Researchers at the National Institutes of Health have discovered that a rare cancer of the digestive tract is linked to a shutdown in an enzyme that helps supply oxygen to cells.
In some cases, the enzyme's failure to function resulted from errors in genes containing the information needed to make the enzyme. In others, the cause could not be identified, but was believed to be genetic.
Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are tumors of the esophagus, stomach, and intestines. They occur in cells of the nervous system, which control the muscles of the digestive tract.
Within the last 10 years, researchers have found that the majority of adults who develop GIST have mutations in two genes, known as KIT and PDGFRA. The drug imatinib (Gleevec) is effective in treating many GIST having mutations in these genes. Unfortunately, most GIST tumors that occur in children do not have KIT or PDGFRA mutations, and imatinib is not effective for treating them. Pediatric GIST is very rare, occurring in less than 1 in a million individuals each year.
For the current study, the researchers set out to find genetic causes of GIST among individuals who do not have mutations in the genes for KIT or PDGFRA. The researchers examined tissue from 34 GIST patients for mutations in the genes for succinate dehydrogenase, an enzyme that processes oxygen to obtain energy for cells. The researchers narrowed their search to genes for succinate dehydrogenase because earlier research has shown that mutations in this enzyme are a hallmark of Carney Stratakis syndrome, a rare disorder in which individuals develop GIST and paraganglioma, a tumor that also affects cells of the nervous system.
The researchers found that 12 percent of the GIST patients in their study had mutations in genes containing the information needed to make the up the parts, or subunits, of succinate dehydrogenase. Specifically, the patients had defects in the B and C subunits of the enzyme. Although the remaining patients did not have any of these mutations, succinate dehydrogenase in tissue from their tumors did not appear to be functioning and cellular respiration was disrupted. The researchers believe that undiscovered mutations account for the enzyme’s failure to function.
“Tracing the roots of this disease to cellular respiration has yielded a promising lead on how GIST tumors might form,” said senior author Constantine A. Stratakis, M.D., D.Sc., acting director of the Division of Intramural Research at the NIH’s Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD, and one of the researchers after whom Carney Stratakis syndrome was named. “The finding may also lead to the development of treatments for GIST subtypes that have not responded to traditional therapies.”
First authors Katherine A. Janeway, M.D., of the Dana–Farber Cancer Institute and Children’s Hospital, Boston, and Su Young Kim, M.D., Ph.D., of the National Cancer Institute worked with Dr. Stratakis; colleagues at their respective institutions and at others in Miami, San Antonio, Boston, New York, France, the Netherlands, Austria and Ireland; and members of the NIH Pediatric and Wild-Type GIST Clinic (http://www.pediatricgist.cancer.gov/). The research also was funded in part by the NIH Office of Rare Diseases, the National Cancer Institute, the NICHD, the GIST Cancer Research Fund, the St. Baldrick’s Foundation, the Voelcker Fund Investigator Award, the Health Research Board of Ireland, the Life Raft Group, the Shuman Family Fund for GIST Research, the Leduq foundation the and the government of Ireland.
The findings were published online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The body's healthy cells require oxygen to access energy, grow and multiply, Dr. Stratakis explained. Previous research has shown that tumors use oxygen differently than do normal cells.
“Our next goal is to identify the other genes that control the normal cellular respiration process and determine if mutations in these genes play a role in cancer,” Dr. Stratakis added.
The study was undertaken at the NIH Pediatric and Wild-Type GIST Clinic, established to increase understanding of GIST, and its causes, and further new treatments. The clinic, located at the NIH Campus in Bethesda, Md., is supported by the NICHD and the National Cancer Institute.
The NICHD sponsors research on development, before and after birth; maternal, child, and family health; reproductive biology and population issues; and medical rehabilitation. For more information, visit the Institute’s Web site at http://www.nichd.nih.gov/.
NCI leads the National Cancer Program and the NIH effort to dramatically reduce the burden of cancer and improve the lives of cancer patients and their families, through research into prevention and cancer biology, the development of new interventions, and the training and mentoring of new researchers. For more information about cancer, please visit the NCI Web site at http://www.cancer.gov or call NCI's Cancer Information Service at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237).
