As previously mentioned on this blog, glutamine has been advocated as a supplement for cancer patients, but it's still a controversial subject. On the one hand there is some laboratory evidence that supplemental glutamine can boost the immune response of patients, it can improve anti-oxidant status in normal cells but not tumour cells and has had some clinical use already. On the minus side it is known that glutamine is a prime food for tumour cells - probably second only to glucose. So, the question is does taking glutamine help the patient or the tumour? For the moment there's no clear answer to this.
Glutamine is an essential amino acid, but an article on Anticancer.org.uk reports on a new study of a different amino acid - arginine. In this study supplemental arginine is shown to partially reverse the suppression of the immune system invoked by glioblastoma (brain cancer) tumours. It looks like an interesting piece of work that's worth following up.
The article is worth a read: http://www.anticancer.org.uk/2011/11/arginine-glioblastoma-and-immune-system.html
Friday, 25 November 2011
Tuesday, 20 September 2011
Glutamine - friend or foe?
Glutamine was at the core of the old Grouppe Kurosawa anti-cancer protocol. Steve Martin had picked up on laboratory evidence that glutamine worked to decrease the anti-oxidant defences of tumour cells while increasing the anti-oxidant defences of normal cells (specifically it changed the levels of glutathione in tumour cells versus non-tumour cells). He suggested that people take high levels of oral gultamine powder as part of h is protocol. While it has been used clinically to try and stop sores in the mouths and stomachs of cancer patients taking chemotherapy, it's use has always been quite controversial.
The problem is that glutamine is also one of the key nutrients that cancer cells depend on - possibly second only to glucose. The fear has been that taking glutamine supplements would end up feeding the tumours rather than helping destroy the tumours. The evidence has never been that clear, and in trials that have looked at using glutamine to fight chemotherapy side effects, the focus has been on that and not on whether it makes a difference to long term survival.
In rats at least, the work of Professor Klimberg and her co-workers has repeatedly shown positive results, including when glutamine is used with chemotherapy. To date, however, there have been no studies that have looked at using glutamine specifically as anti-cancer agent - with and without other treatments.
In the meantime, we can read of another glutamine clinical trial - this time looking specifically at whether it can target peripheral neuropathy (another common chemo side effect) in multiple melanoma patients:
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-09-over-the-counter-drug-effect-chemo-side.html
Also of interest is the on-going activity around low dose naltrexone. You can read more about it...
http://www.anticancer.org.uk/2011/09/ldn-aware-voices-dvd.html
and here:
http://www.ldnresearchtrust.org/
The problem is that glutamine is also one of the key nutrients that cancer cells depend on - possibly second only to glucose. The fear has been that taking glutamine supplements would end up feeding the tumours rather than helping destroy the tumours. The evidence has never been that clear, and in trials that have looked at using glutamine to fight chemotherapy side effects, the focus has been on that and not on whether it makes a difference to long term survival.
In rats at least, the work of Professor Klimberg and her co-workers has repeatedly shown positive results, including when glutamine is used with chemotherapy. To date, however, there have been no studies that have looked at using glutamine specifically as anti-cancer agent - with and without other treatments.
In the meantime, we can read of another glutamine clinical trial - this time looking specifically at whether it can target peripheral neuropathy (another common chemo side effect) in multiple melanoma patients:
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-09-over-the-counter-drug-effect-chemo-side.html
Also of interest is the on-going activity around low dose naltrexone. You can read more about it...
http://www.anticancer.org.uk/2011/09/ldn-aware-voices-dvd.html
and here:
http://www.ldnresearchtrust.org/
Thursday, 8 September 2011
Fuda Hospital - Caution Needed
Many late-stage cancer patients faced with failed treatments and doctors who are giving up, will think of going abroad to seek different or better treatments. In the UK, for example, it often seems that cutting edge treatments – such as cryoablation, photodynamic therapy or newer drugs – are simple not available on the NHS, or else only used in very specific cancers whereas they may be used for a wider range of diseases in other countries. Anyone looking abroad might well be attracted to the Fuda Hospital in Guangzhou, China. The hospital offers late stage cancer patients treatments that may not be available in their home countries, and seems to be especially welcoming to foreign patients. Fuda has a web site in English, is listed in Wikipedia and is generally well known on the internet. This article aims to sound a warning to patients who are considering going to Fuda for treatment. It is based on detailed discussions with three patients from the UK who have been treated at Fuda. It may be that these three patients have been unlucky, but at the very least their experiences might provide a contrast to the glowing reports listed on the Fuda website.
