Fundraising for dementia research: a million for a million
July 2, 2009 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
When you think about companies giving to charity, you wouldn’t think of a budget airline company as being among the generous, right? Wrong! easyJet, one of Europe’s budget carrier has just announced its pledge of raising one million pounds for charity. The beneficiary of this corporate generosity is no other than the Alzheimer’s Society of the UK. The fund raising drive is called “a million for a million”, a million pounds for a million people who will suffer from some form of dementia in the next ten years.
According to Andy Harrison, CEO of easyJet
Hre’s how the fundraising will work: Passengers on board all easyJet flights will be asked to donate their spare or excess foreign currency to dementia research. A collection bag will probably be given out to each passenger and collected just before landing. In addition, the Alzheimer’s Society will receive a percentage of the sales of scratch cards sold on easyJet flights. Collection starts this summer.
I think this is a splendid idea to raise money for charity. Those of you who are travelling international would know the hassle of different currencies and all those small change that clutters your purse. This is a great way of getting rid of them. And if you have more to spare, you can give more, too.
Neil Hunt, CEO of Azheimer’s Society UK says
Thank you and happy landings.
Photo credit: stock.xchng
Mobile phone and cancer Part II: Those who say “Yes”
June 22, 2009 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under CANCER, Featured
Last week, I presented one side of the phone-cancer issue, basically the side that says “No, mobile phone use does not cause cancer.” This week, I am presenting the other side of the coin. But remember, this is not about taking sides. It’s about presenting the whole picture.
Because of the involvement of industry groups in funding the INTERPHONE studies, it is not surprising that many are sceptical of the results that those studies reported. Some independent research studies have also been conducted to investigate the link between RF radiaton - cancer which reported otherwise.
What the research studies say
- The BioInitiative Working Group is an international working group consisting of scientists and health experts who looked at the published and unpublished evidence on the health effects of ELF. The group came up with the BioInitiative Report that “raises serious concerns about the safety of existing public limits that regulate how much EMF is allowable from power lines, cell phones, and many other sources of EMF exposure in daily life.” The group reported that there is enough evidence showing that ELF can increase the risk for breast cancer, childhood leukaemia, and possibly other cancers. However, the group’s study looked mainly at ELF, the radiation emitted by power lines, but not specifically on RF radiation emitted by mobile phones.
- A group of Swedish researchers led by Lennart Hardell of the Örebro University looked at the INTERPHONE data and came up with a different conclusion compared to their colleagues. They found an increased risk for brain tumors among 2,162 users of cordless handsets and cellular phones.
Another group of Swedish researchers found an association between acoustic neuroma and long-term mobile phone use (10 years or more) but not on the short-term (less than 10 years).- In 2008, Israeli researchers found a “positive dose-response trend” between cell phone use and tumors in the parotid gland in a study of 1,266 participants.
- A 2008 study by Finnish researchers was the first to report that RF radiation can cause changes at the molecular level by altering protein expression in human skin cells.
What some health experts say
- The International Agency for Cancer Research classifies ELF as a possible human carcinogen.
- In July 2008, Dr. Ronald Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, issued a memo warning the institute’s employees against the use of mobile phone, especially among children. His concerns was based on early unpublished data and the fact that “it takes too long to get answers from science…[people] should take action now - especially when it comes to children.
- The Australian neurosurgeon Dr. Charlie Tia specialized in pediatric neurosurgery states that “apendamoma’s seem to be increasing in incidence in children…I think the EMR, mobile phones, and other electrical appliances may have something to do with what we are seeing.”
- The complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) guru Dr. Ed Mercola is a strong believer of the adverse health effects of mobile telephony and recently warned against the popular use of mobile phones, particularly the iphone. For this reason, he is manufacturing his own “blue tube headset” that supposedly minimizes the user’s exposure to RF radiation through “its air-filled wireless tube that reduces the emission of radiation.”
- The group at www.cell-phone-dangers.com features doctors and health experts who speak out about their concerns on mobile phone use.
Coming up next in this series:
- Why is a clear cut answer to the mobile phone - cancer question hard to find?
- What are the other health effects of mobile telephony?
