lauantai 14. syyskuuta 2019

How Much Cancer "Treatments" aka Medical Voodoo Costs



How Much Cancer Costs


NewsHealth & Medical Conditions


When a doctor says the word cancer, 
a patient’s mind often enters complete shock.
Then, questions emerge.
How serious? Is it treatable?
What can I do? How long do I have?

Patients shouldn’t have to ask,
“How much will this cost?”


But the cost of cancer is an aspect of growing importance in the conversation between healthcare providers and patients as drug prices continue to rise across the world. 
Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved a treatment for melanoma, a deadly skin cancer, which shrunk tumors in 60 percent of patients in a clinical trial.
The drug’s manufacturer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, will charge $141,000 for the first 12 weeks of treatment and $256,000 for a year of treatment, according to the Wall Street Journal. Experts fear the cost of the drug could keep some patients from receiving what could be the best care available.
Americans are growing increasingly irritated with the rising costs of cancer drugs and treatments.
A Kaiser Health Tracking poll found 76 percent of the public believe a top priority for the president and Congress should be making high-cost drugs for chronic conditions affordable.
Another Kaiser poll found 72 percent of Americans believe drug costs are unreasonable and 74 percent think Big Pharma cares more about profits than people.
The cost of cancer isn’t just affecting patients and their families either. It’s affecting society. Politicians offer new plans to increase votes, health institutions encourage doctors to ask patients for money and the workforce loses billions of dollars every year in lost production.
And the cost of cancer keeps rising.

Cost of Cancer on the Rise

Each year, cancer costs the world more money than any other disease, according to the American Institute of Cancer Research (AICR).
Cancer costs $895 billion annually. Comparatively, heart disease costs $753 billion. Nothing else comes close, with traffic accidents and diabeteseach costing about $204 billion.
“The price for one year of life increased to $139,100 in 2005 and $207,000 in 2013.”
The biggest financial impact is in terms of loss of life and productivity, in which cancer accounts for 1.5 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP) losses. The AICR estimates Americans lost 83 million years of healthy life because of cancer deaths and disabilities in 2008.
More than half a million Americans die of cancer, the second-leading cause of death in the U.S., every year.
To breakdown the direct healthcare costs, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) estimated cancer cost Americans $88.7 billion in 2011.
Of that cost:
  • 50% came from hospital outpatient or doctor office visits
  • 35% came from inpatient hospital stays
  • 11% came from prescription drugs
And it’s getting more expensive.
A 2011 study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute determined the cost of all cancer care in the U.S. totaled $124.5 billion in 2010. The researchers projected the total cost would rise to $157.7 billion by 2020. The projected cost increase by phase of treatment is displayed in the table below.
Cost of Cancer Care in Billions of 2010 Dollars
InitialContinuingLast
2010$40.46$46.64$37.45
2020$48.31$61.37$48.07
Increase19.4%31.6%28.3%
There doesn’t seem to be a good reason for the increase in cost though.
A 2015 National Bureau of Economic Research study found anticancer drug prices at launch increased by 10% ever year between 1995 and 2013, about an $8,500 annual increase. That’s after an adjustment for inflation and survival benefits.
When calculating the average cost for one extra year of life, the researchers determined patients and insurers paid $54,100 in 1995. The price for one year of life increased to $139,100 in 2005 and $207,000 in 2013.
Another study (2014) published in The Lancet found the costs of cancer are already unaffordable in many countries. In the U.S., even those with very good insurance coverage incur out-of-pocket costs or experience overexposure to harmful treatments.
Many people have no idea what to expect financially when their doctor gives them or a loved one the heartbreaking diagnosis.

Total Cost of Cancer Treatment

On an individual level, a cancer diagnosis isn’t limited to physical and emotional hardship. It can put someone in a hard spot financially too.
People may have to choose between more successful expensive treatments and less effective, affordable treatments.
Each person’s cost to treat cancer is different. According to the American Cancer Society (ACS), factors to treat cancer include:
  • The type of treatment.
  • The length of treatment.
  • The location of the treatment.
  • The type of insurance coverage.
For people with health insurance, the concern might not be as great. But some insurance plans won’t cover the most expensive, sometimes most-necessary treatments.
Sadly, many cancer patients have to spend time and energy working out financial issues before treatment even begins. Others face financial struggles during treatment, and almost everyone spends precious energy trying to manage their money while recovering from treatment.
Major healthcare costs to consider include:
  • Hospital and clinic visits.
  • Medicine and prescription drugs.
  • Lab tests.
  • Treatments.
  • Surgeries.
  • Home health services.

