The post Is Diet Soda Killing Us? appeared first on Citizens Report.

Green tea’s long-standing reputation has led to coverage in health magazines and blogs, but research on the benefits of the beverage have been mixed.

Supporters assert green tea aids in weight loss, improves blood flow, lowers cholesterol, helps with cardiovascular health and even has a positive impact on cancer. It’s important to review the data to understand the specific reasons for incorporating green tea into your diet.

About Green Tea Benefits

Green tea contains flavonoids, polyphenols and antioxidants derived from plants. Among other ingredients, green tea has an active substance called epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG). EGCG is a catechin, which boosts the metabolism, stops cell damage and slows the development of diseases.

Systems in the body are interconnected. When something benefits the heart, it’s likely it will also benefit the brain and blood vessels. Green tea has been known to improve various bodily functions and processes, including:

• Weight loss
• Diabetes
• Cholesterol
• Brain Health
• Cardiovascular Health
• Cancer
• Relaxation

In the Data

Researchers have begun to examine green tea in an effort to provide clear-cut evidence about its benefits. The University of Maryland Medical Center, along with WebMD and others, have outlined a number of health claims associated with drinking green tea.

Weight Loss

One of the most popular claims associated with green tea is weight loss, though researchers have not come to a solid consensus. While some studies show EGCG can promote weight loss by boosting the metabolism, others show no significant link. However, green tea is a good option for individuals looking to cut sugar-laden soda consumption, which can lead to obesity.

For this reason, green tea is also regarded as a good addition to diabetes treatments. Catechins in green tea are believed to reduce blood sugar and keep levels stable. 

Cholesterol

Green tea contains antioxidants that raise good cholesterol while lowering bad cholesterol. The polyphenols work to stop the absorption of the negative cholesterol, helping the arteries to function better. The oxidation of bad cholesterol is blocked, helping to reduce levels in the blood.

The Archives of Internal Medicine published a study conducted in China that illustrated drinking green tea can reduce the risk of developing hypertension by 46 to 65 percent. Another study showed “men who drink green tea are more likely to have lower total cholesterol than those who do not drink green tea,” according to the University of Maryland Medical Center.

Brain Function

A study conducted by the University of Basel in Switzerland linked green tea benefits to better memory function. The researchers took MRIs of people who drank green tea and discovered their working-memory was improved. Green tea also slows the formation of Alzheimer’s disease by stopping plaques from forming in the brain.

“The MRI showed increased connectivity between the parietal and the frontal cortex of the brain,” according to researchers. “These neuronal findings correlated positively with improvement in task performance of the participants.”

Cardiovascular Health

The antioxidants in green tea show that it also helps the functioning of the cardiovascular system. The properties of green tea that improve blood pressure work to prevent coronary artery disease, heart failure and other cardiac issues.

In 2013, researchers reviewed a number of studies and confirmed the preventative benefits of green tea in the cardiovascular system. The studies, carried out over extended periods, included large sample groups to understand how tea affects people with different diet and lifestyles.

Studies show that the risk of heart disease is lowered when bad cholesterol is reduced. Researchers found that drinking three cups of tea per day decreases the risk of heart attack by 11 percent.

Cancer

Scientists have found evidence showing green tea can have a positive impact on skin, breast, lung, colon, esophageal, and bladder cancer. While green tea benefits should not be used as a singular treatment for cancer, it has been proven to help healthy cells grow stronger.

The polyphenols in green tea are believed to help prevent cancer, with a correlation between the fact that tea consumption is high while cancer rates are low in Asian countries. According to the National Cancer Institute, it “does not recommend for or against the use of tea to reduce the risk of any type of cancer.”

Relaxation

Because it allows you to slow down, drinking tea has a positive effect on stress. Green tea contains theanine, an amino acid that binds to GABA receptors, changes brain waves and calms the nervous system.

The theanine compound has been shown to reduce anxiety, lower blood pressure and improve sleep. Green tea contains the highest amount of theanine.

A Daily Routine

According to Harvard Women’s Health Watch, the best way to maximize the green tea benefits is by drinking three cups a day. Consuming tea multiple times a day will help the body to utilize its potent compounds.

