How are children surviving cancer today? Better than ever before. Some childhood cancer patients, now in their young adult years, are expecting to reach milestones in their lives others before them never would have reached.

Today, 1 in 1,000 young adults in the United States is a childhood cancer survivor. In the 1970s, the chance a child would outlive leukemia or lymphoma was 25 percent. Today, it's 80 percent. That's better than most adult recovery rates.

As recovery rates rise, a new frontier is on the horizon -- follow-up for these young people as they age. You see, the very treatments that saved these individuals may cause them complications later in life. It's not yet clear what happens when kids live 20 to 30 years beyond diagnosis. But teams at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, plan to find out as they launch one of the most ambitious follow-up programs to date. Contacting 5,000 patients who have survived for more than 10 years, doctors hope they will recruit a group to receive free check-ups for life. They'll also receive blood tests, MRI scans, even fertility counseling. Their medical histories will serve as rich textbooks for medical professionals and future patients -- so the war on childhood cancer can continue.

We all want an experienced surgeon, of course, but are you sure your surgeon is experienced enough?

In a recent article published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, patients with prostate cancer who have a prostatectomy performed by a more experienced surgeon tend to have better outcomes.

A prostatectomy involves removal of the prostate gland and surrounding tissue. A study was done to evaluate the total number of prostatectomies a surgeon has performed and if this indeed had influence on recurrence rates.

It seems so, patients who had a surgeon that performed less than 10 prior prostatectomies had a recurrence rate of 18 percent. Patients who had a surgeon that performed over 250 prostatectomies had recurrence rates of only 10 percent.

I think the take home message here is, no matter what kind of surgery you are getting -- ask your surgeon how many times they have done this specific procedure. If it seems very low you might want to consult another surgeon who has more experience.

According to a New England Journal of Medicine article, the answer is no. Women with the breast cancer mutations BRCA1 and BRCA2 seem to have similar survival rates as women without these gene mutations.

A clinical trial was conducted including 1,500 patients. The researchers wanted to see if the patients with gene mutations had worse outcomes then those that did not have the gene mutations.

The researchers found:

• Overall, deaths rates from breast cancer were not significantly different among patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations from those without the mutations.
• Among patients who underwent treatment with chemotherapy, death rates from breast cancer were not significantly different between patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations from those without the mutations.

Why are many early-stage pancreatic cancers not treated with life-extending surgery? It seems that one of the reasons might be that physicians in general have pessimistic views toward all patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and are subsequently not being offered surgery.

There are instances where surgery is not an option but it seems that many cases, more often patients over the age of 65, African Americans, patients with lower incomes or those who are on Medicare or Medicade are passed over and not given this life-extending surgery and a chance for cure.

A study published this week by the Annals of Surgery said there is an under-use of curative resection for pancreatic cancer. Pancreatectomy is the primary treatment for early-stage disease. Over the years the survival results from this surgery have improved, giving at this time 19 percent of patients a five-year survival rate.

Femara (letrozole) is an aromatase inhibitor that works by suppressing the production of estrogen. In postmenopausal women estrogen is still produced in the body by the adrenal gland. Decreasing this production is a way of decreasing the risk of recurrence.

Tamoxifen on the other hand works by blocking the estrogen receptors on the cancer cell itself resulting in slower growth of the cell or cell death. Tamoxifen can be given to post or premenopausal women but Femara would only be prescribed to women that are postmenopausal. The reason being, is that a premenopausal women will still have estrogen produced by the ovaries. Femara would not be effective in this instance.

A Phase III clinical trial that is ongoing shows preliminary results that Femara is superior than Tamoxifen in women with early stage disease that are postmenopausal. The results of the study were published in the Annals of Oncology.

Red meat makes headlines -- again -- due to new research indicating it increases a woman's chances of developing breast cancer. I've heard this before. Maybe that's because it's becoming pretty conclusive.

Findings are most significant for post-menopausal women because these are the women with the highest rates of consumption -- about one portion of red meat per day. This daily doses puts them at a 56 percent greater risk than women who eat no red meat.

Researchers at the University of Leeds followed the eating habits and health of more than 35,000 women over the past seven years to gather their data, published in the British Journal of Cancer.

