Which drug has been approved by USFDA to treat Lung Cancer? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Which drug has been approved by USFDA to treat Lung Cancer?

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Eldepylis a drug to used to treat which disease ?....

QA->WHICH DRUG IS KNOWN AS WONDER DRUG....

QA->World Bank economist who derived Lorenzo’s Oil to treat his son, died on October 24, 2013?....

QA->White lung disease is prevalent among the worker of which industry?....

QA->The renowned South Indian playback singer who had rendered nearly 7000 songs in many languages including Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Hindi, Malayalam…etc, died recently due to cardiac arrest followed by intestinal lung infection?....

MCQ->Which drug has been approved by USFDA to treat Lung Cancer?....

MCQ-> Throughout human history the leading causes of death have been infection and trauma, Modem medicine has scored significant victories against both, and the major causes of ill health and death are now the chronic degenerative diseases, such as coronary artery disease, arthritis, osteoporosis, Alzheimer’s, macular degeneration, cataract and cancer. These have a long latency period before symptoms appear and a diagnosis is made. It follows that the majority of apparently healthy people are pre-ill.But are these conditions inevitably degenerative? A truly preventive medicine that focused on the pre-ill, analyzing the metabolic errors which lead to clinical illness, might be able to correct them before the first symptom. Genetic risk factors are known for all the chronic degenerative diseases, and are important to the individuals who possess them. At the population level, however, migration studies confirm that these illnesses are linked for the most part to lifestyle factors — exercise, smoking and nutrition. Nutrition is the easiest of these to change, and the most versatile tool for affecting the metabolic changes needed to tilt the balance away from disease.Many national surveys reveal that malnutrition is common in developed countries. This is not the calorie and/or micronutrient deficiency associated with developing nations (type A malnutrition); but multiple micronutrient depletion, usually combined with calorific balance or excess (Type B malnutrition). The incidence and severity of Type B malnutrition will be shown to be worse if newer micronutrient groups such as the essential fatty acids, xanthophylls and falconoid are included in the surveys. Commonly ingested levels of these micronutrients seem to be far too low in many developed countries.There is now considerable evidence that Type B malnutrition is a major cause of chronic degenerative diseases. If this is the case, then t is logical to treat such diseases not with drugs but with multiple micronutrient repletion, or pharmaco-nutrition’. This can take the form of pills and capsules — ‘nutraceuticals’, or food formats known as ‘functional foods’, This approach has been neglected hitherto because it is relatively unprofitable for drug companies — the products are hard to patent — and it is a strategy which does not sit easily with modem medical interventionism. Over the last 100 years, the drug industry has invested huge sums in developing a range of subtle and powerful drugs to treat the many diseases we are subject to. Medical training is couched in pharmaceutical terms and this approach has provided us with an exceptional range of therapeutic tools in the treatment of disease and in acute medical emergencies. However, the pharmaceutical model has also created an unhealthy dependency culture, in which relatively few of us accept responsibility for maintaining our own health. Instead, we have handed over this responsibility to health professionals who know very little about health maintenance, or disease prevention.One problem for supporters of this argument is lack of the right kind of hard evidence. We have a wealth of epidemiological data linking dietary factors to health profiles/ disease risks, and a great deal of information on mechanism: how food factors interact with our biochemistry. But almost all intervention studies with micronutrients, with the notable exception of the omega 3 fatty acids, have so far produced conflicting or negative results. In other words, our science appears to have no predictive value. Does this invalidate the science? Or are we simply asking the wrong questions?Based on pharmaceutical thinking, most intervention studies have attempted to measure the impact of a single micronutrient on the incidence of disease. The classical approach says that if you give a compound formula to test subjects and obtain positive results, you cannot know which ingredient is exerting the benefit, so you must test each ingredient individually. But in the field of nutrition, this does not work. Each intervention on its own will hardly make enough difference to be measured. The best therapeutic response must therefore combine micronutrients to normalise our internal physiology. So do we need to analyse each individual’s nutritional status and then tailor a formula specifically for him or her? While we do not have the resources to analyze millions of individual cases, there is no need to do so. The vast majority of people are consuming suboptimal amounts of most micronutrients, and most of the micronutrients concerned are very safe. Accordingly, a comprehensive and universal program of micronutrient support is probably the most cost-effective and safest way of improving the general health of the nation.The author recommends micronutrient-repletion for large-scale treatment of chronic degenerative diseases because
....

MCQ->Statements: In Japan, the incidence of stomach cancer is very high, while that of bowel cancer is very low. But Japanese immigrate to Hawaii, this is reversed - the rate of bowel cancer increases but the rate of stomach cancer is reduced in the next generation. All this is related to nutrition - the diets of Japanese in Hawaii are different than those in Japan. Conclusions: The same diet as in Hawaii should be propagated in Japan also. Bowel cancer is less severe than stomach cancer.

....

MCQ-> Read the following case – let and answer the question that follow Krishna Reddy was the head of a pharmaceutical company that was trying to develop a new product. Reddy, along with his friend Prabhakar Rao, assessed that such products had mixed success. Reddy and Rao realized that if a new product (a drug) was a success, it may result in sales of 100 crores but if it is unsuccessful, the sales may be only 20 crores. They further assessed that a new drug was likely to be successful 50% of times. Cost of launching the new drug was likely to be 50 crores. Now, Reddy and Rao were in a quandary whether the company should go ahead and market the drug. They contacted Raj Adduri, a common friend for advice. Adduri was of the opinion that given the risky nature of launch, it may be a better idea to test the market. Rao and Reddy realized test marketing would cost 10 crores. Adduri told them the previous test marketing results have been favorable 70% of times and success rate of products favorably tested was 80%.Further, when test marketing results were unfavorable; the products have been successful 30% of the times.How much profit can the company expect to earn if it launches the new drug(suppose there are no additional costs)?
....

MCQ->Dr. Puneet worried about the test results of his patient, Ms. Benita. Ms. Benita was an old rich widow with no dependents. The results indicate that Ms. Benita has the potentially fatal Lymphanigioleiomyomatosis (LAM) disease. LAM is rare and difficult to diagnose. People with LAM often need oxygen and lung transplants as the disease continues its course. According to the test results, Ms. Benita might have got it. Dr. Puneet explained the situation to Ms. Benita carefully. Without naming the disease, he explained that the disease was progressive and would need treatment using drugs which were still at the experimental stage. Even then, the chance of success was not too bright. If the treatment was unsuccessful, then they would have to get ready for a lung transplant. The lung transplant itself was a risky course of treatment. Even if successful, she would require constant medical support and treatment. Ms. Benita looked blank. She asks Dr. Puneet for his advice about the course of action. He nods gravely, ”I’m afraid, Ms. Benita, I think there is only one course we can take.” What should be Dr. Puneet’s advice?....