Cost of Surgery

Physically removing a tumor during surgery is one of the top ways to treat cancer. Doctors can use surgery to prevent, diagnose, remove, or debulk (remove as much as possible) cancer. They have a variety of methods to do so too, according to the MayoClinic. Surgery methods include:
  • Cryosurgery: freezing cancer cells to destroy them.
  • Electrosurgery: killing cancer cells with high-frequency current.
  • Laser surgery: killing cancer cells with beams of intense light.
  • Mohs surgery: removing cancer cells layer by layer.
  • Laparoscopic surgery: minimally-invasive surgery using small incisions.
  • Robotic surgery: use of 3-D imaging and computers to operate surgical tools.
The costs per surgery vary greatly, depending on the hospital, insurance coverage and type of procedure.
A 2014 study examining the costs of surgery involving various types of cancer found average costs ranging from $14,161 to $56,587. The costs included admissions, readmissions, physician services and other costs (outpatient visits, hospice care, home health agencies or medical equipment).
Average Cost of Cancer Surgery
ProcedureCost
Colectomy (colon)$31,738
Cystectomy (bladder)$42,386
Pancreatectomy (pancreas)$56,587
Proctectomy (rectum)$33,759
Prostatectomy (prostate)$14,161
Pulmonary lobectomy$39,412

Cost of Chemotherapy

Chemotherapy is another way to treat cancer. It involves chemicals that kill fast-growing cells. Since cancer cells grow more quickly than other body cells, doctors often use chemotherapy to treat the disease.
According to an Avalere Health study which analyzed three years of data, the adjusted (based on age, sex and prior cancer history) cost of chemotherapy differed depending on location – in a doctor’s office or hospital’s outpatient department (HOPD).
Average Cost of Chemotherapy
OfficeHOPD
1 Month$10,764$13,828
6 Months$49,062$61,661
12 Months$66,826$102,395
The costs also differed depending on the type of cancer. The most expensive was colon cancer, which cost $45,997 in an office and $46,220 in an HOPD. The average costs for all lengths of treatment (averaging 3.8 months in an office and 3.4 months in an HOPD) ranged from $28,177 in an office to $34,973 in an HOPD.

Cost of Radiation Therapy

Radiation therapy is another form of expensive cancer treatment. It involves the use of intense energy beams, usually X-rays, to kill genetic material. The radiation kills both healthy cells and cancer cells, so the length of treatment is usually shorter than chemotherapy.
The Avalere Health study also analyzed the adjusted cost of radiation therapies at different locations.
Average Cost of Radiation Therapy
OfficeHOPD
1 Month$11,472$13,209
2 Months$23,305$24,150
3 Months$38,732$35,761
The costs of radiation therapy also differed by cancer type. The most expensive was prostate cancer, which cost $37,472 in an office and $29,800 in an HOPD. The average costs for all lengths of treatment (averaging 2.1 months in an office and 1.9 months in an HOPD) ranged from $25,144 in an office to $23,756 in an HOPD.
Most people think of healthcare costs when they think of the cost of cancer, but there are other costs that many don’t consider.

Hidden Costs During Cancer Treatment

Cancer affects people far more financially than they usually realize. The cost is not limited to hospital visits and clinical treatments. It often includes costs like traveling to specialized centers, lost income from having to miss work and new clothes or accessories.
According to the ACS, hidden costs include:
  • Gas and parking expenses during visits to appointments.
  • Lodging during treatment on the road.
  • Meals while away from home.
  • Child care costs.
  • Communication costs, like copies of medical records.
  • Special nutritional supplements.
  • Special equipment or clothing.
Additionally, some families hire someone to assist them with the challenges they face. They may hire someone to make meals and clean around the house.
Families often seek legal and financial guidance too. They may ask a lawyer to help them understand legal rights when dealing with employers or insurance companies, how to write a will or how to deal with medical professionals if something were to occur.
Families may seek help preparing income taxes with their new medical expenses, planning estates or granting a power of attorney.
Cancer affects people far more financially than they usually realize.