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) — The Nation's Medical Research Agency — includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and it investigates the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit http://www.nih.gov.
Image information: URL: http://www.nichd.nih.gov/news/releases/images/GIST_release-graphic_700.jpg Alt text: succinate dehydrogenase and its component parts Caption: The enzyme succinate dehydrogenase processes oxygen to supply energy to the cell. It is embedded in the outer membrane of mitochondria, cellular structures which supply energy to the cell. The enzyme is made up of parts, or subunits. The researchers found that some patients with GIST had mutations in the genes for the B and C subunits of the enzyme. In other cases, the enzyme failed to function, presumably because of other, as yet undiscovered, mutations.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) — The Nation's Medical Research Agency — includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting basic, clinical and translational medical research, and it investigates the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
NIH researchers link rare cancer to cell oxygen deficiency
Monday, December 20, 2010
How Drug Companies Bribe Doctors to Suck You Into Their Web
With that kind of marketing budget, it’s easy to understand how drugs have become the first line of defense in many physicians’ offices, rather than the last resorts they should really be. But when you uncover the tactics used by drug representatives -- some of them revealed in the video above -- it goes way beyond “marketing.”
Psychological warfare would be a better way to describe it.
Drug Reps Use Unbelievable Tactics to Manipulate Doctors
Drug reps are taught tactics for manipulating doctors for industry benefit; it’s a standard part of their training because doctors are essentially their “dealers.”
Shahram Ahari, who was featured in the above video, is a former drug rep who has spoken out before. He spent two years selling Prozac and Zypraxa for Eli Lily and told a Senate Aging Committee that his job involved "rewarding physicians with gifts and attention for their allegiance to your product and company despite what may be ethically appropriate."
Ahari describes sales tactics that were openly taught to new reps during a training class, including:
- How to exceed spending limits for important clients
- How to be generous with free samples to leverage sales
- How to use friendships and personal gifts to foster a "quid pro quo" relationship
- How to exploit sexual tension
If you think that last one is a stretch, think again. Drug companies commonly hire former cheerleaders, ex-models, former athletes and military members to ensure their reps have a certain appealing look and outgoing personality.
Pharmaceutical sales reps are trained in tactics that are on par with some of the most potent brainwashing techniques used throughout the world, according to one PLoS report co-authored by Ahari.
The report states:“Pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars annually to ensure that physicians most susceptible to marketing prescribe the most expensive, most promoted drugs to the most people possible.
The foundation of this influence is a sales force of 100,000 drug reps that provides rationed doses of samples, gifts, services, and flattery to a subset of physicians …
Physicians are susceptible to corporate influence because they are overworked, overwhelmed with information and paperwork, and feel underappreciated. Cheerful and charming, bearing food and gifts, drug reps provide respite and sympathy; they appreciate how hard doctor's lives are, and seem only to want to ease their burdens.
But … every word, every courtesy, every gift, and every piece of information provided is carefully crafted, not to assist doctors or patients, but to increase market share for targeted drugs.”
The Brainwashing Begins in Medical School
Unsuspecting medical students and residents are among the drug companies’ best targets. Drug reps can take advantage of their naivety and inexperience to successfully “train” them to be top prescribers even before they finish medical school.
Drug companies are allowed to develop their own education curriculum for medical students and residents, lavishing them with gifts, indirectly paying them to attend meetings and events where they promote the company’s products.
Even Harvard Medical School, one of the most prestigious in the United States, recently earned an F for its policies regarding accepting money and gifts from drug companies.
The grade came from the American Medical Student Association (AMSA), which ranked 150 medical schools according to their ties to industry. The more money and other incentives a school was receiving from the pharmaceutical industry, the worse grade they got.
Harvard earned the lowest grade possible. According to AMSA:
- Out of Harvard's 8,900 professors and lecturers, 1,600 admit that they or a family member have ties to drug companies that could bias their teaching or research.
- The pharmaceutical industry contributed more than $11.5 million to Harvard in 2008 for “research and continuing education classes.”
