Conventional cancer treatment alone or with regional hyperthermia for pain relief in lung cancer: A case-control study

The Clinical Validation of Modulated Electro-Hyperthermia (mEHT)

The mEHT method uses tissues' thermal and bioelectromagnetic heterogeneity for the selective mechanisms. The success of the therapy for advanced, relapsed, and metastatic aggressive tumors can only be demonstrated by measuring survival time and quality of life (QoL). The complication is that mEHT-treated patients cannot be curatively treated any longer with "gold standards", where the permanent progression of the disease, the refractory, relapsing situation, the organ failure, the worsening of blood counts, etc., block them. Collecting a cohort of these patients is frequently impossible. Only an intent-to-treat (ITT) patient group was available. Due to the above limitations, many studies have single-arm data collection. The Phase III trial of advanced cervix tumors subgrouping of HIV-negative and -positive patients showed the stable efficacy of mEHT in all patients' subgroups. The single-arm represents lower-level evidence, which can be improved by comparing the survival data of various studies from different institutes. The Kaplan-Meier probability comparison had no significant differences, so pooled data were compared to other methods. Following this approach, we demonstrate the feasibility and superiority of mEHT in the cases of glioblastoma multiform, pancreas carcinomas, lung tumors, and colorectal tumors.

Systematic review about complementary medical hyperthermia in oncology

Hyperthermia is a generic term for different techniques using heat in cancer therapies. Temperatures of about 42° Celsius in combination with chemo- or radiotherapy may improve the effectiveness of those treatments. Clinical benefit is shown in “standard hyperthermia” with tumour temperatures assessed during treatment. This systematic review thoroughly assesses the state of evidence concerning the benefits and side effects of electro hyperthermia or whole-body hyperthermia (“alternative hyperthermia”) in oncology. From 26 April 2021 to 09 May 2021, a systematic search was conducted searching five electronic databases (Embase, Cochrane, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Medline) to find studies concerning the use, effectiveness and potential harm of alternative medical hyperthermia therapy on cancer patients. From all 47,388 search results, 53 publications concerning 53 studies with 2006 patients were included in this systematic review. The patients were diagnosed with different types of cancer. The hyperthermic methods included whole-body hyperthermia (WBH) with different methods and electro hyperthermia (EH). The majority of the included studies were single-arm studies, counting in total 32 studies. Six studies were randomized controlled trials (RCT). In addition, one systematic review (SR) was found. The most critical endpoints were tumour response, survival data, pain relief, myelosuppression and toxicities. Outcome was heterogeneous, and considering the methodological limitations, clinical evidence for the benefit of alternative hyperthermia in cancer patients is lacking. Neither for whole-body hyperthermia nor for electro hyperthermia there is any evidence with respect to improvement of survival or quality of life in cancer patients.

The effect of modulated electro-hyperthermia on the pharmacokinetic properties of nefopam in healthy volunteers: A randomised, single-dose, crossover open-label study

Purpose: Nefopam is a widely available analgesic for the management of pain. The aim of this study was to reveal the effect of regional hyperthermia of the abdominal area on the pharmacokinetics of nefopam. Materials and methods: A randomised, single-dose, crossover, open-label study was conducted to reveal the effect of hyperthermia using modulated electro-hyperthermia on the pharmacokinetics of nefopam. The pharmacokinetics of orally administered nefopam without hyperthermia was studied in 12 healthy volunteers and then 7 days later they were treated with nefopam plus modulated electro-hyperthermia to the abdominal area for 1 h. Blood samples were collected up to 24 h after the drug administration. From the blood concentration-time curve, the maxinum plasma concentration (C_max), time to C_max (T_max) and the area under the curve (AUC) were obtained. The safety and tolerability of these treatments were also assessed. Results: The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) ((nefopam + modulated electro-hyperthermia)/nefopam) and the associated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for C_max, AUC_last and AUC_inf were 1.2804 (1.1155∼1.4696), 1.0512 (0.9555∼1.1566) and 1.0612 (0.9528∼1.1819), respectively. The increase in C_max was statistically significant, and T_max was significantly shortened. Conclusions: The significant increase in C_max and decrease in T_max indicated that modulated electro-hyperthermia increased the absorption of the orally administered nefopam, thereby transitionally increasing the blood concentration of the drug. The AUC is an important parameter that contributes to the therapeutic effect of drugs. The lack of significant change in AUC suggests that modulated electro-hyperthermia may increases the absorption of orally administered drugs without increasing the systemic adverse effect of the drugs.