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.

Sure Touch is a unique digital sensing device that assists a physician or other health care professional in screening for breast cancer during routine exams. It can increase the chance of early diagnosis of breast cancer.

During the breast exam the device is placed on the breast and an image is then reflected on a computer screen. It produces a visual map of the breast and if a mass is detected it can show its estimated size, shape, hardness, and location.

A clinical trial published in the American Journal of Surgery says that Sure Touch more accurately determines if there is a mass and if the mass is cancerous than manual palpation alone. The study included 110 women who reported a mass in her breast. These women underwent palpation, then testing with Sure Touch, which was followed by ultrasound and mammography. Sure Touch identified the masses 94 percent of the time, while physician just feeling the breast identified masses 86 percent of the time.

Its always nice to hear about another tool that can be used to detect breast cancer! I hope physicians are taking advantage of this new technology.

Do you want to know your risk for developing invasive breast cancer? If so, you can use an online interactive tool for measuring your five year risk and also your lifetime risk of developing the disease.

There are seven questions to answer to calculate your risk. It should not be used by women who already have had a breast cancer diagnosis. This tool has been used successfully in clinics for women with a strong family history of breast cancer.

Keep in mind that other factors also affect the risk of developing breast cancer that are not accounted for by the online tool. Women who do not get mammograms will have a lower chance of having their breast cancer detected.

There are four pages in the March 2007 Reader's Digest featuring amazing discoveries, devices, tests, and cures. And many of the snippets of information are -- yes -- somehow linked to cancer.

Think about this:

• A new ultrasound technique lets radiologists distinguish between malignant and benign breast lesions. Using elasticity imaging, researchers accurately identified harmless and cancerous lesions in almost all of the 80 cases studied. If results can be reproduced in a large trial, this technique could significantly reduce the number of breast biopsies required.

• Scientists seeking new treatment for diseases can use an online tool developed by researchers at MIT and Harvard. The Connectivity Map matches diseases with compatible drugs, based on the genetic profiles of both. So far, about 160 drugs and compounds are cataloged, and a few new uses for existing drugs have already been suggested. Eventually, all FDA-approved drugs will be included.

• For those who sometimes forget to take their pills, a new device -- that can be preloaded with up to 100 doses of medication -- could one day be implanted in the body and programmed to administer drugs via wireless signals. This device, successful in tests using dogs, was designed to deliver medicines that are less effective when taken orally.

Sometimes it seems cancer's grip is tightening. Other times, in the war against this pesky disease, it seems we are on the verge of something really great.

Physicians now have a tool that can diagnose depression in cancer patients. Patients sometimes will need additional treatment to enable them to cope with their cancer more effectively.

The problem has been that doctors might have a hard time telling what patients actually have clinical depression. The patient may be just showing normal signs of sadness, feelings which commonly result from being diagnosed with cancer.

A team from the University of Liverpool's Division of Primary Care has created this method of testing called Brief Edinburgh Depression Scale (BEDS). What this test does is assess the cancer patient's mental condition with a six-step scale. The test includes questions on worthlessness, guilt and suicidal thoughts.

Professor Mari Lloyd-Williams, lead researcher says "The effects of depression can be as difficult to cope with as the physical symptoms of a terminal illness such as cancer. Patients often feel useless, that they are to blame, and even experience suicidal thoughts during cancer - these are all signs of depression but rarely elicited."

The clinical trial that was conducted included 246 patients with advanced cancer. Twenty-five percent of those patients were shown to have depression that had previously not been diagnosed.

It has just recently been discovered that CT scans for children have been inappropriately used in two Ontario hospitals. As a result, some children have received excessive doses of radiation, putting them at greater risk of developing cancer later in life.

Staff at the two hospitals -- Peterborough Regional Health Centre is one -- reported that in close to 50 percent of selected cases, the appropriate equipment settings were not used.

Herein lies the problem -- developing organs are more susceptible to damage, and giving a small child an adult dose of radiation in a CT scan delivers the same amount of radiation as 4,000 traditional X-rays. Research shows that increased exposure to radiation over time can cause radiation-induced cancer.

CT scans are valuable diagnostic tools because they create 3-D images of organs, offering a better view of head injuries, chest trauma, cancer, and fractures. So they should not be disregarded -- but clearly, hospitals need to improve the management of all scanning procedures.

In Ontario, a diagnostic image safety committee has already been formed. The goal of this committee is to develop standards and do a better job of tracking radiation levels.

Experts are encouraging Ontario parents to refrain from worry unless their children have received many CT scans. And all parents are encouraged to speak up before their children receive CT scans. "Is my child receiving a pediatric protocol?" is all it takes.

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.

Cervical cancer was once the most common cancer in women. But between 1955 and 1992, the number of cervical cancer deaths dropped by 74 percent -- thanks to increased use of the Pap test, a screening tool that can find changes in the cervix before cancer develops and can also detect cancer in its most curable stage. The Pap test is still widely used. And the cervical cancer death rate continues to drop four percent every year.

In 2006, about 9,700 new cases of invasive cervical cancer will be diagnosed in the United States. About 3,700 women will die from the disease. Non-invasive cervical cancer is believed to be four times more common than the invasive form of the disease. Nearly all of these cases can be cured.

Cervical cancer typically occurs in women between the ages of 35 and 55 and rarely in women under the age of 20. It affects mostly Hispanic women, and African-American women develop the disease 50 percent more often than non-Hispanic white women. Women most as risk for cervical cancer are smokers, those with HIV or chlamydia infections, those with diets low in fruit and vegetable consumption, those who between 1940 and 1971 took the hormonal drug DES, and those who have taken oral contraceptives for extended periods of time. Women who have had multiple pregnancies, have a family history of the disease, and have a low socio-economic status are also at risk. Those most at risk, however, are women with human papilloma virus.

Human papilloma virus (HPV) is the most common risk factor for cervical cancer, and some experts believe a woman must have HPV to contract cervical cancer. There are 100 different types of HPV, 13 of which are likely to cause cervical cancer through sexual contact. There are usually no symptoms of HPV, but possible signs of cervical cancer can include vaginal bleeding, unusual discharge, pelvic pain, and pain during sexual intercourse.

There are two ways to stop cervical cancer. First, women can protect themselves against HPV. Protection comes in the form of delaying sexual activity, limiting the amount of sexual partners and their partners, using condoms (thought to be 70 percent effective) and receiving the cervical cancer vaccine, recommended for use in females ages 11-26. The vaccine is most effective for women who have never been sexually active. Second, women can receive regular Pap tests in order to catch pre-cancers. Pap tests are recommended for women three years after their first sexual encounter and before the age of 21 -- and then every year after that.

An abnormal Pap test typically prompts a colposcopy -- a technique that uses a scope to examine the cervix. Diagnosis usually stems from a combination of other scoping methods, pelvic exams, imaging tests, and biopsies used to confirm the presence of cancer and to stage the disease. Stages range from 0-4.

For non-invasive cervical cancer, surgery -- ranging from removal of the cancerous tissue to hysterectomy -- may be the only treatment necessary. For invasive forms of the cancer, surgery is often followed by radiation and chemotherapy. Women interested in preserving their fertility should discuss options with their physicians.

The state of cervical cancer has come a long way over the years. And this year, two critical developments emerged. In June 2006, the FDA approved the first drug for late-stage cervical cancer. The drug, Hycamtin, is recommended for use in combination with chemotherapy. Also is June, the cervical cancer vaccine, Gardasil, was released. Both developments are monumental -- and both will undoubtedly help decrease the already-dropping cervical cancer death rate.

For more information about cervical cancer, visit the following sites:

American Cancer Society
Mayo Clinic
Medline Plus
National Women's Health Information Center

Breast density has something to do with breast cancer. This is not really news. It's clear there is some kind of link, some kind of relationship, some kind of risk related to breast density for both pre- and post-menopausal women. It's just not clear how exactly breast density -- how much fat tissue fills the breast compared to other tissue -- contributes to breast cancer risk. But once it is clear, medical professionals will have a whole new arsenal of power in the fight against this deadly disease.

Cancer News in Context, a regular series of podcast commentaries produced by the Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention, highlights two recent studies that add weight to the fact that breast density is an important tool in breast cancer prediction and identifies two areas that with futher study might help determine why breasts that are very dense are associated with higher risks for breast cancer -- and why density may be as important a factor as age in determining risk.

Currently, mammograms are the chosen method for measuring breast density. But measurement is not required, and there are no national standards for how to measure. Once federal groups issue requirements and direction on how to classify density, women will receive more accurate assessments of their personal risk.

There is also speculation that altering breast density through hormonal therapy may lower risk. Perhaps genetics are the strongest indicator of risk, making short-term solutions ineffective, but perhaps certain interventions can override genetics, helping women protect themselves from breast cancer.

There are many issues that must be ironed out before we really understand how breast density affects breast cancer. There is no doubt that density, when added to other risk factors, will surely help improve the accuracy of prediction. It's one tool, among many, that is poised to open all sorts of doors.

Each month, about 22,000 women log on to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) web site and answer seven questions to determine their risk of developing invasive breast cancer. The Gail Model, named for the NCI's chief biostatistician, Mitchell H. Gail, generates a five-year risk and a lifetime risk for each woman who answers each of these seven questions.

• Does the woman have a medical history of any breast cancer or of any ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS)? Note: This assessment tool cannot accurately predict risk for a woman who already has a medical history of breast cancer.
  
• What is the woman's age? Note: This tool only calculates risk for women ages 35 and older.
  
• What was the woman's age at the time of her first menstrual period?
  
• What was the woman's age at the time of her first live birth of a child?
  
• How many of the woman's first-degree relatives -- mother, sisters, daughters -- have had breast cancer?
  
• Has the woman ever had a breast biopsy? How many breast biopsies has the woman had? Has the woman had at least one breast biopsy with atypical hyperplasia?
• What is the woman's race/ethnicity?

A simple drop-down answer menu is provided for each question, and explanations for each question are available. Upon completion of the short survey, the Gail Model spits out a five-year breast cancer risk and a lifetime breast cancer risk with comparisons to the general population of women.

While this is only an assessment -- based on statistics that do not always take into account individual differences -- it is still a helpful tool. Because it's clear that women can minimize breast cancer risk with behavior changes and sometimes medication. And generating a personal rating on risk is a rating worth knowing. It's also worth knowing that this tool was designed for use by health professionals. If you are not a health professional, consider discussing your results with your doctor.

There is no major test or screening tool or exam that reveals the definite presence of cancer in the body. There are mammograms that can detect suspicious masses in the breast and there is a blood test that might raise concerns about the health of ovaries and there are various x-rays and scans that allow doctors to peek into the intricacies of the human body -- and some tests, like the mammogram clearly do save lives -- but some tests that seem harmless can damage the psyche while accomplishing little else.

I asked my oncologist how he would know if my breast cancer returns. He said I will receive regular mammograms and ultrasounds of my breasts. And he will perform in-office exams every few months. He will complete a breast exam and will feel my neck for enlarged lymph nodes. He will listen to my lungs and feel my stomach. But largely, he will rely on me to report symptoms and signs and complaints -- because these are the true indicators that something is amiss.

I imagined myself getting a whole host of tests on my whole body to rule out that cancer is invading every part of me. But this won't happen without reason -- because some tools, like imaging tests, may detect noncancerous abnormalities and false positives that lead to unnecessary psychological stress and tests -- and sometimes even surgery. So if I develop a persistent cough that can't be controlled, perhaps my oncologist will order a chest x-ray. If headaches begin to plague me and relief is not in sight, then perhaps a scan of my head will be in order. But as long as I feel well, the assumption is that I am well. It's better for my soul this way -- to live life without the constant worry that cancer will return. And it's a whole lot more cost effective too.

At the U.S. Department of Energy Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California-Berkeley, researchers have created a profiling technique that has the potential for detecting the very beginning of cancer at the cellular level. Based on the ability to monitor the O-linked protein glycosylation -- the attachment of sugars to proteins through an oxygen atom on the protein -- scientists can now create a profile and detect changes that might indicate cancer. The researchers are hoping that this ability will one day lead to a simple blood test that can diagnose the earliest stage of cancer in a patient.

Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention Disease Risk offers a free interactive online tool that can estimate your risk of cancer and provide you with personalized tips for cancer prevention. It is most accurate for people age 40 and over, although anyone can utilize the tool to determine their cancer risk. In addition, if you are a cancer survivor, it will not allow you to participate in the series of questions to determine your risk of developing cancer. So, if you want to take advantage of the service, you will have to answer no when asked if you have ever been diagnosed with cancer.

According to the website, the developers spent ten years collecting the latest scientific evidence on disease risk factors to create this easy-to-use tool. To find your risk for each cancer, first choose the cancer type and then proceed with the questionnaire. At the end it will rate your risk and make cancer prevention suggestions.