Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

Q: Clearly, the costs involved in cancer treatment already are high. By removing a layer of treatment from an estimated 40,000 patients, those costs would have to drop, but it is unclear from the story by how much. Also, it would have been worth mentioning whether this is likely to affect how insurance companies handle lymph node removals. The story did a good job providing some numbers on benefits, but we wish it had provided more and explained some things a bit more. It says, for example, “In 27 percent of the women who had additional nodes removed, those nodes were cancerous.” How many women had additional nodes removed and, of those, how many had cancerous nodes? A figure like 27% means 1 out of every 4 women had nodes that were, indeed, cancerous, which seems to conflict with other statements in the story about chemotherapy and radiation wiping out the cancer. The story discusses several harms from lymph node removal, and shows that the difference in survival for women who had nodes removed and those who did not was not significant. “Indeed, women in the study who had the nodes taken out were far more likely (70 percent versus 25 percent) to have complications like infections, abnormal sensations and fluid collecting in the armpit. They were also more likely to have lymphedema.” This is where the story really outperformed some of the competition covering the same news. It placed the study into the broader context of a movement in cancer care away from surgeries that don’t provide a clear benefit, and it also explained the study design and the limitations of the study in several ways. “The study, at 115 medical centers, included 891 patients. Their median age was in the mid-50s, and they were followed for a median of 6.3 years. … One potential weakness in the study is that there was not complete follow-up information on 166 women, about equal numbers from each group. The researchers said that did not affect the results. A statistician who was not part of the study said the missing information should have been discussed further, but probably did not have an important impact. It is not known whether the findings also apply to women who do not have radiation and chemotherapy, or to those who have only part of the breast irradiated. Nor is it known whether the findings could be applied to other types of cancer.” It was too bad that it did not mention limitations in terms of lack of enrollment. The targeted enrollment was 1900. There also was an imbalance in the randomization that should have been mentioned. The story is careful to explain to readers that the research findings only apply to a subset of women with breast cancer. “Now, researchers report that for women who meet certain criteria — about 20 percent of patients, or 40,000 women a year in the United States — taking out cancerous nodes has no advantage. It does not change the treatment plan, improve survival or make the cancer less likely to recur. And it can cause complications like infection and lymphedema, a chronic swelling in the arm that ranges from mild to disabling.” The Q&A that ran with the story provided more detail about the different types of cancers and cancer patients, noting, for example, “First of all, 20 percent (the estimate of the study’s lead author, Dr. Armando E. Giuliano) refers to 20 percent of all the newly diagnosed cases of invasive breast cancer each year. This does not include noninvasive breast cancer, or DCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ. The total is about 207,000, so 20 percent is roughly 40,000 women. That is about how many women would match those in the study, in terms of tumor status, affected lymph nodes and course of treatment.”  The story also says, “The results mean that women like those in the study will still have to have at least one lymph node removed, to look for cancer and decide whether they will need more treatment. But taking out just one or a few nodes should be enough.” Good quotes including from Dr. Monica Morrow, chief of the breast service at Sloan-Kettering and an author of the study, but also a few fromindependent experts toward the end. Dr. Grant W. Carlson, a professor of surgery at the Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, and the author of an editorial accompanying the study, provides some soul-searching context by saying that, in taking out so many lymph nodes, “I have a feeling we’ve been doing a lot of harm.” Dr. Elisa R. Port, the chief of breast surgery at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Manhattan, said, “It’s definitely practice-changing.” And Dr. Alison Estabrook, the chief of the comprehensive breast center at St. Luke’s-Roosevelt hospital in New York said, “In the past, surgeons thought our role was to get out all the cancer. … Now he’s saying we don’t really have to do that.” The story does a great job explaining the history of this form of treatment and how it has evolved over time. “But doctors have continued to think that even microscopic disease in the lymph nodes should be cut out to improve the odds of survival. And until recently, they counted cancerous lymph nodes to gauge the severity of the disease and choose chemotherapy. But now the number is not so often used to determine drug treatment, doctors say. What matters more is whether the disease has reached any nodes at all. If any are positive, the disease could become deadly. Chemotherapy is recommended, and the drugs are the same, no matter how many nodes are involved.” The story goes on to do something that stories like this rarely do, it compares compares the harms from different forms of treatment, saying “After armpit surgery, 20 percent to 30 percent of women develop lymphedema, Dr. Port said, and radiation may increase the rate to 40 percent to 50 percent. Physical therapy can help, but there is no cure.” The story makes it clear that removing all under-arm lymph nodes is the standard of care for women with breast cancer and that feelings about that standard are entrenched. The story establishes that a change in treatment protocol away from removing all the lymph nodes under the arms of women with breast cancer would be novel. There is some nuance, here, though that could be missed by a casual reader. Women who have one to two positive lymph nodes would avoid having additional lymph node surgery. The overall tone of the story may make it appear to some readers that women get to avoid lymph node surgery altogether, but they don’t. The story goes well beyond any news release.