Impressionable medical students are being indoctrinated into the drug-based model of disease care as we speak. It goes on all the time, and I can vouch for this personally as I, too, was brainwashed in medical school to favor the drug paradigm.
In the mid '80s, I was actually a paid speaker for the drug companies. They would fly me to various physician education events around the country and pay me a very generous stipend to lecture to these groups. That was more than two decades ago, before I was able to remove myself from their very powerful brainwashing techniques -- and I was finally able to understand the truth of what they were doing.
Your Physician is Likely Influenced by These Persuasive Tactics
If you think your physician will be able to see past these persuasive tactics, think again -- and it’s not about intelligence or even ethics. Your physician may be very intelligent, and he or she may have every intention of NOT listening to a drug rep’s sales pitch.
But maybe she just wants to take advantage of the free samples they’re handing out to offer them to her patients. And there the rep gets a foot in the door, and even if he doesn’t say another word is able to keep a certain drug’s name upfront in this physician’s mind. And maybe he’ll drop off a few pens and pads of paper, also with the drug’s name, in case it starts to wear off.
Even if your doctor isn’t prescribing many targeted drugs, there are ways that drug reps will get that to change.
Drug companies have been hiring outside firms to purchase data on doctors from pharmacies since the mid-1990s. The reports letdrug sales representatives see a doctor’s prescribing habits, among other things, which lets them know:
- If their sales pitches are working
- How to change their sales pitch if they’re not
For example, if the report shows a doctor generally prescribes a drug’s competitor, they can prepare a sales pitch specifically to discredit the competing drug. Meanwhile, those doctors who do regularly prescribe their drugs would likely be singled out to receive some “incentives” to keep doing so.
As Ahari said:
“It's my job to figure out what a physician's price is. For some it's dinner at the finest restaurants, for others it's enough convincing data to let them prescribe confidently and for others it's my attention and friendship ... but at the most basic level, everything is for sale and everything is an exchange.”
How to Stay Safe in a Medical System Run by Drug Pushers
If you’re prescribed a drug, how do you know that it’s really necessary and safe, as opposed to one made by a company that’s paying off, or essentially brainwashing, your doctor?
You don’t, and that’s why you’ve got to learn to get your own information. Do not take a drug just because your doctor prescribes it. First, learn what the drug is supposed to do, how it may help you, how it could harm you and, most importantly, what alternatives there are.
Drug companies are willing to do just about anything to make you, and your physician, think their drugs are great -- quietly devising a hit list of doctors to silence, collecting secret reports on doctors, buying off Congress, advertising to you in your living room, even corrupting studies in medical journals so they show only favorable results.
It isn’t always easy to fight back against this system, but know that the drug companies are not going to protect you.
And it is unlikely that your physician can protect you either -- even a well-meaning one -- when he or she is operating within a system that has become RIGGED for Big Pharma profit.
You are the only one that can protect yourself and your family. You need to Take Control of Your Health. Search my Web site and the Web for answers. Don’t trust what your doctor tells you at face value.
Make sure you double and triple check every recommendation, as your health is too precious a commodity to lose to some carefully manipulated recommendation by the drug company.
So remember to stay alert and informed before taking any new drug, and maintain a naturally healthy lifestyle that will optimize your body’s innate healing abilities and minimize your need for the drug companies’ latest concoctions.
And for those of you in medical school right now, or planning to enter soon, please become familiar with AMSA’s PharmFree campaign. Aside from being a great source of information, their site offers guides and kits to help you make positive changes, including major policy reforms, at your own school.
Friday, December 17, 2010
AHRQ News and Numbers
U.S. workers took an average of 14 sick days in 2007 due to their own illness or injury, or to care for a sick child or other family member.
On average, employees took 10 days off because they were sick or injured and an additional 4 to care for family members.
[Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, MEPS, Statistical Brief #300: Restricted-Activity Days, 2007: Estimates for the U.S. Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population, Ages 16-64]
HHS HealthBeat (December 17, 2010)
Weight training after breast cancer
From the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, I’m Ira Dreyfuss with HHS HealthBeat.
