Technology has come a long way over the years -- and now the technology behind digital mammography is allowing life-saving screenings for the toughest patients to diagnose with breast cancer.

This is no small technological breakthough. It is a critical component for lowering the breast cancer death rate the American Cancer Society reports has declined 2.3 percent each year between 1990 and 2002. Since breast cancer is a treatable disease if caught early, digital mammography will up the odds of survival for women with this disease.

Digital mammography operates according to a computer-based technique that allows for digital manipulation of a breast X-ray. It exceeds the capability of film mammography -- and is much like the comparison between digital photography versus film photography. Both work. But one works better.

Studies show digital mammograms have a lot to offer. They detect tumors better in young women with dense breast tissue, for example. They allow for ease of storage and retrieval of images. And they can easily become part of a woman's electronic medical record.

There are still benefits of traditional mammography and women are still urged to use this less expensive option. They are also urged to conduct self-breast exams and to report for clinical exams with physicians. It's the whole package that contributes to comprehensive breast health, not just one isolated test. When used in combination with all other screening methods, digital mammography makes for a more accurate overall picture.

MTV is currently airing another installment of the Real World/Road Rules Challenge reality show. This season -- called Fresh Meat -- pairs former show contestants with individuals who have never before appeared on any MTV reality show. These new contestants -- the fresh meat -- compete with the veterans in tense and strenuous physical and mental challenges for an array of prizes and for a grand award of $250,000. Winning the money could be life-changing for any one of these participants. But for one woman, it could also be life-saving.

Diem Brown, 25, was cast on the MTV challenge show before hearing her diagnosis of ovarian cancer. She didn't want to regret passing on the opportunity so with two chemotherapy treatments completed and armed with medication to manage nausea and other side effects, she packed her bags and headed for Australia where her days consisted of challenging stunts and tough competition. She survived it all -- although fatigue and pain sometimes slowed her down -- and she is busy surviving ovarian cancer too.

Brown has started a foundation called Live for the Challenge -- kind of like a Make-A-Wish Foundation for patients who are stuggling with medical difficulties. And her own personal wish is that ovarian cancer -- "the disease that whispers" -- would get a megaphone to attract more attention and more research. Because one in 50 women will get ovarian cancer and with no accurate screening for this disease, it leads to tragic outcomes for many women.

It is clear that Brown is one tough contender -- both on TV and in her everyday life. And that makes her a winner no matter what.

I recently learned that the CBS website features a whole section of public service announcements about various topics -- such as child abduction, depression, HIV/AIDS, menopause, osteoporosis, and heart disease. But what first caught my eye when I was visiting this site was the topic of breast cancer -- because this is the disease I am fighting. And then I spotted a section about colorectal cancer. I was intrigued about a television network's commitment to public health issues. So I kept reading and learned a thing or two about the CBS Cares initiative -- that is also delivered through television spots.

I learned that hundreds of hours have been spent researching each featured subject. And I learned that experts in each field have been consulted and interviewed for accurate and up-to-date information. I found that the basics of each topic are included on the website as well as detailed information that viewers might not otherwise know. For breast cancer, readers can learn about breast cancer in general, about early detection, and about risk factors. And there are video clips of celebrity spokespeople -- like Marg Helgenberger and Melina Kanakaredes -- who share their voices on the topic. For colorectal cancer, readers can gain insight into the prevalence of the disease by region. They can learn about polyps, about warning signs, about treatment options, and about survival rates. And celebrities Stockard Channing and Charles S. Dutton voice their messages about this disease. Doctor interviews and information from the American Cancer Society are sprinkled into the content of these very thorough, informative, and enlightening pages.

Dr. Jay Winsten, Associate Dean and Director of the Frank Stanton Center at the Harvard School of Public Health says, "It is truly unprecedented for a television network to create a website that draws so extensively and effectively on the expertise of numerous world-leaders in pubic health research." And now, CBS has set the precedent.

According to researchers, a new blood test can accurately detect early stage non-small-cell lung cancer, the most common type of lung cancer, with 90 percent accuracy. This advancement in lung cancer diagnosis has the potential to eliminate the sometimes inaccurate test results reported with CT scans. After a CT scan, biopsies are often required to confirm the presence of lung cancer. The accuracy of the blood test reduces the number of biopsies done in the need to confirm detection of lung cancer. Another benefit of the blood test is that it can detect non-small-cell lung cancer years before traditional X-ray tests can.

The blood test to detect non-small-cell lung cancer is licensed to 20/20 GeneSystems. Additional clinical studies will be done to confirm the accuracy of the blood test, and if it proves to be as accurate as the initial studies have indicated, this blood test will become the first blood test to predict cancer since the introduction of a prostate specific antigen blood test, PSA, to detect prostate cancer.

This research is published in the Journal of Thoracic Oncology.

No two people are alike. It could be that no two tumors are alike and might explain why one-size-fits-all cancer treatments do not work the same for all cancer patients. In the past, there was little in the way of determining beforehand which cancer patient would do well with treatment, and which patient would do poorly.

Increasingly, researchers are discovering methods of reading cancer, and interpreting what they find into individualized treatment for the cancer patient specific to the characteristics of their cancer. For brain cancer patients, University of Calgary scientists have found that molecular diagnosis and DNA testing of the genetic composition of brain cancers reveals that defining the tumor by genetics leads to more effective treatment.

"You wouldn't want to take treatment the doctor knows ahead of time wouldn't work," said Dr. Greg Cairncross, head of Clinical Neurosciences. "It's genetic changes that drive tumor growth." A new molecular diagnostics program is being developed in the Tom Baker Cancer Centre at the University of Calgary as a result of this diagnostic breakthrough.

If you are a regular reader to this blog, then you know that while I might tell you about the results of new scientific studies, I certainly do not want to be the final word on the subject. I have ended more than one post on a cautionary note, and used the word prudent more times than you probably wanted to read it. If the study I mention is of interest, I expect that you will do additional, independent and thorough research into the results of the new study being reported.

Gordon, who is a family physician and whose wife Marjory is currently battling breast cancer, blogs Beating Breast Cancer about the very subject of media reporting on new breast cancer research findings and the hazards inherent in the reporting. He does say that those who report are doing their very best to report accurately the findings released to the media by research centers, but the competitive edge in creating eye-catching headlines can lead to creating false first-impressions. Then there is the research community, competitively vying for attention, that might lead them to release the most sensational part of the research rather than the whole dreary study.

Gordon offers advice to the reader in discerning what they are reading and if it even applies to their cancer. He uses the recent example of the breast cancer drugs that have been debated and fought over. The advice is excellent. Before you read one more headline, stop by Gordon's blog to read his New Drugs For Breast Cancer post. 

The day I was diagnosed with breast cancer is the day I bought Dr. Susan Love's Breast Book -- actually my sister ran to the store and bought it for me -- after it was recommended as the bible for women with breast cancer. I was told that in the absence of answers to my questions from my doctor, I should look to Dr. Love for responses that would probably mirror what my own doctor would say. So if a question or worry entered my head, I didn't have to call and leave a message for my doctor. I didn't have to wait for a return call or for my next appointment. I could open the pages of this almost 600-page book and find up-to-date and accurate information. The information I found eased my mind and gave me hope -- and it also scared me and introduced to me to the sometimes-tragic effects of breast cancer.