Tag Archives: benefit

Selena Gomez wows in silver gown at Rare Impact Fund Benefit in LA – Daily Mail

  1. Selena Gomez wows in silver gown at Rare Impact Fund Benefit in LA Daily Mail
  2. Selena Gomez Says She’s Feeling ‘Really Happy’ After ‘Years of Constant Back and Forth in My Head’ (Exclusive) PEOPLE
  3. Selena Gomez Hosts Inaugural Rare Impact Fund Benefit, Calling Mental Health Fund “The Most Important Thing That I’ve Ever Done” Hollywood Reporter
  4. Selena Gomez wears three different dresses for charity benefit Cosmopolitan UK
  5. Selena Gomez Spells The ‘Lavender Haze’ As She Turns A Gorgeous Living Flower During Latest Outing & Honestly, This Purple Barbie Could Give A Tough Competition To Margot Robbie! Koimoi
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Datopotamab deruxtecan demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival benefit in patients with HR-positive, HER2-low or negative breast cancer in TROPION-Breast01 Phase III trial – AstraZeneca

  1. Datopotamab deruxtecan demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival benefit in patients with HR-positive, HER2-low or negative breast cancer in TROPION-Breast01 Phase III trial AstraZeneca
  2. AstraZeneca, Daiichi hit first goal in breast cancer ADC trial FierceBiotech
  3. AstraZeneca, Daiichi breast cancer treatment succeeds in trial STAT
  4. Dr Liu on the 5-Year OS Data With Atezolizumab and Chemotherapy in ES-SCLC OncLive
  5. AstraZeneca and Daiichi’s breast cancer drug meets goal in study Reuters
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Todd Howard on Benefit of Starfield Xbox Exclusivity: ‘When You Think of Zelda You Think of Switch’ – IGN

  1. Todd Howard on Benefit of Starfield Xbox Exclusivity: ‘When You Think of Zelda You Think of Switch’ IGN
  2. Starfield isn’t “Skyrim in space”, and I’m torn on whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing Gamesradar
  3. Starfield Is A Better Game Because It’s Exclusive To Xbox And Not On PlayStation, Todd Howard Says GameSpot
  4. Starfield’s Xbox exclusivity ‘yielded a better product’, Todd Howard says | VGC Video Games Chronicle
  5. Todd Howard defends Starfield Xbox Series X/S exclusivity: “When you think of Zelda you think of the Switch” Gamesradar
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Opdivo (nivolumab) in Combination with Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy Shows Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival Benefit for Cisplatin-Eligible Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in the Phase 3 CheckMate -901 Trial – Bristol-Myers Squibb

  1. Opdivo (nivolumab) in Combination with Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy Shows Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival Benefit for Cisplatin-Eligible Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in the Phase 3 CheckMate -901 Trial Bristol-Myers Squibb
  2. Bristol Myers’ Opdivo stages comeback in bladder cancer, teeing up 2 ‘Merck’ showdowns FiercePharma
  3. Bristol Myers’ Opdivo extends survival in bladder cancer study Reuters
  4. First-line Nivolumab Plus Chemo Provides Survival Benefit in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma OncLive
  5. Study: Bladder Cancer Drug Extends Survival Newsmax

Read original article here

Novartis Kisqali® significantly reduced the risk of recurrence by 25% across a broad population of patients with early breast cancer; clinically meaningful benefit was consistent across subgroups – Novartis

  1. Novartis Kisqali® significantly reduced the risk of recurrence by 25% across a broad population of patients with early breast cancer; clinically meaningful benefit was consistent across subgroups Novartis
  2. Drug cuts risk of breast cancer recurrence for some early-stage patients, trial shows CNN
  3. Novartis drug cuts recurrence risk by 25% in early-stage breast cancer Reuters
  4. ASCO: Novartis details Kisqali’s adjuvant breast cancer win FiercePharma
  5. Breast cancer drug cuts risk of most common form returning by 25% The Guardian
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Will Bajrang Dal Ban Promise Hurt Or Benefit Cong? Rajdeep Sardesai & Shiv Aroor Share Their Views – India Today

  1. Will Bajrang Dal Ban Promise Hurt Or Benefit Cong? Rajdeep Sardesai & Shiv Aroor Share Their Views India Today
  2. Karnataka assembly polls: Local ‘stars’ fail to glitter in closely fought elections Times of India
  3. Karnataka Assembly Polls Live: EC asks Congress chief to clarify Sonia’s remark Hindustan Times
  4. Rajdeep Sardesai Shares His Views On Karnataka Polls: ‘Cong Is Benefiting From Partial Split In BJP’ India Today
  5. Karnataka elections 2023 live updates: EC sends notice to BJP over newspaper ad, seeks response from Congress over social media post on ‘sovereignty’ Times of India
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Pause in US development of AI would ‘simply benefit China,’ ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt warns – New York Post