Women who get breast cancer treatment may develop possibly painful swelling in the arm or side affected by treatment, such as removal of lymph nodes near the breast with cancer. These nodes ordinarily hold and drain fluid, and the fluid can then back up.
But a study finds that a program of slow but increasing weight training can cut the risk of the condition, which is called lymphedema. At the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Dr. Kathryn Schmitz looked at data on 154 women. Half of the women lifted weights twice a week:
``Women who did the weight training were less likely to have increases in arm swelling than women who did not do the weight training.’’ (6 seconds)
The study in the Journal of the American Medical Association was supported by the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more at hhs.gov.
HHS HealthBeat is a production of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. I’m Ira Dreyfuss.
Last revised: December, 16 2010
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
CDC Reports 1 in 6 Get Sick from Foodborne Illnesses Each Year
New estimates more precise
About 48 million people (1 in 6 Americans) get sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die each year from foodborne diseases, according new estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The figures are the most accurate to date due to better data and methods used. The data are published Wednesday in two articles in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases.
The papers provide the most accurate picture yet of what foodborne pathogens are causing the most illness, as well as estimating the proportion of foodborne illness without a known cause. The reports are the first comprehensive estimates since 1999 and are CDC's first to estimate illnesses caused solely by foods eaten in the United States.
"We've made progress in better understanding the burden of foodborne illness and unfortunately, far too many people continue to get sick from the food they eat," said CDC Director Thomas Frieden, M.D, M.P.H. "These estimates provide valuable information to help CDC and its partners set priorities and further reduce illnesses from food."
CDC's new estimates are lower than in the 1999 report. The difference is largely the result of improvements in the quality and quantity of the data used and new methods used to estimate foodborne-disease. For example, it is now known that most norovirus is not spread by the foodborne route, which has reduced the estimate of foodborne norovirus from 9.2 to approximately 5.5 million cases per year. Because of data and method improvements, the 1999 and current estimates cannot be compared to measure trends.
CDC's FoodNet surveillance system data, which tracks trends among common foodborne pathogens, has documented a decrease of 20 percent in illnesses from key pathogens during the past 10 years. However, these FoodNet pathogens make up only a small proportion of the illnesses included in the new estimates.
Of the total estimate of 48 million illnesses annually, CDC estimates that 9.4 million illnesses are due to 31 known foodborne pathogens. The remaining 38 million illnesses result from unspecified agents, which include known agents without enough data to make specific estimates, agents not yet recognized as causing foodborne illness, and agents not yet discovered. In both the 1999 and current estimates, unspecified agents were responsible for roughly 80 percent of estimated illnesses.
"Foodborne illnesses and deaths are preventable, and as such, are unacceptable," said FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D. "We must, and can, do better by intensifying our efforts to implement measures that are prevention-oriented and science-based. We are moving down this path as quickly as possible under current authorities but eagerly await passage of new food safety legislation that would provide us with new and long overdue tools to further modernize our food safety program."
Among the additional findings for foodborne illness due to known pathogens:
- Salmonella was the leading cause of estimated hospitalizations and deaths, responsible for about 28 percent of deaths and 35 percent of hospitalizations due to known pathogens transmitted by food.
- About 90 percent of estimated illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths were due to seven pathogens: Salmonella, norovirus, Campylobacter, Toxoplasma, E.coli O157, Listeria and Clostridium perfringens.
- Nearly 60 percent of estimated illnesses, but a much smaller proportion of severe illness, was caused by norovirus.
"People expect food to nourish them, not to harm them. So we need to intensify efforts to decrease the number of illnesses and deaths due to foodborne diseases," said Christopher Braden, M.D., director of CDC's Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases. "We now know more than ever what pathogens are causing the most harm, and we will continue our work to help protect people from these illnesses. Much that remains unknown about how and why people get sick and we are committed to learning more in the future."