- How to use your phone properly to minimize radiation exposure
Photo credit: stock.xchng
What about cancer resistance?
February 23, 2009 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under CANCER
Two people. One smokes, the other a lifetime non-smoker. So why is it that the non-smoker develops lung cancer and the smoker doesn’t? Is it pure luck? Is it simply one of life’s ironies? Or is there a scientific explanation behind it?
The majority of research studies in oncology investigate what makes people susceptible to cancer. Most researchers look at susceptibility genes and risk factors. This is understandable because millions of people worldwide have cancer. Cancer is a major cause of mortality and the rates are rising: cancer is predicted to be the number one killer globally in the coming decade.
But what about the millions who do not get cancer? For every cancer victim, there are two people who escape the disease. Even some of the heaviest smokers don’t get lung cancer while the most health-conscious people do fall prey to this cruel disease. What do these cancer-free people have that the others don’t? Is this a matter of chance, or are there cancer-resistant genotypes?
Swedish professor George Klein is busy with a field of research in oncology that is neglected, almost overlooked - cancer resistance. He recently published a paper called “Toward a genetics of cancer resistance” in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
In the course of his research, Klein has hypothesized five protective mechanisms that may protect people from cancer, namely:
- Immunological mechanisms. Individuals may differ in terms of immune system efficiency.
- Genetic mechanisms. Some people have more effective DNA repairing system than others. Those with specific DNA repair deficiency can develop certain types of cancer.
- Epigenetic mechanisms. Genetics involve the DNA itself while epigenetics involve gene expression. Different gene expressions can have different results.
- Intracellular mechanisms. This involves apoptosis or cell death, a defense mechanism within the cell itself. Apoptosis is triggered in some people but not in others.
- Intercellular mechanisms. The researchers believe there is a defense mechanism that makes cells watch their neighbors and sound the alarm when precancerous conditions are detected.
Klein is urging researchers to look into cancer resistance as well and not only into cancer susceptibility.
Photo credit: stock.xchng
Antioxidant supplements: do they work?
December 16, 2008 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under HEART AND STROKE
In an era when people are becoming more and more health-conscious, vitamin pills are becoming more and more popular. Millions of people are swallowing vitamin supplement pills everyday, believing that these medications are beneficial to their health, especially their hearts. These supplements range from vitamin cocktails to omega-3’s to antioxidants. These “power pills” or “health supplements” are supposed to keep our body strong and healthy and prevent a wide range of diseases, from heart disease to high blood pressure, from aging to cancer.
In this resource post, I am reviewing the recent updates on vitamin and antioxidant supplementation and answer the question: Do we really need them?
Vitamin supplements
A 2007 meta-analysis by Bjelakovic and colleagues on vitamin supplements came up with surprising results: not only are the benefits of antioxidants suspect, they can actually increase overall mortality. A group of researchers analysed data from clinical trials which used supplementation of the antioxidants vitamin A, vitamin E, beta-carotene, vitamin C and selenium used as stand-alone supplements or in combination in people with a variety of health conditions. The results showed that most of these vitamins actually do not have a discernable health benefits to those who took them. Furthermore, vitamins A and E and beta-carotene (but not Vitamin C) and selenium can actually result in increased mortality.
Based on their results, Bjelakovic and colleagues discourages the use of synthetic vitamin supplements. Instead, we should go for the natural sources of these vitamins - fresh fruits, vegetables and nuts.
In a more recent review paper, the same researchers evaluated several clinical trials involving over 200,000 people which compared the efficacy of antioxidant supplements versus placebo in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular gastrointestinal, neurological, ocular, dermatological, rheumatoid, renal, and endocrinological disorders
The authors reported that:
Folic acid and vitamin B
It has always been a popular belief that folic acid and vitamin B can protect us from the monsters which are heart disease and stroke by reducing the levels of the amino acid homocysteine in the blood. Homocysteine is believed to be a biomarker for cardiovascular diseases. Unfortunately, the results of this long-term trial seem to cast doubts on the homocysteine theory.
