Do Snail Facials Have Anti-Aging Benefits?

A Tokyo spa is offering $243 snail facials, but dermatologists say it probably won’t have lasting health benefits.

What the shell, right?

The treatment, called, “Celebrity Escargot Course,” promises to help heal damaged skin and promote beauty, Yoko Minami, a sales manager at a Ci:z.Labo spa,?told the Telegraph.

The newspaper’s reporter said she became the first person in Japan to try the facial in which three snails were placed on her cheeks and forehead and allowed to wander around her face, leaving mucus-y goo in their wake.

Have a skin question? Try our topic page.

“This clearly is not very scientifically done,” said dermatologist Dr. Stephen Mandy, who works in Miami Beach, Fla., noting that the snail facial therapy session involves a message, a mask and electrical pulse machines, making it difficult to tell which one is benefiting the client.?”It kind of reminds me of the fish pedicures.”

The goo is supposedly packed with “a beauty-boosting cocktail of proteins, antioxidants and hyaluronic acid,” according to the Telegraph.

But Mandy, a member of the American Academy of Dermatology, said there isn’t much proof it will work.

Read about a woman who was burned by her facial.

Hyaluronic acid, or hyaluronan, is a molecule found in humans that gives tissue its flexibility and promotes healing. Dermatologists use it as a filler to plump the skin and minimize the appearance of wrinkles.

Last month, researchers at the University of Rochester wrote that naked mole rats’ super-long hyaluronan molecule actually tells cells to stop reproducing, which is why they think naked mole rats don’t get cancer.

Read more about naked mole rats’ cancer-proof goo.

But it’s not clear how long the snail’s hyaluronan molecules are, said University of Rochester biology professor Vera Gorbunova, so she’s not sure they might work.

Even if it could work as a filler, it wouldn’t make it through the outer layer of the skin without an injection, fractional lasers, microdermabrasion or electrical gradients, Mandy said. Only fat-soluble molecules and lipids can make it through that outer barrier.

Dr. William Stebbins, a dermatology professor at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, said the snails might temporarily make skin look nice but, again, the hyaluronan would likely just sit on top of the skin.

“I’d be surprised if this has any lasting effect on skin health,” Stebbins said.

The salon said its snails were fed organic vegetables and kept clean, but Mandy said it’s possible their slime could trigger allergic reactions in unsuspecting customers.

So what can you do instead? Dermatologists said the best way to get great skin without an abrasive procedure is to moisturize and apply sunscreen.

Read the answers to 15 common sunscreen questions.

The snail facial is only available in Japan from Ci:z:Labo, which operates a clinic and makes beauty products in Japan, but is called called Dr. Ci:Labo in the United States.

Shima Becker, who works for the company’s U.S. office, said the company also sells a snail cream that is popular in Japan, but it is not available in the United States.

No one in the U.S. office was available to discuss the benefits of the snail facial or cream, she said.

(Credit: Yoshikazu Tsuno/AFP/Getty Images)

View the original article here

Benefits, Risks of Removing Ovaries

Should you have your ovaries removed if you are BRCA positive?

This is a question that every board-certified gynecologist is used to discussing with a patient who has recently undergone BRCA testing.? As with any such discussion, I feel it’s key to explain all the risks, benefits and alternatives.? That is to say: What are the risks of doing surgery and the risks of not?doing surgery? What are the benefits to doing surgery and the benefits of not doing surgery??In reality, this is a decision that a woman needs to make with her family and her physician, and it’s complicated.

Angelina Jolie’s Mastectomy: What You Should Know

For the average woman, the lifetime risk for ovarian cancer is 1.3 percent (compare to the lifetime risk for female breast cancer of 12 percent in an average woman).? It represents the most lethal cancer for women, although it is far from the most common.? Part of the reason this cancer is so deadly, and is often referred to as the “silent killer” of women, has to do with anatomy.