Effect on Families

Treating cancer is often a team battle, and patients rely on the time and energy of friends and family to help them get through their challenging time.
Studies that compare caregivers of cancer patients to the general population show caregivers suffer economic ramifications. Many miss work and report work impairment. Caregivers are also more likely to suffer depression, anxiety, insomnia and migraines, requiring them to seek their own health treatment.
Unfortunately, families suffering from the loss of a loved one at the hands of cancer also have to deal with financial struggles at one of the most difficult times in their lives. Financial costs can include autopsies, funeral services, obituaries, death certificates, and settling estate and property claims.

Insurance’s Role in Cancer Costs

Health insurance is the biggest factor in the equation of personal healthcare costs for cancer patients. Insurance plans usually cover most major costs like doctor appointments, hospital stays, tests and procedures.
However, very few plans cover all of the costs in full. Almost all plans require co-payments for each appointment or visit. Tests and procedures often require patients to pay some money out of pocket too.
The most effective drugs and procedures are usually the most expensive. That means access to the treatment that can most successfully treat cancer often requires insurance. People without insurance usually don’t receive the best care available because they can’t afford it.
Fortunately, the Affordable Care Act helped millions of Americans receive access to health insurance.

Affordable Care Act

President Barack Obama signed the ACA in March of 2010.
The ACA made drastic changes to many health insurance plans in terms of coverage and services offered. Some of the changes that affect cancer patients and their families include:
  • Health plans must cover people with a pre-existing condition, like cancer.
  • Cancer screening tests, such as mammograms and colonoscopies, must be available at little or no cost to patients.
  • Insurance plans can’t cancel coverage if patient gets sick.
  • Plans can’t charge ill people – including those with cancer – more than healthy people.
  • Plans can’t have annual and lifetime dollar limits for how much a provider will pay.
  • Plans can’t limit or drop coverage for a patient who chooses to participate in a clinical trial.
  • Young adults can stay on their parents’ plan until age 26.
Even with the growing number of people covered by the ACA, about 11 percent of Americans were without health insurance through the first half of 2015, according to Gallup polls.
For people without insurance, the costs to treat cancer can be astronomical. Many people don’t realize health insurance providers aggressively negotiate costs of drugs and procedures.
An August study found uninsured cancer patients in North Carolina paid twice as much for doctor appointments and 43 times as much for chemotherapy as the amount people with insurance and their providers paid.
People who don’t have health insurance can ask doctors and hospitals for discounts. Patients can also ask for generics, although very few generic drugs are available for treating cancer.

Minimizing Expenses

There are other ways cancer patients can attempt to minimize expenses. Many hospitals provide case managers or have social workers who work on site to help patients and their families deal with the emotional and financial hardships they face.
Doctors and nurses can also provide referrals to a number of support services and financial resources available to cancer patients.
Local and national service organizations and government assistance programs may offer grants to help pay for some services or medications.
It’s also important to learn what insurance will cover when participating in a clinical trial. Insurers can’t drop coverage if a patient participates in a trial, but some plans do not cover “experimental” or “investigational” treatments.
Some plans only cover tests or doctor’s visits that would have been part of a treatment plan if it weren’t for clinical trial participation. They aren’t usually required to pay for the experimental treatment.
That might not be worrisome for some trials though. The study sponsor may provide treatment and tests at no cost to participants. Sponsors may also cover travel time, mileage and hotel stays. Patients should always be aware of their possible expenses if they join a clinical trial, and how much that costs compared to standard treatment.

Medical Debt from Cancer

Even with health insurance and proper financial planning, many cancer survivors or families of patients suffer from medical debt.
A study presented at the 2014 Palliative Care in Oncology Symposium found 27 percent of cancer survivors reported suffering a financial problem like debt or bankruptcy. Another 37 percent reported modifying work plans or delaying retirement.
Experts say one of the biggest financial mistakes patients make is letting bills pile up. It’s easy to do when faced with such a tragic diagnosis, but it often leads to even more problems in the future.
Individuals and families feel the financial burdens of cancer on personal levels, but it affects everyone on a larger scale.

