Saturday, April 24, 2010

MBV manufacturer Canada COLEY's TOXINS BOOK excerpt w footnotes


Coley Fluid was a mainstream cancer therapy for many years, but its use particularly in the United States declined with the advent of chemotherapy. In 1962, an amendment to the Pure Food and Drug Act established the present system of FDA approval. The amendment included a “grandfather clause” that legalized drugs currently being marketed. Unfortunately, in 1962 no U.S. companies were marketing Coley Fluid so in spite of a 70-year history of safe and effective use, beginning in 1962 Coley Fluid was no longer an approved therapy in the United States.

In 1982, researchers determined 5-year survival of historical Coley Fluid cancer patients was equivalent to 5-year survival of modern patients. In 1999, researchers found 10-year survival of historical Coley Fluid patients was better than modern sarcoma, kidney and ovarian cancer patients. In addition to prolonging survival, Coley Fluid was frequently curative in types of cancer that are incurable today.

Coley Fluid is known by many different names: Coley Vaccine, Coley’s Toxins, Coley’s Mixed Toxin, Coley’s Mixture, Erysipelas and Prodigiosis Toxins, Febrivax, Multi Bacterial Vaccine, and Vaccineurin.

MBVax Bioscience provides Coley Fluid for research and clinical study.

http://mbvax.com/images/coleynew.gif

The first patient to receive Coley Fluid was a sixteen-year-old boy with a massive abdominal tumor. Every few days, Coley injected his fluid directly into the tumor mass and produced the symptoms of an infectious disease, but did not produce the disease itself. On each injection, there was a dramatic rise in body temperature and chills. The tumour gradually diminished in size. By May 1893, after four months of intensive treatment, the tumour was a fifth its original size. By August, the remains of the growth were barely perceptible. The boy received no further anticancer treatment and remained in good health until he died of a heart attack 26 years later.

Coley published his results and by the turn of the century 42 physicians from Europe and North America had reported cases of cancer that had been successfully treated with Coley Fluid. Coley Fluid became a mainstream cancer treatment and was successfully used in the treatment of most types of cancer. Until his death in 1936, Coley was the head of the bone tumor department at Memorial Hospital in New York City where he treated thousands of bone cancer patients with his fluid. In the United States the pharmaceutical company Parke Davis manufactured Coley Fluid until 1951.

The historical results of Coley Fluid therapy are difficult to compare with modern results. Even so, every published study has reached the same conclusion: Coley Fluid therapy is as good, or better, than modern therapies. However, there were many different formulations of Coley Fluid that varied greatly in effectiveness, and there were many different treatment protocols that also varied greatly in effectiveness. The company believes its Coley Fluid formulation and treatment protocol will be more effective than current therapies for a wide range of cancers.

book excerpt - “Coley” from Spontaneous Regression: Cancer and the Immune System, by Donald H. MacAdam.

From Spontaneous Regression: Cancer and the Immune System
by Donald H. MacAdam, Xlibris: Philadelphia 2003.

For more information on this book see:
http://www2.xlibris.com/bookstore/bookdisplay.asp?bookid=
20887


Chapter Two Coley

In 1999, a group of researchers compared cancer patients
treated by William Coley with contemporary cancer
patients and reached the following conclusion: "Given the
tremendous advances in surgical techniques and medicine
in general, any cohort of modern patients should be
expected to fare better than patients treated 50 or more
years ago. Yet no such statistical advantage for the
modern group was observed in this study."

In 1891, Dr. William Coley plunged a syringe into the
neck of a young Italian man and carefully injected a
solution of infectious bacteria. This particular type of
bacteria was known to cause a skin disease called
erysipelas. At the time, long before the discovery of
antibiotics, erysipelas was often fatal even in a healthy
person. But the young Italian man was not healthy. He was
terminally ill with cancer. Coley’s intention was to
produce erysipelas in the hope the patient, while
recovering from the skin disease, would also recover from
cancer. It was an experiment. But, as is often the case
in medical research, there was an unforeseen problem. The
first injection, then the second, then the third, failed
to produce an infection. But Coley persisted, time after
time injecting the young man with bacteria but repeatedly
failing to infect him. Finally, after four months without
success, an injection of a particularly virulent strain
did the trick. Within an hour, the typical symptoms of a
severe attack of erysipelas appeared. There was pain,
nausea, a chill lasting forty minutes, and a fever that
rose as high as 105°. The attack of erysipelas lasted for
more than one week. By the time it subsided, the tumors
had begun to break down, and within weeks the tumors had
disappeared.

