Tykerb (lapatinib) may be effective at shrinking breast cancer tumors in the brain, researchers say. This drug is called a targeted therapy because it can kill cancer cells and leave normal cells alone. Tykerb targets HER2 and EGFR, two proteins that function abnormally in breast cancer cells.

A study was conducted that included 241 breast cancer patients with brain metastasis that continued to progress after radiation treatment and Herceptin therapy.

The study concluded that nearly half of the patients, 46 percent, experienced at least a twenty percent reduction in the size the the brain tumors.

The researchers concluded "Tykerb has promise in the treatment of brain metastasis".

My friend and fellow young breast cancer survivor has received a great honor to serve as one of the 55 delegates representing breast cancer advocates worldwide at Ignite the Promise: Global Advocate Summit in Hungary.

I'm so proud of you Deb!

This press release says it all:

Deb Kirkland, of Baltimore, MD, has been selected to serve as one of 55 delegates representing breast cancer advocates worldwide at "Ignite the Promise: Global Advocate Summit" in Budapest, Hungary, Sept. 29-30, 2007.

Organized by Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the world's largest grassroots network of breast cancer survivors and activists, the summit will pair the 25 U.S. breast cancer advocates with their counterparts from 30 countries. The overarching goals for holding this international summit are to elevate the dialogue on breast cancer's global impact and to share strategies used to combat breast cancer in the delegates' local communities

"Each year, more than 1 million women worldwide receive a breast cancer diagnosis," said Nancy G. Brinker, founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure. "The need to provide these women-regardless of race, nationality, or socioeconomic status-an equal opportunity to beat a breast cancer diagnosis has never been greater. This summit will enable advocates to share outreach tactics that have been implemented in the U.S. and elsewhere to meet our collective goal of saving lives and ending breast cancer forever."

Early trials show a breath test for lung cancer detection may surface in the not-too-distant future. And it could be simple, inexpensive, non-invasive, and effective too.

The tests needs a good amount of work still, but if we keep our fingers crossed and medical researchers stay hot on the trail of this test, it just might be possible to one day spot lung cancer by simply breathing into a device for a few minutes.

The lung cancer breath test measures chemicals called volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the breath. There's a certain pattern of VOCs associated with lung cancer, and they show up as colored dots across a quarter-sized panel.

The theory behind this test is great. The test itself is not perfect yet, however.

It's promising, though, says The Cleveland Clinic's Peter Mazzone, MD, MPH and colleagues who describe the test in the Online First edition of the journal Thorax and reveal the test correctly identified in studies three out of four people with lung cancer and detected lung cancer almost as frequently.

The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation wants help fighting breast cancer. So forget about fighting crowds this holiday season -- help fight cancer instead.

The Komen Marketplace is offering two specially designed holiday greeting cards this year, available for purchase on-line through December 8.

Prices for cards, that can be personalized with an individual name, a company name, and a special message, range depending on the card. One option costs $1.30 to $1.40 per card, plus nominal printing fees. Another option costs $5.00 per card, with no printing fees. For this option, The Komen Foundation will also print envelopes with mailing and return addresses. They will even stamp envelopes and drop the cards in the mail too.

Fifty to 100 percent of sales will benefit the fight against breast cancer. And 100 percent of the cards will spread hope and promise through messages like this -- The best gifts are wrapped in the joy we give to others. Happy Holidays. This card has been given to you as a special tribute in support of the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation.

On Sunday, for the very first time, I read a magazine article about the hospital where I received treatment for breast cancer. I had never before seen mention of my hospital, my doctors, my city in anything other than local and regional newspapers and on area television stations. I figured news about Shands Hospital at The University of Florida was out there -- in more areas than my own -- because it's a well-known facility. People travel from all over to receive treatment here. So I know it's a good place. But to see in the October 2006 issue of Good Housekeeping an actual blurb about a new kind of lumpectomy -- pioneered right here in Gainesville, Florida -- is exciting.

I am the happy recipient of this new kind of lumpectomy -- which really is not new at all. It was developed 20 years ago by the surgeon who performed my own lumpectomy, and it allows women who undergo lumpectomy the chance to avoid return trips to the operating room.

The method is called frozen section analysis, and it was first used by Dr. Edward Copland III, first director of the UF Shands Cancer Center, who was tired of waiting for pathology reports and tired of operating on patients two and three times to ensure clear tumor margins.

