A pilot study from the Mayo clinic, led by Dr. Pruthi, finds that adding flaxseed to the diet can reduce hot flashes in postmenopausal women who do not take estrogen replacements. The findings were published in the Journal of the Society for Integrative Oncology.

Hormone replacement therapy was commonly prescribed for hot flashes, but side effects and health concerns, including increased risk of cancer, have reduced their use. The researchers involved in this study looked at variety of herbal and dietary supplements including vitamin E, black cohosh and soy, but none decreased the frequency or severity of hot flashes other than the flaxseed.

The 29 participants did not want to take HRT due to a perceived increased risk of breast cancer. Most of them completed the six-week flaxseed trial, which involved eating 40 g of crushed flaxseed daily.

The frequency of hot flashes among the women decreased 50 percent over six weeks. Flaxseed contains lignans and omega-3 fatty acids. Lignans have weak estrogen characteristics. Dr. Pruthi cautions that this was a pilot study and further study in a large, randomized placebo-controlled study may not turn out such results.

Hormone Replacement Therapy is a controversial treatment for the sometimes severe symptoms of menopause which include hot flashes, mood swings, night sweats and weakened bones. There's been ongoing debates about the safety of such treatments, because HRT has, in some studies, been shown to increase a woman's risk of heart attacks and breast cancer. Yet some feel that these findings have been exaggerated and the benefits of HRT outweigh the risks. In fact, there's even a type of HRT designed to fight breast cancer.

So what's my point here? It's this: If you're considering HRT, it's important to make an informed choice. Here's an article that sums up the issue of HRT, and as always, talk to your doctor about risks before taking any medication

Researchers are stating that fooling a female body into thinking it is going through menopause could end up protecting the fertility of women with cancer. Shutting down the ovaries using a "hormonal switch" may do just that.

If ovulation stops (just temporarily), then the ovaries and the precious eggs inside are summarily taken out of the equation when it comes to possible damage from radioactive chemotherapy treatments. For women with cancer undergoing chemo -- but who wish to later have children -- protecting those eggs is one of the largest priorities, right?

Scientists are not exactly sure why the ovaries are completely protected when the body stops ovulating, but the research may give an alternative to those women who would prefer not to have their eggs removed and frozen for later use.

Now here's some good news for Tamoxifen-taking, hot-flash suffering women. A new study finds women who have lots of hot flashes during treatment with the breast cancer drug Tamoxifen have a lower risk of recurrence than women who don't suffer from the annoying waves of heat commonly associated with menopause.

"This study provides the first evidence that hot flashes may be an indicator of a better prognosis in women with early stage breast cancer," said study author John P. Pierce, Ph.D., from the University of California at San Diego. "Our data supports the possibility of a significant association between hot flashes and disease outcome."

More study is necessary to determine whether or not hot flashes -- which may predict better outcomes than severity of cancer, hormone receptor status, and age -- are associated with Tamoxifen and breast cancer progression.

Simply being female puts all women at risk for breast cancer. That and age, race, family history, personal history, genetic make-up, when they had children, when they reach menopause, and a whole host of other possible factors.

Now U.S. doctors are officially calling body mass index, breast density, and alcohol consumption predictors of the disease, says Therese Bevers, medical director of the Cancer Prevention Center, at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

Bevers helped write updated guidelines for the prevention of breast cancer and presented them at the 12th annual National Comprehensive Cancer Network in Hollywood, Florida on Friday.

The guidelines, featuring the revised list of risk factors, also offer treatment options for women -- including bilateral mastectomy for women who have tested positive for the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 as well as possible medical treatments with drugs such as tamoxifen and raloxifene.

Wyeth officials say their hormone replacement therapy Prempro is not the cause of one Ohio woman's breast cancer. But two jury decisions prove otherwise.

The first jury, in October, awarded Jennie Nelson and her husband $1.5 million in compensatory damages, validating Nelson's claim that her breast cancer -- resulting in a double mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation -- was caused by the Prempro she took for six years. When this verdict was thrown out due to a mistrial, a retrial began.

The retrial concluded yesterday -- with a Philadelphia jury awarding the Nelsons this time with $3 million.

"Both times this case has been heard on terms established by Wyeth and still the juries have clearly found that Prempro causes breast cancer," says Nelson's attorney Tobias Millrood, adding that Wyeth puts sales ahead of patient safety.

Wyeth respectfully disagrees and argues that it acted responsibly in the promotion of its hormone replacement products and in disclosing with doctors and patients all therapy-associated health risks.