  1. Pause in US development of AI would ‘simply benefit China,’ ex-Google boss Eric Schmidt warns New York Post
  2. Former Google CEO Rejects AI Research Pause Over China Fears Bloomberg
  3. China’s AI Dominance A Threat For US? Former Google CEO Speaks Out Against Proposed Pause – Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT), Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOG), Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOGL), Baidu (NASDAQ:BIDU) Benzinga
  4. Former Google CEO says AI pause would ‘simply benefit China’ Fox Business
  5. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt doesn’t support a 6-month A.I. pause ‘because it will simply benefit China’ Fortune
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Celebrations Can Benefit Your Health and Well-Being

Perceived social support is an important factor in maintaining good mental health and well-being. Studies have shown that individuals with high levels of perceived social support have better mental and physical health outcomes, and are less likely to experience depression, anxiety, and stress.

New research has found that celebrations that highlight accomplishments can boost the perception of social support.

New research shows that actively acknowledging positive life events and accomplishments while gathering for food and drink can increase feelings of social support.

The study, published in the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, found that celebrations that involve a social gathering, eating or drinking, and the intentional recognition of a positive life event can increase perceived social support. Previous research has shown that perceived social support, or the belief that one has a network of people who care about them and are available to provide help and support, is linked to improved health and well-being outcomes, such as increased lifespan and reduced anxiety and depression.

“Many celebrations this time of year include two of the three conditions – eating and drinking while gathering together,” said Kelley Gullo Wight, assistant professor at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business and co-author of the study. “Adding the third condition, making an intentional effort to recognize other’s positive achievements, is key. For example, take the time to congratulate someone for getting accepted to their first-choice university, or a work project that went well, or a new job offer. This will maximize the benefits to your well-being and the well-being of all the attendees at that holiday party.”

Wight and her co-authors, including professors Danielle Brick of the University of Connecticut, and James Bettman, Tanya Chartrand, and Gavan Fitzsimons of Duke University, used behavioral experiments to survey thousands of participants over several years.

The research revealed that even if gatherings are virtual, if everyone has food and drink (no matter if it’s healthy or indulgent) and they’re celebrating positive events, this also increases a person’s perceived social support, and they can receive the same well-being benefits from it.

It also has implications for marketing managers or anyone looking to raise funds for a good cause.

“We found that when people feel supported socially after a celebration, they’re more ‘pro-social,’ and more willing to volunteer their time or donate to a cause,” said Danielle Brick, assistant professor of marketing at the University of Connecticut and co-author on the study. “This would be a good time for non-profits to market donation campaigns, around the time many people are celebrating positive life events, like holidays or graduations.”

The researchers note that hosting celebrations that increase perceived social support can be especially beneficial at places serving populations more at-risk of loneliness and isolation, like nursing homes or community centers.

They also note the importance of understanding the well-being benefits of celebrations for policymakers looking to implement regulations or measures that could impact social gatherings, like COVID lockdowns, to avoid negative consequences to mental health. They recommend that if organizers need to have virtual celebrations, they should involve some type of consumption and the marking of a separate, positive life event, so people leave the celebration feeling socially supported.

Reference: “Celebrate Good Times: How Celebrations Increase Perceived Social Support” by Danielle J. Brick, Kelley Gullo Wight, James R. Bettman, Tanya L. Chartrand and Gavan J. Fitzsimons, 1 December 2022, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing.
DOI: 10.1177/07439156221145696



Read original article here

Medical experts divided on whether 2nd FDA-approved Alzheimer’s drug provides a benefit

An MRI scan of the brain of a patient affected by Alzheimer’s disease. (Getty Images)

The Food Drug and Administration recently approved a drug that may help patients in the early stages of Alzheimer’s by slowing down the progression of the disease. In clinical trials, the drug called lecanemab reduced the rate of cognitive decline among participants.

But doctors and health experts are divided on whether the drug warranted an accelerated FDA approval. While some of them have praised the agency’s decision, describing the drug as groundbreaking, others are skeptical of whether it provides a substantial benefit.

In the U.S, over 6 million people are living with Alzheimer’s, an incurable and fatal disease that affects the brain and causes loss of cognitive function over time. While there are available medications that can treat Alzheimer’s symptoms, there have been no treatments that can address the underlying cause of the disease. This is why some doctors have welcomed the accelerated approval of lecanemab. The FDA is likely to consider a full approval later this year.

“We’re pretty excited that we finally have something,” Dr. Reisa Sperling, who directs the Center for Alzheimer Research and Treatment at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, recently told NPR.

Heather Snyder, vice president of Medical and Scientific Relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, told Yahoo News the organization “celebrates” the Jan. 6 approval of the drug. “This is now the second approved treatment that evidence suggests changes the course of Alzheimer’s disease in a meaningful way,” she said.