The ovaries, which produce sex hormones, are walnut-sized glands that sit free in the pelvic cavity, tethered to the sides of the pelvis.? When a cancer develops in the ovary, it can grow to a large size before producing significant signs or symptoms.? It can also “seed” the cancer throughout the pelvis and abdominal cavity because the ovaries are not wrapped in any covering that separates them from other organs.

Should You Get BRCA Gene Testing?

The most concerning symptoms of ovarian cancer are bloating, increased urination and pelvic pain/ pressure that occurs more than 50 percent of the time for a period of more than a few weeks. Other symptoms include early satiety, increasing abdominal girth and a change in weight or bowel habits.

Now the nitty gritty: What are the risks of the surgery to remove your ovaries?? Today, this is a surgery that is done laparoscopically (through 1 centimeter incisions in your abdomen) and typically takes less than one hour in skilled hands.? For women who are BRCA positive, the fallopian tubes are removed with the ovaries because they can develop the same cancer as the ovaries.? The uterus does not need to be removed, so the surgery is not called a hysterectomy but a bilateral salpingoophorectomy (or BSO).? Often, patients go home the same day or the day after surgery.

The risks are similar to any surgery and include bleeding, infection, damage to other nearby organs and those associated with general anesthesia.? Recent data has shown that women who have their ovaries removed for benign reasons have a slightly increased risk of cardiovascular issues.? Also, a woman having her ovaries removed will go through immediate surgical menopause, and the process may cause hot flashes, vaginal dryness and osteoporosis, among other associated low-estrogen-state side effects.? The risk of ovarian cancer following surgery does not drop to zero because cancer cells may have escaped before surgery occurred, and women can develop a variant called peritoneal carcinomatosis.

What about the risks of not having surgery?? With a BRCA1 mutation, a woman can have as high as a 50 percent increased risk of developing ovarian cancer, and that cancer tends to occur at a younger age than in women who develop the sporadic type of ovarian cancer.? Increased surveillance in women who choose watchful waiting include physical pelvic exams, pelvic sonograms and ovarian tumor marker blood tests.? But it is important to note that there is no generally accepted screening test for ovarian cancer, the way a mammogram (while not perfect) is an accepted screening test for breast cancer.

Now for the benefits of surgery. Women with a BRCA mutation who remove their ovaries and fallopian tubes have a significantly lower risk of developing ovarian cancer.? This risk drops far below that of the average woman.

The benefits of not having surgery is the avoidance of the above-mentioned risks that accompany this procedure.

Options for reducing risk of ovarian cancer include taking oral contraceptives or the birth-control pill, which has been shown to dramatically reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 60 percent in women who have taken the pill for three or more years.? There may be a similar protective effect with breast-feeding and full-term pregnancies because of the theory that the ovaries are spared the hormonal stimulation and damage to the ovarian cortex with all of these situations.? Diets high in fruits and vegetables have also been associated with a reduced risk of ovarian cancer.

The emotional toll of either option can be significant for a woman and her family.? Every woman feels differently about living with risk. Every woman is entitled to her opinion and decision.? My hope is for a BRCA-positive woman considering this surgery to discuss these issues with a?gynecologic?in addition to her general OB-GYN.? There is no such thing as minor surgery, even if it is a same-day procedure.? All aspects, the physical, psychological, financial and social, should be considered before a plan is made.? Understanding the risks, benefits and options/alternatives are at the foundation of any good decision-making process.

View the original article here

The Many Benefits Of Robot-Assisted Kidney Cancer Surgery Do Not Include Cost

Main Category: Urology / Nephrology
Also Included In: Cancer / Oncology;??Medical Devices / Diagnostics
Article Date: 09 May 2013 - 1:00 PDT Current ratings for:
The Many Benefits Of Robot-Assisted Kidney Cancer Surgery Do Not Include Cost

Robot-assisted surgery to remove kidney cancers has seen a rapid increase in use, and has both replaced and proven safer than laparoscopic procedures for the same purpose, according to a study by the Vattikuti Urology Institute at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit.

However, the study also shows that robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) - while resulting in fewer complications than both open (OPN) and laparoscopic (LPN) removal of cancerous kidney tissue - also involves more "excessive" hospital charges.

