. “I am convinced we need a vaccine. I'm just not sure anyone knows how to make one yet.” Jansen, who knows Daum, said she understands his skepticism. “I'm a microbiologist. I know bacteria pretty well. They are very potent adversaries.” She says there's a reason the company was not the first out of the gate. “We wanted to make sure that we looked under all the rocks and found what we needed to find.” Tests in animals and people suggest the vaccine induces production of antibodies that defeat staph's defenses and kill the bacteria. “To our knowledge, we are the only ones who have demonstrated very, very robust killing responses.” That was enough for Jansen. “We essentially said, 'That's it. We put it together as best as we know how. Now is the time to test it.'”source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/pfizer-takes-its-shot-at-vaccine-for-evasive-mrsa-superbug/
Adults who drink at least one sugar-sweetened drink a day are slightly more likely to develop kidney stones than people who rarely imbibe them, according to a new study. While the recommendation for kidney stone prevention has been to drink a lot of fluids, the study suggests that it's not just the amount of fluid but the type of drink that also matters. Dr. Gary Curhan, the senior author of the study, said patients often ask for dietary advice to help prevent kidney stones. While the recommendation has been to drink plenty of fluids, Curhan said, patients often ask, “what should I drink? There's a lot of lore out there.” To see whether the type of beverage might matter, Curhan, of the Channing Division of Network Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital, and his colleagues collected data from three massive surveys of nearly 200,000 people. The questionnaires surveyed participants every two to four years and asked about diet, lifestyle and health, including how much they drank certain beverages and whether they developed kidney stones. None of the people in the study had kidney stones at the start. They found that 159 out of every 100,000 people who drank a sugar-sweetened non-cola beverage, such as clear soda, less than once a week developed kidney stones, compared to 306 out of every 100,000 who drank soda daily. After accounting for other factors, that translated to a 33 percent greater chance of developing kidney stones. Frequent punch drinkers also had an 18 percent higher chance of developing kidney stones. For every 100,000 people who drank punch at least every day, 226 developed kidney stones, compared to 158 out of every 100,000 participants who had punch less than once a week. Curhan said that while the numbers of people developing kidney stones in each group are not enormously different, the increased risk spread across an entire population is quite big. “Sodas are so commonly used that even though the absolute rate doesn't look that different, if there's a huge number of people consuming it, then the magnitude on the public health can be quite substantial,” Curhan told Reuters Health. Other drinks, such as coffee, tea, wine, beer and orange juice were tied to a lower risk of developing kidney stones. For instance, 205 out of every 100,000 people who rarely drank coffee developed kidney stones, compared to 137 out of every 100,000 people who drank it daily. Just 96 out of every 100,000 people who drank red wine daily developed kidney stones, while 174 out of every 100,000 people who drank red wine less than once a week developed kidney stones. Curhan's study, published in the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, follows others showing a link between stones and fructose, non-dairy calcium, vitamin C supplements and other factors. The new study doesn't prove cause-and-effect between certain drinks and kidney stones, but it's possible that sugar could be involved, Curhan said, because it might play a role in how the body handles calcium. Another possibility is that sugary drinks might be contributing to obesity, and obesity is also tied to a higher kidney stone risk, said Dr. Elaine Worcester, a professor at the University of Chicago, who was not part of the study. Despite the lack of proof of a cause-effect relationship, Worcester said “these kinds of studies are the best we have to give advice to our patients.”source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/sugary-drinks-tied-to-kidney-stone-risk/
Your loyal pooch may be bringing a whole world of bacteria into your home but don't panic. Research suggests that exposure to a wide variety of microbes may be good for us. A new study reveals that homes with dogs have greater bacterial diversity than canine-free dwellings. Dog-related diversity is particularly high on television screens and pillowcases, the researchers found. “When you bring a dog into your house, you are not just bringing a dog, you are also introducing a suite of dog-associated [microbe] taxa directly into your home environment, some of which may have direct or indirect effects on human health,” the researchers wrote today (May 22) in the journal PLOS ONE. [5 Wacky Things That Are Good For You] Microbes around us The microbes in our environment are the subject of increased interest by scientists, thanks to studies revealing how intertwined human lives are with those of the single-celled. Skin microbes, for example, may be key for warding off disease. And the load of microbes living in the human gut may influence everything from immunity to obesity. North Carolina State University biologist