Cancer’s Cost on Society

Cancer affects society on both global and national levels.
When pharmaceutical company CEO Martin Shkreli raised the price of a drug used in AIDS, malaria and cancer patients 5,000 percent the eyes of politicians lit up.
Presidential candidate Hilary Clinton proposed a plan that would allow the U.S. government and Medicare to negotiate prescription drug costs. Candidate Donald Trump called Shkreli a spoiled brat who ought to be ashamed of himself. Other candidates also proposed alternative healthcare plans they promised to implement if elected.
Facing enormous public pressure, Shkreli dropped the price of the drug.
The cost of cancer’s effect on society isn’t limited to political discussion. Work forces across the planet feel the impact.
A 2014 study in the International Journal of Cancer estimated the cost of lost productivity from cancer deaths in Europe was 75 billion euros ($84 billion), with breast cancer costing the most of any cancer at 7 billion euros ($7.84 billion) in lost productivity.
The cost affects hospitals and other healthcare facilities too. Many institutions rely on private donors to help keep cancer treatment available and affordable.
A recent study found almost half of doctors surveyed at 40 leading cancer centers were taught to identify patients who might be a good donor. One third of those surveyed had been asked to solicit a donation, but only half of that number agreed to do so.
The moment a doctor says the word cancer after a test or procedure, the lives of the patient and their families change. They’ll have a thousand questions to ask. They’ll wonder how much it will cost physically and emotionally.
Sadly, they’ll also have to determine how much cancer will cost financially.
Last modified: March 17, 2016

__

Voodoo

Religions

See also: Afro-American religion for a list of related religions which are sometimes called or mistaken for Vodou/Voodoo, such as Santería or Candomblé.
  • Candomblé Jejé, also known as Brazilian Vodum, one of the major branches (nations) of Candomblé
    • Tambor de Mina, a syncretic religion that developed in northern Brazil
  • Cuban Vodú, a syncretic religion that developed in the Spanish Empire
  • Dominican Vudú, a syncretic religion that developed in the Spanish Empire
  • Haitian Vodou, a syncretic religion practiced chiefly in Haiti
  • Louisiana Voodoo or New Orleans Voodoo, a set of African-based spiritual folkways
  • West African Vodun, practiced by Gbe-speaking ethnic groups of Africa

___

Orthodox Cancer Treatments Don’t Treat Cancer

Posted by Dr Sircus on October 8, 2012 | Filed under CancerMedicine




5 prescription drugs doctors had no idea could hurt their patients
Most fine doctors like Dr. Ben Goldacre like to have all the available facts about a prescription drug before prescribing it. However, when it comes to pharmaceutical medicines, it’s nearly impossible to find real data, so doctors really never know the true dangers about the drugs they use.
Not only are they not sure about the side effects and the possibility of death but they are also not sure whether or not the drug will help the patient at all. In short, modern medicine is based on research fraud and we find doctors and medical officials, including the FDA, abandoning their public health mission by revolving everything they do and promote around pharmaceutical interests. Anything non-pharmaceutical in nature is patently condemned.
In a study published in Nature in March 2012, researchers tried to replicate the results of 53 basic preclinical cancer studies. Of those 53 studies, only six were replicable. In his new book, Bad Pharma, Dr. Goldacre sounds a warning bell on the fact that drug manufacturers are the ones who fund trials of their own products. One of the most widely recognized and true tests of scientific proof is when these studies showing positive results can be and are replicated by independent researchers (not researchers chosen or paid by the drug manufacturer providing the original finding).
“Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analyzed using techniques that are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments,” writes Goldacre in his book. “When trials throw up results that companies don’t like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug’s true effects.”
This dishonest, inaccurate and incomplete representation of many of the pharmaceutical drugs coming to market is what most doctors are basing their holy allopathic medical practices on. What kind of medical science do we have when negative scientific information is not published, not accessible to practitioners, denied, repressed and simply not included in medical conclusions?
This is a systematic flaw in the core of medicine.
Dr. Ben Goldacre
Erick Turner did a survey, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, of all the antidepressant trials filed with the United States Food and Drug Administration. There were 38 studies that produced positive results and 36 that produced negative results. Of the positive-result group, 37 of the studies were published. Of the negative results group, only three were published.
Almost every day we are hearing medical horror stories that should completely frighten the public away from their doctors’ offices. The latest scare was in October of 2012 where U.S. health officials ramped up warnings about a Massachusetts specialty pharmacy linked to a widening outbreak of a rare kind of meningitis, urging doctors and hospitals not to use any products from the company.
Investigators found contamination in a sealed vial of the steroid at the New England Compounding Center in Framingham, Mass., according to Food and Drug Administration officials. Tests are under way to determine if it is the same fungus blamed in the outbreak that has sickened 35 people in six states. Five of them have died. All received steroid shots for back pain. Almost everyday we hear another grim report of another death.
Medical and pharmaceutical science should be able to identify an appropriate mechanism and what the active ingredient might be for each drug that doctors are supposed to use. The problem is that they cannot do this without their fraudulent research, clinical trials and even FDA approval.