Lecanemab, which will be marketed as Leqembi, is the second Alzheimer’s drug to receive a fast-track approval by the FDA. This accelerated authorization is usually given to promising treatments targeting diseases for which there are no other effective options available. In the summer of 2021, the agency gave a similar drug called aducanumab, sold under the brand name Aduhelm, accelerated approval as well. But the move was controversial because the FDA approved the drug despite conflicting evidence about whether it provided a benefit to patients, and against the recommendation of one of its committees of outside experts.

Aduhelm’s accelerated approval prompted a congressional investigation. Since then, the federal Medicare program has decided not to cover Aduhelm treatment for the general population, but only for patients who were enrolled in the clinical trial. Some hospital systems across the country have also declined to offer the drug to Alzheimer’s patients. Due to the controversy surrounding the drug’s efficacy and its high price, as well as the negative publicity it has received, few patients have gotten the treatment. As a result, many doctors who treat the disease have been left, once again, with limited options.

Snyder said that even though Leqembi is not a cure, by slowing the progression of the disease, the drug would give patients more time to enjoy aspects “of daily life.”

“That could be things like participating in a birthday party or going to a wedding, recognizing their spouse, their children, their grandchildren, their neighbors, and really that time is enabling an individual to also make decisions about their care as they go forward as well,” she said.

Lecanemab, which will be marketed as Leqembi, received accelerated approval by the FDA on Jan. 6. (Eisai via Reuters)

Like Aduhelm, the drug lecanemab was developed by Eisai in partnership with fellow drugmaker Biogen. These treatments are monoclonal antibody therapies that are designed to remove a substance called beta-amyloid from the brain. Beta-amyloid is a naturally occurring protein that becomes toxic when it clumps together and forms the sticky plaques that are a hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease.

The theory behind the development of monoclonal antibody treatments like lecanemab is that amyloid plaques cause the loss of brain cells that leads to cognitive decline in people who suffer from Alzheimer’s. By reducing the amount of amyloid plaques in the brain, these treatments are believed to help slow down the process of memory loss and cognitive decline.

In a clinical study of nearly 1,800 people in the early stages of Alzheimer’s, those who were given lecanemab for 18 months experienced 27% less decline in memory and thinking compared to those who received the placebo. Although the trial results were positive and unprecedented, some experts believe the excitement for the drug is not proportional to its apparent benefit.

“The clinical trial data shows a statistically significant but clinically undetectable difference in the outcome measure between active treatment and placebo over 18 months,” Dr. Michael Greicius, a professor of neurology and neurological sciences at Stanford University, told Yahoo News.

He said the accelerated FDA approval of lecanemab made sense because in clinical trials, the drug showed that it can affect a biomarker associated with a disease. In this case that biomarker is the reduction of beta-amyloid in the brain. “Lecanemab definitely removes amyloid plaques,” Greicius said.

But some experts fear that the approval of lecanemab will incentivize drug companies to focus on therapies targeting amyloid plaques while neglecting other treatment approaches that may be more fruitful.

“I do consider it a game changer but in a negative sense for how it will change the clinical and research landscape around Alzheimer’s disease,” Greicius said.

The new drug, which is given through intravenous infusions every two weeks, is costly. The companies that develop the medication have said it will price it at $26,500 per year. So far, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has said it will not cover the drug, and unless it receives full FDA approval that isn’t likely to change.

“What CMS is doing by restricting coverage for approved treatments is unprecedented,” Snyder said. “It’s not something we’ve seen before and it’s wrong.”

If CMS ultimately decides not to cover lecanemab, Greicius said, the drug will likely be used but not very widely, as it would have to be paid for out of pocket.

He noted that there are some safety concerns about lecanemab that need to be considered, particularly a condition that can occur with most other drugs that remove amyloid plaques from the brain, known as ARIA, or amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. Two forms of ARIA involve brain swelling and bleeding.

In the lecanemab study, more than 12% of people who got the drug experienced swelling of the brain, and more than 17% had bleeding. While few participants experienced complications, there have been at least three deaths linked to the drug, though those patients appeared to have had additional risk factors.

But Snyder said these side effects should not be a reason for doctors and patients in the early stages of the disease to not consider the medication.

“It’s really important to remember this, Alzheimer’s is fatal … and all treatments have side effects” she said. “So it’s important that we manage those and we understand them, and an individual should weigh any treatment decision — not just with this medication or this disease, but across the board — be able to weigh the potential benefits and risks [in] conversation with their clinician.”

Read original article here

In clinical trials for cancer, patients often overestimate the benefit

Comment

Recently, I saw a patient who drove six hours to consult with me. He was a former boxer, a light heavyweight, and had a leukemia that refused to be knocked out by a few rounds of chemotherapy. He looked like an aged version of the movie fighter Rocky, though his voice was gravelly, more like the Burgess Meredith character, Mickey Goldmill, Rocky’s trainer.