Rob Dunn and his colleagues wanted to step back from the body to better understand the microbes in our environment at large. They gave 40 families a home-sampling kit and asked them to swab down nine locations in their houses: a kitchen cutting board, a kitchen counter, a refrigerator shelf, a toilet seat, a pillowcase, a television screen, the main door's exterior handle and the upper trim on both an interior door and on an exterior door. The researchers then examined the microbial DNA from the swabs to detect different families of microscopic tenants living on these surfaces. All told, the 40 homes harbored 7,726 different types of bacteria. The most common were Proteobacteria, Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, all families containing a wide range of species. Types of bacteria tended to differ by location: Kitchen environments (cutting boards, counters and shelves) had similar colonies from home to home, as did frequently touched surfaces (toilet seats, pillowcases, door handles) and rarely cleaned surfaces (door trims and television screens). “This makes sense,” Dunn said in a statement. “Humans have been living in houses for thousands of years, which is sufficient time for organisms to adapt to living in particular parts of houses. We know, for example, that there is a species that only lives in hot-water heaters. We deposit these bacterial hitchhikers in different ways in different places, and they thrive or fail depending on their adaptations.” Bacteria related to human skin were found most frequently on pillowcases and toilet seats as were bacteria commonly found in human feces. Bacteria from leaves and produce were found most often on door trims and also on kitchen surfaces. Bacteria from the soil were found across the home, but were most common on the exterior door trim, the researchers found. Doggie diversity Dunn and his colleagues next looked for variables that would alter bacterial communities from home to home, such as the presence of cats, children, carpet and other factors. The only one they found that made any difference was whether or not the family had a pet dog. Pillowcases and TV screens of dog-owning families had 42 percent and 52 percent more microbial groups, respectively, than pillowcases and TV screens of non-dog-owning families. This extra diversity, unsurprisingly, was made up largely of bacteria known to live on dog fur. (Other factors, such as the level of humidity in a home, could also influence microbe diversity, the researchers wrote, but they were unable to measure those factors in this study.) Dog owners shouldn't ship Fido off to the countryside for fear of nasty bacteria, though. In fact, the family pet may be a boon to health. Previous studies have found that pregnant women who live in homes with dogs are less likely to have children with allergies. Scientists speculate that the reason might be an exposure to greater numbers of microbes that keeps the immune system from turning on the body. “Our study provides evidence to robustly support this assumption,” Dunn and his colleagues wrote. The researchers are planning to process samples from a total of 1,300 homes across the United States to look for geographic differences in microbial roommates. Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/dogs-bring-swarm-bacteria-into-your-home/
CLEARWATER, Fla. – & It's not unusual for a cat to get a hairball, but a 400-pound tiger needed help from veterinary surgeons in Florida when he couldn't hack up a basketball-size hairball by himself. The 17-year-old tiger named Ty underwent the procedure Wednesday at a veterinary center in the Tampa Bay area community of Clearwater. Doctors said in a statement that they safely removed the 4-pound obstruction from Ty's stomach. The tiger, which is cared for by Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation in Seminole, was brought to veterinarians after not eating for nearly two weeks. Doctors said they detected the hairball using a scope with a camera. Vernon Yates, whose nonprofit group regularly assists law enforcement agencies with seized animals, says he's thankful the hairball was removed and Ty is doing fine.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/veterinary-surgeons-remove-basketball-sized-hairball-from-tiger-in-fla-that/
Maintaining that delicate balance of eating enough to fuel your workouts and not overdoing it afterwards is a source of confusion for even the most educated exerciser. Sometimes, those post-workout hunger pangs hit, begging you to replace what you just burned off. Other times, your brain is telling you it's time to reward your hard work (with extra cheese). Related: Foods That Will Make You Look Younger Recent research from Australia has reopened the debate on this quandary: Is it possible to exercise and not eat more? While findings have been mixed, a review of studies published in the journal Appetite showed that exercise does not, in fact, lead to a significant increase in calorie consumption. Related: Stylish Male Athletes Who Became Models And calories might not matter much anyway, according to Equinox tier 4 coach Dr. Paul Spector.  “The goal of someone who says they want to lose weight is really to lose fat and gain muscle,” Spector said. “Therefore the real question with regard to exercise and nutrition is how to maximize the use of fat as a fuel source. It's about body composition, not weight.” More: The Worst Celebrity Eyebrows of All Time Want to train your body to burn more fat?