Catechins are best absorbed when consumed fresh, after letting the tea steep for three to five minutes. Steer clear of decaffeinated, instant and bottled teas, which are less powerful. Be sure to prepare the tea yourself.

In some cases, an ingredient present in tea called tannin may affect nutrient absorption. Always drink tea between meals to maintain your body’s ability to absorb nutrients from fruits and vegetables, according to Harvard Women’s Health Watch.

Tea can impede the absorption of iron from fruits and vegetables. The addition of lemon or milk in the tea can help, too.

While green tea doesn’t provide a definite cure-all, research has shown it can offer a number of benefits with regular and proper consumption.

The post The Real Benefits of Drinking Green Tea appeared first on Citizens Report.

Nearly 50 years ago, researchers linked the ubiquitous healthcare product to ovarian cancer. Today, the majority of talcum powder users are African American women. By knowingly targeting a black female demographic, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) spread cancer to a disproportionate amount of people of color.

An Initial Settlement

Jacqueline Fox, a wife and mother, used talcum powder as a staple in her daily routine for more than 40 years. She used Baby Powder in her underwear and on her body, according to court documents.

In 2013, doctors diagnosed Fox with advanced ovarian cancer. She died two years later in Oct. 2015. Her family testified on her behalf, and a St. Louis jury ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $72 million in damages.

Baby Powder Cancer

The association between talcum powder and ovarian cancer was first discovered in the 1970s, and then confirmed again in the 1980s. Scientists found talcum particles embedded in ovarian tumors, leading to more than 20 epidemiological studies that linked talc products to an increased risk of ovarian cancer.

Court records show that J&J had been made aware of the studies and subsequent risk. The publication of the research caused a decrease in the number of white women purchasing the product, leading to a decrease in profits.

Negligent Marketing

Instead of choosing to issue a warning about the health risk, J&J marketed the product to African American women who would be more likely to use it based on myths about black women’s bodies.

According to Omise’eke Natasha Tinsley’s article, published in Time, J&J capitalized on the fact that African-American women douche and deodorize their genitals twice as much as white women.

“Why do black women work so hard to keep our vaginas from smelling like we ever bleed, orgasm, sweat or eat catfish?” she wrote.

“Johnson & Johnson and other companies are ready to profit from these myths of the excessive black vagina,” Tinsley added. “They’re willing to capitalize on our internalized misogynoir even if we die in the process.”

Legal Battles

Johnson’s Baby Powder has been on the market for more than 100 years, and thousands have developed ovarian cancer as a result. Scores of women are now taking action against the pharmaceutical juggernaut.

On May 2, 2016, J&J settled a lawsuit with another African American woman who developed ovarian cancer after using its talc-based products. The jury awarded Gloria Ristesund $5 million in damages and $50 million in punitive damages.

J&J is being sued in more than 1,200 suits, according to the Washington Post. The majority of lawsuits are condensed in St. Louis, with 1,000 in Missouri and 200 in New Jersey.

While J&J plans to appeal the ruling and claims their product is safe, women are coming forward to raise awareness about the dangers of talcum powder and getting compensation for their injuries.

The post Did Johnson and Johnson Market Carcinogenic Baby Powder To African American Women? appeared first on Citizens Report.

Jerry Woodell filed a legal complaint against the manufacturers of power morcellator devices for their refusal to address known safety concerns.

A North Carolina man named Jerry Woodell is taking legal action against makers of the power morcellator device that allegedly caused the death of his wife.

Woodell is seeking damages on behalf of his late partner Bethann, who developed cancer after undergoing a total laparoscopic hysterectomy procedure.

The Woodell Family’s Story

Jerry and Bethann Woodell.
Image: Ridge Funeral Home

In 2012, Bethann was diagnosed with uterine fibroids. For this painful but common condition, doctors recommended a hysterectomy.

In March of that same year, Bethann underwent a laparoscopic morcellation procedure to have the fibroids removed.

Less than six months after the surgery, Bethann began to experience unusual symptoms. She often felt fatigued and started to suffer from migraine headaches. She was admitted to the hospital, where doctors noticed that she had a growth in her pelvis.

Doctors originally thought the large mass was benign, but it was later discovered that Bethann had developed a high-grade cancer called leiomyosarcoma.

