In results from a widely watched clinical trial, Genentech's Avastin failed to show a significant effect on preventing the occurence of colon cancer, the New York Times reported.

This is the third finding in the past five weeks showing that commonly-believed and oft-practiced cancer treatments and screening processes are actually not beneficial, and in some cases harmful, to cancer patients.

Genentech and its sister company, Roche, did not release any of the specific data from the clinical trial on account that full data will be presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting in late May.

The trial had 2,700 patients who received six months of the standard chemotherapy or six months of the standard chemotherapy plus Avastin. The trial studied how many patients were alive and cancer free after a period of time.

Although Avastin is already a best-selling cancer drug, a successful trial could have paved way for a new use of the drug.

Clinical trials are obviously an important step in understanding the best uses of a drug. However, pharmaceutical companies must ensure that clinical trials are accurate so that the use of a drug is evidence-backed before it becomes a billion dollar drug.

To read the full article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/health/23avastin.html?ref=health

A multimedia link in The New York Times about cystic fibrosis details how the use of evidence-based  and peer-reviewed research and medicine evolves into a best practice and brighter futures for patients with cystic fibrosis.

Cystic fibrosis affects 70,000 children and adults worldwide, according to the article. Treatment for cystic fibrosis has evolved from its rudimentary dietary suggestions of the 1950s to adult-only medication in the 1980s to today's specialized care centers and treatment programs.

"Today, physicians say the most exciting avenue of research involves new drugs that could address the root of the problem," which is genetic, the article reported.

Its wonderful to be able to map out the revolutionary betterment of medicine, just as the multimedia piece has done. AllMed, an independent review organization, in essence, maps out each disease via treatment as its in-house and contracted doctors work to provide payers and hospitals with the most up-to-date treatment plans.

To read the full article, click here: http://health.nytimes.com/ref/health/healthguide/esn-cystic-fibrosis-ess.html?ref=health

Bug and insects are gross to a high majority of the people in our American bug-free culture. Yet, doctors are turning back to an age-old trick when it comes to treating leg ulcers: maggots.

As reported in the New York Times, leg ulcers are notoriously difficult to treat. However, the use of maggots to get rid of the wound of the dead tissue is an alternative option to the standard chemical dressing treatment.

The British study concluded that the two options are nearly equal in effectiveness and that maggots can be more painful than the standard chemical dressing. Even so, this return to ancient medicine can be a positive step in the route to more creative and innovative treatments.

At AllMed, we like to think that we're also innovative and creative. Our in-house doctors are knowledged with the newest and most up-to-date treatments and therapies, giving you the best answers for any of your payer problems.

To read the full article, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/health/31regi.html?_r=1&ref=health