• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
LongeCity .                       Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Is 3-Bromopyruvate (3-BP) a Cancer Cure?

cancer cancer cure

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
214 replies to this topic

#1 mag1

  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 10 September 2014 - 12:10 AM


Moderation - I've moved some posts from a similar discussion here. The title has also been modified to reflect the additions.

 

 

Preliminary indications that 3-Bromopyruvate might be a broadly effective cancer treatment has been building over the last

15 years. It is time that a topic on this forum considered the potential benefits and risks of this molecule.

3-Bromopyruvate appears to interfere with cancer cells energy supply through blocking glycolysis.

 

Some topics of interest concerning 3-Bromopyruvate that might be discussed here include:

 

- The FDA's granting of orphan drug status for 3-Bromopyruvate in pancreatic cancer (04/2014) and liver cancer (03/2013).

 

- The phase 1 trial that was authorized by the FDA over a year ago.

 

- The recently published human case study of a metastatic melanoma patient who after treatment with 3-Bromopyruvate and paracetamol (which depletes tumor glutathione)

experienced a decline in serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) from over 4200 U/L to 12 U/L.

 

- A published human case study of 3-Bromopyruvate in liver cancer that also showed remarkable anti-cancer results. 

 

- The possible risks that 3-Bromopyruvate poses for cognitive impairment. Mouse models have found that injection of 3-Bromopyruvate

into the brain causes an Alzheimer-like phenotype. 


Edited by niner, 06 February 2015 - 10:04 PM.

  • Informative x 1

#2 joelcairo

  • Registered User
  • 465 posts
  • 127
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • NO

Posted 18 September 2014 - 08:15 PM

I'd be surprised if there was any Alzheimer's risk. A cancer patient would only take 3-BP for a short period of time.

 



sponsored ad

  • Advert
To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#3 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 18 September 2014 - 09:49 PM

Agreed. It would be an easy decision to choose 3-Bromopyruvate treatment against a theoretical risk of Alzheimer's disease.

 

 

 

Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1995 Aug;51(4):917-22.

Holeboard maze-learning deficits and brain monoaminergic neurotransmitter concentrations in rats after intracerebroventricular injection of 3-bromopyruvate.

 

The mice received 2 injections of 0.2 mumol  3-Bromopyruvate directly into their cerebral ventricles. 10 weeks later they displayed cognitive

impairment related to a cholinergic deficit connected to glucose metabolism. The article suggests that 3-Bromopyruvate could be used as an animal for Alzheimer's disease.

 
 
Such a problem would be avoided if 3-Bromopyruvate were loaded into minicells.
A 250 microgram cancer treatment with 3-Bromopyruvate in minicells would not likely cause any side-effects. 

Edited by mag1, 18 September 2014 - 09:51 PM.

  • Good Point x 1

#4 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 04 October 2014 - 07:10 PM

The patent for 3-Bromopyruvate as a cancer therapy described how intra-arterial injections to the liver caused the regression

of large tumours and long term survival of animals. However, when 3-Bromopyruvate was injected systemically there was 

no regression of liver tumours, though it did appear to suppress the development of lung metastases.

 

The first published human case study of 3-Bromopyruvate also used an intra-arterial injection method to treat liver cancer.

 

Yet, the recently published human case study in metastatic melanoma combined a GSH depletor and intravenous 3-Bromopyruvate  

administration. This resulted in a very large anti-cancer effect.

 

A published study found that 3-Bromopyruvate when used as an inhalation therapy could effectively suppress lung tumour

growth in mice.

 

Could someone give an opinion as whether 3-Bromopyruvate could be a universal cancer cure given as a systematic therapy (as it is promoted on some websites) or whether it could have a more limited use as a site specific anti-cancer therapy ( for example, only injected into a liver artery etc.)?   



#5 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 18 January 2015 - 07:37 PM

I would be interested in the use of transplanted mitochondria for cancer treatment.

 

If mitochondria could be engineered that would self-destruct when given some signal (for example,

in the presence of mutated p53), then cancer cells could be deprived of their energy source.