These women were “blinded” - that means they didn´t know whether they were taking vitamins or placebo - and followed-up for more than 7 years. The results of the trial were a bit disappointing. 14.9% of those who took the vitamin pills had at least 1 cardiovascular event, such as a heart attack or stroke. 14.3% of those who were given placebo also had at least 1 cardiovascular event within the same period of time. The difference between the 2 groups was not significant.
The study results had important implications, namely:
- The homocysteine - cardiovascular link needs to be re-examined; homocysteine may not be an appropriate biomarker for cardiovascular disease.
- Taking folic acid does not prevent cardiovascular disease.
- Flour in the US and some other countries is fortified with folic acid. Additional supplementation is not necessary except for pregnant women.
Pregnant women are routinely advised to take folic acid supplement to prevent birth defects that can affect the baby´s nervous system, leading to the condition of spina bifida. Natural sources of folic acid are green leafy vegetables and citrus fruits.
This trial evaluated the effects of vitamin D and calcium supplements on blood pressure and hypertension risk of healthy women. The study involved 36,252 postmenopausal women who were followed up for about 7 years. The results show that
Selenium and Vitamin E
A more recent development comes from the large-scale study called SELECT (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial) which assessed whether
selenium and vitamin E supplements can prevent prostate cancer as suggested by earlier studies. Recently, about 5 years into the study, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) decided to stop the study due to lack of preventive effects as well as”concerning” findings that showed a slight increase risk of developing prostate cancer among those who took vitamin E and diabetes among those who took selenium. Even though the “slight increased risks” observed in this study of 35,000 healthy men were not statistically significant, they are risks that couldn’t be ignored.
What the experts have to say
The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (AHA) do not recommend the use of antioxidant supplements as specified in 2002 Guideline Update in for the management of chronic angina. In 2005, the AHA science advisory board issued that statement that “scientific data do not justify the use of antioxidant vitamin supplements” in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases.
Conclusion
V
itamins and minerals are essential for our health. But we have to be careful about our sources of essential nutrients. In spite of all the claims of these supplements, they are no substitute to the natural fresh fruits, vegetables, and nuts as well as a healthy lifestyle.
Photo credit: stock.xchng
News from the cancer side December 5, 2008
December 5, 2008 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under CANCER
Your cancer news for this weekend is here. happy reading!
News from the technology side
Caltech scientists develop ‘barcode chip’ for cheap, fast blood tests
This device promises to revolutionize diagnostic medical testing. In just 10 minutes, the chip can read froma drop of blood the presence and concentrations of proteins which are used as biomarkers pf certain diseases - including cancer and cardiovascular disease. The Integrated Blood-Barcode Chip (IBBC) has been developed by researchers at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech). Traditional lab tests are time consuming, require large volumes of blood, and are costly. This chip definitely is a speedier and cheaper alternative. “We wanted to dramatically lower the cost of such measurements, by orders of magnitude,” according to lead researcher James Heath. “We measure many proteins for the cost of one. Furthermore, if you reduce the time it takes for the test, the test is cheaper, since time is money. With our barcode chip, we can go from pinprick to results in less than 10 minutes.” Good new for the health care industry, good news for the patients.
News from the funding agencies
UK charity’s £1.5 billion strategy includes plans for 20 new research centres.
A boost for cancer research in the UK! The country’s leading not-for-profit charity group Cancer Research UK has some big plans. It announced that it will fund more research on pancreatic, lung and oesophageal cancers and open several new research centers. The plans include spending £1.5 billion (US$2.3 billion) on cancer research over the next five years. In addition to pure basic research, it plans to step up work on radiotherapy and surgery.
The charity is also setting 20 new research centers to step up on early detection of cancer, an area considered to be weak in the UK.
News from the health care side
“Stem Cell Tourists” go abroad for unproven treatments
The latest trend in medical tourism is attracting people with uncurable diseases with promises of stem cell cures in other countries. Unfortunately, the so-called “stem cell tourists” usually end up disappointed, even worse, in danger. This trend is causing concerns and has led International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) to issue guidelines on the use of stem cell therapy. “U.S. experts fear that some foreign doctors are rashly treating patients without waiting for clinical trials to validate the safety of their procedures“, National geographic reports.