CDC continues to encourage consumers to take an active role in preventing foodborne infection by following safe food-handling and preparation tips of separating meats and produce while preparing foods, cooking meat and poultry to the right temperatures, promptly chilling leftovers, and avoiding unpasteurized milk and cheese and raw oysters.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Exposure to tobacco smoke causes immediate damage, says new surgeon general's report
Exposure to tobacco smoke – even occasional smoking or secondhand smoke – causes immediate damage to your body that can lead to serious illness or death, according to a report released today by U.S. Surgeon General Regina M. Benjamin. The comprehensive scientific report - Benjamin’s first Surgeon General’s report and the 30th tobacco-related Surgeon General’s report issued since 1964 - describes specific pathways by which tobacco smoke damages the human body and leads to disease and death.
The report, How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease, finds that cellular damage and tissue inflammation from tobacco smoke are immediate, and that repeated exposure weakens the body’s ability to heal the damage.
“The chemicals in tobacco smoke reach your lungs quickly every time you inhale causing damage immediately,” Benjamin said in releasing the report. “Inhaling even the smallest amount of tobacco smoke can also damage your DNA, which can lead to cancer.”
"Over the last two years we have stepped up efforts to reduce tobacco use, including implementing legislation to regulate tobacco products, investing in local tobacco control efforts and expanding access to insurance coverage for tobacco cessation" said Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. "This will remain a key priority of this Administration."
The report also explains why it is so difficult to quit smoking. According to the research, cigarettes are designed for addiction. The design and contents of current tobacco products make them more attractive and addictive than ever before. Today’s cigarettes deliver nicotine more quickly and efficiently than cigarettes of many years ago.
Tobacco smoke contains a deadly mixture of more than 7,000 chemicals and compounds, of which hundreds are toxic and at least 70 cause cancer. Every exposure to these cancer-causing chemicals could damage DNA in a way that leads to cancer. Exposure to smoke also decreases the benefits of chemotherapy and other cancer treatments. Smoking causes more than 85% of lung cancers and can cause cancer almost anywhere in the body. One in three cancer deaths in the U.S. is tobacco-related.
The report describes how the delicate lining of the lungs becomes inflamed as soon as it is exposed to the chemical mixture in cigarette smoke. Over time, the smoke can cause chronic obstructive pulmonary disease including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
Even brief exposure to secondhand smoke can cause cardiovascular disease and could trigger acute cardiac events, such as heart attack. The report describes how chemicals from tobacco smoke quickly damage blood vessels and make blood more likely to clot. The evidence in this report shows how smoking causes cardiovascular disease and increases risks for heart attack, stroke, and aortic aneurysm.
Smoking causes many other harmful effects throughout the body, including making it harder for diabetics to control their blood sugar. Smoking makes it harder for women to get pregnant and can cause a miscarriage, preterm delivery, low birth weight, as well as damage to fetal lungs and brain tissue. Babies who are exposed to secondhand smoke are more likely to die from sudden infant death syndrome, the report finds.
“This report makes it clear – quitting at any time gives your body a chance to heal the damage caused by smoking,” the Surgeon General said. “It’s never too late to quit, but the sooner you do it, the better.”
Fortunately, there are now more effective ways to help people quit than ever before. Nicotine replacement is available over the counter and doctors can prescribe medications that improve the chances of successful quit attempts. Smokers can also call 1-800-QUIT-NOW for help.
To help communicate the report findings as widely as possible, the Surgeon General unveiled an easy-to-read guide with practical information about how tobacco smoke causes disease, A Report of the Surgeon General: How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: What It Means to You.
Copies of the full report, executive summary, and the easy-to-read guide may be downloaded at www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/tobaccosmoke/index.html.
To order printed copies of these documents, go to http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco and click the Publications Catalog link under Tools & Resources.
###
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Daily Dose Of Aspirin Could Cut Cancer Risk
A daily dose of aspirin can cut the risk of dying from cancer by more than a third, according to a new study.
The doctors studied trials involving more than 25,000 people, who were taking 75mg of aspirin a day - a quarter of the normal pain-killing dose.
Five years after starting treatment, cancer deaths fall by 34%.
Professor Peter Rothwell, who led the research, said the benefits far outweigh the risk of bleeding in the stomach.
He told Sky News: "If you wanted to reduce your risk of cancer, then the sensible time to think about taking aspirin would be starting in your mid-40s.
"That's when the risk of cancer goes up very steeply, but the risk of bleeding is still relatively low - and continuing to take it until you're 70."