The young man returned to his home in Italy where, ten
years later, he died of unknown causes.

The young Italian man was only the second cancer patient
treated by Coley. He had treated his first patient less
than a year before. Bessie, a teenager from a prominent
family, had bone cancer in her right hand. The year was
1890. Radiation had not been discovered, chemotherapy had
not been dreamt of, and the only medical treatment for
cancer was surgery. Coley did everything that could be
done when he amputated Bessie’s arm beneath the elbow
but, as is so often the case with cancer, everything that
could be done was not enough. The following month, lumps
appeared in her breasts and lymph nodes, and Bessie was
in constant, debilitating pain that could only be managed
with increasingly larger doses of morphine. In her next
and final month, more nodules developed, more lymph nodes
hardened, Bessie’s enlarged liver turned her skin yellow
from jaundice, and the cancer filled her abdominal cavity
and covered her skin from head to foot. Unable to
tolerate solid food, her condition steadily declined.
With the young doctor at her bedside, death finally
brought relief. 4


Coley was painfully aware that surgery was rarely
effective except when the cancer could be completely
removed and the patient was in good physical condition,
but this was exactly such a case. Bessie was healthy and
her cancer was confined to the extremity of a limb. Her
death had a profound impact on Coley. If the fact that
his surgical skills had proven useless in this one case
was troubling, the knowledge he was not equipped to face
the next case was even more so.

The medical schools of the late nineteenth century, even
the great ones like Harvard from which Coley graduated in
1888, taught much about anatomy, bone-setting, surgery
and diagnosis, but very little about the treatment of
disease. By today’s standards, diseases usually went
untreated. Other than morphine to dull pain, there were
very few available medications. Ailments were either
self-limiting or incurable. To the nineteenth century
physician, his or her role was to perform practical
doctoring and, when there was nothing practical to be
done, to diagnose disease and to explain its probable
course, positive or negative. It was all that could be
expected. But Coley wanted to do more. In a personal
campaign to find something that might help the next
Bessie, Coley researched about 100 similar cases treated
at the New York Hospital during the previous 15 years.

He found nothing out of the ordinary except for a
peculiar incident involving a German immigrant named
Stein that had occurred seven years previously.

In 1884, the 31-year-old Mr. Stein had undergone an
operation to remove a cancerous growth from his neck. It
had been his fifth operation in three years and, for the
fifth time, it proved impossible to remove the entire
tumor. And there was more bad news to come. After two
weeks confined to his hospital bed recuperating from the
ineffective surgery, Mr. Stein contracted a dangerous
skin disease called erysipelas. He experienced high
fever, chills, nausea and pain, then, as the skin disease
began to subside there was a second attack. Once more Mr.
Stein was racked with fever, chills, nausea and pain,
until finally, the second attack of erysipelas gradually
came to an end. It was at this point that the attending
physician, Dr. Bull, witnessed an extraordinary event.
During the resolution of the skin disease, the wound from
the operation healed along with all visible traces of the
tumor. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Stein was discharged from
the hospital.

After this remarkable incident, there was no further
mention of Mr. Stein in the records of the hospital, not
even a follow up examination. After five surgeries in
three years, the most reasonable explanation for the
extended absence was that he had died, but no one knew
for sure. Coley set out to discover what happened to Mr.
Stein. Even today, it is difficult to reconstruct a
patient’s history seven years after the fact, but in 1891
it must have seemed an impossible task. Nonetheless,
Coley searched New York’s immigrant neighborhoods for
someone with knowledge of Mr. Stein’s ultimate fate.
Then, in his own words, "After great effort I finally
succeeded in tracing the after-history of this patient
and found him alive and well." Coley persuaded Mr. Stein
to accompany him back to the New York Hospital where he
was examined by Coley and Dr. Bull. No trace of the
cancer remained.

The only clinical factor that distinguished Mr. Stein’s
case from the others was the erysipelas infection. To
Coley, it seemed obvious that the accidental infection
must have somehow cured the cancer. If so, Coley
reasoned, then an intentional infection might also have
curative effects. Coley decided to act on his intuition.
He resolved to purposely induce an attack of erysipelas
in his next appropriate cancer patient. It would be
something like fighting fire with fire and, in
researching the bacterial cause for this new kind of
fire, Coley found there were others who had come to the
same conclusion before him.

In 1867, a German professor named Busch wrote what is
likely the first account of an attempt to cure cancer by
intentionally infecting a patient with erysipelas.