News from the clinical trials side
Fox Chase Cancer Center physician leads new international treatment study for ovarian cancer
This new, large scale study will “compare the overall effectiveness of the standard treatment (a combination of paclitaxel and carboplatin) for ovarian cancer with recently developed chemotherapy combinations incorporating newer drugs.” It is now open in the US and is planned to include participants in other countries including Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. The drugs to be studies are topotecan, gemcitabine, and liposomal doxorubicin.
Photo credit: Stock.xchng
Knowing your heart and stroke drugs: statins
November 17, 2008 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under HEART AND STROKE
Resource post for November
Background
Statin drugs or HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors play a very important role in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. They are the first line treatment against high cholesterol levels. Statins have anti-inflammatory properties and interfere with the production of cholesterol thus slowing down the formation of plaques on the arterial walls.
According to the US FDA, statin medications
- work in the liver to prevent formation of cholesterol
- are effective in lowering bad cholesterol levels and raising good cholesterol
- are not recommended for pregnant patients or those with active or chronic liver disease
- can cause serious muscle problems
Statins are also said to be the bestselling drugs of all times, raking in billions of dollar in sales every year. Currently available statin drugs are:
- Lovastatin (Mevacor, Altoprev)
- Pravastatin (Pravachol)
- Simvastatin (Zocor)
- Fluvastatin (Lescol)
- Atorvastatin (Lipitor)
- Rosuvastatin (Crestor)
Research studies
Recent studies indicate that statins may play a major role in therapeutic areas outside cardiovascular medicine, thus may earn the title of “the aspirin of the 21st century“. Some of these studies are summarized below.
Statins associated with lower risk of death from pneumonia
Pneumonia is a major cause of mortality worldwide, even in developed countries. It has been reported that the incidence of pneumonia is increasing and hospitalization rates in the US and Europe have increased by 20 to 50% during the last 10 years. About 10 to 15% of pneumonia cases result in death.
Does statin use lower mortality rates due to pneumonia? Danish researchers report in the October 27 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine that “individuals who take cholesterol-lowering statins before being hospitalized with pneumonia appear less likely to die within 90 days afterward.”
The researchers studied data from 29,900 patients hospitalized with pneumonia between 1997 and 2004. 4.6% of these patients (1,371) were taking statins before and during hospitalization as anticholesterol treatment.
Death rates within 30 days among statin users were much lower (10.3%) were much lower than non-statin users (15.7%). The same trend was observed after 90 days, with 16.8% mortality rates among statin users compared to 22.4% among non-users.
The mechanism behind this effect of statins is not clear but the authors theorize that
Statins block 1 cause of pregnancy loss in mice
What does statin have to do with pregnancy? Researchers at Cornell University observed that statins can actually prevent antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), an inflammatory condition that causes serious complications in pregnancy ranging from spontaneous abortion, fetal growth problems and even fetal death. The researchers demonstrated this beneficial effect of statins in laboratory mice.
Statins may protect against memory loss
Statins seem to also have protective properties against dementia and other neurodegenerative diseases. This is according to a study by researchers at the University of Michigan School of Public Health. The researchers observed that “if a person takes statins over a course of about 5-7 years, it reduces the risk of dementia by half.” The study studied tracked 1674 older Mexican-Americans did not have dementia for 5 years. Within the follow up period, 130 study participants developed some form of dementia or cognitive impairment. The incidence of dementia was lower among the 452 participants who took statins at some point in the study. This is an interesting development in view of stories about the popular statin drug Lipitor causing memory losses.
Statins lower blood marker for prostate cancer
Men who are taking statins to lower their cholesterol levels have lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA). PSA is a known biomarker for cancer risk. The PSA reduction seems to be related to statin use in a dose-dependent manner. The study followed up 1214 men who were on statins between 1990 and 2006 and monitored their PSA levels. Whether the effect of statins on the PSA levels translates into anticancer properties is not yet clear.
Are statins beneficial or harmful in multiple sclerosis?
A previous study in animals has shown that some statins may be beneficial against multiple sclerosis when combined with other drugs. This was demonstrated by University of California researchers in mice. In another study, Phoenix researchers showed that simvastatin may have some anti-inflammatory effect that counteracts inflammatory components of multiple sclerosis. However, another study indicates that certain doses of stains combined with beta interferon may actually increase the clinical disease activity in patients with multiple sclerosis. “Caution is [therefore] suggested in administering this combination.” The latter study was based on data of 26 study participants.