In the summer of 2011, Andrea Syglowski noticed a mole she’d had her entire life was starting to look different. Concerned, she booked an appointment with a dermatologist, and within a week was diagnosed with stage-0 melanoma – an early phase of the deadliest type of skin cancer. A week later, Syglowski, a Philadelphia-based actress who is in her 20s, underwent surgery to remove the mole, leaving her with a five-inch scar on her leg. Syglowski said that while she used sunscreen before her diagnosis, she now realizes she didn’t always use it correctly. “I think all I knew was that I needed to have it on,” Syglowski told FoxNews.com. Skin cancer affects millions of people like Syglowski every year, but many remain confused about the basic rules of sunscreen application. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently implemented new changes to sunscreen labeling, which aim to clear up some of the confusion. Here’s what to look for on sunscreen labels this summer. ‘Broad spectrum’ protection There are two types of ultraviolet light: UVA and UVB rays.  Currently, all sunscreens contain UVB protection, which shields the skin against cancer-causing sunburns. But not all sunscreens are required to have UVA protection, which protects against both skin cancer and aging. “UVB is what causes a sun burn; UVA doesn’t sunburn you. But now, we want something more. We want sunscreens to prevent cancer and wrinkles in addition to sunburn,” Dr. James Spencer, a member of the American Academy of Dermatology and a board certified dermatologist in St. Petersburg, Fla., told FoxNews.com. According to the new FDA guidelines, new sunscreen labels can only claim that they offer “broad spectrum protection” if they protect against both UVA and UVB rays. “When we say broad spectrum, we mean we're covering both UVA and UVB as wide in the spectrum as we can cover,” pharmacist Ian Ginsberg, owner of C.O. Bigelow in New York City, told FoxNews.com. Furthermore, sunscreens can now only claim to “prevent cancer” and “prevent wrinkles” if they contain both UVA and UVB protection. “It turns out that UVA contributes to cancer and wrinkles but not to burns. So now we’re asking sunscreens to help (protect us) from cancer and wrinkles too; we want that UVA added in,” Spencer said. ‘Water resistant’ not ‘waterproof’ Waterproof sunscreen may sound like a great option, but according to Spencer, “there’s no such thing as waterproof.” Sunscreen companies must now remove the word “waterproof” from their labels and replace it with the phrase “water resistant,” according to the new FDA guidelines. A “water resistant” sunscreen will be less likely to wash off in water, but doctors warn that it still needs to be reapplied. To make sure people remember to lotion up again after getting wet, the FDA now requires all sunscreens to state whether they are water resistant for “40 minutes” or “80 minutes.” “So that gives you an idea…how long you’re good for; that’s useful information,” Spencer said. And if you’ve had the same tube of sunscreen for the entire summer – you’re doing something wrong. “One tube should only last two weeks, and if you’re going to the beach, (it should last) for a week,” Dr. Hooman Khorosani, assistant professor of dermatology and chief of division of Mohs, reconstructive and cosmetic surgery at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City, who also treated Syglowski, told FoxNews.com. Don't forget to take note of the expiration date on your tube of SPF either. Expired sunscreen could be less effective.  “Most people throw these things in their beach bag and/or let them sit in direct sunlight for hours on end so you should live by the (expiration) date,” Ginsberg said.  SPF 30, not SPF 100 Resist the urge to reach for the highest SPF on the shelf.  It likely won’t offer any more protection, according to doctors. “An SPF 30 blocks 97 percent of UBV rays - SPF 45 blocks 98 percent. Once you get to 98 percent, it’s getting a little silly. And SPF 100 is a little misleading,” Spencer said. “You can’t get more than 100 percent blocked.” Spencer said the FDA is considering prohibiting sunscreens labeled higher than SPF 50, but due to objections from sunscreen companies, the change is still being negotiated.   