Millions of women have used Wyeth's hormone replacement therapies to control the effects of menopause, and the company, sanctioned in January to pay $1 million to an Arkansas breast cancer survivor, now faces more than 5,000 lawsuits of this same nature.

Despite a large-scale study revealing drugs like Prempro increase the risk of breast cancer if used for five years or more, the drug still remains on the market. And Wyeth is so sure their drug is not at fault for causing Nelson's breast cancer that they plan to appeal yesterday's verdict.

The first documented whole-ovary transplants are now on the map -- the United States map.

On February 5, a renowned infertility expert in St. Louis transplanted a whole ovary from one woman into her sister in order to enable the sibling to have children after a battle with ovarian cancer that resulted in early and permanent menopause.

Dr. Sherman Silber, who performed the same type of transplant on twins last month and has previously restored fertility via ovary tissue transplants, believes his success is unmatched. Apparently, surgeons in China have reported similar success but offer few details to support their claim. And due to a lack of published material about the case, it is believed Dr. Silber's ovary transplants may be the world's first scientifically documented cases.

Silber says whole-ovary transplants, that could potentially allow women with cancer to freeze an ovary, undergo treatment, and then have the ovary returned to restore fertility, could also one day help women who don't have cancer but experience natural premature ovarian failure, which leads to early menopause.

While both of Silber's ovary transplant patients are awaiting news about their status of their fertility, Silber awaits the long-term results of his work. Ovarian tissue transplants last a few years, but whole ovary transplants should last for decades, he says.

The ABC building in the Brisbane suburb of Toowong -- subject of a December 2006 post -- has been officially vacated following an investigation that turned up a cancer cluster among female employees.

Over the past 11 years, 10 women from this one building have been diagnosed with breast cancer. Eight of the women worked in the ABC newsroom, and most had been there for more than five years. The breast cancer risk for these women was six times higher than for the general population of women in the area. And while the investigation continues and clues are beginning to connect, the big question -- Why? -- has still not been answered.

It has been determined it is highly unlikely the increase in breast cancer was caused by exposure to radio frequency, low frequency electromagnetic radiation, or chemical contamination. According to experts, had any of these factors been at play, there would have been a rise in cancer among male employees as well as female employees. Therefore, it appears something specific to women has caused this cluster.

Perhaps clues will emerge from an analysis of lifestyle influences -- like smoking, diet, and alcohol and medication use -- and already women have answered questions pertaining to body weight, height, level of physical activity, and reproductive history.

One common theme among women is the use of oral contraceptives for periods varying from two to 18 years. Other interesting findings include the average number of babies born to the women -- 1.6 -- and the breastfeeding practices of the women -- each woman with a child breastfed for an average of 2.3 to 12 months -- and the educational background of the group -- of the 10 women, six have college degrees.

Experts says these are important factors. Early puberty, late menopause, lack of breastfeeding, use of oral contraceptives, and the trend of older mothers having fewer babies all can influence breast cancer risk. And so can level of education. Research shows increased rates of breast cancer in women with white collar jobs -- which is related to socioeconomic status and late childbearing.

Everything is important really -- because as breast cancer rates continue to skyrocket, all possible reasons need to be considered.

One in eight women in Australia will be diagnosed with breast cancer before the age of 85. About 13,261 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2006. And it is predicted that 14,818 will be diagnosed in 2011.

2006 will forever be the year linking the decline in breast cancer cases to the decline in use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). This was big news on the cancer front, and while some argue other forces helped drive the breast cancer drop, there is still much speculation that the use of HRT somehow increases the risk of developing the disease. Even so, it is predicted that Wyeth's sales of hormone replacement drugs will have reached more than $1 billion as of yesterday, the last day of 2006.

Even more interesting is the prediction by analysts that revenue from the pills -- used to treat symptoms of menopause -- will rise five percent annually for the next several years.

It seems the sales growth, despite the overall decline in the HRT market, is primarily due to increased demand from wholesalers and price increases too.

It's hard to tell what will happen to the world of HRT in the year 2007 -- will women embrace what is considered the best therapy around for menopausal issues? Will they abandon the controversial treatment altogether? Will they find variations of HRT that meet their needs while minimizing risk for disease? Only time will tell.

Carrying extra weight is a risk factor for developing breast cancer. But it's not been clear how the timing of weight gain affects this risk. Evidence is mounting, though, and it's now believed that weight gain in adult life is more predictive of breast cancer risk than absolute body weight.

