Just recently, European researchers announced that MRI scans offer a new way to detect breast cancer in its earliest form. They can even prevent cancer among high-risk women.

Better than standard mammograms, MRI can detect a nonmalignant tumor called ductal carcinoma in-situ, or DCIS. Once found, the lesion can be surgically removed before it becomes cancerous.

Think about this: It is believed that almost all breast cancer starts out as DCIS. And this: if MRI were the gold standard breast cancer screening tool, we might be able to prevent a lot more breast cancer cases than we do now. It seems researchers agree.

It seems screening for lung cancer doesn't save lives and it doesn't prevent advanced disease. But it does lead to potentially unnecessary and harmful treatment.

This isn't the final word on the use of CT scans to screen smokers and former smokers for the disease. But right now, the hope some experts had for the special X-rays to detect tiny lung abnormalities has been diminished by a large study that is still in the works. And until conclusive evidence says the screening is useful, the American Cancer Society will not endorse the test.

While CT screening did increase diagnosis and treatment -- those screened were three times more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer and 10 times more likely to have lung surgery than predicted -- study co-author Dr. Peter Bach of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York says, "We don't see a trace of evidence that a single life was saved, that a single case of advanced cancer was avoided."

And because CT scanning led to more biopsies and surgeries, patients were put at risk for complications such as lung puncture, bleeding, and infection, according to Bach, whose work is published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"Getting screened for lung cancer with CT scanning is not only unproven, it's potentially a risky endeavor," he said.

Until an effective screening tool emerges -- possibly still years away -- experts say there is one surefire way to protect yourself from lung cancer. Stop smoking.

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 urine test can tell the difference between an enlarged prostate or prostate cancer. This test from Gen-Probe is not approved in the United States but is approved in some European countries.

If a man has a noncancerous condition of the prostate a PSA (prostate-specific antigen) tumor marker test can rise. This rise in the PSA test can lead to a biopsy of the prostate. This biopsy is the only way to determine if the PSA test is picking up a cancer or an enlarged prostate that is not cancer.

The urine test is different because it detects genetic material--RNA--from prostate cancer gene 3 or PCA3. PCA3 is only found in the prostate and when the cells become cancerous the cells express more PCA3 RNA than normal cells. It is independent of the PSA test and works differently to detect cancer.

This test is not designed to replace the current PSA tumor marker but it can do something that the PSA cannot. It can be a separate tool used to determine if cancer does exist. Its not a perfect test but it can help out a few situations. If a man has a low PSA but wants some extra reassurance without getting a biopsy this test could be added along with the PSA. Also, it can help men that have a negative biopsy but a rising PSA decide whether they would like a second biopsy.

Urine tests are already used to detect bladder cancers and some kidney cancers so this test could provide the patient and the doctors with more information and better decision making tools.

The ultrasound technique called elasticity imaging might be able to reduce the amount breast biopsies given to patients. It works almost like a regular ultrasound examination of the breast except it is much more sensitive. The technique gauges how much tissue moves when pushed to detect how soft or stiff the mass is in the breast.

The study that was done showed that all 17 of the imaging studies thought to be malignant were found to be malignant after a biopsy was done. It also identified 105 out of the 106 benign lumps in the breast. From this study it suggests that elasticity imaging is 100 percent sensitive and 99 percent specific.

This could turn out be another useful tool used along with mammography and breast MRI's to detect a cancerous lesion in the breast. I, however, will always want a lump biopsied since I know that is the only way to know 100 percent whether it is malignant or benign.

(Thanks to Patti Anastasi for the tip)

PSA tests are a recommended way to screen for prostate cancer, however the test is not very precise. Too much PSA, prostate-specific antigen, in a man's blood can indicate that he has either a benign enlarged prostate or cancer. Only a biopsy can tell the difference.

A new study suggests that physicians should monitor not only the number of the PSA test but also the trend of the results. In other words, if the blood test shows a jump by a few points, even though the number is still in normal range, it could be a sign that the patient has prostate cancer.

The study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, suggests evaluating how fast a man's PSA level rises may help that tricky balancing act of when to biopsy and how aggressive to treat.

What does that mean for men today? That its a good idea to order a biopsy for a man with a low but fast-rising PSA.

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.

Stomach cancer is hard to detect. It has no symptoms in its early stages, and there is no effective screening to detect its presence. So early detection and early treatment for this disease -- that attacks 800,000 people worldwide -- are hard to come by. In Taiwan, stomach cancer is the fifth most common cancer and the focus of study for researchers working to devise a method for detecting stomach cancer in its infancy.

A team of researchers at National Taiwan University Hospital have discovered a toxic factor -- GroES -- that causes stomach cancer. And they have discovered that a simple blood test will show either a positive or negative result for this substance, leading to immediate endoscopic exams for patients who may be at risk for stomach cancer. The test to identify GroES has already achieved a 65 percent accuracy rate.