The three patients were all from the UK and suffering from recurrent and metastatic cancers – all had solid tumours that were in multiple locations and resistant to conventional treatments. All three travelled to China despite the concerns raised by their doctors, but they felt that they had nothing to lose as there were no curative options left from the NHS. Of the three one has since died, one is alive but has progressive disease and one I no longer have contact with. Of necessity I cannot identify these patients by name, and because I am involved in charitable activities involving supporting cancer patients I cannot identify myself either. I apologise for this, but feel the information is important enough to share despite this level of anonymity.
Firstly all three patients were attracted to Fuda because of the combination of multiple treatments on offer – specifically: cryoablation of solid tumours, concurrent immunotherapy and the possibility of Cancer Microvessel Intervention (a highly targeted chemotherapy delivery direct into the tumour). They felt that this package offered a compelling treatment plan, which was agreed in advance of their arrival in China. In the run up they had many email or phone conversations with Fuda, and sent scans and other clinical information. However, on arrival they found that they had been assigned to doctors who did not seem to know the history or have much knowledge of their cases. Once they had arrived new treatment plans were worked out, and other treatments were added in: brachytherapy (radioactive beads implanted into or near the tumours), Chinese herbal medicine and in one case acupuncture.
Now there’s nothing wrong with changes to the treatment plans once the doctor has seen the patient, but treatment at Fuda is not covered by health insurance or health service support. These changes all had the effect of increasing the costs of treatment. They also had the effect of lengthening the duration of treatment, which also increased the costs. And at Fuda everything has to be charged for, including, for example the cost of drinking water, food and accommodation.
The treatments themselves seemed to be carried out in a rather ad hoc manner. In all three cases the use of brachytherapy was a cause for concern. The cost of the treatment was based on the number of radioactive beads implanted, not on the number of tumours treated or the number of treatments. All three patients felt that number of beads used were excessive and in two cases there was subsequent nerve damage. Communication with patients also left something to be desired. Fuda provides translators, but often they would not be available when the doctors were around, which was frustrating when the doctors could not speak English very well.
The policy at Fuda is to use PET/CT scans as the primary imaging tool, but this is not available at Fuda and has to be performed at another hospital in Guangzhou. While Fuda are keen that this is done at the beginning of treatment (and the patient has to pay for it to be done), they did not perform a follow up to see whether the treatments had had any effect. When questioned the patients were told that that inflammatory changes following treatment meant that there needed to be a delay before follow up scans could be interpreted properly. This is true, but it meant that often multiple treatments were being performed and then the patients were asked to go home and get themselves scanned to see if anything had worked. The approach was – you have late stage cancer, nobody else will treat you, we’ll throw some treatment at you and then hope for the best. And in the mean time please pay for all of these additional extras.
A common theme reported by these patients, and one they had heard from other patients while in China, was of costs escalating, of promises of effectiveness being down-scaled and of treatments being tried for which there was no real evidence of effect. This last was particularly true of the immunotherapies being used at Fuda – which are both very expensive and which are lacking clinical trial or even best case evidence. In almost every case patients complained of having to stay longer than promised and having to pay more than expected.
This is not to say that Fuda does not do any good. There may be cases where Fuda does a great job and which saves people – or at least significantly prolongs life. But in the cases I have examined in some detail that is not the case.
Recently an article in the journal Nature reported that:
Unfortunately Fuda gives precisely that impression. If you are considering going to Fuda then exercise caution and as we’ve said before on this site, do not expect miracles, despite what Fuda says about itself.
If you have personal experience of Fuda than please post details here to share with others. Please include an email address so that it can be followed up.
The three patients were all from the UK and suffering from recurrent and metastatic cancers – all had solid tumours that were in multiple locations and resistant to conventional treatments. All three travelled to China despite the concerns raised by their doctors, but they felt that they had nothing to lose as there were no curative options left from the NHS. Of the three one has since died, one is alive but has progressive disease and one I no longer have contact with. Of necessity I cannot identify these patients by name, and because I am involved in charitable activities involving supporting cancer patients I cannot identify myself either. I apologise for this, but feel the information is important enough to share despite this level of anonymity.
Firstly all three patients were attracted to Fuda because of the combination of multiple treatments on offer – specifically: cryoablation of solid tumours, concurrent immunotherapy and the possibility of Cancer Microvessel Intervention (a highly targeted chemotherapy delivery direct into the tumour). They felt that this package offered a compelling treatment plan, which was agreed in advance of their arrival in China. In the run up they had many email or phone conversations with Fuda, and sent scans and other clinical information. However, on arrival they found that they had been assigned to doctors who did not seem to know the history or have much knowledge of their cases. Once they had arrived new treatment plans were worked out, and other treatments were added in: brachytherapy (radioactive beads implanted into or near the tumours), Chinese herbal medicine and in one case acupuncture.