A new study, published in December's International Journal of Cancer, reveals a link between gaining weight in adulthood and an increased risk of breast cancer after menopause.

"We did find some suggestion that weight gain during the 30s and 40s, weight gain since a woman's first pregnancy and weight gain since menopause, especially for women with a longer time since menopause, may all be of importance in relation to postmenopausal breast cancer risk," report the researchers who followed 1,166 women with breast cancer and 2,105 without the disease.

A 70 percent increased risk was found among postmenopausal women who gained more than 60 pounds between age 20 and the onset of menopause. This was in comparison to women who gained less than 20 pounds during the same period of time. Overall, there was a four percent increase in breast cancer risk for each 11-pound increase in adult weight.

According to a CBC News report, ancient druids believed mistletoe had magical properties because of the way it grows, never touching the ground and without taking nourishment from the earth. However, University Hospital of Wales in Cardiff researchers are warning there is nothing magical about the use of mistletoe extract for the treatment of cancer, and in fact, it can cause harm.

Serious side effects from the injection of mistletoe extract have been reported in the Christmas issue of the British Medical Journal, including a case concerning a 61-year-old woman who had a tumor-like growth develop under her skin, brought on when she self-injected herself with mistletoe extract. The researchers warn that the use of mistletoe extract has been shown to cause a severe allergic reaction, breathing difficulties, joint pain and kidney failure. Some studies have shown that mistletoe might actually lead to cancer growth.

Edzard Ernst, a professor of complementary medicine at the Universities of Exeter and Plymouth is quoted as saying, "The idea that mistletoe may help treat cancer is based on that the idea that mistletoe, like cancer, is a parasitic growth that eventually kills its host." The researchers of this published study indicated that there are over 30 mistletoe extract preparations available in Europe, and its use by cancer patients is well-known.

From another source, the National Cancer Institute's overview of mistletoe includes the following:

• Mistletoe is a plant that grows on several types of trees and has been used since ancient times to treat many ailments.
• Mistletoe extract has been shown to kill cancer cells in the laboratory and to boost the immune system.
• Animal studies have suggested that mistletoe may be useful in decreasing the side effects of standard anticancer therapy.
• Many human studies using mistletoe to treat cancer have been done in Europe with unclear results, and a few clinical trials in the United States and abroad are in progress.
• Very few bad side effects have been reported from the use of mistletoe extract, though mistletoe plants and berries are poisonous to humans.
• The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved mistletoe as a treatment for cancer or any other medical condition.
  

To read detailed information about the highlighted overview, visit the NCI's FAQ about mistletoe.

Breast cancer statistics for 2003 are in, and researchers have announced that the number of breast cancer cases dropped by an impressive seven percent, with the greatest drop occurring in women between ages 50-69 diagnosed with estrogen receptor positive (ER-positive) breast cancer.

The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center researchers attribute this good news to the fact that in the same time frame, millions of women stopped taking hormone replacement therapy (HRT) over concerns that HRT led to an increased risk for breast cancer.

If the statistics hold for upcoming years, HRT will have proven a greater causative effect leading to breast cancer than originally believed.

"Incidence of breast cancer had been increasing in the 20 or so years prior to July 2002, and this increase was over and above the known role of screening mammography," stated Donald Berry, Ph.D. "HRT had been proposed as a possible factor, although the magnitude of any HRT effect was not known. Now the possibility that the effect is much greater than originally thought all along is plausible, and that is a remarkable finding."

While the researchers best guesstimate is that HRT might be the contributing factor to the drop in ER-positive breast cancer cases for 2003, they cannot be 100 percent certain at this point. We will need to wait and see what the years 2004 and 2005 tell us about any continuing declines in breast cancer cases, and learn what other, if any, contributing factors are responsible for the decline.

Previous posts we have done regarding HRT and breast cancer:

• Hooray for HRT!?
• HRT and smoking dramatically increases breast cancer risk
• HRT increases breast cancer risks

One in five postmenopausal women with estrogen-positive breast cancer do not take the newer chemoprevention hormone therapy aromatase inhibitor drugs to prevent recurrence as prescribed, according Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals researchers who conducted a study to determine drug usage.

Aromatase inhibitors, such as Anastrozole, have been shown to be an effective means of blocking estrogen that fuels cancer for women diagnosed with estrogen-positive breast cancer, and Dana Farber's Dr. Ann Partridge warns that, "Women may be compromising their care, and ultimately their survival, if they do not take these medications as recommended."