Orthodox Cancer Treatments Don’t Treat Cancer

I have always said that orthodox oncologists use treatments and diagnostic procedures that cause cancer to treat and diagnose cancer. A perfect example is mammography. Every mammogram a woman gets increases her risk of breast cancer by 5%[1],[2] due to the radiation involved and mammograms frequently lead to over-diagnosis and unnecessary treatment.
Most people sense that modern oncology is very dangerous. What is most terrible about it though is that treatments are in no way intended to target the cause or causes of cancer so even though the cancer industry is constantly talking about finding the “cure,” that’s the last thing on their agenda. The only treatments oncologists have to offer are therapies that do not treat cancer but rather make the person sicker and ultimately die a more horrible death.
Various analyses show that past media coverage often gave incorrect messages about the complexity of breast cancer, the age at which women are at highest risk, the progress made and the importance of early detection.
Fran Visco, the president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition, believes the solution lies in science—specifically, in studying how breast cancer develops and metastasizes. “We get sidetracked by efforts to focus on getting every woman a mammogram,” she recently told The Daily Beast. “We could screen every woman in the world, and we would not have stopped breast cancer. I am not saying to stop funding for screening; however, we cannot afford to make it a main focus.”
Recent research indicates that the cause of cancer has very little to do with genetics. We know some basic things about why cancer starts. We know it is initiated under low-oxygen conditions. We know that it is initiated also by trauma and especially by inflammation. We know with low-oxygen conditions and inflammation we have infectious agents running around out of control.
So we have low O2, low CO2, low pH (acidity) and low cellular energy; we have infection hordes fighting for their existence. Mix in some inflammation, heavy-metal and chemical contamination and nutritional deficiency (along with some genetic disruption) and we have the recipe for CANCER—a beast that is eating the human race alive starting with the old but now increasingly working its way down to the young and very young where death should not be lurking.
Does chemotherapy or radiation treat this condition? Does it treat cancer? Does it kill cancer when it provokes more of it? There is nothing real about orthodox oncology. How such inaccurate ideas like those of modern oncology could be born in an intelligent race of beings is beyond comprehension.
A new MIT study offers a comprehensive look at chemical and genetic changes that occur as inflammation progresses to cancerOne of the biggest risk factors for liver, colon or stomach cancer is chronic inflammation of those organs, often caused by viral or bacterial infections.
In 2008 researchers in France found that one in six cancers are caused by treatable infections.[3] Helicobacter pylori, hepatitis B and C viruses, and human papillomaviruses were responsible for 1.9 million cases, mainly gastric, liver, and cervix uteri cancers. In women, cervix uteri cancer accounted for about half of the infection-related burden of cancer; in men, liver and gastric cancers accounted for more than 80%. Around 30% of infection-attributable cases occur in people younger than 50 years.
The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine tells us that, “Tumor promotion and progression are dependent on ancillary processes provided by cells of the tumor environment but that are not necessarily cancerous themselves. Inflammation has long been associated with the development of cancer. This review will discuss the reflexive relationship between cancer and inflammation with particular focus on how considering the role of inflammation in physiologic processes such as the maintenance of tissue homeostasis and repair may provide a logical framework for understanding the connection between the inflammatory response and cancer.[4]
“It is believed that cancer is caused by an accumulation of mutations in cells of the body,” says Dr. Carlo M. Croce, professor and chair of molecular virology, immunology and medical genetics. “Our study[5] suggests that miR-155, which is associated with inflammation, increases the mutation rate and might be a key player in inflammation-induced cancers generally.” This and many other studies show how inflammation can help cause cancer. Chronic inflammation due to infection or to conditions such as chronic inflammatory bowel disease is associated with up to 25% of all cancers.
Chemotherapy and radiation only make inflammation worse! These are not instruments of cancer treatment and everyone knows that they have nothing to do with cancer cures, which are illegal anyway. The best they can say is that these treatments can extend your life beyond their predictions of what would happen to you if you did not treat it in any coherent way.
“Pre-malignant tumors are ‘wound-like’. Such tumors are similar to healing or desmoplastic tissue in many ways, such as the presence of activated platelets. As described by Coussens and Hanahan, tumor growth may be ‘biphasic’. In the first phase, the body treats early tumors as wounds. This phase is characterized by tumor growth mediated by the actions of the stroma ‘indirect control’ as occurs in physiologic tissue repair.”[6]
Are chemotherapy and radiation appropriate treatments for wounds? The most amazing thing about these treatments is that many do survive these treatments, showing us how resilient the human body really is.