Busch applied the used bandages of an erysipelas patient
to the neck of a 19-year-old female patient with a
child-head-sized tumor. The young woman contracted
erysipelas, her temperature rose to 104°F, and the huge
tumor shrank to the size of a small apple within two
weeks. After the erysipelas infection was cured, the
tumor grew back and the woman left the clinic to an
unknown fate.

In 1882, a German scientist named Fehleisen was the
first to identify, isolate and culture the bacteria
responsible for erysipelas.

Fehleisen injected the live cultured bacteria into seven
cancer patients and achieved remissions in three of them.
As mentioned earlier, remission has a different meaning
than regression. Tumors in a cancer that is in remission
have stopped growing, and tumors in a cancer that is in
regression are becoming smaller either in number or size.
In total, Coley found more than 20 published accounts
before 1890 linking infections of erysipelas to
remissions or regressions of cancer.

In May 1891, Coley conducted his first erysipelas
experiment with the young Italian man described at the
beginning of this chapter as his patient. By the
following year, he had treated a total of ten "inoperable
and quite hopeless" cancer patients, but continued to
find it difficult to produce an erysipelas infection.
After his initial success with the Italian man, Coley was
able to induce an attack of erysipelas in only two out of
his next nine cancer patients. In these two successfully
infected patients, the cancerous tumors entirely
disappeared in one and reduced in size and number in the
other.

These results were very encouraging because every
patient who contracted erysipelas showed remarkable
improvement. However, most patients did not contract the
disease and there could be no therapy without the
disease. Coley needed a more efficient method of
infecting patients, and perhaps he found one because the
next two consecutive patients were successfully infected.
But then there was a setback. Both patients died, but not
from cancer. They died from erysipelas.

The consecutive fatalities forced Coley to rethink his
strategy. He needed an alternative method to deliver the
beneficial effects of erysipelas without the necessity of
producing the disease itself. Coley suspected the
anticancer activity of his treatment was not the result
of the skin disease erysipelas, but rather due to an
unknown component of the bacteria that was "toxic" to the
cancer. If so, it might be possible to treat patients
with killed bacteria. That way the patient would receive
the benefit of the anticancer toxin without the necessity
of contracting an often-fatal skin disease. These
thoughts, more intuitive than scientific, led Coley to
abandon the use of live bacteria and begin treating
patients with killed bacteria.

In the first version of "Coley Toxins," which despite the
name are not poisonous, the bacteria responsible for
erysipelas were heat sterilized and passed through a
porcelain filter. This version was used in four cases of
inoperable cancer but failed to generate the intense
symptoms such as chills and high fevers that had been
observed in all successful treatments. As an experiment,
a revised version of Coley Toxins was prepared that
included a second type of killed bacteria known to
generate intense reactions in rabbits. Coley hoped the
mixture of the two types of bacteria would generate a
more intense and therefore more beneficial reaction.


The first patient to receive the mixed version of Coley
Toxins was a sixteen-year-old boy who was bedridden with
an abdominal tumor measuring six by five inches in width
and about five inches in thickness. An exploratory
surgery revealed the tumor to be inoperable because it
involved the entire thickness of the abdominal wall and
was attached to the underlying bones. A sample of the
tumor was microscopically examined and found to be
cancerous. Over a period of four months, every few days
Coley injected his new mixed toxin directly into the
tumor mass. On each injection, there was dramatic rise in
body temperature and extreme chills and trembling. The
tumor gradually diminished in size. At discharge from the
hospital in May 1893 after four months of intensive
treatment, the tumor was a fifth its original size. Two
weeks later, a small mass could be felt but it was no
longer visible. By August the remains of the growth were
barely perceptible. The boy returned to his regular work
and received no further anticancer treatment. He remained
in very good health until he died suddenly of a heart
attack 26 years later.

Between 1891 and 1896, Coley published 16 papers
describing his method but his reports did not generate
widespread excitement. At the time, most physicians
practiced surgery and firmly believed there could be no
cure for cancer other than surgery. Since it was
impossible for Coley’s treatment to be successful,
surviving patients must not have had cancer in the first
place. As one 1893 observer succinctly put it, "A cure by
means other than surgical is … sufficient proof of a
mistaken diagnosis." 16

To most members of the medical community, non-surgical
approaches to the treatment of cancer were simply of
little interest. The medical journals in which Coley
published, however, had a wide readership. While most
readers ignored Coley’s articles, a number of
independently minded doctors began to make use of the new
cancer treatment. Before the turn of the twentieth
century, at least 42 physicians from Europe and North
America had reported cases of cancer that had been
successfully treated with Coley Toxins. 17


