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: This release makes no mention of the costs of the drugs compared in this study, even though the drugs have been in use for years and are widely available. Since the study is a comparison of various treatments for this form of cancer, it seems relevant to offer a cost comparison as well as a comparison of efficacy. It appears that the high dose methotrexate is given over a 24-hour period, presumably in the hospital, while the standard methotrexate is given as a single dose. Also, the high dose methotrexate is followed by leucovorin administration while the standard dose is not. According to the site GoodRx, the cost for methotrexate in low-dose (2.5 mg) pill form averages out to about $50 for a month’s supply. Newer, injectable variations of the drug cost upwards of $500 a month for the 25 mg dose. The release states that patients receiving high doses of the drug methotrexate “had a significantly better outcome, by 5 to 6 percent” than did patients receiving the current standard of care, which is gradually escalating doses of the drug. The release also explains that patients nine years old or younger who were also treated with a steroid called decadron (dexamethasone) for half as long as normal (14 versus 28 days) benefited from the treatment while patients 10 and older did not. We’re not sure of the meaning behind these results as portrayed in the release. Which outcome was better by 5 or 6 percent? The study has several. Does that mean the relapse rate was reduced or is it the event free survival that was better? It would be more meaningful to readers if the release had included the actual relapse and event free survival rates for each group analyzed in terms most people can understand. For example: “relapse rates were 5 percent lower in Group X compared to Group Y.” We’ll give this category a satisfactory rating largely due to the release including information that patients 10 and older receiving dexamethasone “were at much higher risk for a debilitating bone condition called osteonecrosis,” although we would have been happier if that greater risk would have been quantified. However, the published study explains that there were toxicity problems beyond that of dexamethasone and the release would have been stronger including that information as well. The release stated the study was randomized and controlled, and provides a broad overview of the study design, for which we give the release a borderline satisfactory under this criteria. However, these are the superficial results. On deeper delving into the study methodology, the statistical significances of the results were very close to not statistically significant. This is due to their planned interim stopping of the treatment and the fact that they were looking at multiple outcomes in multiple groups. This release doesn’t demonstrate disease-mongering. While the release does say that this clinical trial was run by the Children’s Oncology Group, which is funded by the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health, it makes no mention of possible conflicts of interest. Compounding that is the fact that the published study says, “Disclosures provided by the authors are available with this article at www.jco.org,” but that information is behind the journal’s paywall for most readers, so it’s unknown if there is, or is not, a conflict. It appears as though five of the authors (out of a total of about 20) have some conflicts of interest, mostly from several types of drug company payments. The release is comparing the efficacy of treatment regimens using different drugs so alternative treatments for B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia are noted. The release makes clear at the end that the treatment of this disease is improving thanks to refinement of the use of existing drug treatments, meaning that they are readily available for patient use. The release suggests the study findings could change the way childhood leukemia is treated. Modifying existing treatments to enhance a patient’s survival is certainly novel enough to warrant a release. There is no use of unjustifiable language in this release. However, the tone may be a bit overly optimistic given the study findings.

