Bentham Science Journal ::: Clinical Cancer Drugs


Clinical Cancer Drugs publishes original research and (as well as) expert reviews, and thematic issues in all core areas of translational and clinical cancer drug research.

The journal publishes pre-clinical and clinical studies on the development of new anti-cancer agents. Clinical studies of new reported anti-cancer drugs include Phase 1–IV clinical trial studies, their designs, research methodologies, and analyses. The journal is essential reading to clinical oncologists, toxicologists, medicinal chemists, and to pharmacologists.










For more details on this new journal, log on to the website

New Podcast by Dr. Johansson

To view the podcast, click here:

EBook: “Inside the New University Prerequisites for a Contemporary Knowledge Production”

Author: Dr. Kristina Johansson

This eBook focuses on the concept of the ‘new university’ encompasses a number of interconnected topics, ranging from the impacts of the market forces on the old academic territory to current perceptions about relationships between teachers and students.

For more information, please visit:

Recent Issue of the Journal Letters in Organic Chemistry has been published

Letters in Organic Chemistry, 11 Issue 9

Aims & Scope

Letters in Organic Chemistry publishes original letters, mini-reviews and guest edited issue in all areas of organic chemistry including synthesis, bioorganic, medicinal, natural products, organometallic, supramolecular, molecular recognition and physical organic chemistry. The emphasis is to publish quality papers rapidly by taking full advantage of latest technology for both submission and review of the manuscripts.
The journal is an essential reading for all organic chemists belonging to both academia and industry.

Abstracted & Indexed in:

Science Citation Index ExpandedTM, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, ISI Alerting ServicesTM, Current Contents®/Physical, Chemistry Citation Index®, Scopus, Chemical Abstracts, Chemical and Earth Sciences, PubsHub, Genamics JournalSeek, MediaFinder®-Standard Periodical Directory, Reaxys, J-Gate.

Contributor’s Comments

Journal: Current Medicinal Chemistry

“Publishing with Bentham in my experience has always been a great pleasure; I never had problems or unnecessary delays, and regarding the points raised by the Referee’s .Even if they required a lot of changes, it always led to an improvement in the Ms quality; thus, a special thanks for the referee’s work and quality.

I would also like to appreciate the Editor of the journal, as he was able to select competent people for this crucial task.

Additionally, it is always a pleasure to read articles published in CMC, owing to their quality and the up-to-date topics .Current Medicinal Chemistry is one of the few journals that I check every month. In particular, my last submission is of interest for both pharmaceutical and biomedical industry.”

Dr. L. Costantino
University of Modena e Reggio
Emilia, Dipartimento di Scienze della Vita,
Via Campi 183, 41100 Modena,Italy

Contributed article: Challenges in the Design of Clinically Useful Brain-targeted Drug Nanocarriers

Human Saliva Is Six Times Powerful A Painkiller Than Morphine


Pain killer Continue reading “Human Saliva Is Six Times Powerful A Painkiller Than Morphine”

Recent issue of the Journal Current Radiopharmaceuticals has been published

Current Radiopharmaceuticals, 7 Issue 1

Aims & Scope

Current Radiopharmaceuticals publishes original research articles, letters, reviews, drug clinical trial studies and guest edited issues on all aspects of research and development of radiolabelled compound preparations. The scope of the journal covers the following areas: radio imaging techniques, therapies; preparation and application of radionuclide compounds including the incorporation of tracer methods used in scientific research and applications.

Abstracted & Indexed in:

Chemical Abstracts, Scopus, EMBASE, Media Finder®-Standard Periodical Directory, Genamics Journal Seek, MEDLINE, PubsHub, J-Gate.

For more details please visit:

Psychologist shows why talking to kids really matters

Fifty years of research has revealed the sad truth that the children of lower-income, less-educated parents typically enter school with poorer language skills than their more privileged counterparts. By some measures, 5-year-old children of lower socioeconomic status (SES) score two years behind on standardized language development tests by the time they enter school.

In recent years, Anne Fernald, a psychology professor at Stanford University, has conducted experiments revealing that the language gap between rich and poor children emerges during infancy. Her work has shown that significant differences in both vocabulary and real-time language processing efficiency were already evident at age 18 months in English-learning infants from higher- and lower-SES families. By age 24 months, there was a six-month gap between SES groups in processing skills critical to language development.