Cancer therapies have improved since Coley’s day, but
improvements in treatment have resulted for the most part
in prolonging the disease rather than curing it. For
example, when an appeal for donations on behalf of the
American Cancer Society claims, "Today, far more than
half of all cancers are curable,"18

it is referring to the fact that about 60% of patients
diagnosed with cancer during the period 1989-96 survived
for at least five years. 19

According to the National Cancer Institute, the
five-year survival rate includes "persons who survive
five years after diagnosis, whether in remission,
disease-free, or under treatment". 20

This concept is far different than Webster’s definition
of cure as something that "heals or permanently
alleviates a harmful or troublesome situation." 21


According to the National Cancer Institute, about 60% of
cancer patients survive at least five years after initial
diagnosis compared to only 35% in 1950.22

The principal difficulty with this kind of comparison is
that the process of cancer diagnosis has improved over
the years. Many patients seem to be surviving longer
simply because their cancers are diagnosed sooner.
Instead of dying in four years in the 1950s, an
equivalent group of cancer patients in the 2000s might be
dying in six years. In these cases, the improvement in
survival is the result of better diagnosis, not better
treatment. For example, in white females resident in the
United States, the five-year survival of breast cancer
patients during the period 1988-1997 was about 82%
compared to only 64% in the period 1975- 1987. That
appears to be a considerable improvement. However, during
1988-1997 about 63% of breast cancers were initially
detected when the disease was confined to a primary tumor
compared to only 51% in the period 1975-1987.23

The 28% increase in five-year survivability must be
tempered by the fact that 24% more breast cancers were
diagnosed before they began to spread.

Earlier diagnosis is the most important contributing
factor in the observed increase in five-year survival
rates. Only that portion of the improvement in survival
rates that is independent of time of diagnosis can be
rightfully credited to modern cancer therapies. The
improvement in survival due to modern cancer treatments
is small but we are grateful for it. However, this
improvement, encouraging as it might be, masks a
fundamental problem. Modern therapies have added some
years to the life of the average cancer patient, but
modern therapies have not reduced the patient’s chances
of dying from the disease. In fact, a resident of the
United States is more likely to die of cancer today
(202.8 per 100,000) than in 1950 (195.4 per 100,000). 24


The greatest value of Coley Toxins is evident through
the experience of patients who received the therapy.
Rather than surviving additional years with cancer, many
of these patients lived the rest of their lives without
cancer. For example, in December 1895 a woman was
diagnosed with inoperable cancer. She had a tumor the
size of an orange in her upper left breast that extended
to a region under the clavicle and surrounded major blood
vessels. The woman was in a rapidly declining state of
health and had lost 24 pounds in the previous six weeks.
Her Connecticut surgeons administered 76 injections of
Coley Toxins over a period of three months and, as the
tumor shrank in size, on nine occasions incisions were
made into it to facilitate the drainage of dead tissue.
By the end of three months of therapy, the tumor had
entirely disappeared and the woman soon regained her
weight and her health. She lived a normal life and died
of pneumonia in her 89th year, more than 47 years after
diagnosis. 25


Progress against cancer is calculated in terms of
five-year survival after diagnosis. Five years is an
arbitrary, but practical, unit of measure. It might be
more meaningful to measure longer-term survival, but it
would be impractical in terms of patient-tracking and
reporting delays. Doctors and patients want to know the
expected performance of current therapies, not the
performance of historical therapies. In any case, the
infrastructure that would be needed to follow the
long-term medical histories of cancer patients does not
exist. We must be content with an imperfect reporting
system that makes no distinction between patients who
survive five years and patients who enjoy the remainder
of their lives without cancer.

Most patients with inoperable cancer do not survive even
five years. However, even before the turn of the
twentieth century some patients with inoperable cancer
went on to live normal lives. In 1893, a 29-year-old
woman noticed a small swelling on the left side of her
abdomen that rapidly increased in size. An exploratory
operation found an inoperable tumor involving much of the
abdominal wall. Microscopic examination of a tumor sample
returned a diagnosis of cancer of the connective tissue.
Toxin therapy was begun the following month. Injections
directly into the tumor were given daily for six weeks
and then, after a month of rest to allow the inflammation
caused by the repeated injections to subside, the therapy
was continued for an additional month. Over the treatment
period the tumor steadily decreased in size to the point
it was no longer detectable. There was no trace of
malignancy at the time of her death from heart failure in
1918, 25 years after diagnosis. 26


After the death of her father in 1936, Helen Coley Nauts
inherited her father’s papers including his diaries,
medical reports, case files and a correspondence
numbering many thousands of letters. Her original
intention was to write her father’s biography but, after
a meticulous reading of the archive, she found her true
vocation. For more than fifty years, the daughter labored
to "rehabilitate her father’s reputation and revive use
of the toxins in modern medicine." 27

Thanks to the relentless detective work of Helen Coley
Nauts, we now know that many of Coley’s patients were
long term survivors who went on to live normal lives.