Antiretroviral drugs, used to prevent HIV transmission from mother to child, are now believed to cause genetic damage in infants. This damage, leading to an increased risk of developing cancer, makes it highly plausible these children may be diagnosed with the disease in mid and late adulthood.

Two new studies indicate there are cancer-causing effects of transplacental exposure to AZT, an antiretroviral drug. These effects -- like increased incidence of tumors and tumors with genetic changes -- have been demonstrated in mice and rats and seem to be cause for concern in humans too.

"The cumulative mutagenesis data suggest that infants exposed transplacentally to AZT may be at increased risk for cancer as they age," said one researcher, whose findings are published in Environment and Molecular Mutagenesis.

The best cancer treatment centers are not always right around the corner. Sometimes, it's necessary to travel far and wide to reach facilities offering the latest and greatest in cancer therapy. And when a back-and-forth commute is not possible due to daily or long-term treatment protocols, lodging becomes a necessity. And often, a hassle.

If you find yourself confronted with a stressful travel scenario, key into Joe's House. It's sure to ease your burden.

Think about this:

Joe's House is a non-profit organization that serves hospital staff and cancer patients in search of lodging. Founded in 2003 by Ann Calahan who for six years struggled to find appropriate accommodations during her late husband's cancer battle, Joe's House makes life a little easier for those fighting cancer on the road.

Joe's House features a centralized listing of lodging information for patients to access online or with a simple phone call (877-563-7468). For online searches, a drop-down menu allows patients, loved ones, and caregivers to locate lodging by selecting states, cities, and treatment facilities. Details on each lodging facility are available with information on amenities, rates, and reservation methods, and requirements.

I just gave this system a whirl. I chose Florida as my state, Gainesville as my city, and the hospital where I receive my treatment. Up popped four lodging locations -- two are free for cancer patients, one runs $10 per night, and the other charges $77 per night. Fortunately, I live right around the corner from my treatment center. But for those who don't, this service -- it's free -- is definitely worth trying.

An article recently published in the journal Cancer says that middle-aged men who are obese at the time of diagnoses of prostate cancer have a significantly worse overall survival than those who are not overweight.

Researchers from the University of Washington and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center recently conducted a clinical study to further evaluate potential associations between obesity and outcomes among patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. This study included 752 middle-aged men diagnosed with the disease.

They concluded that the men with the highest body fat had an approximate 2.5 fold increase in risk of death from prostate cancer. Also, the obese men had a 3.5 fold increased risk of metastasis.

Fewer women are getting mammograms. Facilities offering mammograms are closing. Mammogram machine usage is declining. And we don't really know why.

"We're heading in the wrong direction," says Carol Lee, professor of radiology at Yale University School of Medicine and chair of the American College of Radiology's commission on breast imaging.

"If this decline holds up, it will be very worrisome," she says.

"We're looking at a possible increase in deaths if we see this continue," according to Diana Balma, vice president of public policy at Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

Studies don't show which women -- rich or poor, young or old, educated or uneducated -- are skipping these critical screenings, but there are a few possible reasons for this dangerous drop.

Think about this:

Perhaps there are fewer facilities, staffed by fewer radiologists and technologists due to high lawsuit rates and modest reimbursement. This is scary -- because the number of women old enough to get screened is increasing.

Women may be missing out on all sorts of necessary medical care because of inadequate health insurance or other access problems.

Women may be choosing, for whatever reasons, not to get mammograms, despite strong public urging that women age 40 and older get screened one time every year.

And now think about this:

Recent news about declining breast cancer rates may not be all that good. It may not be that fewer women are developing breast cancer. It may simply be that fewer women are getting early diagnoses because of irregular or nonexistent screening.

One in 18 men and women will be diagnosed with colorectal cancer during their lifetimes -- that translates into more than 150,000 people diagnosed and more than 52,000 colorectal cancer deaths each year, securing the disease as the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States.

Fortunately, mortality rates for this disease have been declining due to earlier screenings, awareness of symptoms, removal of polyps, and improved treatments through advances in research discoveries -- like today's genetic breakthroughs.