"Excessive hospital charges were significantly higher with robotic partial nephrectomy," says Khurshid R. Ghani, M.D., of Vattikuti Urology Institute and lead author of the study. "While we can report no cost-savings with the procedure - quite the opposite - the benefits are obvious."

"It is a safe operation that has rapidly replaced LPN as the most common minimally invasive approach for partial nephrectomy. It has shown superior results compared to open surgery, and was better than laparoscopy in every respect but cost," he adds

The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the American Urological Association in San Diego.

Dr. Ghani says data was mined from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), which includes inpatient discharge information from 1,044 U.S. hospitals.

Between October 2008 - when the NIS first included an identifier for robot-assisted procedures - and December 2010, the researchers found a total of 38,064 patients who underwent OPN, LPN or RPN to treat kidney cancers that had not metastasized.

Of the total, nearly 70 percent had open surgery, nearly 24 percent had robot-assisted surgery and a little more than 9 percent were treated laparoscopically.

Researchers also noted that while all three forms of kidney surgery had increased in 2010, robot-assisted partial nephrectomy soared by more than 45 percent, far overshadowing the other two types.

Complications were tracked during and after each procedure. The Henry Ford team found: Patients undergoing RPN were least likely to receive a blood transfusion, while those who had open surgery were most likely to need one. The same was true for developing complications after surgery or requiring a prolonged hospital stay. Only those undergoing RPN were less likely to develop complications during surgery.Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click 'references' tab above for source.
Visit our urology / nephrology section for the latest news on this subject. Funding source: Henry Ford Hospital
Henry Ford Health System Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

Henry Ford Health System. "The Many Benefits Of Robot-Assisted Kidney Cancer Surgery Do Not Include Cost." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 9 May. 2013. Web.
13 May. 2013. APA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.

'The Many Benefits Of Robot-Assisted Kidney Cancer Surgery Do Not Include Cost'

Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.

If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.

All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)

Contact Our News Editors

For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.

Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:

Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.

View the original article here

Weighing the Risks and Benefits of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene for Breast Cancer Prevention

Researchers have developed a tool that can help guide decisions about which drug—tamoxifen or raloxifene (EvistaR)—is the best choice for breast cancer prevention in high-risk postmenopausal women. These results were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.???

Drugs that block the effects of estrogen have been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer in women at high risk of the disease. Two drugs that have been approved for breast cancer risk reduction in certain groups of women are tamoxifen and raloxifene. Tamoxifen is approved for breast cancer risk reduction in women who are at high risk of the disease (including high-risk premenopausal women). Raloxifene—originally approved for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis—is approved for breast cancer risk reduction in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis or postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer.??

To help postmenopausal women and their healthcare providers evaluate the likely effect of each drug, researchers developed a benefit-risk index. In addition to considering the extent to which each drug reduced breast cancer risk, the researchers also assessed other health outcomes, such as bone fractures, blood clots, stroke, and endometrial (uterine) cancer.???

The researchers found that the risks and benefits of tamoxifen and raloxifene vary by a woman’s age, race/ethnicity, risk of breast cancer, and whether the woman has had a hysterectomy.????

The researchers write “By combining this information with information on clinical features and personal preferences, the health care provider and patient can make an informed decision.” The researchers provide tables to help specific subgroups of women evaluate the likely benefit (or harm) of each drug.?

Women who have a high risk of breast cancer as a result of their family or personal medical history may wish to talk with their doctor about ways to reduce their cancer risk.?

Reference: Freedman AN, Yu B, Gail MG et al. Benefit/risk assessment for breast cancer chemoprevention with raloxifene or tamoxifen for women age 50 years or older. Journal of Clinical Oncology. Early online publication May 2, 2011.?

View the original article here

T-DM1 Benefits Women With Advanced HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

Among women with advanced, previously treated, HER2-positive breast cancer, trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)-an investigational drug that combines Herceptin(r)?

(trastuzumab) and a chemotherapy drug-resulted in better progression-free survival than standard treatment. The results of this Phase III clinical trial were presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.?

