Marika
Chrisanthopoulos
AP Biology
Article Review
December 6, 2012
In
the article, “Bigger Role Seen for Breast Cancer Drug” by
Andrew Pollack, the study of a drug recently being used in keeping breast
cancer from reoccurring in healing and surviving patients has revealed that
those taking the medication should be staying on it for more years than
previously suggested to keep the cancer from coming back. The drug tamoxifen has been used and prescribed to thousands of women
worldwide to help prevent breast cancer, and was initially taken for five years
after recovery, but this study has shown that the drug should be taken for at
least 10, doubling the recommended usage. In order to prevent the cancer from
coming back, tamoxifen blocks the results of the hormone estrogen, which fuels
tumor growth in estrogen receptor-positive cancers that account for about 65
percent of cases in premenopausal women. Studies performed in the 1990s showed
that there were no benefits in women staying on the drug for over five years,
but the new study named Atlas found that women who continued taking the
medication were less likely to have the cancer come back or to die from the
disease in comparison to those who took it for five years. The new study
included 7,000 women from three dozen countries all around the world that
tested positive with estrogen-related breast cancer. Half of the women were
chosen at random to continue taking the drug even after the 5 prescribed years,
while the others took it for the assigned amount. In the 10-year group, 21.4%
of the women had a recurrence of breast cancer in the ensuing 10 years, which
is the period 5-14 years after their diagnoses. The recurrence rate for the
5-year group was higher, at 25.1%. About 12.2% of those in the 10-year treatment
group died from breast cancer, compared with 15 percent for those in the
control group. There are side effects to taking the drug, however, including;
endometrial cancer, blood clots, and hot flashes. In the study, 40% of the
women in the 5-year group stopped taking the drug early due to these
uncomfortable effects, although they can be reversed by taking a few other
medications.
This
article relates to me and to humanity because many of us, including me, know
people who have had or currently have breast cancer, which frequently results
in death, or the prescriptions and treatments for it lead to other deadly
cancers and diseases. This result can be very important in the future, for a
3.7% decrease in the deaths of women caused by breast cancer that can be
prevented by just an increase in the longevity of taking a certain drug is
amazing and will affect many families and people all around the world.
Hopefully the drug will be prescribed to more women for the extended period of
time to help them stay healthy and keep the cancer from coming back.
This
article was very well written; one thing the author did well was that he
clearly described the study and talked about how the drug worked, which relates
to biology and how the body reacts to prescription drugs. Another nice touch
was that there were quotes and opinions from numerous doctors and scientists
talking about their views of the drug, as well as how the drug could be
improved to continue to help more people. There was an example of a women, a
breast cancer survivor, aged 39, that also spoke about her opinions about the
drug and how she will continue to use it for 5 years in order to keep her
disease under control. The article included numerous statistics comparing each
group involved in the study and their results, which added to the desired
effect of convincing the audience that the drug can continue to help more
women. One thing that could have been improved about the article was if the
author talked a little bit more about the women involved in the study; maybe
differentiating the results with older and younger women, as well as those from
different countries and from differing backgrounds.
The article reviewed by Marika, “Bigger Role Seen for Breast Cancer Drug” by Andrew Pollack, was very well written and explained. She was able to explain the study that was tested with the drug called, tamoxifen. The study of the drug was recently being used in keeping breast cancer from reoccurring in healing and surviving patients. In order to prevent the cancer from coming back, tamoxifen blocks the results of the hormone estrogen, which fuels tumor growth in estrogen receptor-positive cancers that account for about 65 percent of cases in premenopausal women. Many of the studies performed in the 1990s showed that there were no benefits in women staying on the drug for over five years, but the new study named Atlas found that women who continued taking the medication were less likely to have the cancer come back or to die from the disease in comparison to those who took it for five years. I found this to be very interesting because now more people can become aware of this study, and those who had breast cancer should consider staying on the medication.
ReplyDeleteThis review could have been improved if the variables of the study were more explained. For example, which groups of people were tested in the study and from which backgrounds? Also, I thought it would be interesting to know how many breast cancer survivors have continued their medication, and maybe noticed a difference.
In general, the article was very well explained and had interesting details. I learned that these new studies proved the study from the 1990’s to be incorrect and this could potentially save many women. The medication was well describes and demonstrated a high understanding of the study. I think that Marika did an excellent job at explaining the article in detail and explaining the study performed.
--Nastaran Soroori
Marika read the article, “Bigger Role Seen for Breast Cancer Drug,” which discusses a miraculous drug that is helping prevent breast cancer from reoccurring during the healing process of patients who have already endured the hardships of cancer. Marika does an excellent job explaining the use for the tamoxifen drug, which blocks the results of the hormone estrogen, which has been recognized as the catalyst for tumor growth. She also highlights the important, and recent realization that this drug should be taken for nearly double the amount of time it was first recommended. Years ago, doctors believed five years would be enough time for the tamoxifen to prevent breast cancer from coming back, however, today we learn that ten years is the most effective time table. Lastly, Marika does a good job at bringing to light what we should take from this piece, and the significance of this drug, which could help save thousands of lives in the future.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I have many more good things to say about Marika’s breakdown of the article, “Bigger Role Seen for Breast Cancer Drug,” a first suggestion I have for her is that she may want to slim down the review, so that it is just a little more practical and easier to read. All of the information is great, but I feel like it may be a touch excessive. A second more specific critique I have is that she could have brought in the different views scientists have which she mentioned as being a “nice touch,” in her final paragraph of her article review.