In an attempt to save her life, Bethann was exposed to intensive chemotherapy and underwent multiple surgeries. However, her cancer only continued to grow.

Despite a number of last-ditch treatments, Bethann passed away on Sept. 9.

Fighting The Potential Flaws Of Morcellation

Power morcellation can spread hidden cancer cells throughout the body.
Image: Contemporary OBGYN

On Oct. 22, Woodell filed a lawsuit against high-earning morcellator manufacturers. In his complaint, Woodell listed various injustices. He’s suing for product liability, wrongful death and personal injury.

The lawsuit alleges that the “spinning blades that shred, grind, and core tissue into smaller pieces” can leave behind fragments in the “abdomino-pelvic cavity, or attach to surrounding organs, and cancerous cells can travel to remote areas of the body.”

In his complaint, Woodell argues that device manufacturers were aware of the risks related to the spread of hidden cancer and refused to remedy the situation by altering the design.

“Long before [Bethann] underwent surgery in 2012, defendants knew or should have known that their laparoscopic power morcellators could cause occult malignant tissue fragments to be disseminated and implanted in the body, which, in turn, upstages any cancer present and significantly worsens a woman’s chance of survival,” according to the lawsuit.

Research shows that 1 in 350 women undergoing power morcellation procedures may have hidden cancer cells in their uterus. The FDA warns that if these women have surgery with a power morcellator, it “will spread the cancerous tissue within the abdomen and pelvis, significantly worsening the patient’s likelihood of long-term survival.”

If you developed cancer after having your uterine fibroids removed with a power morcellator, you might be entitled to compensation for this medical side effect.

Request a free, no-obligation case evaluation now to see if you qualify.

The post Man Files Suit Against Morcellator That Caused Wife’s Death appeared first on Citizens Report.

A couple comprised of two medical professionals has made it their mission to ban power morcellator surgery.

Cardiothoracic surgeon Dr. Hooman Noorchashm and anesthesiologist Dr. Amy Reed have experienced the dangers of power morcellation surgery firsthand.

After the procedure to remove her uterine fibroids spread undetected cancer in her body, Reed and her husband launched a campaign to ban the device once and for all.

The Birth of the Campaign

Power morcellator surgery can spread fragments of cancerous tissue, leading to a worsened prognosis.
Image: Contemporary OBGYN

Laparoscopic power morcellation is a medical procedure that is used to remove painful fibroids from the uterus. Through small incisions, the morcellator device breaks and clears fibroids embedded in uterine tissue.

In October 2013, doctors at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston removed Reed’s uterine fibroids with a power morcellator.  No one expected that a minimally invasive procedure could come with life-changing consequences.

As the device destroyed the fibroids, it spread hidden leiomyosarcoma cancer cells throughout Reed’s abdomen. Reed and her husband were outraged, and they began searching for answers.

The couple set out to discover how frequently undetected leiomyosarcoma was released and spread by power morcellation surgery. After consulting with doctors and other women who developed cancer as a side effect of surgery, the two took to the internet to start a Change.org petition that urged the FDA to put an end to the procedure.

“I basically used the same intensity I brought to work and focused it on this,” Noorchashm told ABC News. “What you’re seeing here is a large volume of time and non-stop sustained [work] in order to make a change.”

Reed and her husband were successful in altering the ways that doctors at Brigham and Women’s Hospital regulate power morcellator procedures, but the duo won’t stop until it has been banned altogether. The real goal is to save other women from an avoidable fate.

“We want the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology to change this ‘standard of care’ by ending the needless waste of life caused by spreading cancer with morcellation,” Noorchashm wrote on Change.org.

FDA Defines Risk Associated With Power Morcellators

Currently, there is no way for doctors to test if a mass in the uterus is a benign fibroid or a malignant uterine cancer.
Image: Medscape

Power morcellation surgery can cause pain and infections, but the most serious side effect is the possibility of developing uterine cancer. Although Reed and Noorchashm haven’t reached their ultimate goal of banning the surgery, the campaign has been successful in drawing attention to the issue.