Current cancer treatments (e.g. 3-Bromopyruvate) have shown impressive clinical results when shutting 

down cellular respiration.

 

{It is also of note that a clinical trial with donated blood from younger people is in the works for Alzheimer's disease.} 


  • Disagree x 1

#6 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 18 January 2015 - 08:59 PM

I would be interested in the use of transplanted mitochondria for cancer treatment.

 

If mitochondria could be engineered that would self-destruct when given some signal (for example,

in the presence of mutated p53), then cancer cells could be deprived of their energy source.

Current cancer treatments (e.g. 3-Bromopyruvate) have shown impressive clinical results when shutting 

down cellular respiration.

 

{It is also of note that a clinical trial with donated blood from younger people is in the works for Alzheimer's disease.} 

 

Can someone clarify this, because I thought the entire mode of operation of cancer was to shut down mitochondria and to use glycolysis OUTSIDE of the mitochondrial environment.

 

A drug that shuts down mitochondria would on face value simply enhance the glycolysis that feeds the cancer.   It would be a catastrophic mistake.

 

If you believe Warburg's theories about cancer as a metabolic disease, the therapy that has merit would in fact be the opposite.  You would want to upregulate aerobic metabolism and use of oxygen.   There is some support for that in the literature by inserting healthy mitochondria into cancer cells:

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/23080556

 

Since cancer involves potential DNA modifications, it's not clear to me that simply replacing the mitochondria with new ones accomplishes this.   You need to force the entire cancerous cell to upregulate its use of oxygen and downregulate glycolysis.

 

3-Bromopyruvate is a wonderful agent, but it does not act by denying cancer mitochondrial energy.   It is an alkylating agent and may act by inhibiting the HK2 enzyme that cancer cells use to immortalize themselves and block apoptosis:

http://link.springer...0863-012-9425-4

 

Note the work of people like Dominic D'Agostino in Florida, who are now extending on Warburg's work and testing metabolic therapies.   Dominic's lab has been using ketogenic diets, hyperbaric oxygen, and ketone supplements that boost ketones without dietary inputs.    Here is a good overview of his work and early results, which are extremely impressive:

 

Dominic is very promotional for his lab, and you will find dozens of podcasts and Youtube videos with him advocating his work.   Honestly if I was a billionaire I would fund him.


Edited by pone11, 18 January 2015 - 09:10 PM.

  • like x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert
To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#7 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 18 January 2015 - 09:27 PM

Cancer cells use a 50 50 energy mix from OXPHOS and glycolysis. (Normal cells use a 95 5 energy mix)

 

Selectively, removing the OXPHOS energy input from cancer cells would likely result in an overwhelming stress to 

cancer cells. This energy crisis would result in the immediate destruction of the cancer cells.   

 

The engineered mitochondria could be delivered to a patient as a "pro-drug". A signal molecule could then shut off the

mitochondria in cancer cells (e.g. cells with mutated p53 etc.).

 

The cancer therapy 3-Bromopyruvate which interferes with cellular respiration (specifically through the mitochondria) has shown dramatic results.

 

Consider:

 

Chin J Cancer. 2014 Jul;33(7):356-64. doi: 10.5732/cjc.013.10111. Epub 2014 Mar 14.

Safety and outcome of treatment of metastatic melanoma using 3-bromopyruvate: a concise literature review and case study

 

There are other 3-Bromopyruvate combinations including salinomycin, ketone therapy etc. .

 

 

 

 


  • Disagree x 1

#8 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 18 January 2015 - 09:55 PM

Cancer cells use a 50 50 energy mix from OXPHOS and glycolysis. (Normal cells use a 95 5 energy mix)

 

Selectively, removing the OXPHOS energy input from cancer cells would likely result in an overwhelming stress to 

cancer cells. This energy crisis would result in the immediate destruction of the cancer cells.   

 

The engineered mitochondria could be delivered to a patient as a "pro-drug". A signal molecule could then shut off the

mitochondria in cancer cells (e.g. cells with mutated p53 etc.).

 

The cancer therapy 3-Bromopyruvate which interferes with cellular respiration (specifically through the mitochondria) has shown dramatic results.

