Mesothelioma in New Jersey
While mesothelioma is a problem in all states, the specific incident rate for New Jersey is 1.6 / 100,000. This is above the average rate of 1.1 / 100,000. Click on the tabs below to find mesothelioma and asbestos research in NJ, recent NJ mesothelioma-related court cases, mesothelioma specialists in NJ and potential asbestos hotspots in New Jersey.
New Jersey Mesothelioma Info
By clicking on the above tabs, you will find information on mesothelioma specific to the state of New Jersey
New Jersey Research and Clinical Trials
< This is a partial list of scientific or medical grants in your state for research into mesothelioma and related illnesses. /p>
New Jersey Doctors and Hospitals
This is a partial list of hospitals and physicians that reportedly treat mesothelioma patients in your state.
New Jersey Cases
This is a partial list of relevant court cases on mesothelioma in your state.
Disclaimer: Inclusion on this directory does not constitute endorsement by Cancer Monthly, Inc. All physicians who appear in this section do so based on their own expression of interest in the fields of mesothelioma treatment. Cancer Monthly, Inc. has not verified the competence, professional credentials, business practices or validity of the expressed interests of these physicians. Cancer Monthly makes no recommendation of any physician on this list and makes no suggestion that any such physician will cure or prevent any disease. Those consulting a physician on this list should approach the consultation exactly as they would with any other unknown physician.
Abstract: DESCRIPTION (Applicant’s Description) The proposed investigation is designed to provide clinical and pharmacologic data to determine the efficacy of IP gemcitabine therapy. Gemcitabine is a relatively new cytidine analog that has been approved for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer and has shown promising activity in breast, lung, ovarian and bladder cancer. The potential advantage of IP chemotherapy is the ability to provide high regional drug concentrations for tumors confined to the peritoneal cavity. The pharmacokinetic advantage’ of this regional therapy is primarily dependent on hepatic metabolism leading to clearance of the drug before systemic exposure. Gemcitabine appears to be an ideal candidate for IP therapy since approximately 98% of the dose is deaminated to the inactive dFdU by cytidine deaminase, which is present in high concentra-tions in the liver. Thus, by virtue of its high ‘first-pass’ metabolism, systemic exposure following IP gemcitabine should be minimal. High peritoneal gemcitabine concentrations may be effective in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis arising from ovary and pancreas cancer, primary peritoneal carcinomatosis, or possibly mesothelioma. The specific aims of the proposed investigation are: (1) To determine the MTD of IP gemcitabine, when given weekly, in patients with refractory intra-abdominal malignancies. (2) To evaluate the pharmacokinetic advantage of IP gemcitabine by quantitation gemcitabine, the active intracellular metabolite dFdCTP and the deaminated metabolite dFdU in peritoneal fluid and plasma. (3) To identify mechanisms of clinical resistance to gemcitabine. There are currently few drugs that are effective in the therapy of primary intra-abdominal malignancies. The results from the proposed trial should allow development of gemcitabine as an effective therapeutic strategy. Moreover, the proposed pharmacodynamic studies will provide important new data with regard to possible mechanisms of resistance to gemcitabine that are operative in patients.
Tags: Cytidine, Neoplasm /cancer Chemotherapy, Pharmacokinetics Dosage, Drug Screening /evaluation, Human Therapy Evaluation, Injection /infusion, Metastasis, Peritoneal Cavity Clinical Research, Human Subject
- Followup Grant: 5R03CA079510-02
Hospital and Cancer Centers
We do not have any doctors or cancer centers for this state at the moment.
Olivo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.
A-23 September Term 2005 , SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 18, 2006, Argued , April 24, 2006, Decided
Olivo v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
DOCKET NO. A-4328-03T5 , SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 13, 2005, Argued , May 5, 2005, Decided
Sarkozy v. A.P. Green Indus., Inc.
DOCKET NO. A-0312-07T1, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, December 15, 2008, Argued, July 31, 2009, Decided
Leonard v. Mid-State Sprinkler, Inc.
DOCKET NO. A-4952-06T2, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 5, 2008, Argued, May 20, 2008, Decided
Stevens Inst. of Tech. v. Hine
DOCKET NO. A-3574-04T2, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, January 18, 2007, Argued, July 31, 2007, Decided