Apparently, if the human body is infected with GroES, it produces antibodies to the factor and can cause chronic inflammation of the stomach, causing cells to rupture and proliferate. Long-term inflammation can cause stomach cancer. Researchers say about 45 percent of adults in Taiwan are infected with GroES -- and one percent will go on to develop stomach cancer.

Right now, patent applications are underway in the United States, Japan, and Taiwan. Once a kit is developed, a single drop of blood will be all it takes to determine the risk for stomach cancer.

NIRScanner is a battery-operated hand-held infrared-based optical scanning device that the developers claim is both affordable and safe and could be used by women as an at-home personal health care solution to the early detection of breast cancer.

However, Drexel University and the University of Pennsylvania scientists state the device is not designed to replace mammography, ultrasound, or other methods of screening for breast cancer, only that it offers an additional method of detection, much the same as monthly self-exams, only far more accurate at early detection. The simple device surpasses self-exam by touch in that it can detect changes in the breast that traditional self-exam could not, and the developers state that it would alert women to seek medical attention should the device detect a problem in the breast.

The NIRScanner makes steady low beeps as it moves over the breast. Using a type of near-infrared light that travels deep into breast tissue, if the hand-held device detects a tumor the beep tone gets higher. A microchip stores the information on the size and location of the tumor as the patient performs the self-examination and the information can be taken to be analyzed on a computer by a physician.

Although the researchers state that the device proved to be accurate over 90 percent of the time, it is still being tested, and needs funding to be brought to market. To read more about the NIRScanner, they have made an illustrated brochure available as a PDF document.

It seems like common sense to me -- that lifestyle choices can affect a person's risk for contracting cancer -- but apparently, many people are not aware of this. Or they are aware but are not heeding the advice that might just save them from this life-threatening disease. According to Carolyn "Bo" Aldige, president of the Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation, in Alexandria, Va., it's not undiscovered treatments and therapies that are key to fighting off cancer -- it's likely that the toll cancer takes can be reduced by lifestyle changes and routine screenings. Aldige reports that nearly half of all cancer deaths are preventable. And she urges us to consider these facts.

• Smoking is the most preventable cause of death in the United States and causes nearly one in five deaths, killing about 438,000 Americans each year. Yet 45 million adults still smoke -- 23 percent of them men and 19 percent of them women.
• Poor nutrition, inactivity, and obesity account for one in three of the 564,830 deaths from all cancers. Experts say that excess calories cause mutations that start genes traveling down pathways that cause cells to divide out of control -- and that's what cancer is. According to Aldige, if each person could magically acquire the perfect body mass index, there would be a whole lot less colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers.
• It requires little time and not much discomfort for certain screenings that can detect cancer at an early enough stage that it can be successfully treated. There are already screenings for breast cancer, colon cancer, prostate cancer, testicular cancer, cervical cancer, and skin cancer. And soon, there may be a simple screening for lung cancer too.
• A diet rich in nutrients and vitamin supplements helps maintain health and prevent cancer.

There are some highly effective defenses against cancer -- but they require some attention and effort on the part of each individual. Not everyone will make health-conscious choices -- some for reasons out of their control (lack of access to screenings, for example) and some for reasons I personally do not understand. But maybe that's because I have already had cancer and I know that I don't ever wish for it to return. So for that reason alone, I plan to adhere to the considerations listed above. It seems like common sense to me.

Inflammatory breast cancer accounts for only 1 percent of all breast cancers -- yet this disease that mostly affects young women and teenagers can be especially aggressive. And sadly, many of the symptoms  -- inflammation, irritation, itching, redness, blotching, and increase in size -- are mistaken for infection. Not until further, more serious symptoms arise does breast cancer become a possible explanation. A breast may become firmer, warmer, and may grow in size more each day. Although distinct lumps are not apparent, the skin may become dimpled and increased tenderness can occur. Large veins may surface, and cancer may spread in sheets or nests instead of from a solid tumor -- making it virtually impossible to detect a lump. While mammograms are usually ineffective for detecting this cancer, certain biopsies and MRI testing can reveal and confirm a diagnosis -- which years ago was much scarier than it is today with new studies and research and therapies that can better fight this aggressive form of cancer.

A combination of the drugs Lapatinib and Capecitabine have been used to treat inflammatory breast cancer in women who have not responded to standard therapies. And this combination is doubling the patient's survival time. Like like the drug Herceptin -- used for many young women with another aggressive form of breast cancer -- these drugs may be the innovative new approach for saving even more young women.

I clearly remember reading a pamphlet about a test that might determine with pretty good accuracy whether or not I would benefit from chemotherapy for breast cancer. This was more than a year ago and I hoped, prayed, wished upon a star that I would be a candidate for this test -- and that the result would reveal that I did not need the toxic chemotherapy that I feared with every fiber of my being. But I did not qualify for this test because it's only effective for tumors that are estrogen receptor positive -- and I am negative. So I received chemotherapy and while I've survived it, there still remains an important issue -- did I need it?