 

Consider:

 

Chin J Cancer. 2014 Jul;33(7):356-64. doi: 10.5732/cjc.013.10111. Epub 2014 Mar 14.

Safety and outcome of treatment of metastatic melanoma using 3-bromopyruvate: a concise literature review and case study

 

There are other 3-Bromopyruvate combinations including salinomycin, ketone therapy etc. .

 

Think about what you just said.   Cancer cells upregulate glycolysis from 5% of energy used in the cell to 50%.  So your solution to cancer is to destroy the remaining 50% attributable to aerobic metabolism by downregulation of oxidative phosphorylation ("OXPHOS") and making glycolysis closer to 100% of the cells energy needs?   That's 100% the opposite approach of what the literature suggests works.

 

You are not summarizing the metastatic melanoma study correctly.   It's true that 3HP downregulated OXPHOS, but this was "In addition to inhibiting key glycolysis enzymes including hexokinase II and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)...."    So 3BP attacks the cancer by denying it glycolysis, and naturally since the cancer uses the HK2 enzyme to control activity of the mitochondria, a drug like 3BP that downregulates HK2 is going to selectively deny the cancer access to all energy sources, including OXPHOS.   That's a side-effect, NOT the primary mechanism.

 

I have a metabolic disorder - now partly under control - that shifted my body into glycolysis.   I can tell you that getting even 25% of your energy from glycolysis is like setting your body on fire.  It's like someone has taken a needle and injected acid right into your brain and systemic circulation.  You can't move; you can't think.  It's overwhelming.   The effects of high glycolysis levels on cancer patients is devastating.   A therapy that downregulated OXPHOS without also targeting glycolysis would be a quick death sentence, and at minimum the patient would be in agony.   I say that from personal experience, but the literature is quite clear that cancer is about the upregulation of glycolysis, and the therapy you are suggesting is about selectively denying the cancer cells energy from all sources.

 

Your choice of studies here is unfortunate since it is a report about how 3BP largely failed to impact the human patient's cancer, which was unfortunately quite advanced at the time they began therapy.   The study I quoted from Peter Pedersen is a better overview of all of the 3BP modalities.


Edited by pone11, 18 January 2015 - 09:57 PM.


#9 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 18 January 2015 - 10:14 PM

I am very unsure about these comments concerning OXPHOS. I had thought that if one were to remove the mitochondrial

energy input from the cancer cell, then this would be sufficient to destroy the cancer cell. It is notable that the suggestion is to selectively

remove half the energy supply from the cancer cell and not from the other cells of the body. 

 

Cancer metabolism, stemness and tumor recurrence

Cell Cycle. May 1, 2013; 12(9): 1371–1384.

 

..."Thus, oxidative mitochondrial metabolism (OXPHOS) is a common feature of both (1) normal stem cells and (2) proliferating cancer cells. As such, we should consider metabolically treating cancer patients with mitochondrial inhibitors (such as Metformin), and/or with a combination of MCT1 and MCT4 inhibitors, to target “metabolic symbiosis.”

 

The article with the cancer patient which used 3-Bromopyruvate resulted in an overwhelmingly massive cancer response. Figure 3 from the article shows that the patient's cancer was essentially metabolically cured after 3 combination treatments with 3BP. The patient's LDH level went from 1800 to 12 after those three doses. The article noted that the patient did not actually die from cancer, as no metabolically cancer was present at death. In fact, the patient died from hypoxia. 



#10 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 18 January 2015 - 10:43 PM

I am very unsure about these comments concerning OXPHOS. I had thought that if one were to remove the mitochondrial

energy input from the cancer cell, then this would be sufficient to destroy the cancer cell. It is notable that the suggestion is to selectively

remove half the energy supply from the cancer cell and not from the other cells of the body. 

 

Cancer metabolism, stemness and tumor recurrence

Cell Cycle. May 1, 2013; 12(9): 1371–1384.