It all happens like this -- a surgeon removes the breast cancer tumor, takes tissue samples, freezes them in an embedding compound, and sends them to a pathologist for immediate analysis. In a typical case, this frozen section process adds just 15 minutes to the operating time. If pathology reveals more tissue must be removed, the surgeon returns to the patient, still under anesthesia, and continues surgery. The patient does not need to return for more surgery.

Surgeons at most institutions rely on a method called permanent section analysis to determine whether or not cancerous cells remain along the margins of a tumor. The technique is labor-intensive, takes days to complete, and requires patients to return for additional surgery if margins are not clear. Surgeons using the frozen section method still consult permanent sections to confirm margins are clear -- but they are mostly certain of their findings during frozen section.

Studies show frozen section analysis to be safe and effective -- and it adds just $851 to the cost of surgery, a savings considering the cost of returning for surgery as a result of permanent analysis.

There are many advantages -- but the procedure is tricky and on occasion can fail to detect some cancerous margins, indicating frozen section should continue to be used in conjunction with permanent section. Opponents of the practice say false positives could result in unnecessary mastectomy. But Copeland says this has never happened at UF -- and he would never remove a woman's breasts until permanent section confirmed it was necessary.

Despite the promise of this method, only a handful of institutions make practice of this surgery-sparing technique. Shands at UF is the only hospital in North Florida where breast surgeons perform frozen section analysis on a regular basis.

The procedure -- which is not risky, is not harmful, and clearly saves patients from returning for surgery -- is the exact procedure I received almost two years ago. Dr. Copeland removed my tumor, froze tissue samples, sent them to pathology, and 15 minutes later knew my tumor had clear margins and had not spread to my lymph nodes. He visited my family in the hospital waiting room just after surgery and told them the good news -- clear margins, no spread, a 1.1 cm. tumor, stage I. And while other tumor criteria, such as ER/PR status and HER2 status, did not come my way immediately, I at least knew the basics when I woke from surgery. No waiting. No worrying. No complaints.

TIME magazine has faithfully followed the issues defining cancer. The topic has made the covers of many issues, and it receives plentiful press on the pages in between. Stories spotlight an array of different cancers, address research and new developments, and offer personal glimpses into the lives of both everyday survivors and those with celebrity status. A look into the archives of TIME magazine -- seven specific issues -- illustrates a proven commitment to the cancer cause. And it proves the mystery of cancer is much the same today as it was many years ago.

Every time I hear about someone who has died from cancer, it knocks me down a notch. It makes me sad for the person, for the family, for the friends, for me -- because I know I am not guaranteed survival from cancer and while I mostly live each day as if I am immune to this tragic outcome, the knowledge that people do really die from this disease that I am trying to beat is overwhelmingly sobering. And what shakes me most is the fact that these people who die from cancer must have had the same outlook as me at some point in their journey -- the outlook of promise and hope and continued survival. And then something happens that jolts this hope from their grasp. It could happen to me -- and my family and my friends. And that scares me.

Sometime last year, my husband told me about a woman in one of his graduate classes whose husband was fighting melanoma that had spread to his brain. He was in year number eight of constant treatment -- both traditional and alternative -- and with each day, his hope for survival was fading. His wife and my husband talked at times about his journey -- and they talked about my journey with breast cancer. And after the class ended, both spouses periodically checked on each other. Today, my husband asked this woman in an e-mail about her husband. She replied and shared that he died last October. She wrote that he could not fight any longer -- that the last chemotherapy he tried to endure was too hard on him. He died with dignity. And she is proud of him. And I can't stop crying.

My tears will dry. And sadness will drift from my every thought. And I will return to my usual enthusiastic approach to surviving my own dreaded disease. But in the back of my mind, where I have saved every sad story about cancer and death, my sorrow will linger. And I suppose it should. So I can keep my sights on the possibility that surrounds me -- death -- and so I can continue living with every fiber of my being. Because living is not a guarantee. Ever.

Parents may want to save their kids' baby teeth for more than just nostalgic reasons -- they may want to save them because they are rich in stem cells and the pulp tissue could provide the means to treatment for injuries and disease. BioEden Inc. is a new company out of Austin, Texas pioneering this effort that is so new some doubt science will ever catch up with the expectations of this firm. But President Jeff Johnson says all evidence indicates that baby teeth are a wonderful source of stem cells -- cells that doctors and researchers pursue for their capability of replicating and morphing into specialized cells that can be used to repair the body. Experts think baby teeth stem cells might one day be used for bone, teeth, and even nerve cell regeneration which could hold potential for spinal cord injuries and Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.