Statins lower risk of clots in cancer patients
Researchers at the Albert Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia observed that cancer patients taking statins have lower incidence of blood clots than non-users. Thus, statins “may have a future in preventing blood clots in patients with breast, lung, colon and other solid-organ cancers.”
Caveat
The abovementioned studies show that there are other potential uses of statins aside from lowering cholesterol levels. However, all these results are preliminary. Further and larger studies are needed to further explore these beneficial effects as well as the risks that may be involved. Many people will 
claim that most of the positive reports about statins are propaganda from the pharmaceutical companies. Conspiracy theories abound. However, if statins can provide health benefits beyond cardiovascular medicine, who are we to say no?
We also have to be aware that like all drugs, statins come with side effects. Most side effects are mild but some can be serious. Myopathy is a potential fatal denegerative disease of the muscles possibly linked to statin use.
Photo credit: stock.xchng
Cancer is the most studied disease
November 5, 2008 by Raquel Billiones
Filed under CANCER
It is good news for oncology, bad news for other therapeutic areas - cancer is currently the most studied disease. This is based on the number of studies registered at ClinicalTrials.gov during the last two years, according to heartwire.
The review entitled “Trends in disease focus of drug development” and published in the August issue of Nature, examined
“trends in industry-sponsored phase 2-4 interventional studies registered with the US-based clinical-trials registry between October 2005 and September 2007.” The results show that oncology ranked first in terms of the number of registered clinical trials.
Breast cancer and lung cancer were especially popular topics of study, probably because they are the most prevalent of all types of cancer. However, colorectal and prostate cancer studies were also many.
This is a blow to the field of cardiology which only ranked 3rd (after neurodegenerative disoders), used to be favorite study subject. In fact, many pharmaceutical companies are shifting their attention to oncology, leaving behind cardiovascular medicine as a low priority therapeutic area, inspite of the anti-cholesterol blockbuster drugs that brought in billions of dollars of revenues. One example is the case of Pfizer, which, in an internal memo somehow obtained by Forbes, expressed more enthusiasm for oncology than cardiology research. According to the memo, cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, pain remedies, and mental health are the high priority areas.
According to the Nature review
“anticancer drugs are the second largest therapy market, with US$ 34.6 billion in global pharmaceutical sales in 2006.” In that year, the top sellers were the lipid regulators which raked in sales of US$ 35.2 billion. However, this leading edge of anti-cholesterol drugs was considered “marginal” and is not expected to be sustainable. Most of the bestsellers (e.g. Lipitor (atorvastatin), Norvasc (amlodipine), Risperdal, Seroquel, Lamictal, and Avandia) or the previous years, many of which are cardiovascular drugs have either gone off patent or are schedule to go off-patent in the near future. Generic versions have flooded or will be flooding the market.
Anti-cancer drugs on the other hand, particularly chemotherapy drugs, are very expensive and are very unlikely to have generic versions anytime soon.
Avastin (bevacizumab), for example, a chemotherapy agent against colorectal cancer, can cost up to US$ 100,000 a year. For a life extension of 4.2 months, a patient has to pay $42,800 to $55,000.
In addition, drug regulators tend to pave the way towards fast approval of oncology drugs, in consideration of those people who are terminally ill and desperately hoping for a cure.
We can only hope that the current focus in oncology research will bring better (and hopefully cheaper) drugs to the market.
Photo credit: stock.xchng
Diabetes Clinical Trial Update
October 2, 2008 by Tina Radcliffe
Filed under DIABETES
Before we review what’s going on in diabetes clinical trials let’s review the basics of clinical trials for our new readers.
What is a clinical trial?
A clinical trial is scientific research involving people that studies the effects of a new medication, therapy or device to determine if it is safe and effective.
In the United States, clinical trials are monitored by the Food and Drug Administration.
The Phases of a Clinical Trial:
Phase I evaluates dosage parameters.
Phase II continues to evaluate safety and begins to study efficacy.