 

..."Thus, oxidative mitochondrial metabolism (OXPHOS) is a common feature of both (1) normal stem cells and (2) proliferating cancer cells. As such, we should consider metabolically treating cancer patients with mitochondrial inhibitors (such as Metformin), and/or with a combination of MCT1 and MCT4 inhibitors, to target “metabolic symbiosis.”

 

The article with the cancer patient which used 3-Bromopyruvate resulted in an overwhelmingly massive cancer response. Figure 3 from the article shows that the patient's cancer was essentially metabolically cured after 3 combination treatments with 3BP. The patient's LDH level went from 1800 to 12 after those three doses. The article noted that the patient did not actually die from cancer, as no metabolically cancer was present at death. In fact, the patient died from hypoxia. 

 

The "Cancer metabolism, stemness and tumor recurrence" study is really interesting:

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3674065/

 

From that study:

"Cancer cells have high bioenergetic requirements needed to maintain cell growth. Glycolysis with generation of lactate and reduced mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation metabolism (OXPHOS) is commonly found in carcinoma cells in culture.  OXPHOS generates more ATP per molecule of glucose than glycolysis with lactate generation and hence it is unclear why some cells would use a metabolically inefficient pathway. It has been hypothesized that glycolysis may confer a growth and survival advantage, although the mechanism is unknown."

 

This study is VERY interesting, and it paints a very complex picture of what cancer does.   It suggests that the most lethal cancers have a core set of cells that emphasize OXPHOS, but that a key critical component of the complex is a set of surrounding cells that are glycolytic and feed lactate and ketones to the OXPHOS cells.  From your study:

"A significant subset of HNSCC tumors have a large glycolytic carcinoma cell compartment as measured by MCT4 expression and are associated with a statistically significantly decrease in DFS (Disease Free Survival). It may be that these tumors are more aggressive, because they generate oxidative stress, lactate and ketone bodies to fuel mitochondrial metabolism (OXPHOS) in adjacent proliferating epithelial cancer cells with high MCT1 expression."

 

So far, all of your studies confirm that cancer is about glycolysis, and that it is the glycolytic effect that causes the upregulation of cancer-controlled mitochondria.   

 

What I take away from your studies is that cancer uses HK2 enzymes to control the mitochondria.  Drugs like 3BP that downregulate HK2 interfere with glycolysis in the cancer cell and downregulate mitochondria at the same time.

 

Your studies are important, because they suggest that cancer is very good at both upregulation of glycolysis, but it then uses that energy to produce additional energy in mitochondria.  I wasn't aware of that before, so thank you.

 

I would beg you to please listen to Dominic's presentation that I linked.   The clinical outcomes they achieved by starving glycolysis are extremely impressive.

 


Edited by pone11, 18 January 2015 - 10:48 PM.

  • like x 1

#11 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 18 January 2015 - 11:08 PM

The below 2 citations are reports of patients with severe cancer who received 3-Bromopyruvate and had very large cancer responses.
Could someone confirm that the second article (July 2014) treated metastatic cancer using 3-BrP delivered only IV?

The Johns Hopkins reports did not report such an outcome. In their reported research, the tumors were not treated via systemic
therapy. Instead, in one instance they stopped circulation to the liver of experimental animals and then applied a treatment of 3BrP.
Comments in their research raised doubts as to whether 3BrP would be successful if given systemically.

The anti-cancer effect achieved in the July 2014 article seems to be truly remarkable. Severe metastatic illness appears to have been cured using only IV BrP and paracetamol. The 3 combination doses of 3BrP and paracetamol appear to have had an overwhelming anti-tumor effect.





A translational study "case report" on the small molecule "energy blocker" 3-bromopyruvate (3BP) as a potent anticancer agent: from bench side to bedside.
J Bioenerg Biomembr. 2012 Feb;44(1):163-70. doi: 10.1007/s10863-012-9417-4. Epub 2012 Feb 11.

Chin J Cancer. 2014 Jul;33(7):356-64. doi: 10.5732/cjc.013.10111. Epub 2014 Mar 14.
Safety and outcome of treatment of metastatic melanoma using 3-bromopyruvate: a concise literature review and case study
  • Informative x 1

#12 resveratrol_guy

  • Registered User
  • 1,129 posts
  • 220

Posted 19 January 2015 - 11:44 PM

I agree: the Dominic D'Agostino video is revolutionary, even for those of us already familiar with the ketogenic or paleo diets. This is an outstanding contribution, so thanks for posting.