“What do I have to do to get rid of my leukemia? I’ll try anything,” he said to me earnestly. “I heard you had a study going on here. I want in!”

He was interested in enrolling in a clinical trial of a new immunotherapy treatment that harnessed a patient’s own immune system to target and eliminate leukemia cells. His doctor told him we had the trial available at our cancer center.

The clinical trial was a Phase 1 study, more dramatically called a “first in human” trial — the first time a drug is given to people following what’s called “preclinical” testing. The primary purpose of Phase 1 trials is to find the right drug dose and to assess the safety of that drug — and not to determine whether the drug actually works.

In these trials, in fact, the chance that a drug will be at all effective at treating a patient’s cancer is historically less than 15 percent.

What motivates people to enroll in trials to receive an experimental drug before its efficacy — and even its dose — has been clearly determined, and ostensibly, the purpose of such a trial has nothing to do with shrinking a person’s cancer?

What motivates patients to enroll in clinical trials?

In one study, surveys asking this very question were mailed to nearly 300 cancer trial participants. When patients were asked the primary motivation for participating in a clinical trial, 45 percent of respondents who were enrolled in Phase 1 trials said they were motivated by the possibility that they would receive medical benefits from the treatment.

The next highest motivations for adults participating in Phase 1 trials was trusting the study doctor (17 percent), to maintain hope (15 percent), and to help future patients (4 percent). This last category is considered medical altruism, as in wanting to help advance medical science. These tend to be more common in patients with better prognoses.

Why then did almost half of these patients enroll in a cancer clinical trial hoping for a drug that would work, when the goal of the trial was only to find the right drug dose?

Imagine you’re my patient, with a leukemia that has continued to burn despite multiple rounds of chemotherapy. Your doctor tells you that there aren’t any more treatment options available, so you’d better go to the university hospital nearby, or to one of the big academic hospitals where they might be running a clinical trial of a new drug.

A communication gap in signing up for a clinical trial

To someone like my patient, who feels well enough to drive six hours for a consultation, a clinical trial becomes the next treatment step, regardless of what that trial entails or any promises that the drug might work, simply because his doctor told him one exists.

Probably a more common reason, though, is that those of us involved in clinical research don’t effectively communicate the true goals of such an early phase trial.

Such ineffective communication can lead to therapeutic misconception — the belief that the purpose of the research is to directly benefit the individual patient enrolling in the trial, when in reality only future patients will benefit from the research.

Another study examined how doctors communicated the risks and benefits of participating in Phase 1 trials to 85 families of pediatric cancer patients. Risks of the drug treatments were discussed 95 percent of the time, with 81 of 85 families. It is a bit surprising that this didn’t occur 100 percent of the time, as these Phase 1 trials involved chemotherapy.

Therapeutic benefits were discussed almost as frequently — 88 percent of the time, for 75 of 85 families. Altruism was mentioned to 41 percent of families. In 13 percent of conversations, though, the clinical trial was actually described as a bridge to another therapy or to extend life — despite no evidence that these first-in-human drug treatments would even work to shrink the cancer.

‘I’m not ready to throw in the towel yet’

People with end-stage cancer pursue treatment for a variety of reasons, and are willing to withstand tremendous side effects from drugs for the potential of even tiny benefits.

As health care providers, it’s our responsibility to understand those motivations and ensure that our patients don’t enroll in a clinical trial with the wrong goal in mind — and take particular care that we don’t misinform our patients about what treatment goals are even possible.

I asked my patient if he was sure he wanted to pursue another treatment for his leukemia, given the vanishingly low chance that it would work.

“Nah doc, I’m not ready to throw in the towel yet. I’m still tough as nails!” He lifted his arms and gave the air a couple of jabs, to emphasize his point.

He qualified for the trial and spent the next month in the hospital, enduring substantial side effects to the therapy but retaining his remarkable spirit throughout. But at the end of that month, the leukemia remained despite his — and our — efforts.

I saw him in my clinic one final time before he returned home, and apologized for how he had spent what would turn out to be his final weeks. I felt terrible that he had spent this time in a foreign city, withstanding the blows of an experimental therapy, instead of being home with his family.

He waved me off. “Doc, it was worth a shot, right? And I figure, maybe you learned something by studying me, and I help someone else in the future.”

His altruism was so moving. And maybe to my patient, just having the moxie to take that treatment step — to get into the ring one more time and say he had explored every avenue — had been the point all along.

Mikkael A. Sekeres, MD, MS is chief of hematology at the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami. He is the former chair of the FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee and author of the book Drugs and the FDA: Safety, Efficacy, and the Public’s Trust. Follow him on Twitter @MikkaelSekeres.

Sign up for the Well+Being newsletter, your source of expert advice and simple tips to help you live well every day

Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site