Phase III compares the new drug with standards of care or if there are none, a placebo.
Phase IV is used if the drug normally used as a standard is to be used for another condition or if the formulation is changed. This phase may also be used for extended studies on drug side effects.
Diabetes clinical trials may involve studies of prevention of diabetes or the treatment of diabetes.
Types of Diabetes Clinical Trials
- Action studies (doing something) - These focus on finding out whether actions people take, such as exercising more or quitting smoking, can prevent diabetes or their impact on current diabetics.
- Agent studies (taking something) - These studies examine whether taking certain medicines, vitamins or food supplements (or a combination) have an affect on preventing or treating diabetes.
Why Participate in a Clinical Trial?
People participate in clinical trials for many reasons including the opportunity to try new cutting edge therapies under the care of leading researchers and health care providers, and for the opportunity to contribute to research to help themselves and others.
Clinical trials do have side effects including the possible negative effect of the therapies and/or no effects at all and they can be more time consuming than originally anticipated.
If you are considering participating in a clinical trial not only is it important to explore all facets of the trials through informed consent, but it is important to determine the cost and funding of a clinical trial and how your insurance coverage or Medicare comes into play. While often the medication being tested is free, there may be additional costs such as lab tests and hospitalization which are not.
Get answers ahead of time.
In depth resources on clinical trials and registries for clinical trials:
ClinicalTrials.gov not only lists registries of current clinical trials in the U.S and other countries but breaks them down according to condition, drug, sponsor and location.
World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. “The mission of the WHO Registry Platform is to ensure that a complete view of research is accessible to all those involved in health care decision making.”
CRISP, Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects. “A biomedical database system containing information on research projects and programs supported by the Dept. of Health and Human Services.”
Center Watch: Clinical Trials Listing Service. This site provides a notification services for new clinical trials.
American Diabetes Association provides basic information on clinical trials.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International lists current JDRF funded clinical studies and provides information on what phase those studies are currently in.
The Children With Diabetes site lists current clinical trials.
Diabetes Clinical Trial Update
August 12, 2008 by Tina Radcliffe
Filed under DIABETES
Diabetic clinical trials are an important element of battling diabetes.
What are clinical trials?
Basically a clinical trial is a scientific research involving people, that studies the effects of a new medication, therapy or device to determine if it is safe and effective.
In the United States, clinical trials are monitored by the Food and Drug Administration.
The Phases of a Clinical Trial:
Phase I evaluates dosage parameters.
Phase II continues to evaluate safety and begins to study efficacy.
Phase III compares the new drug with standards of care or if there are none, a placebo.
Phase IV is used if the drug normally used as a standard is to be used for another condition or if the formulation is changed. This phase may also be used for extended studies on drug side effects.
Diabetes clinical trials may involve studies of prevention of diabetes or the treatment of types of diabetes.
Cancer Clinical Trial Update
August 11, 2008 by Tina Radcliffe
Filed under CANCER
Time for a clinical trial update.
What are clinical trials?
Basically a clinical trial is a scientific research involving people, that studies the effects of a new medication, therapy or device to determine if it is safe and effective.
In the United States, clinical trials are monitored by the Food and Drug Administration.
The Phases of a Clinical Trial:
Phase I evaluates dosage parameters.
Phase II continues to evaluate safety and begins to study efficacy.
Phase III compares the new drug with standards of care or if there are none, a placebo.
Phase IV is used if the drug normally used as a standard is to be used for another condition or if the formulation is changed. This phase may also be used for extended studies on drug side effects.
Cancer clinical trials may involve studies of prevention of cancer or the treatment of cancer.
For more information see the Battling Cancer archives on the topic.
Enlight:
Participants needed for the Enlight Clinical Research Study. Researchers and doctors at medical facilities in the United States and Canada are studying two procedures in treating prostate cancer. If you are male, aged 60 or older, and have a diagnosis of low-risk, localized prostate cancer, you may qualify for this study.
The purpose of the study is to compare the safety and effectiveness of a high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) procedure to cryotherapy (freeze therapy), a standard-of-care, minimally invasive treatment for prostate cancer.
More information and an online pre screening are available now.