The FDA has released figures that show 1 in 350 women are at risk of developing uterine cancer from power morcellation surgery. The regulatory agency is still looking into the procedure to determine what should be done to mediate this risk.

In the meantime, women are still suffering as a result of power morcellation surgery. Those who developed cancer after undergoing a uterine fibroid removal procedure with a power morcellator might be entitled to compensation. 

Complete a free, no obligation case evaluation now to see if you qualify.

The post Two Doctors Spearhead A Life-Saving Campaign Against Power Morcellators appeared first on Citizens Report.

The Government Accountability Office will inspect the Food and Drug Administration’s hasty approval of power morcellators.

Despite the fact that power morcellators are associated with minimally invasive surgery, Congress holds these controversial medical devices accountable for hundreds of cancer-related deaths.

After a multitude of dangers linked to power morcellators, the federal government is finally paying attention.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has launched an internal investigation to evaluate the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the widely used surgical instrument.

How Could Surgery Spread Cancer?

Power morcellators are often used to fibroids, also known as benign growths, in the uterus.
Image: Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

Many are inclined to believe that minimally invasive surgeries are safe, but that’s not always the case. Laparoscopic power morcellation procedures, which provide relief from uterine fibroids through small incisions, have extremely dangerous long-term side effects.

The devices treat uterine fibroids through two different kinds of procedures. Hysterectomies involve removing the uterus while a myomectomy focuses on eliminating the actual fibroids. A myomectomy is preferred for women wanting to have children. Less frequently, the devices are also used for renal nephrectomy or splenectomies.

Fibroids are painful mounds of tissue that cause heavy menstrual bleeding, extended periods and radiating pain. Fibroids are very common and can be removed by a medical professional.

During the power morcellation removal process, pieces of tissue are often left behind. The remaining tissue spreads throughout the body, forming undetected tumors that develop into cancer.

Women who underwent these procedures are increasingly being diagnosed with uterine cancer, causing the medical community to speculate on the safety of the devices. Since then, multiple studies have linked power morcellation to occult uterine cancer.

The Long-Awaited Investigation

The GAO will be evaluating the FDA’s 510(k) approval process and the time it took to add a warning label to power morcellators.
Image: Facebook

The devices, which are meant to come with few risks, have been used by medical professionals since 1991. As regulators begin to evaluate the devices, the truth will finally be uncovered.

The FDA issued a warning in April 2014 urging doctors to discontinue the use of power morcellators in their practices. The warning came after a study that unveiled the true number of women who developed cancer from power morcellation surgeries.

The results proved that 1 in every 350 women who had fibroids removed were at risk for uterine cancer. After six months, the FDA finally included a warning on the product’s labeling.

The investigation, which includes two major parts, was deemed necessary by twelve members of Congress. These lawmakers are determined to find out why the FDA waited months to warn the public about the dangerous side effects of power morcellators.

In addition, the investigation will evaluate the 510(k) approval process that brought the devices into the market with little speculation. The accelerated process, which limits the need for extensive pre and post-approval safety testing, may be responsible for the lack of awareness about the cancer-causing side effects.

Legal Support For Injured Patients

Patients who developed cancer from power morcellation deserve justice.
Image: ABC News

Federal investigators are set to start looking into the devices, but the issue remains largely unresolved until new regulations are enacted. Patients who underwent uterine fibroid surgery because they weren’t informed of the risks deserve justice now.

If you or a loved one developed cancer from a procedure that used power morcellation techniques, you are not alone. You are entitled to health-related compensation for problems caused by power morcellation procedures.

Click here for a free case evaluation to learn more about legal rights and remedies.

The post Federal Government Launches Investigation Into Power Morcellators appeared first on Citizens Report.

A new study shows that frequently eating red and processed meat can cause cancer in humans.

Americans are reeling from the recent negative news about bacon, a long-time food favorite.

A World Health Organization report illustrates the link between the consumption of bacon and cancer, in addition to outlining the carcinogenic characteristics of other processed meats.

Evaluating Red And Processed Meat

Red and processed meat has been linked to bowel cancer, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer and stomach cancer.
Image: Cuisine and Health

The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) released a report that associates red and processed meat with cancer. The findings are included in a Q&A fact sheet.