Despite warnings, a significant number of women are choosing to discontinue use and the researchers of this survey can only speculate as to the reasons why. Some of the reasons they believe play a role in the women's decision not to comply with recommended treatment are: fear of side effects, actual experience of side effects, cost of treatment, and negative health beliefs that treatment will not help.

From a personal insight, the most common reason I know of as to why women are not taking this medication, or discontinue usage, is the fact that these drugs do not have a long history of use, and one can only guess what the possible, and presently unknown, long-term side effects will end up being. While Dr. Partridge states without a shadow of a doubt that these new aromatase inhibitor drugs are effective in breast cancer recurrence, only time itself will remedy the hesitation and non-compliance.

Some of the aromatase inhibitors include Anastrozole (Arimidex), Letrozole (Femara), Exemestane (Aromasin) and Formestane (Lentaron). To learn more about aromatase inhibitors, visit the National Cancer Institute's aromatase inhibitors digest.

Photographer Paula Lerner was diagnosed with breast cancer just after beginning work on Why We Walk: The Inspirational Journey Toward a Cure for Breast Cancer -- a book that captures through photographs the momentum of millions who year after year crowd America's streets and walk to conquer this disease.

A peek into this book is offered in the form of an online slide show, hosted by the Washington Post. Set to inspiring music and lyrics and lasting just three minutes and 59 seconds, this media presentation tells a story about a disease that strikes every three minutes and kills every 14 minutes.

Gripping photographs and sobering facts dominate this powerful piece. There are shots of women in pink wigs and pink tutus, children hosing off physically and emotionally drained walkers, women holding up photographs of lost loved ones -- one with a printed message that reads, Mom, we would walk forever to bring you back. May 14, 2004. There are smiles and cheers and tears. Every image packs an emotional punch.

The facts that appear throughout the slide show really stand out. They spell out in black and white some of the most important facts about breast cancer. And here they are -- all seven of them.

• 40,970 women and 460 men will die from breast cancer annually.

• Breast cancer is the most common cancer in African American women but ranks second to lung cancer in cause of cancer deaths.

• People over the age of 50 account for 77 percent of breast cancer cases.

• Breast cancer is most commonly diagnosed among Hispanic women and is the leading cause of cancer death among this group.

• Being overweight is linked to a higher risk of breast cancer, especially after menopause.

• Risk is increased by onset of menstruation before age 12, menopause after 50, first child after 30, or no children.

• Family history of breast cancer increases risk, especially if close relatives are diagnosed before the age of 50. A first-degree relative -- mother, sister, daughter -- with breast cancer approximately doubles the risk of breast cancer.

I never got a chance to call for the results of my breast biopsy the day after it was performed -- because my phone rang hours before I was told to inquire about the pathology of my lump. That one phone call changed everything. Forever.

November 2004

The next day, November 24 and the day before Thanksgiving, my phone rang at 10:00 AM and the doctor who did the biopsy said the pathology report was back already. He said that unfortunately, cancer cells were found. He said I would need a lumpectomy (surgery to remove the lump), radiation, and possibly chemotherapy. He told me to buy a book called Dr. Susan Love's Breast Book. I got the book that day.

Somehow, I made it though the Thanksgiving weekend, with my thoughts jumping from the hope that this would turn out okay to the fear that I would not see my boys grow up. My mind wandered and worried about surgery and what treatments I would have. I wondered if I could have more kids and whether or not I would lose my hair. I cried and lost sleep and was hopeful too.

I learned a lot from reading my new book. I learned that many women do go on to have kids after cancer but I also learned that chemotherapy in young women can cause early menopause. I learned that I have an 85 percent survival rate and also that I will get tiny little tattoos surrounding my breast to aid in the proper delivery of radiation. These permanent tattoos will also alert any future doctors that my breast has had radiation because I can never have it again in that same area. The book helped me feel positive about this journey but it also helped me face reality.

I have since faced reality. And now I am surviving the reality of breast cancer. Following my diagnosis, I endured a lumpectomy, four rounds of dose-dense chemotherapy, more than six weeks of radiation, and one year of Herceptin treatment. Through it all, I learned that I am okay, that I will likely see my boys grow up, that my early menopause was only temporary, that I am physically able to have more children, that I did in fact lose my hair, that my 10 tiny tattoos are so small I can barely see them, that my survival rate is much higher than 85 percent.

I knew I had breast cancer the day I detected a lump in my breast. It just took eight days to confirm my suspicion. And now it's been two years. I have survived for two years.