Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

5132 Posts | Page(s): Prev 12...502 503 504 505 506 ...513514 Next 

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by dumbcritic on Wed Apr 03, 2019 08:30 PM

Quote | Reply

Some info from the AACR abstarct on NEO100 in pts with rGBM: ''Inclusion criteria include temozolomide failure, bevacizumab naïve, tumor less than 3x3 cm, and Karnofsky score greater than or equal to 60. Total number of patients to be enrolled for Phase I is 12 with four dose escalating cohorts of 3 patients per cohort. The remaining 31 patients would be enrolled after maximal tolerated dosage (MTD) for Phase IIa. To date, 8 patients have been enrolled. Cohort 1 received 96 mg/dose qid, Cohort 2 received 144 mg/dose qid, cohort 3 received 192 mg/dose qid, and cohort 4 will receive 288mg/dose qid. No toxicities were detected. Inhalation was very well tolerated. The duration of the trial is for 6 months. To date, 3 patients have not shown evidence of progression for greater than 6 months (one patient 1 year (cohort 2), one patient 7 months (cohort 3), one patient 6 months) (cohort 3). Although preliminary, we are encouraged by the progression free survival of 3/8 patients in this dose escalation trial.'' [1]

Ref:

https://www.abstractsonline.com/pp8/#!/6812/presentation/987

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by dumbcritic on Thu Apr 04, 2019 09:29 PM

Quote | Reply

A new paper: Metabolically supported chemo (weekly carboplatin/paclitaxel) combined with the ketogenic diet, hyperthermia and hyperbaric oxygen therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC [1].

Ref:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02656736.2019.1

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by dumbcritic on Sat Apr 06, 2019 09:23 PM

Quote | Reply

A new paper has been published. All patients (with metastatic NSCLC) had weekly chemo along with the KD, hyperthermia and hyperbaric oxygen therapy [1].

Ref:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30931666

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by dumbcritic on Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:03 PM

Quote | Reply

The trial (NCT01976585) testing this in low-grade lymphoma is still recruiting. Another (NCT03789097) is open to patients with either NHL, metastatic breast or head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and adds Keytruda.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2019-04-treatment-tumors-canc

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Wed Apr 10, 2019 02:51 AM

Quote | Reply

critic, thank you for this one! I think we first heard about this about 2 years ago and I wasn't sure whether it would ever be published. The results are quite striking! They are claiming over a 4 fold improvement in survival in those with stage IV lung cancer. From the article, they did not appear to select patients with the most favorable outcomes. Of course, one wants to remain cautious, though we have seen a recurring pattern of positive results from a range of sources using the metabolic approach. I am unable to suggest why lung cancer patients seem to have had such impressive results, even more so than for example, pancreatic patients. I am starting to wonder whether talking about the Metabolic Theory of Cancer might no longer be the correct terminology. Perhaps it should be the Metabolic Law of Cancer.       

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Thu Apr 11, 2019 02:59 PM

Quote | Reply

dumbcritic:

Author information
1a Department of Medical Oncology , School of Medicine, Altinbas University , Istanbul , Turkey.2b ChemoThermia Oncology Center , Istanbul , Turkey.

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by peggyznd on Thu Apr 11, 2019 07:09 PM

Quote | Reply

Thinking that 3-BP was 'too effective" in terms of how it managed the cancers of the patients fails to include the possibility that athe 3-BP was indeed very effective--as a poison.  There safety of the doses given may be under discussion in this trial, but the reality is that almost anything can be safely given in appropriately small doses.  A tiny bit of arsenic may be safe in minute doses, afterall.

Klaus Ross gave his other patients many mixes of "medications", per the various reports from Germany immediately post the deaths of the 3 patients which revealed the problems at this clinic. There is no clarity from the records as to which of the 70 patients who had gone through the clinic and died in relatively shortly thereafter.  Sadly, all these patients were very ill and desperate for some help.  All paid many, many thousands of dollars, and to a man who had minimal training.

The goal we have in common is in finding the effective and safe drugs which may be  helpful in fighting cancer.  If 3-BP has value as one of those drugs for one or other cancers, then it should be tested for that safety in a Phase I trial, then for any signals of effectiveness in a Phase II trial.  None of this has happened despite efforts of the supporters of 3-BP as a cancer-fighting tool.  

Do share any links to the the ongoing trial, whether in English or German, so that we all can have access to that information, if you would please do.

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Tue Apr 16, 2019 03:31 AM

Quote | Reply

As soon as I had word of the Bracht incident, my first thought in the off thread discussion was that it might be TLS. TLS occurs when a cancer treatment is essentially "too effective". This is not entirely fantastical thinking as the liver patient treated at the "normal" dose (though with TACE) developed what initially was expected to be a fatal TLS type response to 3-BP. The melanoma patient also treated at the "normal dose" (though this time iv) might also have experienced a TLS like response. This patient's LDH levels did fall to essentially 0 after the combo treatment. It is almost too much to believe that shutting down all metabolic activity in a large tumor would not induce such a response.