The information came after the WHO analyzed 800 observational studies that evaluated the amount of red meat consumed by different countries, ethnicities and diets.

Red meat includes unprocessed meat such as beef, veal, pork and lamb. Processed meat includes muscle meat that has undergone salting, curing, fermentation, smoking, or other treatment.

“People who eat a lot of these meats are at higher risk of bowel cancer than those who eat small amounts,” according to the NHS Choices website.

Meat has also been linked to pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer and stomach cancer. For men who love eating meat, be sure to consider taking a supplement that is good for prostate problems.

However, there is one piece of good news for meat lovers. Beef, lamb and pork can actually be included in a healthy diet if consumption is limited. Red meat is a good source of protein, vitamins and minerals such as iron and zinc if eaten sparingly.

Instead of cutting bacon out of your breakfast altogether, make sure you’re keeping track of how many pieces hit your plate. A few different ways to monitor your intake include switching to chicken or fish or only eating red meat on the weekend.

The World Health Organization Takes A Stance

Health professionals recommend limiting the intake of red and processed meat to reduce the risk of cancer.
Image: IB Times

In light of the recent evidence, it has been reported that the World Health Organisation will add bacon, sausages and other processed meats to the list of carcinogenic substances. The organization classifies red meat as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Bacon is now listed among cigarettes, alcohol and asbestos as a group one carcinogen. Evidence shows that processed meats are likely to cause bowel cancer, among other health problems.

But if eating a hamburger is just as bad as smoking a cigarette, the meat industry is going to have a serious problem. There’s no doubt that sales will drop if the WHO labels processed meat as a carcinogenic substance.

Betsy Booren, president of the North American Meat Institute, said that labeling red and processed meat as cancerous would cause problems throughout the meat industry that would take decades and billions of dollars to fix.

The post Regular Consumption Of Bacon Linked To Cancer appeared first on Citizens Report.

The American Cancer Society recently made changes to its mammogram and breast exam recommendations.

In 2015, there will be 231,840 new cases of invasive breast cancer and 40,290 deaths in the United States.

The American Cancer Society has revised its guidelines, recommending that women have fewer mammograms beginning at a later age. The group originally urged women to get a mammogram and a clinical breast exam every year after they turn 40.

The society now suggests a breast cancer screening every year from age 45 to 54. The women should then get cancer screenings every other year until it is no longer likely that they will live another 10 years.

Reasons For The Shift

Breast cancer is uncommon in women under the age of 45 and the risks decrease after menopause, which creates a target age group for testing.
Image: Safe Bee

The new guidelines were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, along with an editorial and an article on the benefits and risks of screening. Another article and editorial were also published in JAMA Oncology.

Women who don’t have a personal, family or genetic history are considered to have an average risk of developing breast cancer. The guidelines only apply to these women.

A clinical breast exam involves a lump inspection for women of all ages, regardless of if they have experienced symptoms or breast abnormalities. Many of these women do not need additional exams.

The American Cancer Society carefully reviews research data to update its screening guidelines, said Dr. Richard C. Wender, the chief cancer control officer. The last review was in 2003, while the current research began in 2013.

Regular mammography can reduce the risk of dying from breast cancer by about 20 percent, but breast cancer is less common in younger women. New evidence illustrates the flaws of mammography, such as false-positive results, overdiagnosis and unnecessary biopsies.

The new guidelines were based on a 2001 study that found 61 percent of women who had yearly mammograms starting at age 40 had at least one false-positive by the time they were 50. The JAMA Oncology article showed that this was cut to 42 percent when women were tested less frequently.

The recommendation attempts to weigh the risks for each age group. Because breast cancer is uncommon in women under 45, the recommended testing begins at that age and continues once a year as women get older.

The risk of developing breast cancer during the next five years is 0.6 percent in women ages 40 to 44, 0.9 percent from ages 45 to 49 and 1.1 percent from ages 50 to 54. But at age 55, the majority of women are finished with menopause and the risk stops increasing. In addition, tumors are not as aggressive and mammograms are easier to read.

The American Cancer Society made sure to not be too strict, staying open to each women’s preferences. Women from age 40 to 44 may still “have the opportunity” to receive tests if they desire. Mammograms should still be available for women age 55 and older.