One thing that he said really blew me away (paraphrasing): transplanting cancer mitochondria into good cells resulted in cancer, even though transplanting cancer nuclear DNA into good cells did not. This begs the question: is there a more direct kinetic kill option here?

In particular: Can we use selective thermolysis to obliviate glycolytic (Warburg glycopathcological) mitochrondria? In other words, can we use a strategy similar to what the SENS team investigated for lipofuscin destruction using specific wavelengths of light, or what Yoav Medan used for ultrasonic tumor ablation -- but in this case, to selectively destroy mitochondria? One can imagine a whole body "scanner" which would bathe the patient in some specific wavelength of energy (photons, ultrasound, or something else). The viability of this strategy depends upon glycopathcological mitochrondria having distinct physical characteristics. This is more plausible than it sounds, on account of the deterioration of the cristae (interior mitochondrial membranes) @ 34:30 in the video, which might change the resonant frequencies of the encapsulating membrane as a whole. For example, if a normal mitochondrion explodes due to membrane resonance at 80 +/- 5 KHz, then maybe a bad one explodes at 93 +/- 5 KHz, in which case, we bathe the patient in the latter for some particular amount of time. Collateral damage might occur if the frequency domains overlap, but that might be desirable to the extent that it would destroy precancerous mitochondria as well. This ought to be relatively cheap to investigate.

 

Conversely, by analyzing the absorption spectrum, we might be able to use the ablation machine as a cancer detector.

 

All in all, kinda like this one currently in use on Elysium. ;)

 


Edited by resveratrol_guy, 20 January 2015 - 12:07 AM.


#13 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 20 January 2015 - 03:33 AM

The below 2 citations are reports of patients with severe cancer who received 3-Bromopyruvate and had very large cancer responses.
Could someone confirm that the second article (July 2014) treated metastatic cancer using 3-BrP delivered only IV?

 

Based on the interesting 3BP research you posted, I contacted Dominic D'Agostino to see if his group is researching 3BP.   He indicated that they are starting to look at lonidamine, which is a similar drug that selectively targets the hexokinase 2 enzyme in cancer.   He does not have published studies yet, just abstracts.   He only has in vivo data and they need funding to do animal studies.   He indicated the data they have is very compelling.

 

I would say you have a winner there with 3BP and just passing the pointer to lonidamine for your further research as well.   Really any hexokinase 2 inhibitor is worth your time to research.

 

And if we have any billionaires here who want to fund Dominic's work, contact me by private messaging and I'll make an introduction.   I can say that Dominic strikes me as the kind of young researcher who has a shot at curing cancer.   He is super smart and very wise about how he funds research (e.g., getting the Navy to fund hyperbaric oxygen studies, which he then leveraged into oxygen therapy research for cancer).   But - most importantly - he has the right idea.   After 20 years of wasting billions of dollars on genetic cures to cancer, we finally have researchers coming back to Warburg's original idea that cancer is a metabolic disorder.   Some combination of oxygen therapies, selective downregulation of energy production inside the cancer cell, dietary control to reduce glucose available to the cancer, etc, has a real shot at tripling lifespan expectancy for many cancers, just by starving their growth.   Looking at the dietary issue alone, I cannot help but be amazed that Dominic figured out a way to produce a ketone ester that - taken orally - will raise ketone levels for hours, thereby allowing the person to live on ketone energy and sending their glucose levels very low without any metabolic discomfort to the brain or normal cellular metabolism.    That ester by itself would be a huge accomplishment if commercialized, and he did that just to help prove a point in a larger study about cancer.  Dominic gets stuff done.


Edited by pone11, 20 January 2015 - 03:36 AM.

