Metabolic Protocol Success
The Oncothermia clinic in Turkey has posted some strong results over the last few years with its use of pre-dosing fasting and insulin with chemo and HBOT and hyperthermia. There are so many potential treatment protocols with metabolics that I thought perhaps it could take some time to find one that could reproducibly have good treatment outcomes. Yet, the protocol used at the clinic appears to be having some success. Perhaps by simply adding more and more of an anti-metabolic stress on the cancer, eventually the tumor is no longer capable of withstanding these forces. Interestingly, there are still quite a few metabolic strategies that would still be on the table if more stress were needed. The protocol that is currently being used should be thought of as the "lite" version.
The reason why my opinion has evolved is this latest patient report. This patient had stage IV triple negative breast cancer and achieved a pathological complete response within 5 months of their protocol. This is the most impressive result to date that I have seen from MSCT (Metabolically supported chemotherapy).
The references from the above article also not that a stage 3 rectal cancer also achieved a pCR using this approach, as well as a non-randomized clinical trial with over 30 stage III/IV pancreatic cancer patients in which not only did the overall survival increase by 8 months but also a number of the survivors appeared to have longer term survival.
It would be a big step forward for the entire metabolic approach if we have a base protocol with reproducible results can be proven. This would mean that we could scaffold other ideas that we have discussed on this site onto the main protocol. For example, perhaps we could add in deuterium depleted water and many more. The current MSCT protocol actually uses very well established and relatively inexpensive treatments, so there would be room to add in others if the base protocol needed a boost.
D, yes, this is impressive. It would be so great to have a base protocol that could be worked around. The treatments that they are using are all the ones that we have talked about for so long. Putting it all together in a nice package amplifies the effectiveness. By themselves, none of these treatments would be overly effective.
Just so that you know this clinic was mentioned in the updated version of Tripping Over the Truth page 201.
Here's there website http://chemothermia.com/
Read the below url. The results that they are reporting for NSCLC are impressive. In the LC patients from the clinic they included all of them in a patient report and the overall group did very well. This is a big step up from single patient reports from other clinics. This clinic is reporting a substantial amount of successes in their patients.
Some other treatments that might be added in: perhaps they could intensify the lead in fast?; possibly add in phlorzin and/or make the insulin potentiation deeper or perhaps add in PMID:25579853 (this is one of favorites for the last while).
I greatly wish that other clinics will replicate the chemothermia results. It is amazing. People can be treated with very expensive drugs and not have anywhere near 43 month survival for Stage IV NSCLC.
D, it is amazing. With Western medicine, they will nearly always have clinical trials that are monotherapy or perhaps a single combination. Yet, the Chemothermia clinic throws in a range of treatments and is able to post results that are far ahead of the results expected from mainstream Western medicine.
I am not sure why pharma does not do more crossover studies with alternative medicine. I am quite sure that they could post much stronger results if they did. I think it is very unrealistic to think that cancer patients can truly be thought of as homogenous. Cancer isn't even homogenous in the same tumor!
They could have trials in which there would be a lead pharma drug and then there might be 10 or more alternative add-ons that could used at the treating doctors discretion. The idea here would be that you could keep on throwing darts until you hit the target. Sticking to a fixed drug regimen when it does not appear to help patients is not ethical and winds up proving nothing.
D, really could hardly believe this one. After going to all the trouble of getting down to the nM for BRAF, all sorts of other things happen (see page 21 where they show what happens to HKII, LDH-A etc.). look where it all winds up on page 24 --- no surprise Metabolics. The BRAF drugs have been the possibly one of the most impressive of any cancer pharmaceutical to date. One certainly can now wonder how much of this success is related to HKII, MCT-1 ... changes.
thank you. I checked the links and indeed they seem to have very good results. Interesting to see that they use 2DG and DCA. I expect they are also using 3BP.
I guess Ergin should know them since they are in Turkey. I am curious to know his opinion regarding the clinic.
In order to design a protocol to maximize the results, I think we need more time. What I would consider in that protocol is also addressing:
1. lactic acid to glucose conversion - with hydrazine
2. pH-chemo combo to be right as previously discussed,
- to maximize chemo penetration
- to maximize immune activity
3. possibly fibroblasts and other structures around the tumor
4. brake down HA as discussed here prior to chemo https://www.cancertreatmentsresearch.com/the-hyaluronic-acid-cage-to-open-or-not-to-open/
5. minimize intra cellular antioxidant production
6. other techniques to maximize immune activity
7. possibly replace 2DG with Phlorizin approach
8. reduce MDR pumps as discussed here https://www.cancertreatmentsresearch.com/if-chemotheraphy/
9. address parazites/bacteria prior to chemo as discussed at the link above
10. Increase blood flow at the tumor site as discussed at the link above
11. increase oxygen via e.g. ITTP (use search function of this website as it was discussed before and can increase hemoglobin capability to carry oxy), or possibly ozone treatments, exercise, etc.
These are some of the aspects we may want to address as well in order to increase the effectiveness of treatments.
Would it be anything else that you have in mind J?
Another aspect regarding treatments, that I did not realized so far is related to the macrophages who seem to also represent a barrier against some treatments specifically against those containing nano size particles.
"Many cancer patients do not respond to chemotherapies because the drugs never reach the cancer cells. Even in nanomedicine, which is one of the best new methods for delivering drugs to a tumor, only about one percent of a dose of nanoparticles will successfully arrive at the intended tumor site, while the rest are filtered out by the immune cells of the liver and spleen." https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/11/171106132028.htm
They used Chloroquine prior to decreased the macrophages' ability to clean up the nanoparticles. 🙂
This is very interesting.
D, the metabolic combos are so endless that it is nearly impossible to boil it down to a single protocol. This seems to have been the big contribution made by Chemothermia. They have a base protocol that has accumulated good responses that we can work from. Looks like the metabolic thought leaders have tuned into what is happening there.
Here is another one that I came across. I wondered about the logic of IPT and vitamin C. If IPT opens up glucose transport, then it should open up entry for vitamin C to cancer cells. Would like to know how successful this approach is.
D, I am really liking this one. I have been aware of it for the last year or two and it could have great promise. Ketoadapt for 2 weeks and then move down glucose with gluconeogenesis drug. (One of the ones that is mentioned has now went through numerous phase 1 and phase 2s). Article notes that when starving obese people for 2 months and then injecting insulin glucose got down to a low of 9 in one of the patients! It is simple, though could be effective. Also thought it might alternate with your phlorzin.
There would need to be no complex treatment, it could be added into the protocol. Would not even need to use IPT if glucose had been greatly lowered. Probably would be best not to go down to the extreme suggested of catheterizing the brain, though even a more moderate approach would place a large amount of stress on the cancer. Two big concerns would be glucose going so low that coma might occur and very large cancer reduction leading to TLS. Both are manageable.