Teleconference for advocates to discuss the Cancer Genome Atlas

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) have scheduled a teleconference for cancer patient advocates on December 13 at 12:30 EST to discuss the The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Pilot Project.

TCGA will provide a systematic foundation for an *Atlas* of genomic changes in major cancers, consolidating information about cancer genetic mutations and how they impact the development and spread of cancer.

NCI Deputy Director Dr. Anna D. Barker and NHGRI Director Francis S. Collins will provide information about the project and answer questions from callers. The call is toll-free, and no registration is required.

+ Tuesday, December 13, 2005, at 12:30 p.m. (ET)
+ Toll-Free: 1-800-857-6584
+ Passcode: HADLEY

Posted by Kate Murphy on December 12th, 2005
Posted in: Research & Treatment News | No Comments »

NCI Update on Fiscal Year 2006 Its Budget Status

The following was published in the December 6, 2005 edition of the NCI Cancer Bulletin, a publication of the National Cancer Institute:

Update on FY 2006 NCI Budget Status

Congress has yet to approve appropriations legislation that provides updated funding levels for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for FY 2006, which began on October 1, 2005. As a result, NCI continues to operate within the guidelines of a Continuing Resolution (CR) passed by Congress, which keeps all HHS agencies funded at FY 2005 levels and allows NCI to operate at last year’s spending level of $4.825 billion. The current CR is set to expire on December 17, 2005.

In the interim, and as discussed at the NIH Director’s Advisory Committee meeting on December 1, noncompeting research grant awards will be made at a level of approximately 80 percent of the previously committed level. Upward adjustments to these levels will be considered after the final 2006 budget level is established. Competing renewal awards also are being made at approximately 80 percent of current levels until more definitive budget information is available. NCI leadership has advised that recipients continue to monitor their expenditures carefully during this period.

Go here to read the original article.

Posted by Dusty Weaver on December 11th, 2005
Posted in: Policy & Advocacy News | No Comments »

Women and the elderly less likely to receive chemotherapy for stage III disease

Although adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery has been recommended as standard treatment for stage III colon cancer since 1990, about 1/3 of stage III patients in the United States don’t receive it. In addition, women and the elderly are less likely to be treated according to a study published in the December 7, 2005 issue of the *Journal of the American Medical Association.*

After two randomized clinical trials showed that stage III colon cancer patients had better survival when they were treated with 5FU (fluorouracil) and levamisole after surgery, a National Institutes of Health Consensus Conference in 1990 recommended chemotherapy for all stage III colon cancer patients who were not enrolled in a clinical trial. Further clinical trials during the 1990’s found that leucovorin was as effective as levamisole and not as toxic, so six months of 5FU modified by leucovorin became standard treatment. Recent studies have shown that oxaliplatin added to a 5FU leucovorin regimen improves survival even more, and the combination of 5FU, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin is now the common adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III patients who have had surgery to remove cancer from their colons.

For the JAMA study, researchers analyzed records of nearly 86,000 patients with stage III colon cancer reported by 560 health care facilities from 1990 through 2002. In stage III colon cancer, cancer has spread from the colon to nearby lymph nodes. In the mid-eighties before the Consensus Conference, only 10% of stage III patients had adjuvant chemo. In 1990, after the Consensus recommendation, 39% of patients were receiving chemotherapy, but the percentage increased to 64% by 2002.

Overall, chemotherapy improved survival by about 16%. The greatest improvement was for those whose cancers were well or moderately differentiated (low or moderate grade) while chemotherapy gave patients with poorly differentiated tumors little survival advantage over surgery alone.

In 1990 blacks were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy, but that difference had disappeared by 2002. However, blacks tended to have poorer survival in every time period examined.

Women and people over 80 benefited equally well from chemotherapy, but were less likely to have it prescribed for them.

The research team, led by J. Milburn Jessup, MD summarized their findings:

In summary, 15 years after the NIH Consensus Conference, adjuvant chemotherapy use has increased to include nearly two thirds of patients with stage III colon cancer patients. Patients receiving adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer, especially low-grade cancer, have an increased survival benefit of 16%.

The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be lower in blacks and patients with high-grade cancers. Women have the same benefit but are less often treated. Elderly patients have the same benefit as younger patients but are also less frequently treated.

They also pointed out that more study is needed to see what impact the newer treatments with oxaliplatin and iriotecan will have.

Future studies are needed to identify whether newer agents such as irinotecan and oxaliplatin may be more effective in patients with high-grade cancers or in blacks than the 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin regimens that were dominant during the time that the cohorts reported herein were followed up for survival.

Find more discussion about the study on [MedPage Today](http://www.medpagetoday.com/Gastroenterology/ColonCancer/tb/2274) and from [USA Today](http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-12-07-colon-cancer_x.htm)

Posted by Kate Murphy on December 8th, 2005
Posted in: Research & Treatment News | No Comments »

Walking Your Talk

Many members of Congress find it easy to say they support our war on cancer. We don’t often get a chance to see if they walk their talk. On November 18 2005, we had such a chance.

Senator Durbin (D-Illinois) introduced a motion to the Senate, requiring that negotiations between the House and Senate insist on maintaining the Senate’s proposed 3.5% increase ($1B) for the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

What does that mean and why does it matter?

The next round of negotiations for research funding are scheduled to begin the week of December 12. As in any negotiation, there are places where you give way and places where you don’t. The Senators who supported Durbin’s motion are saying that research funding is non-negotiable. They are walking their talk about supporting cancer research and prevention.

Interestingly, Senator Brownback (R-Kansas) did not vote yes. Senator Brownback is the co-chair of the Senate Cancer Caucus. [His website says:](http://brownback.senate.gov/LICancer.cfm)

>As a co-chair of the Senate Cancer Coalition, I am continuing to work closely with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to educate the Senate and public on issues surrounding the fight against cancer. Together, we are striving to renew the war on cancer.

[See what C3 says to Senator Brownback.](http://www.c-three.org/advocacy/brownback-letter.htm)

[See if your Senators support research funding:](http://c-three.org/advocacy/votingrecord.htm)

Posted by Nancy Roach on December 8th, 2005
Posted in: Policy & Advocacy News | No Comments »

House reject cuts to research

On November 17, Democrats and 22 Republicans in the House of Representatives teamed up to reject a spending proposal that reduced spending in health and education programs. The proposal included basically flat funding at the National Institutes of Health which results in a funding cut due to biomedical inflation. [In contrast, the Senate proposed a 3.7% increase for NIH](http://www.c-three.org/advocacy/2005/11/labor-hhs_conferees_begin_fy_2.php).

See the majority (Republican) perspective on the proposal

The defeat was a surprise to Republican leaders in the House and Senate, and left them scratching their heads to figure out how to proceed. Democrats celebrated the defeat, saying that the proposal gave inadequate funding to key priorities.

See the minority (Democrat) perspective

According to Congress Daily, “Republicans were considering options that include sending the bill back to conference, where conferees could attempt to craft a bill that would muster a majority; attaching it to another piece of appropriations legislation or passing a continuing resolution that would fund programs at the lower end of last year’s or this year’s levels.”

A continuing resolution – which doesn’t take biomedical inflation into account - would reduce funding for programs by $1.6 billion.

Both the House and Senate stopped work on November 18 for a long Thanksgiving break. The House returned on December 6, and the Senate will return on December 12. At that point, Congress will continue work on this and other outstanding legislation.

Posted by Nancy Roach on December 8th, 2005
Posted in: Policy & Advocacy News | 1 Comment »