Popular Articles

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Virginia Abortion Ban
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in a 6-5 decision on Wednesday upheld Virginia"s 2003 law banning what abortion-rights opponents call "partial-birth" abortion, a procedure known medically as intact dilation and extraction, the AP/Hartford Courant reports (O"Dell, AP/Hartford Courant, 6/24). In 2005, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled 2-1 to strike down the Virginia law on the grounds that it does not include adequate exceptions to protect a woman"s health. The U.S. Supreme Court two years ago ordered the appeals court to revisit the issue when it upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, a federal law similar to the Virginia law (White, Washington Post, 6/25). The three-judge appeals panel again struck down the law in 2008 (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/24). The Virginia law permits women to choose various abortion procedures but makes it a crime for providers to perform an intact dilation and extraction, which involves crushing a fetus" skull to ease removal (Washington Post, 6/25). Abortion-rights supporters said that the Virginia law is unconstitutional because its broad definition of intact dilation and extraction could also prohibit standard dilation and extraction, the more common form of second-trimester abortion. Violations of the law would be considered a felony and punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The case is Richmond Medical Center v. Herring (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/24). William Fitzhugh, the Richmond doctor who challenged the Virginia law, said that the banned procedure is necessary to protect the life of the woman in some cases and that the law could prevent abortion providers from performing legal procedures out of fear of prosecution. Stephanie Toti, a Center for Reproductive Rights attorney who represented the plaintiffs, said that the Virginia law is broader than federal law because it punishes abortion providers who accidentally violate the law while performing legal abortion procedures. Judge"s Opinions Judge Paul Niemeyer in the majority opinion wrote that Virginia law protects physicians who are taking needed steps to save a patient"s life and should prevent "a Morton"s fork, where the doctor must choose between criminal liability or care that the doctor believes is not in the best interest of the patient." He added that the circumstances in which doctors could face criminal liability are so limited that they should not invalidate the law in every other case. Judge Blane Michael wrote in the dissenting opinion that the law will create a "real fear of criminal liability" among physicians because it will have the effect of criminalizing the actions of those who seek to perform legal procedures but need to use the banned procedure in rare instances. Michael wrote that the law therefore "places an undue burden on a woman"s right to obtain a pre-viability second trimester abortion -- a constitutional right repeatedly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court" (Washington Post, 6/25).Next StepsToti said that no decision has been made on whether to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court"s 2007 decision on the federal law made it clear that abortion bans must include exceptions for the health of the woman, the AP/Hartford Courant reports. Toti said that the appeals court"s decision "just really ignores that precedent." She added, "It"s really insulting to women"s dignity that the court would put so little priority on protecting women"s health and well-being" (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/25). Toti also said, "It puts doctors in a really untenable position because it forces doctors to choose between taking all the steps necessary to protect their patients and committing a felony" (Washington Post, 6/25). Virginia Attorney General Bill Mims said, "While we anticipate that the U.S. Supreme Court may be asked to review the decision, I am confident that the Supreme Court ultimately will uphold the law" (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/25).

Linking Genes, Brain, And Behavior In Children
It comes as no surprise that some babies are more difficult to soothe than others but frustrated parents may be relieved to know that this is not necessarily an indication of their parenting skills. According to a new report in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, children"s temperament may be due in part to a combination of a certain gene and a specific pattern of brain activity.
News of the day
Xanodyne Receives Approval From The U.S. Food And Drug Administration For ZIPSOR(TM) (diclofenac Potassium) Liquid Filled Capsules
Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc. announced that it has received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Zipsor (diclofenac potassium) Liquid Filled Capsules, a new treatment option indicated for relief of mild to moderate acute pain in adults (18 years of age or older).
Public Health

In Metastatic Kidney Cancer, 2-Drug Combination Appears Safe And Active

Fox Chase Cancer Center investigators report that a two-drug blockade of mTOR signaling appears safe in metastatic kidney cancer in a phase I trial. Early data suggests that a combination of temsirolimus and bryostatin may be active in patients with rare forms of renal cell cancer, which are less likely to respond to other targeted therapies. Elizabeth Plimack, M.D., M.S., a medical oncologist and attending physician at Fox Chase reported the trial results on May 31 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. "We have certainly seen sustained responses with this combination which are encouraging," Plimack says. One of the patients with an extended response has papillary renal cell cancer, which is a rare form of the disease that does not respond well to standard therapies. "Patients with non-clear cell renal cell cancer, including papillary renal cancer, don"t respond as well to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as sunitinib and sorafenib, as patients with clear cell renal cell. So there is an unmet need for therapy for these patients. We"ve seen that this combination may be active to some degree for them." mTOR signaling promotes tumor cell proliferation and blood vessel development. Temsirolimus (Torisel), blocks signaling through one portion of the mTOR signaling complex, called TORC1, and slows tumor progression in patients with advanced kidney cancer. However, a second portion of the complex, called TORC2, is unaffected by temsirolimus and continues to promote cell proliferation. Therefore, Plimack and colleagues suspect that blocking TORC2 signaling activity could improve patient outcomes. Bryostatin blocks a downstream effector of TORC2, called protein kinase C. Plimack and colleagues designed the phase I trial to test the safety of the bryostatin-temsirolimus combination. Twenty-five patients enrolled in the trial, including 20 patients with renal cell carcinoma. The phase I trial tested a combination of 20 micrograms/m2 bryostatin weekly plus one of the following temsirolimus doses, 10, 15, 25, or 37.5 mg, every 28 days. The combination appears to be well tolerated in renal cell patients. Two patients developed dose limiting toxicities (one with renal toxicity and one with neutropenia) at the highest temsirolimus dose. Enrollment is now continuing with patients receiving 25 mg temsirolimus. (Two of the non-renal cell cancer patients developed dose-limiting toxicities early in the trial, after which point the investigators limited enrollment to patients who had not received prior chemotherapy.) Early responses in renal cell cancer patients are promising, according to Plimack. Three patients have had durable partial responses to therapy. Two of those individuals are off therapy and have partial responses continuing at 3+ years and 12+ months, and a third patient continues on therapy with a partial response extending beyond 22 months. Enrollment in the trial is on-going. Diana Quattrone Fox Chase Cancer Center


Add your comment:
Name:
Site address: http://
Your message:
Enter today\\\\'s date, 2 digits
(spam protection):