  • like x 1

#14 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 20 January 2015 - 04:00 AM

http://www.dayspring...-cancer-clinic/


http://www.digitaljo....com/pr/2220319
  • Informative x 1

#15 seivtcho

  • Registered User
  • 1,944 posts
  • 403
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 20 January 2015 - 06:59 AM

By the way, aren't this thing about the mitochondria and the cancer off-topic for mitochondria transplants? Why not you make another topic for that?


  • unsure x 1
  • Off-Topic x 1

#16 resveratrol_guy

  • Registered User
  • 1,129 posts
  • 220

Posted 20 January 2015 - 06:55 PM

 

Good find, if these are to be believed.

 

"Founded in the U.S. 12 years ago, Cancer Treatment Institute of Colombia in Bogota treats cancer using novel cancer drugs and image-guided ablation with tumor vaccine." Yeah, I think these guys get it: the worst thing you can do with a "miracle" cancer drug is to use it as monotherapy. (Has the history of antibiotics taught us nothing?) Leave it to one of the most unstable countries in Latin America to light the way to serious gains against cancer, while we sit here in the US shuffling papers around antiquated tumor-specific approaches, throwing patients from one silo to another while the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

 

As they apparently realized long ago, we need to use 3BP (if it works as advertised) pursuant to physical tumor destruction via surgical excision with positive margins, irreversible electroporesis, ultrasound thermolysis, or whatever. This is basic math: exponentially fewer surviving cancer cells means that the remission threshold for 3BP to overcome is just that much lower. We could finish the job with a vaccine composed of cultured tumor-responsive macrophages. It gives me the creeps to realize that after all this intensive intervention in glycopathology, some cancer stem cells still survive and find another path to lethality. So as crude as it sounds, it seems that a kitchen sink approach is necessary, especially when faced with metastatic cancer. And that doesn't depend on us having an Elysium scanner.



#17 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 20 January 2015 - 10:14 PM

By the way, aren't this thing about the mitochondria and the cancer off-topic for mitochondria transplants? Why not you make another topic for that?

 

Mag1, do you want to start a new thread and then point us there?   Do you want the administrator to move the discussion out of this thread into that one?



#18 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 20 January 2015 - 10:42 PM

Sure, if this goes on much more we probably should start another thread. First, I will wait for the eviction notice.

Point taken about the journal articles. They are not from the top tier of the journal list. It is a concern, when obscure journals
publish such sensational results. However, the original research was published over 10 years ago from Johns Hopkins. The animal results they reported for animals were equally stunning. The FDA has granted 3BrP 2 orphan designations and authorized a human trial to start almost 2 years ago.

It is surprising and disheartening how the US handled the 3BrP find. The investigator who discovered it was fired and has had to enter litigation to receive due recognition for the work. It appears that the university has appropriated the discovery and is developing it as if they discovered it.


Notably, the Columbians are including salinomycin with 3BrP as a combination treatment. Salinomycin has attracted considerable interest in its own right as it appears to have potent anti-cancer stem properties. There have been published human reports demonstrating its effectiveness in cancer therapy.
  • Informative x 1

#19 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 20 January 2015 - 10:46 PM

Sure, if this goes on much more we probably should start another thread. First, I will wait for the eviction notice.

Point taken about the journal articles. They are not from the top tier of the journal list. It is a concern, when obscure journals
publish such sensational results. However, the original research was published over 10 years ago from Johns Hopkins. The animal results they reported for animals were equally stunning. The FDA has granted 3BrP 2 orphan designations and authorized a human trial to start almost 2 years ago.

It is surprising and disheartening how the US handled the 3BrP find. The investigator who discovered it was fired and has had to enter litigation to receive due recognition for the work. It appears that the university has appropriated the discovery and is developing it as if they discovered it.


Notably, the Columbians are including salinomycin with 3BrP as a combination treatment. Salinomycin has attracted considerable interest in its own right as it appears to have potent anti-cancer stem properties. There have been published human reports demonstrating its effectiveness in cancer therapy.

 

I think this is an important thread that should continue to evolve for years on this site.  It deserves a new topic of its own so that the discussion can continue.

 

The two URLs you posted are not scientific journals at all.  They are advertisements for alternative cancer cure clinics.  Profit motive here may overshadow the science.



