Cancer Study Technology announce collaboration with Hammersmith Hospital to develop high strength focused ultrasound for the treatment of cancer Cancer Study Technology , the oncology-focused development and commercialisation business owned by Cancer Study UK wholly, today announce they have entered into an contract with Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust to develop Phased Array High-Strength Focused Ultrasound for the treating tumor about-herpes-virus.html . HIFU therapy utilises ultrasound energy to heat and destroy tumour tissue whilst leaving surrounding healthy tissue intact. Compared with other cancer treatments, HIFU application gets the unique advantages of being noninvasive, with the capacity of precise tumour is definitely and targeting in conjunction with very few unwanted effects. HIFU therapy is applicable for treatment of a variety of cancers including pancreatic, bladder, prostate, kidney and main and secondary liver cancer and for both curative and palliative therapy. Related StoriesCrucial change in single DNA foundation predisposes children to aggressive type of cancerStudy shows uncommon HER2 missense mutations do not spread breasts cancer on the ownNew results reveal association between colorectal cancers and melanoma drug treatmentIn general, current HIFU applications are limited by treatment times of several hours duration, which is normally impractical for routine therapy. Phased Array HIFU has the potential to focus on larger volumes of tissue than can be currently treated with most existing HIFU technologies. This should bring about reduced treatment times significantly, making HIFU and economically viable clinically. Within the agreement, Malignancy Research UK will fund both advancement of a prototype Phased Array HIFU gadget and proof of concept studies to be carried out by Prof. Jeffrey Hand and Mr Paul Abel at Hammersmith Hospital. CRT shall business lead the commercialisation of the new technology in consultation with Hammersmith Hospital. This collaboration underpins the kind of research and development which will increase awareness and accelerate delivery of HIFU as meaningful therapy to numerous patients with serious illness.? and.
As an integral advisor to President Obama’s 2008 Presidential marketing campaign, Varmus was subsequently appointed Co-Chairman of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. He was previously President of the New York Memorial Sloan-Kettering Malignancy Center. Varmus includes a distinguished background in basic research on cancers treatment. However, this is paralleled by insufficient knowledge of mounting scientific evidence on cancer prevention. Two decades ago, he claimed, ‘You can’t perform experiments to discover what causes cancer–it’s no accessible problem, rather than the type of thing scientists can afford to do–everything you perform can’t be risky.’ In 1995, Varmus, then Director of the National Institutes of Health, struck the ‘reasonable pricing clause,’ avoiding exorbitant industry profiteering from the sale of medications, developed with tax payer money. Varmus also gave senior NCI staff free license to check with the cancer drug industry. In this connection, the 2008 edition of Charity Rating Guide & Watchdog Report detailed Dr. Varmus with a payment package around $2.7 million. This is the highest compensation of over 500 major nonprofit organizations ever monitored. As a history main recipient of NCI money for basic genetic study, Varmus warned that ‘fair pricing’ clauses, protecting against exorbitant sector profiteering from medicines developed with tax-payer dollars, were driving away personal industry. So he struck these from agreements between market and the NCI. As a consequence, Varmus eliminated any cost controls on cancer medications made at the tax-payer expenditure. Illustratively, using taxpayers’ money, NCI paid for the research and advancement of Taxol, an anticancer drug, produced by Bristol-Myers Squibb later. Following completion of medical trials, a pricey process in itself extremely, the public paid again for developing the drug’s manufacturing process. Once finished, NCI officials offered Bristol-Myers Squibb the distinctive right to sell Taxol at an inflationary price. As investigative journalist, Joel Bleifuss, warned in a 1995 In These right times article, ‘Bristol-Myers Squibb offers Taxol to the general public for $4.87 per milligram, which is a lot more than 20 moments what it costs to create.’ Taxol has been a blockbuster for Bristol-Myers, posting sales of over $3 billion since its acceptance in 1992, and accounting for approximately 40 % of the company’s sales. Taxol was not the only medication involved in such funding practices. Bristol-Myers Squibb now sells almost one-third of the around thirty-five cancer drugs available, often with extremely inflated profits, and often developed with taxpayer funds. In 1995, Varmus, a past major recipient of NCI funds for basic genetic analysis, decided that ‘reasonable prices’ clauses, avoiding profiteering from drugs developed with taxpayer dollars, were driving away private industry. Therefore he struck these from prices clauses. Taxol had not been an isolated example. Taxpayers have funded NCI’s analysis and development for over two-thirds of all cancer drugs now available. In a frank admission surprisingly, Samuel Broder, NCI Director from 1989 to 1995, mentioned the most obvious: ‘The NCI is becoming what quantities to a government pharmaceutical business.’ Nobel Laureate Leland Hartwell, President of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, endorsed Broder’s criticism. He further stressed that a lot of resources for cancer research are allocated to ‘promoting ineffective medications’ for terminal disease. In this connection, Memorial Sloan-Kettering’s Leonard Saltz approximated that the purchase price for fresh biotech drugs ‘has improved 500-fold in the last 10 years.’ Furthermore, the U.S. Spends five times a lot more than the U.K. On cancer chemotherapy per individual, although survival rates are very similar. Related StoriesNew results reveal association between colorectal malignancy and melanoma drug treatmentMeat-rich diet may boost kidney cancers riskNew RNA test of blood platelets can be used to detect location of cancerAs an expert in cancers treatment, Varmus appears unaware that almost 700 carcinogens, for some of which the public is periodically or regularly exposed, have been identified by independent scientists. He also seems to be unaware that the more malignancy is prevented the less there is to treat. June 15 On, 2009, a letter to Congressional leaders urging drastic reform of the Obama Cancer Plan to mandate prevention, besides urging the annual publication of a open public registry of carcinogens, was released by the five researchers listed below. This letter also outlined seven cancers, summarized their avoidable causes, and their raising incidence since 1975, based on 2005 NCI data: Malignant melanoma of your skin in adults provides increased by 168 percent because of the usage of sunscreens in childhood that neglect to block long wave ultraviolet light; Thyroid cancer tumor has increased by 124 percent due in large component to ionizing radiation; Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma has elevated by 76 percent due mainly to phenoxy herbicides; and phenylenediamine locks dyes; Testicular cancer has increased by 49 percent because of pesticides; hormonal substances in cosmetics and personal maintenance systems; and estrogen residues in meats; Childhood leukemia has improved by 55 percent because of ionizing radiation; domestic pesticides; nitrite preservatives in meats, hot dogs particularly; and parental exposures to occupational carcinogens; Ovary cancer for women over the age of 65 has elevated by 47 percent in African American women and 13 percent in Caucasian women due to genital use of talc powder; Breast cancers has increased by 17 percent due to a wide range of factors. These include: contraceptive pills; toxic hormonal ingredients in cosmetics and personal maintenance systems; diagnostic radiation; and routine premenopausal mammography, with a cumulative breast dose publicity of to about five rads over ten years up. However, and as a specialist in cancer treatment, Varmus is certainly unlikely to be aware of such scientific evidence, that was not recognized until relatively recently widely. Based on latest estimates by the National Institutes of Health, the full total costs of tumor are about $219 billion every year. The annual costs to taxpayers of diagnosis and treatment quantities to $89 billion; the annual costs of premature death are conservatively approximated at $112 billion; and the annual costs due to loss of productivity are conservatively approximated at $18 billion. The individual costs are of far greater magnitude surely. Much of these costs could be saved by cancer prevention.