At that age, most cancers would have been prevented, but the risk of gastric bleeding increases, he said.
The research, published in The Lancet medical journal, shows that aspirin reduces deaths from prostate cancer by 10%, lung cancer by 30% and gullet cancer by 60%.
Professor Peter Elwood, from the University of Cardiff, has studied aspirin for many years.
He said the drug - first derived from willow bark - was highly potent.
"Here's a naturally occurring substance which affects basic mechanisms within the cell at the initiation of cancer.
"So it's going to have effects on many cancers, if not all cancers, right at the beginning. It is prevention," he added.
The risk of a stomach bleeding while taking aspirin is around one in a thousand each year.
But Professor Elwood said taking aspirin with a glass of milk can reduce the damage to the stomach.
Aspirin sharply reduces cancer risk: study
The new study, published in the British medical journal The Lancet, reveals for the first time that aspirin also helps protect against prostate, lung, brain, and throat cancers, among others.
"These findings provide the first proof in man that aspirin reduces deaths due to several common cancers," said Peter Rothwell, a professor at the University of Oxford and lead author of the study.
Rothwell and colleagues reviewed eight previous clinical trials involving a total of more than 25,500 patients. In each, some subjects took aspirin and others look-alike placebos.
None of the studies were originally designed to measure the impact of the drug on the incidence of cancer.
During the trials, which lasted four-to-eight years, doses of aspirin as low as 75 milligrams -- a fraction the normal dose for a headache -- cut cancer deaths overall by 21 percent.
Risk was especially reduced after five years of treatment with the drug, by 30 to 40 percent depending on the type of cancer.
Three of the eight trials ran long enough to examine the impact of aspirin over a period of two decades.
The 20-year risk dropped on average by a fifth: 10 percent for prostate cancer, 30 percent for lung cancer, 40 percent for colon cancer, and 60 percent for oesophageal cancer.
For cancer of the lung and throat, the protective effect was confined to adenocarcinomas, the type typically seen in non-smokers.
"Perhaps the most important finding for the longer term is the proof of principle that cancers can be prevented by simple compounds like aspirin, and that 'chemo-prevention' is therefore a realistic goal," Rothwell said.
The length of time before the benefits of taking aspirin kicked in also varied: five years for throat, pancreatic, brain and lung cancer, about 10 years for stomach and colorectal cancer, and 15 years for prostate cancer.
The reductions in stomach and brain cancers, however, were more difficult to quantify because of the smaller number of deaths recorded.
"These promising results build on a large body of evidence suggesting that aspirin could reduce the risk of developing or dying from many different types of cancer," said Ed Yong of Cancer Research UK in commenting on the study.
"This tells us that even small doses reduce the risk of dying from cancer provided it is taken for at least five years."
Many doctors recommend regular use of aspirin to lower the risk of heart attack, clot-related strokes and other blood flow problems.
But daily use of the drug, available without prescription, may cause stomach problems, including stomach bleeding. Alcohol use can aggravate these symptoms.
"We encourage anyone interested in taking aspirin on a regular basis to talk to their doctor first," Yong said.
Aspirin is believed to have a preventive effect because it inhibits an enzyme called COX-2, which promotes cell proliferation in cancer tumours.
In rich nations, the lifetime risk of developing cancer is about 40 percent, with rates in the developing world increasing.
Aspirin could reduce cancer risk
Scientists are stopping short of urging healthy people to take aspirin, which is known to increase the risk of internal bleeding.
But they say the new findings shift the risk-benefit balance in favour of aspirin, and could lead to a revision of medical guidelines.
Aspirin treatment to ward off cancer would probably be most effective between the ages of about 45 to 50, which is when when most cancers start to develop, say the researchers.
The drug is already taken by millions of Britons at risk of heart attacks or strokes.
Regular low doses of aspirin help to prevent the changes that lead to narrowed arteries and blood clots. But in recent years evidence has started to emerge of much wider benefits from aspirin, leading to its description as a "miracle drug".
A previous study has shown that a 75 milligram dose of aspirin a day can reduce death rates from bowel cancer by more than a third.