The possibility that 3-BP was an effective poison does not appear to fit the facts of the Bracht incident. In the animal experiments that used very high doses of 3-BP, the animals did not survive beyond a few minutes. These experiments demonstrated the potential for 3-BP to be a metabolic poison. This is to say that 3-BP could directly shut down glycolytic processes or destroy tissues involved in these processes. From the descriptions of the Bracht patients, this did not seem to have occurred. These patients survived up to about a day after the treatments. Unformulated 3-BP is   only thought to have a half life on the order of 70 minutes. The Bracht patients probably had no remaining traces of 3-BP in their system when they were hospitalized. How could 3-BP then be a metabolic poison if none remained in their system?

If not a metabolic poison, then what is left? A TLS poison? 3-BP was a poison owing to it being too effective as an anti-cancer treatment? This is a very important question that the trial needs to address. If TLS is involved, which should not be considered entirely unexpected, then the question shifts to what treatments were given to the patients to counteract such a condition.

In terms of the dosing used, the "normal" 3-BP dosing is not homeopathic. An important aspect of moving pharmaceuticals to market is to locate a reasonable therapeutic dosing range. The dosing range that was used with the first two published patients already noted extreme anti-cancer effects. The Bracht patients were supposedly treated at many times higher dose than normal. What I continue to find quite remarkable about these two patients is how minimal the reported side effects were especially given the profound effects that were achieved against the cancers. After these treatments, both patients apparently felt better than they felt before the treatment and this improvement lasted throughout the observation period until no remaining 3-BP would likely have remained.

I have only been able to catch snippets from the trial, though there are some interesting details that have emerged. For instance, the Bracht clinic had just received its tenth 3-BP shipment of 10 grams. I am very unsure how the suspected large overdosing could have been planned to have been maintained over even a few days with only a 10 gram supply. It is also uncertain to me why the defendant would be so shocked with the result? Had such high doses been tried in the past without such consequences? The problem of high dosing of 3-BP naive patients is then suggested. That is treating patients with high tumor burdens right from the start with high 3-BP dosing would be especially dangerous as a large burden of tumor could be destroyed during the first dosing.

I am also interested by the description of one of the patients as having pancreatic cancer diagnosed 10 months earlier (i.e. in October of the previous year with the 3-BP treatment being administered in July). The life expectancy of a stage IV pancreatic patient is roughly 10 months.   

There are a great number of questions that I hope that this trial will be able to answer. At the top of the list for me will be a detailed description of the medical condition of the patients once they entered the hospital and what treatments they received. It would clearly be a dramatic development if these patients did, in fact, experience TLS.          

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Sun Apr 21, 2019 06:35 PM

Quote | Reply

J:

A Dr. Peter Attia podcast with Dr. Seyfried, from last November.  Nearly three hours long:

http://traffic.libsyn.com/peterattiadrive/EP.30_-_Thomas_Sey

Will have to listen later in the wee hours when there are no distractions.

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by peggyznd on Sun Apr 21, 2019 07:46 PM

Quote | Reply

As to the issue of whether the alleged extreme responses to 3-BP, the TLS<tumor Lysis Syndrome) would be possible once the 3-BP is out of the individual's system is not too complex.  There are poisons that are swift acting, and yet are able to be found in the system of the person, others which are very slow acting which can slowly poison someone, thinking here of low doses of arsenci, and in contrast, poisons that can go through a person's system and break down in the half-line of 70 minutes, and be difficult to find in the system within 24 hours.  However, the effect of the poisoning might well trigger reactions in the body that result in the death of the patient, and especially those that are extremely weak and sick as these patients were.  Just because you cannot find the poison in an autopsy that might occur 3-4 days later, or in the tissues of a body buried some months prior, that does NOT mean that the compound was not responsible for the deaths.

Once a vital organ is severely damaged, whether heart or liver, there may be no fixing that damage, which may slowly or quickly lead to the death of the patient.  In a patients which were examined, there may be no common cancer which has already affected vital organs, and therefor no common site of the fatal blow to the person.

If the patient cannot survive the toxicity of the 'treatment', then the value of that treatment is pretty limited.  That is not the same as being "too effective" against the cancer.  This is like bombing the village to kill the one bad actor.  Not worth it, despite its obvious 'effectiveness'.

5132 Posts | Page(s): Prev 12...502 503 504 505 506 ...513514 Next 
Subscribe to this message board discussion

Latest Messages

View More

We care about your feedback. Let us know how we can improve your CancerCompass experience.