In a recent study, researchers identified a cell pathway critical in the development of colon cancer and also lung and stomach cancers.

STAT3 (signal transducer and activator of transcription 3) is the newest discovery and is a target regulated by PRPRT (receptor protein tyrosine phosphatase T), already identified to be mutated in these cancers.

"The role of protein tyrosine phosphatase in cancer is still an under-explored area," says Zhenghe John Wang, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Genetics at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center.

"Our study shows that receptor protein tyrosine phosphatase T regulates an important signaling pathway that is critical in cancer development. This identification will allow new approaches to pharmacological designs and facilitate alternative approaches for cancer treatment."

This study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS Online Edition Feb. 20-23, 2007), provides new hope for the development of drugs that will target this potentially deadly disease.

It's been reported before and sadly, it's still true -- African-American cancer death rates are higher than for the overall population.

A new report from the American Cancer Society reveals the death rate is 35 percent higher in African-American men and 18 percent higher in African-American women. Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death among this population.

While the cancer plight of this group is improving, African-Americans are still more likely to be diagnosed at later stages of the disease. And late diagnosis often translates into a decreased chance for survival.

A clinical study involving 1,000 prostate cancer patients was stopped this week by Southwest Oncology Group in Michigan due to concerns the treatment may have caused leukemia in three of the participants.

The men in the study received the chemotherapy drug mitoxantrone, thought to possibly improve survival rates for those with poor prognoses following prostate surgery. But before results could be measured, leukemia struck and researchers halted the study, declaring the leukemia findings "an unacceptable risk to patients."

While the assumption is that the drug caused the leukemia -- a disease commonly associated with children and the elderly -- it's still unproved at this point.

Mitoxantrone is not a worthless drug, say some experts. Since its release a decade ago, it has been used to decrease bone pain for men with advanced prostate cancer and to treat multiple sclerosis and, ironically, adult leukemia.

Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, MD, is the deputy chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. He is also a blogger and authors his very own blog -- called Dr. Len's Cancer Blog.

Dr. Len writes on his blog about all sorts of topics related to cancer. He shares his opinion on the recent drop in breast cancer cases (December 15, 2006), he promotes the Great American Smokeout (November 14, 2006), he sounds off on lung cancer screenings (October 25, 2006), and he urges parents to always slather sunscreen on their children (October 5, 2006). He has so much more to say -- and his blog is a great stop for those wishing for more information on hot cancer topics.

As this year comes to a close, Dr. Len offers a review of what he believes were the hottest cancer topics of 2006.

Dr. Len reflects in his blog about decreased cancer death rates that represent real progress in the fight against cancer. He calls the HPV vaccine a breakthrough and he recaps the STAR trial -- a comparison of raloxifene to tamoxifen to reduce the risk of recurrent breast cancer in post-menopausal women -- with emphasis on how raloxifene proved just as effective as tamoxifen, but with a better safety profile. He calls new targeted therapies a dream -- with a hefty price tag -- sure to garner debate and discussion in 2007.

Dr. Len reviews the Surgeon General's report on second-hand smoke -- it's harmful to non-smokers, the report says -- and he marvels at the capability of science to approach an understanding of what makes a cancer cell a cancer cell. He also remarks on how remarkable it is that chronic myelogenous leukemia is in fact chronic and no longer fatal, thanks to the drug Gleevec.

Of course, there is ample attention given to the declining incidence of breast cancer, reportedly due to less women using hormone replacement therapy, and the risks weighing on those who are overweight and obese, and survivors and supporters who gathered for Celebration on the Hill -- the site of one incredible American Cancer Society event.

Dr. Len closes his review of 2006 with recognition of three celebrities who lost their lives this year to cancer -- Dana Reeve, Ann Richards, and Ed Bradley. And while he recognizes there are other lives and other stories that deserve mention, there is simply not enough time or space for him to do justice to every noteworthy item.

"What we have seen over the past year is an incredible leap forward in cancer research, diagnosis and treatment, and I suspect there are going to be even more exciting developments in the coming year," says Dr. Len who looks forward to 2007 -- a year that is sure to deliver more hope and more progress in the fight against cancer.