New Jersey Mesothelioma Fact Sheet
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.
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.
This is a partial list of scientific or medical grants in your state for research into mesothelioma and related illnesses.
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.
Olivo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.
A-23 September Term 2005 , SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 18, 2006, Argued , April 24, 2006, Decided
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
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
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
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
DOCKET NO. A-3574-04T2, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, January 18, 2007, Argued, July 31, 2007, Decided
Hospitals and Cancer Centers
We do not have any doctors or cancer centers for this state at the moment.
We do not have any doctors or cancer centers for this state at the moment.
| City | Site |
| Asbury Park |
Byrd & Sons |
| Bayonne |
Bayonne Shipyard National Lead Power Plant |
| Belvidere |
Hoffman LaRoche |
| Bound Brook |
American Cyanamid Chemical Plant |
| Boundbrook |
Union Carbide |
| Brooklyn |
Brooklyn Naval Shipyard |
| Camden |
New York Naval Shipyard |
| Elizabeth |
Sealand |
| Hackettstown |
M&M Candies |
| Hoboken |
Bethleham Steel Hoboken NJ Shipyard |
| Lake Hearst |
Lake Hearst Shipyard |
| Linden |
Exxon Chemical |
| Macafee |
Playboy Club |
| McGuire |
McGuire AFB |
| New Brunswick |
Air Products Building Oxford Chemical RSR Foods Rutgers University Science Building |
| Newark |
Budweiser Brewery Hillside Metals Newark Airport Prudential Building State Drywall |
| Perthamboy |
Chevron Oil Refinery |
| Rockaway |
Picatinny Arsenal |
| Sayreville |
Public Service |
| Somerville |
Olivetti Coro |
| Trenton |
Blakely Dry Cleaning General Electric Kaiser Chemical Steppen Chemical Plant Union Camp Corp |
Research
Poplin, Elizabeth Intraperitoneal Gemcitabine--phase I & Parmacokinetics
Grant: 1R03CA079510-01
Grant: 1R03CA079510-01
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
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
Clinical Trials
Have questions about mesothelioma?
If you want answers right now call our Mesothelioma Resource Specialist - Abby Palmer, MSW.
She takes calls throughout the day and early evening. Her number is: 619-261-7922.
She is not a doctor and does not provide medical advice.
DISCLAIMER: Surviving Mesothelioma® is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Cancer Monthly, Inc. and the website is owned and managed by Cancer Monthly Inc. All of the information provided on this website is for informational purposes only. Neither Cancer Monthly nor this website renders medical advice or professional services. The information provided by Abby Palmer or any other employee or contractor of Cancer Monthly, Inc. is not to be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional. You should consult a qualified health care provider for medical advice and answers to personal health questions. The responsibility of your disease management plan is with your treating physicians and you should only follow your treating physician’s advice. DO NOT change or modify your disease management plan on your own without consulting your treating physicians. This website is not a substitute for professional medical advice, examination, diagnosis or treatment. This website should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease and it is not a substitute for professional care. You should always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health professional before starting any new treatment or making any changes to an existing treatment. You should not delay in seeking or disregard medical advice based on information on this website. Some information may be out of date. The information on this website is intended to convey general information only. It should not be construed as legal advice or opinion. This website and its contents are not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. You should not act on or rely on any information on this website without seeking the advice of an attorney. You are encouraged to promptly speak to legal counsel to identify and protect your legal rights and any deadlines for filing a claim or lawsuit. People who request a free book may be called to verify their address and to introduce other mesothelioma resources that are available.