Parents may find brochures in their dentist offices featuring the benefits of banking their children's teeth once they fall out. And pursuing tooth banking is no different than pursuing any other dental procedure. There are fees involved, of course -- banking fees and perhaps referral fees from dental offices -- and other considerations that each parent must weigh. Dr. Phil Hunke, president of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry and pediatric dentist for 32 years, says the idea of removing cells and freezing them holds true promise -- and he may want to bank the tooth of a child or grandchild once he learns more. Dr. Kevin Donly, a professor of pediatric dentistry, says he sees some potential but will not be banking teeth for his three little boys. He just doesn't think he's at the point where it's necessary. Another pediatric dentist -- Dr. John Updyke -- believes that if money were not an issue, all parents should bank their kids' teeth. But many young families can't afford the initial $595 and the $89 annual storage cost it requires. And without a solid scientific backing, tooth banking might not come up as a priority for many when it may take 10 years or more to even determine how useful these specific stem cells will be.

Herceptin -- a targeted breast cancer drug used to treat women who are Her2 positive -- has received rave reviews and has shown great promise in cutting down on recurrence of this aggressive form of breast cancer. Given over the course of 52 weeks, Herceptin is wondrous for its lack of short-term side effects. There is no hair loss, no compromise of blood counts, no significant sickness. For me, fatigue may have resulted from this treatment -- but it's unclear to me really whether it was the Herceptin or the two small boys I have living in my house that most contributed to my occasional exhaustion. Regardless, I functioned well while receiving Herceptin for the past year -- and I did not suffer anything more than a twinge of pain when my port was accessed for each treatment. In the short term, I have fared well. In the long term, the jury is still out.

Someone once told me to think of cancer as a chronic condition -- an illness like diabetes or asthma that may linger for life and may require continual treatment. And while battling cancer, perhaps for life, I should just hope that medical advances occur and new treatments become available. And maybe, just maybe, the science of medicine will decrease by leaps and bounds the number of people who die from cancer.

During my own battle with cancer -- which has been 18 months long -- two new breast cancer drugs have hit the scene with rave reviews from researchers and medical professionals. This is good news for me because my type of breast cancer makes me a candidate for both drugs. Herceptin is one of these drugs -- given to women who are HER-2/neu positive -- that's me -- and over express a protein that makes the tumor aggressive. Herceptin is received over 52 weeks -- and I go every three weeks for a 90-minute infusion of this clear liquid that causes me really no side effects at all. It can be toxic to the heart but monitoring tests have revealed that my heart is not suffering at this time. And with just three more infusions to go -- one this Wednesday -- I will likely encounter no adverse reactions to this potentially life-saving drug.

And now Tykerb is making headlines. Tykerb, suggested for use with advanced breast cancer and manufactured by British-based GlaxoSmithKline PLC, is an experimental drug that delays the growth of tumors nearly twice as long as standard chemotherapy in patients who no longer respond to Herceptin. This finding, reported this past Saturday at a meeting in Atlanta of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, confirms initial findings about the promise of this drug -- that like Herceptin, made by Genentech, precisely targets tumors without killing lots of healthy cells. The difference between the two drugs is that Herceptin blocks the protein on the cell's surface and Tykerb does it inside the cell -- blocking a second abnormal protein too. And while Herceptin is given intravenously, Tykerb is given in pill form -- which may make it cheaper and easier to use.

While now part of an international study, Tykerb may be available to women in the United States later this year. And it perhaps will be offered in conjunction with Herceptin or instead of Herceptin for women with advanced breast cancer.

I hope I do not ever need Tykerb -- and that Herceptin alone will be enough for me -- but it is comforting to know that there is something else out there. Something that if necessary, just might help me live with this potentially chronic condition called cancer.

After 16 days, the hunger strike colon cancer patients launched in protest over a broken campaign promise has ended. During Israel's last election, colon cancer patients were promised that their medications would be included in the 2006 health basket, and when that promise was not honored, they staged a hunger strike.

For 16 days they sat outside in the Rose Garden in Jerusalem, refusing to end the protest. They were willing to die of hunger before they were willing to die from cancer because of medications denied. During the hunger strike, one of the protestors collapsed and had to be hospitalized at Hadassah University Hospital, Ein Karem. The protest has ended because the government has now assured the cancer patients they will receive the drugs they need to fight their cancer. But, if the promise is broken again, I suspect these strong-willed and resolute people will be right back protesting again. Cancer can make people that way -- from all the fighting against a disease that is trying to take life away. The government might want to just keep the promise.