I am extremely impressed with Marika’s writing ability and her analysis of this new drug, which see seems to be an expert on! Marika provides example after example, having numerous pieces of evidence supporting her argument, she did a wonderful job.
Marika’s review of the New York Times article, “Bigger Role Seen for Breast Cancer Drug,” by Andrew Pollack, was very well done. Like the article, she cited many different statistics. This helps the reader see the differences found within the new study. Also, I agree that the article should have written more about actual women who were and will be affected by this new study. Mr. Pollack briefly mentioned one woman, but that was it. If it were more personal, than the reader would be drawn in more, for there would be more then just numbers. By making the article more personal, the reader can relate more to it, and be more excited by the outcomes. This drug is still not perfect, for there still is a relatively large loss of life, so the writer wants to show the reader that people really are excited by it. Readers would like to hear that people’s lives are being saved, rather than be told that numbers are looking good. I, therefore, also liked how Marika connected the article back to the world, by explaining how significant it can be that 3.7% of women will be saved by taking this medication longer. Of course, she, as had the article, explained that there are side effects, but “Over all, the benefits of extended tamoxifen seemed to outweigh the risks substantially.” I also liked how Marika mentioned that 40% of the women who continued on the medication had to quit, but there are other medications that women can take to prevent these side effects. This analysis was not really delved into in the article, so it was nice to hear that there is a solution. While reading the article, 40% seemed like a concerningly high number, so learning that the patients could take other medication to stop the side effects, made the data more promising.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Marika did a very nice job, there were a few things that she could have done to make the review even better. For example, she could have mentioned the fact that this drug is accessible to many people can access it. This is due to the fact that it can often be obtained for less than $200 dollars a year. This piece of information is very important, since it would be concerning if people were unable to afford staying on drug for another 5 years. By adding this fact, it is made clear that people really should be able to continue on the medication. Also, I felt that Marika’s first paragraph could have been slimmed down a little bit. As I said before, I really appreciated all of the statistical information that she had added, but at points, the numbers could become a little bit overwhelming.
This was a very interesting article to read. I hope that this new study really helps those diagnosed with breast cancer. Markia and the article mentioned that studies in the 1990s claimed that there were no added benefits to staying on the medication, but I hope that that is not the case. It would be great to save 3.7% of women a year as we continue to search for a cure to this awful disease.
ReplyDeleteThis review that Marika wrote is very interesting. The article she read, presents an idea about saving breast cancer from reoccurring in patients. One aspect of this review that as well presented was exactly how tamoxifen works. It blocks the results of the hormone estrogen, which fuels tumor growth in estrogen receptor-positive cancers that account for about 65 percent of cases in premenopausal women. Another aspect of the review that was well presented was how this drug came to be. Similar to any other drug, tests needed to be run in order to determine who was eligible for receiving this drug. Studies from the 1990s showed that there were no benefits in women staying on the drug over five years, but if that woman continued taking the drug she was less likely to have cancer return to her. One last aspect of the review that was well presented was the side effects. The side effects to taking this drug include endometrial cancer blood clots, and hot flashes.
One way I thought this review could have been made better, would be if men with breast cancer are eligible to receive this drug. One other way I would have made this review better, would be explaining a little more in detail about how this drug prevents cancer form reoccurring. I understand that it blocks the results of estrogen, but a little more detail would have made this a lot clearer.
I was very impressed that despite there not being a cure to cancer, there are cure to possibly prevent it form reoccurring, which is astonishing because I have never heard of such a thing.
Timmy Donohue
ReplyDeleteMarika’s review of the article, “Bigger Role Seen For Breast Cancer Drug” was very interesting. There were many things that I thought she presented well. For example, I think she did a very good job in describing the drug tamoxifen and how it is used to prevent and get rid of breast cancer. I felt that she went into great detail to describe this, which only made it easier for the reader. Secondly, I liked how she provided facts on how after being “cured” of breast cancer using the drug; many women were later diagnosed again with the same cancer. Furthermore, following the recurrence rate, I liked how she included the numbers from the experiment that was done on the drug and how women who had taken the drug had a lower mortality rate than women who were not on the drug.
There were a few things that I would have changed in the article. Firstly, I would have liked to know who or what company developed the drug and how they were able to do so. This would have helped the reader get a better understanding of the history of the drug. Also, I would have liked it if she included a little information of the molecular structure of the drug. This would have helped the reader get an understanding of what type of molecule the drug actually is.
One interesting thing I learned from this article is that despite the drugs very serious side effects, it has been pretty effective on the women it is used. Any drug that is able to save lives of human beings from deadly diseases like cancer is an effective drug. In this case, the drug tamoxifen is a very effective drug.