A Continued Debate

Some argue that early and yearly mammograms were meant to counteract the fear of missing the presence of breast cancer.
Image: Market America

Many health professionals continue to encourage women to seek out breast exams as early and as frequently as possible. However, some groups suggest fewer check-ups. Doctors and patients are equally confused about how to interpret the information.

Dr. Nancy L. Keating, a professor of health care policy and medicine at Harvard and a co-author of the JAMA editorial, said the guidelines were headed in the right direction. While some doctors hope the new guidelines will help to end the confusion, others worry that they are no better than the last.

“I think it has the potential to create a lot of confusion amongst women and primary care providers,” said Dr. Therese B. Bevers, the medical director of the Cancer Prevention Center at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network suggests patients receive mammograms every year starting at age 40. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends tests every year or two from ages 40 to 49, and every year after that. It also recommends yearly clinical breast exams starting at age 19.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists  will be holding a conference in January to collaborate with the American Cancer Society and other groups to agree on the guidelines.

“This area is rapidly changing. In five to seven years, we’ll have more knowledge in this area that will let us be more personalized in our approach,” Dr. Kevin C. Oeffinger, the chairman of the cancer society subgroup that developed the guidelines.

The post A Recent Update To Mammogram Guidelines appeared first on Citizens Report.

Monsanto is currently being sued by two workers who developed cancer after being exposed to the herbicide chemical Roundup.

Monsanto is famous for its bad reputation, but it seems that the consequences of the company’s actions are finally catching up.

Two individuals exposed to Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup are suing the multinational agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation for causing their cancer.

Former Workers Taking Legal Action

Monsanto’s underhanded tactics have been widely protested. The lawsuits claim that Monsanto hid the dangerous effects of its herbicide Roundup. 
Image: Common Dreams

The lawsuits were seperately filed by a farmer and a horticultural assistant who both developed cancer after coming into contact with Monsanto’s herbicide.

On top of that, the plaintiffs claim that Monsanto attempted to cover up the risks of working with the Roundup chemical in order to trick regulators into approving its use.

Enrique Rubio is a 58-year-old farm worker who labored in California, Texas and Oregon. He toiled cucumbers, onions and other vegetable crops. Rubio was given the task of spraying fields with Roundup and other pesticides.

He was diagnosed with bone cancer in 1995. On Sept. 22, he filed for legal action in a U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.

Judi Fitzgerald is a 64-year-old horticultural assistant who worked at a horticultural products company in the ’90s where she was exposed to Roundup.

Fitzgerald filed a New York suit on the same day as Rubio. She was diagnosed with leukemia in 2012.

A Predicted Increase In Lawsuits

Roundup, originally classified as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” is now thought to be “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
Image: The Ecologist

Roundup is a weed killer with an active chemical called glyphosate. The World Health Organization (WHO) recently categorized glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Now that the WHO has publicly outed the cancer-causing effects of Roundup, attorneys expect more people to come forward and take legal action against Monsanto.

“I believe there will be hundreds of lawsuits brought over time,” attorney Robin Greenwald said.

According to Charla Lord, a Monsanto spokeswoman, Glyphosate is safe if used as intended.

“Decades of experience within agriculture and regulatory reviews using the most extensive worldwide human health databases ever compiled on an agricultural product contradict the claims in the suit which will be vigorously defended,” she said.

Attorneys will argue that Roundup is “unreasonably dangerous” to consumers and that the company willingly hid or ignored the carcinogenic risks associated with glyphosate.

According to the lawsuits, the Environmental Protection Agency changed glyphosate from “possibly carcinogenic to humans” to “evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans” after being pressured by Monsanto.

However, the WHO cites studies that link glyphosate to cancer despite disagreements from Monsanto. Lawyers will continue to support plaintiffs in class-action lawsuits for the cancer-causing effects of glyphosate.

The post Monsanto Sued For Cancer-Causing Herbicide appeared first on Citizens Report.

A new study shows women who are diagnosed with cancer while pregnant may be able to receive treatment without harming the fetus.

Cancer treatments are taxing on the body, and it seems like it would be nearly impossible to grow and nurture a life while receiving weekly doses of chemotherapy.