#20 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 20 January 2015 - 10:48 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3516046/

#21 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 20 January 2015 - 10:59 PM

Sorry for the confusion.

The 2 articles I referenced above were:

A translational study "case report" on the small molecule "energy blocker" 3-bromopyruvate (3BP) as a potent anticancer agent: from bench side to bedside.
J Bioenerg Biomembr. 2012 Feb;44(1):163-70. doi: 10.1007/s10863-012-9417-4. Epub 2012 Feb 11.

Chin J Cancer. 2014 Jul;33(7):356-64. doi: 10.5732/cjc.013.10111. Epub 2014 Mar 14.
Safety and outcome of treatment of metastatic melanoma using 3-bromopyruvate: a concise literature review and case study

It is true that the 2 urls that I provided were for profit cancer clinics. However, the American clinic has been granted government
authorization to provide 3BrP treatment. Such approval would likely require some regulatory oversight. It also highlights the fact that 3BrP has probably been administered to human cancer patients in a high quality medical environment and such treatment, under those circumstances, is safe.
  • Informative x 1

#22 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 24 January 2015 - 10:44 PM

A new method of delivery for 3-Bromopyruvate could enhance its effectiveness.


Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Dec 15;20(24):6406-17. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1271. Epub 2014 Oct 17.
Systemic delivery of microencapsulated 3-bromopyruvate for the therapy of pancreatic cancer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC4300523/

#23 YOLF

  • Member
  • 7,625 posts
  • 2,461
  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 25 January 2015 - 02:00 AM

Moderation - I've moved some posts from a similar discussion here. The title has also been modified to reflect the additions.


Edited by PerC, 25 January 2015 - 02:08 AM.


#24 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 25 January 2015 - 03:17 AM

I am not sure about the reorganization of this thread. This thread never gained much traction, so I decided to hitch a ride on another thread and report on the 3-BP story there.

This thread might still not generate the right vibe to attract a following.
  • Good Point x 1

#25 YOLF

  • Member
  • 7,625 posts
  • 2,461
  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 25 January 2015 - 08:14 PM

What do you suggest?



#26 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 25 January 2015 - 10:10 PM

I do not think that I would have moved the 3-BP items from the Mitochondrial thread here.

 

In the Mitochondrial thread, I wanted to point out the effectiveness of 3-BP: that was accomplished. A learning opportunity emerged when the actual therapeutic result from the

article in Chin J Cancer. 2014 Jul;33(7):356-64 was misunderstood. Two treatments of 3-Brp and salinomycin resulted in a therapeutic cure for a patient with terminal cancer!

 

It was noted on that thread that 3-BP is an important subject for this forum to address over the next few years. After accomplishing my objective, I intended that the Mitochondrial thread could revert back to its main topic. Unfortunately, the 3-BP comments on that thread sapped the enthusiasm of others and it has now become inactive. I did not intend that to happen.

 

Sometimes a bit of heated disagreement is required to give life to a conversation. This 3-BP thread has been unable to generate such energy, even though 3BP is possibly an important development in cancer treatment. 3-BP could be the cure for cancer. The lackluster success of this thread encouraged me to catch a wave on another thread and push the 3-BP message there.

 

A sensationalistic thread topic such as: Is 3-Bromopyruavte the cure for cancer? might help. However, I do not want to overstate the evidence.       


  • Informative x 1

#27 pone11

  • Registered User
  • 584 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Western US
  • NO

Posted 27 January 2015 - 11:42 PM

What do you suggest?

 

Using 3-Bromopyruvate (3-BP) to Fight Cancer
Is 3-Bromopyruvate (3-BP) a Cancer Cure?


I am not sure about the reorganization of this thread. This thread never gained much traction, so I decided to hitch a ride on another thread and report on the 3-BP story there.

This thread might still not generate the right vibe to attract a following.

 

So what is the other thread in which you want to post 3-BP information?

 

Why not fix what you think is broken in this thread rather than taking another thread off topic?