Now there’s nothing wrong with changes to the treatment plans once the doctor has seen the patient, but treatment at Fuda is not covered by health insurance or health service support. These changes all had the effect of increasing the costs of treatment. They also had the effect of lengthening the duration of treatment, which also increased the costs. And at Fuda everything has to be charged for, including, for example the cost of drinking water, food and accommodation.
The treatments themselves seemed to be carried out in a rather ad hoc manner. In all three cases the use of brachytherapy was a cause for concern. The cost of the treatment was based on the number of radioactive beads implanted, not on the number of tumours treated or the number of treatments. All three patients felt that number of beads used were excessive and in two cases there was subsequent nerve damage. Communication with patients also left something to be desired. Fuda provides translators, but often they would not be available when the doctors were around, which was frustrating when the doctors could not speak English very well.
The policy at Fuda is to use PET/CT scans as the primary imaging tool, but this is not available at Fuda and has to be performed at another hospital in Guangzhou. While Fuda are keen that this is done at the beginning of treatment (and the patient has to pay for it to be done), they did not perform a follow up to see whether the treatments had had any effect. When questioned the patients were told that that inflammatory changes following treatment meant that there needed to be a delay before follow up scans could be interpreted properly. This is true, but it meant that often multiple treatments were being performed and then the patients were asked to go home and get themselves scanned to see if anything had worked. The approach was – you have late stage cancer, nobody else will treat you, we’ll throw some treatment at you and then hope for the best. And in the mean time please pay for all of these additional extras.
A common theme reported by these patients, and one they had heard from other patients while in China, was of costs escalating, of promises of effectiveness being down-scaled and of treatments being tried for which there was no real evidence of effect. This last was particularly true of the immunotherapies being used at Fuda – which are both very expensive and which are lacking clinical trial or even best case evidence. In almost every case patients complained of having to stay longer than promised and having to pay more than expected.
This is not to say that Fuda does not do any good. There may be cases where Fuda does a great job and which saves people – or at least significantly prolongs life. But in the cases I have examined in some detail that is not the case.
Recently an article in the journal Nature reported that:
China does not want to be known as the Wild West of unproven medical technologies.
Unfortunately Fuda gives precisely that impression. If you are considering going to Fuda then exercise caution and as we’ve said before on this site, do not expect miracles, despite what Fuda says about itself.
If you have personal experience of Fuda than please post details here to share with others. Please include an email address so that it can be followed up.
Monday, 8 August 2011
Methyl Jasmonate - Clinical Results
A newly published paper reports the first clinical results from Methyl Jasmonate:
It does lead me to ask the question: are there any readers of the original Grouppe Kurosawa who tried Methyl Jasmonate? The old blog was always short of people reporting back their experiences, yet we do know that lots of people did take Steve Martin's advice to try it.
If you want to help other people, then please report back your experiences - good, bad or indifferent. Please.
This is interesting and encouraging news.Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2011 Mar;15(3):333-6.A preliminary study of the local treatment of preneoplastic and malignant skin lesions using methyl jasmonate.
Source
Department of General Surgery and Surgical Specialties, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia Medical School, Surgical Clinic, Modena, Italy.Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Jasmonates are plant stress hormones. These small hydrophobic compounds exhibit anti-cancer activities, in vitro and in vivo, against cancer cells of various histological origins. Moreover, they show a selective activity against transformed cells and affect drug-resistant cells as well.
AIM:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity of a powerful jasmonate derivative, that is methyl jasmonate.
MATERIAL AND METHODS:
Methyl jasmonate was applied topically on cancerous and pre-cancerous skin lesions from eight patients.
RESULTS:
Methyl jasmonate did not cause any meaningful local or systemic side effects. Three patients exhibited positive responses. Two patients had complete recovery and one had a recurrence of the lesion three months post treatment.
CONCLUSIONS:
Methyl jasmonate is a potentially promising novel topical treatment for prcancerous and cancerous skin lesions. Methyl jasmonate should be evaluated in a larger series of patients.
It does lead me to ask the question: are there any readers of the original Grouppe Kurosawa who tried Methyl Jasmonate? The old blog was always short of people reporting back their experiences, yet we do know that lots of people did take Steve Martin's advice to try it.
If you want to help other people, then please report back your experiences - good, bad or indifferent. Please.
Wednesday, 3 August 2011
Flaxseed and Cancer
One of the anti-cancer agents that Steve Martin was interested in was Flax seed oil. He mentioned it on many posts and recommended it to cancer and HIV patients. It's interesting, therefore to see the following research being published recently:
At the very least it suggests that Flaxseed and Flaxseed oil ought to be considered as strong anti-cancer foods. Worth discussing with your oncologist for sure...
Flaxseed oil-trastuzumab interaction in breast cancer.
Mason JK, Chen J, Thompson LU.