Fernald’s work has also identified one likely cause for this gap. Using special technology to make all-day recordings of low-SES Spanish-learning children in their home

environments, Fernald and her colleagues found striking variability in how much parents talked to their children. Infants who heard more child-directed speech d


greater efficiency in language processing and learned new words more quickly. The results indicate that exposure to child-directed speech — as opposed to overheard speech — sharpens infants’ language processing skills, with cascading benefits for vocabulary learning.

Fernald and colleagues are now running a parent-education intervention study with low-income Spanish-speaking mothers in East San Jose, California, funded by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. This new program, called ¡Habla conmigo! (Talk with Me!), teaches Latina mothers how they can support their infants’ early brain development and helps them learn new strategies for engaging verbally with their children. Although they only have data from 32 families so far, the preliminary results are promising. Mothers in the ¡Habla conmigo! program are communicating more and using higher quality language with their 18-month-olds compared to mothers in a control group.

“What’s most exciting,” said Fernald, “is that by 24 months the children of more engaged moms are developing bigger vocabularies and processing spoken language more efficiently. Our goal is to help parents understand that by starting in infancy, they can play a role in changing their children’s life trajectories.”

[Source: Science Daily]

Human lungs successfully grown in a lab for the first time

Scientists at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston have succeeded in growing human lungs in the laboratory, using components from the lungs of deceased children.

Stem cell specialists have been working on growing lung tissue for some years, but the lung is a complex organ, which presents more problems than regenerating other organ tissue, such as human skin.

The University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) first announced their solution for growing lungs in 2010.

“In terms of different cell types, the lung is probably the most complex of all organs – the cells near the entrance are very different from those deep in the lung,” UTMB researcher Dr. Joaquin Cortiella said at that time.

“People ask us why we’re doing the lung, because it’s so hard. But the potential is so great, and the technology is here. It’s going to take time, but I think we’re going to create a system that works.”

“If we can make a good lung for people, we can also make a good model for injury,” researcher Dr. Joan Nichols suggested, adding that:

“We can create a fibrotic lung, or an emphysematous lung, and evaluate what’s happening with those, what the cells are doing, how well stem cell or other therapy works. We can see what happens in pneumonia, or what happens when you’ve got a hemorrhagic fever, or tuberculosis, or hantavirus – all the agents that target the lung and cause damage in the lung.”

The 2010 research involved destroying the cells of rat lungs by repeatedly freezing and thawing and then “reseeding” the lungs with embryonic stem cells from mice.

Following that work up with similar but more large-scale experiments on pig lungs, the researchers now applied the same regenerative engineering principles to human lungs.

Human lungs grown in a ‘fish tank’ using cells from deceased children

Taking lungs from two children who had died from trauma (most likely a car accident), the researchers stripped one of the lungs down to a bare “skeleton” of just collagen and elastin – the main proteins in connective tissue.

Using this stripped-down lung as a “scaffold,” they then harvested cells from the other lung, which were applied to the scaffolding.

This lung structure was then placed in a chamber filled with a nutritious liquid, which Nichols describes as “resembling Kool-Aid.”

After 4 weeks of immersion, the team extracted a complete human lung from the liquid – “just pinker, softer and less dense.” The team then successfully replicated the process using a second set of lungs.

It is UTMB’s Dr. Michael Riddle who is credited with accelerating the procedure for growing the lungs, and he did so by improvising new equipment out of the most everyday of home furniture.

“He’s the one who went home and actually built using – I’m not kidding – a fish tank that he went and bought from a pet store,” Dr. Nichols says.

Can lab-grown lungs be used in transplants?

Lung transplants are often the only treatment for incurable lung disorders such as cystic fibrosis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). But successful lung transplants are rare, as finding matching donors is very difficult – many patients die while on a waiting list for transplants.

UTMB’s work represents a landmark in regenerative engineering, but the reality of lab-engineered lungs being used in transplants could be at least 12 years away, Nichols says. The next phase of the research will be to test lab-grown lungs in pigs.

Although the science fiction-type nature of the research sounds incredible, UTMB were reluctant to announce their results. Indeed, the team grew the lungs a year ago, but the story has only just been picked up by the media.


“It’s taken us a year to prove to ourselves that we actually did a good job with it. You don’t run out immediately and tell the world you have something wonderful until you’ve proved it to ourselves that we really did something amazing,” Dr. Nichols says.

[Source: Medical News Today]

Figure skating’s high-flying beauty blurs a hazardous side effect

Figure skating’s biggest show is on full display this week at the Sochi Olympics, as the sport’s top stars twirl and glide on the ice. But experts — and athletes — say that for all its beauty, the sport can be brutal, leading to under-recognized but potentially devastating concussions.