Deciding how to deal with a cancer diagnosis while pregnant is one of the most difficult choices a woman has to make. Medical professionals are equally as perplexed. Advice varies, with some doctors suggesting early delivery and others recommending termination.

A new study shows that undergoing cancer treatment while pregnant may not harm the fetus.

The Study

Researchers conducted a neurological test on 129 children and found that they had normal cognitive and cardiac functioning.
Image: River Valley Pediatrics

The study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine, was presented to the European Cancer Congress in Vienna. It included 129 children who had mothers that underwent cancer treatment while pregnant.

The children were exposed to chemotherapy, radiation or surgery during the last two trimesters.

After birth, the researchers conducted a neurological test, called the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, at 18 months and 3 years of age. The exam showed the children had normal cognitive and cardiac functioning.

“We didn’t find any difference in cardiac functioning or cognitive function between children exposed to cancer treatment in utero and the control group,” said Dr. Frédéric Amant, the lead author of the study and a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium.

“To some extent, it’s surprising because cancer treatment is quite toxic and we know most chemotherapy drugs cross the placenta,” he said.

The mothers didn’t go through chemotherapy during the first trimester because a heightened risk of birth defects is associated with that period. Mental development is less likely to be affected by cancer treatments later in pregnancy.

The mothers included in the study had various types of cancer. A vast majority were diagnosed with breast cancer, whereas 16 percent had blood cancers.

“The main message of this study is that termination of pregnancy is not necessarily warranted, and that early preterm delivery to be able to do cancer treatment isn’t warranted, either,” said Dr. Elyce H. Cardonick, a maternal-fetal specialist at Cooper Medical School of Rowan University.

The Problem of Prematurity

Cancer treatment did not affect the newborns, but prematurity was associated with decreased cognitive abilities.
Image: Parent Map

For mothers with cancer, more than 60 percent of children were born earlier than 37 weeks. In comparison, only 8 percent of healthy mothers have premature births.

The majority of mothers had induced labor in order to continue cancer treatment, but Dr. Amant wants to stop this practice. He hopes the study’s findings will help persuade doctors to allow full-term births.

The premature babies were matched with a control group of children of the same age born to mothers without cancer. While the amount of chemotherapy sessions did not impact the cognitive functioning of children, the degree of prematurity did.

Prematurity was associated with lessened cognitive abilities in both study groups. The authors took factors like parental education into account, but still found that more time spent in the womb added two more points on the Bayley test.

“Prematurity is a problem for these children, but chemotherapy is not,” Dr. Amant said.

Chemotherapy treatments use a chemical called doxorubicin, which has been known cause damage to adult hearts in specific doses. The researchers studied the hearts of 47 of the 129 children in the study using electrocardiography and echocardiography.

Researchers found no difference in the size of the heart chambers or the muscle’s ability to pump blood.

At age 3, “the cardiac development of these babies was pretty normal,” said Dr. Michael F. Greene, the chief of obstetrics at Massachusetts General Hospital.

Limitations Of The Study

Although researchers would like the study to be met with cautious optimism, they still hope that it will influence medical decisions about cancer treatment and pregnancy. 
Image: Atlanta Black Star

Dr. Greene expressed cautious optimism about the results, but assures pregnant women undergoing cancer treatment that “it’s not inevitably a horrible problem for their offspring.”

However, the study did not include all chemotherapy drugs and left out targeted anticancer drugs. The study is limited by the rarity of women who receive a cancer diagnosis while pregnant, which only happens in one of every 1,000 pregnancies.

“This paper has very detailed standardized follow-up on children,” Dr. Cardonick said, adding that the multi-center study would provide valuable information to physicians and patients.

Dr. Cardonick, who tracks cancer and pregnancy, has heard of a couple of “sad cases” where “a patient was denied cancer treatment during pregnancy, and died soon after the baby was born, because there was no confidence that cancer treatment during pregnancy would be tolerated by the fetus.”

It is hard to say whether doctors will take the study results into account, but hopefully it will be able to allow the women facing the decision to rest easier.

The post The Effects Of Undergoing Cancer Treatment While Pregnant appeared first on Citizens Report.