A: Lymph Node Study Shakes Pillar of Breast Cancer Care
****
Q: Former Minister of Health Oly Ilunga was taken into custody, police said in a statement Saturday. Ilunga resigned in July to protest President Felix Tshisekedi’s decision to take over the management of the response to the world’s second deadliest Ebola outbreak, which is ongoing now in eastern Congo, from Ilunga. As he resigned, Ilunga deplored the lack of cooperation between him, the president and the prime minister in response to the deadly Ebola outbreak. Police said Saturday that Ilunga had been arrested less than a month ago for misdemeanor offenses involving the mishandling of funds and he was released. He has since made plans to travel to the neighboring Republic of Congo, they said, adding he was taken into custody to make sure he would not avoid legal proceedings. Congo’s National Ebola Response Committee released the latest Ebola numbers Friday after a discussion in Goma by the Catholic Church and the Anglican Church about efforts to help stem the spread of Ebola in communities. A mistrust of health workers and widespread security issues still threaten the fight against the Ebola outbreak in a region where armed groups have fought for decades over the mineral-rich land. The committee reported there were 3,002 confirmed Ebola cases with 1,974 confirmed deaths. The World Health Organization said Friday they recorded 40 new cases of Ebola — the lowest weekly incidence of Ebola since March 2019 — but said it was unclear if this positive trend would continue.

A: Congo police detain ex-health minister in Ebola funds probe.
****
Q: “The two drugs work through different mechanisms of action,  but there is a synergistic effect that inhibits the growth of  prostate cancer cells,” said Xi Cheng, assistant research  professor at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, who  conducted the study. His team administered a combination of Celebrex, a  non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug used to treat arthritis  and other pain, and Lipitor, a cholesterol lowering statin, to  cultured mice tumors in order to measure the transition of  early prostate cancer to its more aggressive and potentially  fatal stage. Both drugs are sold by Pfizer Inc, but the company played  no role in the National Institutes of Health-funded study,  Zheng said. The researcher said both drugs have been shown in earlier  studies to have some impact on cancer growth when used alone. The Rutgers team found that the combination of low doses of  Lipitor and Celebrex had a more potent impact on tumor growth  than a higher dose of either agent when used separately. Prostate cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer death  in men in the United States, with more than a quarter-million  new cases appearing each year, according to the American Cancer  Society. In the early stage of the disease, prostate cancer cells  depend on androgen hormones, such as testosterone, to grow. Treatment involves either decreasing the production of the  hormone or blocking its action. “Anti-androgen therapy slows the prostate cancer but  eventually the cancer becomes androgen-independent, the therapy  becomes ineffective and the cancer cells become more  aggressive,” said Zheng. “Treatments available for the later stage cancers are not  very good,” Allan Conney, director of cancer research at  Rutgers, said in a statement. “Oncologists employ classical  chemotherapy drugs which are very toxic and don’t work all that  well.”    The objective of the Rutgers study was to indefinitely  delay the transition to androgen-independence, prolonging the  time during which the cancer would be responsive to  low-toxicity, anti-hormone therapy. Zheng said it appears that a cell signaling pathway for  tumor cell growth is inhibited by the combination of the two  compounds. He said human clinical trials are being planned.

A:
Celebrex-Lipitor combo may fight prostate cancer.
****