In the meantime, Spencer recommends looking for an SPF of at least 30 and reapplying sunscreen every few hours. Syglowski – who has now been melanoma-free for nearly two years – says she is much more vigilant about sunscreen application and schedules regular skin checks with Khorosani – something she encourages other women to do as well. As for Khorosani, he said one technique seems to be particularly effective at encouraging patients to be vigilant about sun protection. “I have a photo of a patient who sat by the window every day. The left side of her face, which was facing the window, was being hit by (wrinkle-causing) UVA rays, so it looks like she’s 50. The right side looks like she’s 35,” Khorosani said. “All I need to do is show that photo to the women who come in.”  source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/22/heading-to-beach-new-spf-regulations-issued-by-fda/
NEW YORK – & The nation's record-low teen birth rate stems from robust declines in nearly every state, but most dramatically in several Mountain States and among Hispanics, according to a new government report. All states but West Virginia and North Dakota showed significant drops over five years. But the Mountain States of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada and Utah saw rates fall by 30 percent or more. In 22 states, teen Hispanic birth rates plunged at least 40 percent, which was described as “just amazing,” by the report's lead author, Brady Hamilton of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What's driving the declines? No one can say for sure. Experts believe the explanation is complicated and probably varies a bit from state to state. The national figure has been falling since 1991, aside from a brief interruption in 2006 and 2007. The CDC report released Thursday is based on birth certificates for 2007 through 2011. Last year, the CDC announced the overall improvement in teen births: a record low of 31 births per 1,000 teens ages 15 to 19. That compares to 42 births per 1,000 five years earlier. The new report focuses on state figures in 2011: -- Lowest rates are in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Vermont, each with rates under 17 per 1,000. -- Highest rates overall continue to be in the South, led by Arkansas and Mississippi, each with rates of about 50 per 1,000. In Arkansas, the majority of teen births are to white moms. In Mississippi, the majority are black. -- White teens continue to have the lowest birth rate nationally -- about 22 births per 1,000. Black teens saw a larger improvement, but their rate was still more than twice the white rate, at 47 per 1,000. -- Overall, the Hispanic rate plummeted from 75 to 49 per 1,000, now virtually a tie with the black rate. The teen drop in the last five years coincided with an overall decline in births, which experts attribute to a weak economy that dampened enthusiasm for having children. Hispanic women have been part of that trend, possibly due to the economy and to illegal immigration crackdowns in some states that reduce the number of young Hispanic females entering the country from Mexico and other nations, said John Santelli, a Columbia University professor of population and family health. That means new immigrants are having less impact on birth statistics, and second- and third-generation families are having more influence. As time goes on, Hispanics -- like other immigrant groups before them -- tend to adopt American customs and practices. “There is more attention on education, career, and the future,” said Dr. Janet Realini, head of Healthy Futures of Texas, a San Antonio-based organization focused on preventing teen and unplanned pregnancies. Hispanic rates, though, continue to be much higher than those for blacks and whites in most of the states with the largest Hispanic populations, including California, Texas, New York, New Jersey, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Georgia. Texas has the highest number of teen births in the nation, with nearly 43,000 in 2011. Nearly two-thirds were to Hispanic moms. The overall improvement, though, is something to celebrate, said Bill Albert, chief program officer of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. “Geography, politics, or policy alone simply cannot explain the widespread declines,” Albert said in an email. “Credit goes to teens themselves who are clearly making better decisions about sex, contraception, and their future.”source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/nearly-all-us-states-see-hefty-drop-in-teen-births/