Cancer Cures vs. Cancer Death

Doctors rarely talk about “curing” cancer. Instead, the success of treatment is judged on whether a patient is alive five, 10 and 15 years after diagnosis. It is amazing that, after all the slashing, burning and poisoning that oncologists do, survival rates are actually up a little. For instance at the turn of the decade the statistics for England and Wales show that the five-year survival rate for all cancers in men is 31%, while for women the survival rate is 43%. The figures are similar for Scotland. Today though still dismal, they are somewhat better.
But are they really better? Certainly they would like us to think so but one of the reasons for this is statistics. As Mark Twain said: “There lies, damned lies and statistics.” The statistics look better because they don’t put down that the person has died of cancer when they have died of the side effects of radiation and chemotherapy. “Recently a friend of mine died from rectal cancer and his wife was stunned to see that the cancer was the third cause of death on the death certificate after the infection and other problems caused by the treatment,” wrote one of my readers.
This would not have been counted as a cancer death. Also when a person is treated for breast cancer and it moves from the breast to another area, but they live five years after the breast cancer has been diagnosed, it is recorded as a survival from breast cancer.
_
http://drsircus.com/medicine/cancer/orthodox-cancer-treatments-dont-treat-cancer
[1] The Neoplastic Transformation Potential of Mammography X Rays and Atomic Bomb Spectrum Radiation; G. J. Heyes1 and A. J. Mill; RADIATION RESEARCH 162, 120–127 (2004)
http://iamtonline.org/pdfs/neoplastic.pdf
[2] One percent of American women carry a hard-to-detect oncogene, which is triggered by radiation; a single mammogram increases their risk of breast cancer by a factor of 4-6 times. “The usual dose of radiation during a mammographic x-ray is from 0.25 to1 rad with the very best equipment; that’s 1-4 rads per screening mammogram (two views each of two breasts). And, according to Samuel Epstein, M.D., of the University of Chicago’s School of Public Health, the dose can be ten times more than that. Sister Rosalie Bertell-one of the world’s most respected authorities on the dangers of radiation-says one rad increases breast cancer risk one percent and is the equivalent of one year’s natural aging. “If a woman has yearly mammograms from age 55 to age 75, she will receive a minimum of 20 rads of radiation. For comparison, women who survived the atomic bomb blasts in Hiroshima or Nagasaki absorbed 35 rads. Though one large dose of radiation can be more harmful than many small doses, it is important to remember that damage from radiation is cumulative.”
http://rense.com/general48/mam.htm
[3] Global burden of cancers attributable to infections in 2008: a review and synthetic analysis. Catherine de Martel MD,Jacques Ferlay ME,Silvia Franceschi MD,Jérôme Vignat MSc,Freddie Bray PhD,David Forman PhD,Dr Martyn Plummer PhD The Lancet Oncology – 1 June 2012 ( Vol. 13, Issue 6, Pages 607-615 )
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1994795/
[4] Why Cancer and Inflammation?
Seth Rakoff-Nahoum
Yale J Biol Med. 2006 December; 79(3-4): 123–130.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1994795/
[5] E. Tili, J.-J. Michaille, D. Wernicke, H. Alder, S. Costinean, S. Volinia, C. M. Croce. Mutator activity induced by microRNA-155 (miR-155) links inflammation and cancerProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011; 108 (12): 4908 DOI:10.1073/pnas.1101795108

Ei kommentteja:

Lähetä kommentti