A: Relapses of childhood leukemia improve with high doses of common chemo drug
****
Q: In November 2018, a Grand Rapids, Michigan woman who needed a heart transplant due to complications from chemotherapy was turned down by a Spectrum Health medical committee due to lack of funds:Martin’s son, Alex Britt, said she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2005 and the chemotherapy treatment, while curing her cancer, damaged her heart to the extent that she requires a transplant and had to leave her job on disability. Britt said she walked dogs and would pet-sit to raise funds.Martin said she was supposed to have a procedure Monday for an assistive device to help sustain her while waiting for a new heart. At the time, Martin had already raised $4,600 on GoFundMe for her prior medical bills.Britt set up a new GoFundMe page to raise the additional $10,000 needed to cover the cost of the immunosuppressive drugs. The medical center reportedly would not consider Martin for a heart transplant without her being able to pay for the drugs.The letter to Hedda Martin reportedly said, in part:Your medical situation was presented to our multidisciplinary heart transplant committee on Tuesday, October 20, 2018. The decision made by the committee is that you are not a candidate at this time for a heart transplant due to needing a more secure financial plan for immunosuppressive medication coverage. The Committee is recommending a fundraising effort of $10,000.The story went viral when it was shared by Rep-Elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York):Insurance groups are recommending GoFundMe as official policy – where customers can die if they can’t raise the goal in time – but sure, single payer healthcare is unreasonable.h/t @DanRiffle pic.twitter.com/zetPW0MgDd— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Ocasio2018) November 24, 2018The story is true. Spectrum Health acknowledged the letter in a lengthy statement on their official website, although the organization stopped short of discussing Martin’s specific circumstances:It is important for patients to understand the long-term commitment they are making when accepting an organ donation. For this reason, we strive to ensure each patient is the best match so the donation contributes to a renewed life.Each transplant candidate is evaluated by our highly-skilled multidisciplinary team of physicians, nurses, social workers, clinical ethicists, dieticians and other experts. Transplant eligibility is a complex process. It requires consideration of a multitude of factors based on established best practice standards used by transplant centers across the country. Physical health, psychological and social well-being, and financial resources are among the factors considered for each patient. The ability to pay for post-transplant care and life-long immunosuppression medications is essential to increase the likelihood of a successful transplant and longevity of the transplant recipient. We help patients understand the long-term health implications of a transplant along with their total financial commitment, such as post-transplant medication expenses paid to pharmacies of their choice.Martin’s GoFundMe has raised more than enough to cover the costs of the immunosuppressant medication she needs, but her story is far from unusual. At least a third of the money raised on GoFundMe in 2017 was to help with medical issues, because health care costs in the United States are so high:It’s become a go-to way for people in need to help pay their doctors. Medical fundraisers now account for 1 in 3 of the website’s campaigns, and they bring in more money than any other GoFundMe category, said GoFundMe CEO Rob Solomon.“In the old paradigm you would give $20 to somebody who needed help,” Solomon said. “In the new paradigm, you’ll give $20, you’ll share that and that could turn into 10, 20, 50 or 100 people doing that. So, the $20 could turn in hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars.”Since at least 2017, a majority of Americans have listed access to affordable healthcare as one of their most pressing concerns.

A: "A medical committee withheld a heart transplant from a woman saying that she needed to have at least $10,000 for immunosuppressant medication and suggested ""a fundraising effort."
****
Q: As the 2016 school year and the election primary cycles wound to a close in California, they inevitably congealed into political brouhahas that entangled even young students. One such controversy involved the case of third-grader Logan Autry and his “Make America Great Again” hat: Third-grader Logan Autry, 9, said officials at Powers-Ginsburg Elementary School in Fresno told him to remove his “Make America Great Again” hat because it could stir “negative emotions” in other children. The red baseball cap with the phrase printed in white capital letters has become almost synonymous with the campaign of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. “The principal told me to take it off, and I still didn’t take it off,” Autry [said]. “And she said it was against the dress code to wear the hat, but I looked in the dress code and it was not against it.” The Fresno Unified School District’s dress codes for the 2015-2016 school year are fairly easy to track down online, and they haven’t changed much (if at all) from those of previous years: Any apparel, hair style, cosmetic or jewelry, even if not specifically mentioned below, which creates a safety concern, draws undue attention to the wearer, or tends to distract from the educational process is prohibited unless addressed elsewhere in this regulation. Additionally, the following items are specifically prohibited: What many stories didn’t mention was that Logan Autry wore the hat for several days before the school, seeing it as a potential distraction, intervened and told him to remove it: Our job as educators is to facilitate a safe learning environment where we encourage robust conversations of diverse and thoughts. We are proud that in this case, our school achieved that goal by allowing the student to wear his hat for several days. However, it is also our responsibility to take precautions when the discourse begins to impact our school climate and interrupt school operations. Logan told reporters that wearing the hat at school is his First Amendment right. However, the right to free speech is interpreted (by courts and others) somewhat differently in public schools than outside them. The National Coalition Against Censorship has a rundown of how the First Amendment is interpreted within the classroom: Recent Supreme Court decisions have made it clear that the right to free speech and expression can sometimes be subordinated to achieve legitimate educational goals. (See discussions of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, Bethel School District v. Fraser.) A school is not comparable to a public park where anyone can stand on a soapbox, or a bulletin board on which anyone can post a notice. While students and teachers do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (Tinker v. Des Moines), speech is not quite as free inside educational institutions as outside. This does not mean that students and teachers have no First Amendment rights at school. Quite the contrary. But within the educational setting, the right to free speech is implemented in ways that do not interfere with schools’ educational mission. Students cannot claim, for instance, that they have the right to have incorrect answers to an algebra quiz accepted as correct, nor can teachers claim a right to teach anything they choose. Other quotes from Logan present a fuller picture of the third-grader’s political views: He already has the shirt and tie down, and practices speeches about Trump on the playground. “I’ve told them his policies on illegal immigration, and our second amendment, and our first amendment and all of our amendments that need to be protected which are not going to be an amendment at all if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders gets elected,” said Autry.

A:
An elementary school in Fresno, California, forced a third-grader to remove a cap bearing Donald Trump's campaign slogan.
****