Department of Nutritional Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
Flaxseed oil (FO), which is rich in n-3 fatty acid, is commonly consumed by breast cancer patients because of its potential anti-cancer effects. Trastuzumab (TRAS) is the primary drug for epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive breast cancer. We investigated in athymic mice whether combining dietary FO (8%) with TRAS treatment (2.5 or 5mg/kg body weight) can cause better or adverse effect on established human breast tumors overexpressing HER2 (BT-474). Control tumors significantly grew 187%, TRAS2.5 treated tumors did not change, while TRAS5, FO+TRAS2.5 and FO+TRAS5 treated tumors significantly regressed 75%, 89% and 84%, respectively, after 4weeks treatment. Two weeks after stopping TRAS treatment while continuing on same diet, tumor size in FO+TRAS2.5 group was 87% lower than in TRAS2.5 group and was not different from TRAS5 group with or without FO. Combined TRAS2.5 treatment with FO caused a significantly lower tumor cell proliferation and higher apoptosis compared to TRAS2.5 treatment alone and showed similar effect to TRAS5 treatment with or without FO. Hence, FO did not interfere with TRAS but rather enhanced its tumor-reducing effects and combined FO and low dose TRAS was as effective as high dose TRAS treatment.
At the very least it suggests that Flaxseed and Flaxseed oil ought to be considered as strong anti-cancer foods. Worth discussing with your oncologist for sure...
Thursday, 14 July 2011
Another interesting website
For anyone interested in reading about curcumin and cancer, then a great site to look for is: http://margaret.healthblogs.org/. Along with our other favourite: http://anticancer.org.uk/, it's a site that's worth keeping up with.
Are there any other recommended sites worth looking at?
Are there any other recommended sites worth looking at?
Wednesday, 6 July 2011
Angry words from a cancer patient
Angry words from AntiCancer,org.uk on what we pay for in terms of energy policy and what this means for cancer patients.
The bottom line: Angry? We ought to be bloody furious.
Hat Tip/JunkscienceSidebar.com
The bottom line: Angry? We ought to be bloody furious.
Hat Tip/JunkscienceSidebar.com
Tuesday, 21 June 2011
Doing Your Own Cancer Research
Without wanting to make a fetish of peer review, it still stands that any serious research on cancer treatments will have been published in a scientific journal. Something published on a web-site or forum and without supporting evidence has to be treated with a huge amount of scepticism. What it says may be true, but you need to know the evidence – and that doesn't mean anonymous web users reporting second hand stories of what works (or doesn't work).
Pubmed is the best place to start when looking for published research. You'll find everything here, from studies on curcumin, resveratrol, glutamine, methyl jasmonate to the latest in chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery and so on. If you've not got the scientific training you can still learn a lot from reading the abstract and discussion sections of a paper. For help in interpreting the results that are listed a good place to go is the Anticancer.org.uk site, particularly the 'How To Read A Cancer Paper' article.
Monday, 20 June 2011
Cancer cures and the internet
The original Grouppe Kurosowa blog was set up by the late Steve Martin as a vehicle for exploring his theories on cancer treatment. The blog was his way of thinking out loud and musing on various aspects of therapy. His main point was to come up with a set of protocols that could cure cancer using non-toxic and easily available drugs and supplements. His views changed over time and the various protocols he developed changed too. For example curcumin was in, then it was out. The last sets of protocols were mainly based around the combination of glutamine, sodium selenite and methyl jasmonate. All of these were used in combination to generate large amounts of reactive oxygen species (ROS), so that this would overwhelm the anti-oxidant defences of tumour cells. His protocols specifically forbade the use of anti-oxidants. Various versions of these protocols can still be found floating around the dark, dim recesses of the web.
Steve Martin passed away a while back and his family kept the blog site up for a while and then took it down. Like a lot of people I has book-marked the site and came back to find that the blog was vacant again. Rather than let it go to some unscrupulous person who’d exploit the existing traffic for financial gain I have taken the name as a gesture of goodwill.
I think that although Steve Martin had some interesting theories, his protocols were largely untested and potentially dangerous. He did not just present theories, with all of the caveats that that entails, he proposed concrete protocols for people to follow to the letter. He promised that this would cure cancer. He wasn’t a doctor, and even if he was to propose general protocols without even knowing an individual’s medical history and current status is dangerous. Therefore this site will not be posting those protocols again. Instead, patients are urged to do plenty of research for themselves (and we’ll point to some interesting sites to do this), but not to take on trust the ‘cures’ that people like to post on the internet. The sad truth is that there are no guaranteed cures – and that goes as much for conventional treatments as it does for the ‘alternatives’ that litter the web.
Steve Martin had interesting theories, but he could not cure cancer.
Please read stuff carefully.
Please practice scepticism.
Please do not be taken in by false promises of cures.
Thursday, 16 June 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)