Approximately 20-25% of breast cancers overexpress (make too much of) the HER2 protein. HER2-targeted therapies such as Herceptin have dramatically improved outcomes for women with HER2-positive breast cancer, but researchers continue to explore new approaches to treatment.?

T-DM1 links Herceptin with a chemotherapy drug (DM1). T-DM1 delivers Herceptin and DM1 directly to HER2-positive cells, and limits exposure of the rest of the body to the chemotherapy.?

To evaluate T-DM1 for the treatment of advanced, HER2-positive breast cancer, researchers conducted a Phase III clinical trial known as EMILIA. The study enrolled close to 1000 women with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer that had progressed (worsened) in spite of previous chemotherapy and Herceptin. Study participants were treated with either T-DM1 or a standard treatment. The standard treatment consisted of Xeloda(r) (capecitabine) plus?

Tykerb(r) (lapatinib). ?

*???? Survival without cancer progression was 9.6 months among women in the?

T-DM1 group and 6.4 months among women in the Xeloda and Tykerb group. ?

*???? Two-year overall survival was 65.4% among women in the T-DM1 group and?

47.5% among women in the Xeloda and Tykerb group. The survival analysis is still considered preliminary and another analysis is planned for later in the study, and will provide more definitive information about the effect of T-DM1 on overall survival.?

*???? Compared with women treated with Xeloda and Tykerb, women treated with?

T-DM1 were less likely to experience side effects such as diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome, and vomiting. The most common serious side effects of T-DM1 were low platelet counts and changes in liver function tests. ?

These results suggest that T-DM1 may be safe and effective for the treatment of advanced, previously treated, HER2-positive breast cancer. ?

View the original article here

Sequential Chemotherapy Benefits Node-positive Breast Cancer Patients

Women with operable node-positive breast cancer experienced a survival benefit from sequential administration of doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and TaxotereR (docetaxel). These findings were recently published in The New England Journal of Medicine.[1]

Effective treatment of node-positive breast cancer often involves both local and systemic therapy. Local therapy consists of surgery and/or radiation and is directed at removing or destroying cancer cells in or near the breast. Systemic therapy is directed at destroying cancer cells throughout the body, and may include chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and/or hormonal therapy.

Anthracycline and taxane chemotherapy drugs are commonly used in the treatment of breast cancer. To compare three different approaches to administering chemotherapy, researchers conducted a study known as the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-30 trial.

In this multicenter Phase III trial, 5,351 breast cancer patients with node-positive disease who had undergone total mastectomy or lumpectomy were randomized to receive eight cycles of treatment with sequential doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and Taxotere (ACT) over 24 weeks, concurrent TAC over 12 weeks, or a regimen of doxorubicin/Taxotere over 12 weeks.? In the concurrent TAC arm, all three drugs were administered together; in the sequential ACT arm, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide were administered followed by Taxotere. After a median follow-up of six years, disease-free survival and overall survival were improved in the sequential ACT arm.

Overall survival was 83% in the sequential ACT arm, 79% in the concurrent ACT arm, and 79% in the doxorubicin/Taxotere arm.Disease-free survival was 74% in the sequential ACT arm, 69% in the concurrent TAC arm, and 69% in the doxorubicin/Taxotere arm.

The researchers concluded that sequential administration of ACT provided a statistically significant 17% reduction in mortality compared with doxorubicin/Taxotere and a nonsignificant 14% reduction in mortality compared with the concurrent TAC arm. In addition, patients who experienced amenorrhea (absence of menstrual bleeding) for six months or more experienced an improved overall survival in all arms of the study. ?The clinical significance of this finding is uncertain, but it of great interest and will lead to further investigation.? Studies are ongoing that continue to evaluate strategies to improve treatment for node-positive breast cancer patients.

Reference:

[1] Swain SM, Jeong J-H, Geyer CE, et al. Longer therapy, Iatrogenic amenorrhea, and survival in early breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2010; 362:2053–65.

View the original article here