  • Agree x 1

#28 resveratrol_guy

  • Registered User
  • 1,129 posts
  • 220

Posted 01 February 2015 - 08:08 PM

So when I read about the Alzheimer's side effect above (which is probably an exaggeration, as 3BP was directly injected into the CNS, which would never happen except perhaps for brain or spine cancer), I nonetheless am reminded of the purportedly anticancer agent graviola (also known as soursop and in the same plant family as paw paw, another rumored cancer killer). (BTW a family friend had metastatic liver cancer a few years ago -- after being cured of colon cancer via conventional medicine -- and has been in remission ever since, apparently due to a regimen of paw paw along with a Gerson-ish diet and other therapies.) But my point here is the neurotoxicity issue: graviola can also be neurotoxic (depending on the particular dose of seed or fruit extract). This suggests to me that graviola and 3BP might be acting on related pathways, in which case, the former might be a cheaper and more accessible alternative in desperate situations. This is also unsurprising, given the recent studies (for example) demonstrating a significant anticorrelation between cancer and Alzheimer's.

 

So as I understand it, plain vanilla IV 3BP is basically useless; one needs paracetamol to lower the glutathione antioxidant defense of the tumor cells in order to make it effective. (Organ-targetted 3BP-only therapy is potententially effective, but the delivery mechanics are obviously nontrivial, so IMO this is an impractical approach.) So it kind of sounds like 3BP causes HK2 to indirectly downregulate glycolysis. Then, robbed of half their energy, normal oxidative stress becomes an overwhelming tax on the cancer cells which are also glutathione depleted, resulting in cell death. (Not to forget salinomycin, but I'm no expert on it.) Somehow, during this process, we need to preferentially protect healthy cells. Perhaps a proapoptic agent which is also an antioxidant, such as reveratrol or pterostilbene, would be useful. c60oo (and similarly, nicotinamide riboside) might be useful as well, judging from the original Baati experiment, although it's not completely clear whether or not it would protect cancer once it had already developed, even though it appears to prevent it in the first place. (Here is one early encouraging result.) Anyway, I'm just trying to think of a way to protect the patient from undue oxidative and neurological stress (nicotine? lithium? NGF eye drops?) while we fry the cancer. This isn't idle fascination; a friend of a friend of mine (not the guy above) has metastatic pancreatic cancer. I've told his wife about 3BP, for starters.

 

A ketogenic diet has obvious benefits, but is unpalatable to some people, even some people with cancer. (And with digestive cancers, the fat load would require increased synthetic enzyme intake, if it could be tolerated at all.)

 

[Mods: IMO this is "the" 3BP thread, based on internal search ranking, so I vote to keep it that way.]

 


Edited by resveratrol_guy, 01 February 2015 - 08:38 PM.

  • Agree x 1

#29 mag1

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered User
  • 819 posts
  • 129
  • Location:virtual

Posted 01 February 2015 - 08:18 PM

Thanks. I am liking this is THE 3-BP thread.

I want to generate a positive vibe so that all the cool people will join in.
The problem with this forum is that there is no good way to filter down all the bogus cancer threads so that ones like 3-BP
are more prominent.


Longecity does not have many hard core cancer patients posting, so the threads do not have the same urgency as elsewhere.
Check out some of the latest posts from the cancercompass forum.
http://www.cancercom...all,65701,0.htm
  • Good Point x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert
To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#30 resveratrol_guy

  • Registered User
  • 1,129 posts
  • 220

Posted 01 February 2015 - 08:34 PM

Longecity does not have many hard core cancer patients posting, so the threads do not have the same urgency as elsewhere.
Check out some of the latest posts from the cancercompass forum.
http://www.cancercom...all,65701,0.htm

 

We have the biohackers. They have the desperate patients. So to anyone with an established reputation on a patient site, I would recommend making a few polite posts, inviting cancer patients (or better yet, their healthy family members who are not mentally drained by the disease) to visit Longecity cancer threads such as this and others. There is no excuse for keeping the public in the dark about potentially powerful (albeit lightly tested) alternatives, but by and large, that's just the way things work by default. Thanks to you and others for sharing this information.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: cancer, cancer cure

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (1)