No one tracks traumatic brain injuries, or TBIs, in figure skating, but Dr. Rick Figler, a sports medicine expert at the Cleveland Clinic, says they’re probably more common than anyone thinks.

“If you ever got to a skating rink and watch kids practice, they fall and get up, they fall and get up,” he said. “When they’re falling on ice, they’re falling on ice. It’s a very hard surface.”

Team USA figure skating star Evan Lysacek told TMZ Sports last month that’s he’s had between 15 and 20 concussions during his career.

“You know, sometimes we fall at 20 miles an hour. Your neck just kinda snaps back,” he told TMZ.

Spectacular falls like the one U.S. champion Jeremy Abbott took during the men’s short program Thursday aren’t usually the culprit, experts say. While concussions can happen on big moves, they’re more often the result of inattention when a skater’s not prepared to fall.

TBIs account for about 11 percent of all ice-skating injuries that send children to the emergency room, according to a 2011 review by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By comparison, about 7 percent of all football visits were for head injuries.

Anna Kallmeyer, 16, of Cleveland Heights, Ohio, suffered a concussion two years ago that left her with headaches, dizziness and balance problems for months.

“I had just done a little warm-up, a 2-foot hop, to warm up for a double-flip,” she said. “I wasn’t paying attention and the next thing I knew, I fell. I remember falling and hitting my head on the ice, twice.”

She didn’t immediately move, and coaches rushed to her aid before getting her off the ice and into an ambulance.

It’s often not an exotic move or high speed that results in head injuries, athletes and experts say. Dr. Walt Lowe, medical director of the Ironman Sports Medicine Institute at Memorial Hermann medical center in Houston, has worked with superstars like Tara Lipinski, who won gold at the 1998 Winter Olympics. He said head injuries occur when skaters slam into the boards or rails on the sidelines, or when they simply slip and hit the ice.


Mapping our carbon footprints

Living in cities is good for the planet. Living near cities, not so much

How densely packed your neighborhood is can affect the health of our planet, a new study finds.

Scientists measured the impact that people have on the environment using a “yardstick” that they call a carbon “footprint.” That footprint reflects the amount of carbon dioxide — a greenhouse gas — that is spewed into the atmosphere as a result of someone’s daily activities. Carbon footprints tend to be low for city dwellers. Living in a suburb outside a city, however, can turn that footprint into a bootprint.


Energy researchers Christopher Jones and Daniel Kammen published their findings Dec. 13 in Environmental Science and Technology.

The scientists, both at the University of California, Berkeley, calculated carbon footprints for people in every zip code across the United States. To do that, they summed up how much energy and other resources went into providing each person with their transportation, food and housing. Jones and Kammen also looked at items people would typically buy and the amount of water people used.

People living in city centers had small footprints, the researchers found. “It is much easier to have a low carbon impact if your family’s home is close to where you work, shop and play,” explains Jones. Living within walking or biking distance cuts back on the amount of carbon dioxide associated with moving people by cars. And cities with extensive bus and subway networks allow people to travel great distances while keeping releases of climate-altering greenhouse gases low.

Not everyone can afford to live in the city, however. And not everyone wants to. Rings of suburbs have popped up around major cities across the world. Suburbs offer more space, allowing people to build larger homes. Suburbs may offer better schools for a family’s kids. But those homes are typically well beyond walking distance from where their owners work, play or learn. So people who live in suburbs often drive long distances. There’s also the matter of heating and cooling big homes.

All of these factors can bump up carbon footprints so that they exceed those of city dwellers, Jones and Kammen report. The difference is substantial. The average household in a large city releases about 40 tons of carbon dioxide per year. The average suburban household, however, releases closer to 50 tons of carbon dioxide per year. That’s a 25 percent increase over city dwellers.

The new findings are an important contribution to climate research, says Matthew Kahn. An environmental economist at the University of California, Los Angeles, he was not involved with the study. Kahn would like to see the analysis applied to other parts of the world — Europe, India and China, for instance. That would give scientists a better feel for how culture might mix with location to influence our carbon footprints.

You may not have any control over the location of your home. Still, everyone can take steps to shrink their carbon footprints, says Jones. That’s because how much we pollute is influenced not just by where we live, but also how we live.

To shrink your footprint, start small, he says. Turn off lights when they’re not in use. Recycle or reuse things instead of throwing them away. These might not seem like steps that will have a big impact. And as people get used to making small changes, the leap to bigger ones will get easier. Also avoid buying things you don’t need. After all, the process of making new items also produces more pollution, explains Jones.


%d bloggers like this: