Just before my treatment for breast cancer began and during a consultation about what chemotherapy drugs I was about to receive, my oncologist stepped away from my exam room to check on something. When she returned to the room, she told me that she was determining whether or not I qualified for a clinical trial. I had no idea what this meant at the time. All I knew was what she told me -- that my prognosis was too good at that moment to qualify for anything currently under study. I did not fit a profile for anything. I was not a candidate for a clinical trial.

I now know that clinical trials are a critical component of research -- they validate a drug's success or weakness and they provide hope for many who may be at the end of their treatment rope and need something new to consider. A clinical trial is a comparison of standard treatments to newer treatments in an effort to discover better methods for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. Doctors, scientists, and other health professionals conduct these tests according to strict guidelines set by the Food and Drug Administration -- which establishes mandatory guidelines to ensure the maximum safety of the patient.

Clinical trials rely on volunteers -- and sadly, there is a current shortage of patients willing to participate in trials. Experts say that, for the past few decades, just five to 10 percent of all cancer patients in the United States have joined a clinical trial. There is an urgent need -- because the demand for willing, eligible participants far exceeds the supply. Some experts are even recommending that the small pool of candidates that does exist be rationed to only the most important cancer studies -- leaving other studies with no hope for completion. There is no good solution in sight. But the reasons for the shortage are becoming apparent. It's not that patients are unwilling to join. It's that they are unaware, uninformed, not even sure this opportunity is possible -- because doctors are not suggesting trials to their patients. Treatment on a protocol is more demanding for doctors than routine medical care. And it costs doctors to submit to a trial. And trials burden doctors with regulations and paperwork. And some doctors worry about litigation if something experimental goes wrong. So they often don't approach the topic -- and the result is that a wonder drug may sit in a dark freezer because there are not enough people to test it. This potential wonder drug may never show promise, may never save a life, may never see the light of day.

So I guess my oncologist was ahead of the game in this matter -- she compared my diagnosis and prognosis with the needs of all available clinical trials and found that there was not match. Had she not done this, I would have never thought to ask about the possibility -- which is exactly what patients should do instead of waiting for a doctor to make the suggestion. Because it may never happen.

For more information on clinical trials, please visit the Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups.

Lung cancer affects more than 80,000 American women annually. More than 70,000 of these cases are fatal. Thirty thousand more women die from lung cancer than from breast cancer. And lung cancer claims more lives of more women than breast, uterine, and ovarian cancers combined. Yet a new study reveals that American women are uninformed about statistics like these -- and about the threats posed by lung cancer.

A 2006 survey of 500 women provides a snapshot of women's attitudes and beliefs about lung cancer -- and the overwhelming conclusion is that there is a widespread lack of awareness about the nation's top cancer killer. And here's the lowdown:

• Only 41 percent of women know that lung cancer is the leading cancer killer in the United States.
• Only 8 percent of women know that exposure to radon gas is the second leading cause of lung cancer -- 60 percent instead believe that second-hand smoke is the culprit.
• Only 36 percent of women know lung cancer kills more women than breast cancer.
• Only 41 percent of women know that one in 17 women will develop lung cancer sometime in her life.
• Only 4 percent of women know that women typically fare better than men following lung cancer treatment.
• And 25 percent of women mistakingly believe that there is a standard screening test to detect lung cancer in its early stages. Currently, there is not one.

Lung cancer is often believed to be a man's disease. But it is not. It affects tens of thousands of women too. And now I -- as one of the previously uninformed women -- know better.

Despite tensions between the United States and the Middle East, Laura Bush announced Monday a plan to raise breast cancer awareness in the Middle East -- first with partnerships with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia and later with Morocco and Jordan. Joining forces also with the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and Johns Hopkins Medical Center, the First Lady outlined a plan that will allow governments, hospitals, researchers, and survivors to work globally to defeat breast cancer. Campaigns specific to each country will target research, training, and community-outreach programs. The reason for this partnership -- to raise awareness in countries where women are too embarrassed or too uninformed to seek treatment -- stems from compassion and human decency and a desire to form diplomatic friendships too. Laura Bush, whose own mother is a breast cancer survivor, shared that the tragedy of losing a loved one to breast cancer -- and the joy of watching a loved one survive this same disease -- is felt universally. Breast cancer affects all women in all countries. Borders make no difference in this matter. And helping save lives is the right thing to do.