For example, even with the best modern treatment, widely
spread cervical cancer is a virtual death sentence with
only 13% of women surviving five years after diagnosis.
28

Yet, more than 100 years ago a 43-year-old woman with
widely spread cervical cancer recovered from the disease
and went on to live a normal life. In her case, an
exploratory surgery revealed two growths, one on each
side of the abdomen, attached to the small and large
intestines. No attempt was made to remove the tumors.
Microscopic examination confirmed a diagnosis of
inoperable widely spread cervical cancer. The woman’s son
was a doctor and he treated his mother at home. Coley
Toxins were injected deeply into the cancerous masses
twice a week for six months, then once a week for a year.
Each injection resulted in a full reaction including high
fever and the tumors slowly reduced in size. By the
completion of the first eighteen months of therapy, the
woman was able to resume her normal activities. After a
period of rest, the treatments were resumed for an
additional eighteen months as a precaution against
reoccurrence. An extended therapeutic regimen is
difficult both for the patient and the physician, but in
the end it proved to be worth the effort. The woman died
of pneumonia in her 79th year, 36 years after diagnosis.
29


We owe this account to a son and a daughter. Without the
son’s dedication to provide his mother with long-term
therapy there would be no happy ending. Without Helen
Coley Naut’s painstaking research into the ultimate fate
of her father’s patients, the happy ending would be
unknown. Sons and daughters, mothers and fathers; unlike
dispassionate medical statistics, cancer is very much a
family affair and the most tragic cases, and also the
most heartwarming, are those involving children. There is
the case of a nine-year-old girl, bedridden in a
Connecticut hospital, and unable to close her mouth. The
marble- sized tumor that distended her jaws could not be
surgically removed. The only possible treatment was toxin
therapy. Injections were given twice weekly and on each
occasion the girl experienced high fever and violent
chills. After two months, the tumor had completely
regressed and the patient was allowed to go home where
she continued to receive injections for an additional
five months. The little girl grew up and remained in
excellent health. She was free from recurrence when last
traced in 1953, more than 46 years after diagnosis. 30


Coley Toxins therapy was usually administered in the
patient’s own home. Even one hundred years ago, it was
considered too expensive to tie up a hospital bed for
many months at a time. The Mayo Clinic, for example,
would begin toxin therapy and then discharge the patient
into the care of a local doctor. In most cases, however,
cancer patients were never hospitalized at all. These
patients relied entirely on their family doctor. One such
physician, Dr. Calkins of Watertown, New York, routinely
treated his cancer patients for a full year. He would
give daily injections of Coley Toxins for six months and
then twice weekly for another six months. Using this
technique, Calkins achieved an 80% five-year survival
over a 32-year period. 31


Another family physician, Dr. Arthur Burns of Kentville,
Nova Scotia, knew he had a difficult case when a young
woman’s health unexplainably began to rapidly
deteriorate. He referred her to a large Halifax hospital
where an exploratory surgery revealed a huge mass of
tumor attached to and growing outwards from her kidney.
When microscopic examination returned a diagnosis of
widely spread kidney cancer, her condition was considered
hopeless. She was discharged from the hospital and
returned to her hometown on a stretcher. Dr. Burns
administered injections of Coley Toxins for six weeks and
on each occasion her temperature rose to about 105°F. Her
condition gradually improved and she began to gain back
weight. Four months after therapy began, she returned to
a normal, healthy life. When the woman was last traced in
1952, she was entirely healthy 40 years after diagnosis
of widely spread kidney cancer. 32


There are many more examples of desperately sick cancer
patients who received a new lease on life after receiving
toxin therapy. An extremely sick woman with widely spread
ovarian cancer received fifteen months of toxin therapy
beginning in 1916, and completely regained her health
until she died suddenly of a cerebral hemorrhage 20 years
later. 33

A patient with recurrent melanoma received injections of
Coley Toxins in 1902 and remained well without further
recurrence for 41 years. 34

A patient who had become paralyzed due to a massive
tumor involving the spine received injections for three
months in 1902, completely recovered, and lived a normal
life without further recurrence for 42 years. 35

A patient with egg-sized tumors in the neck and jaw,
received six months of toxin therapy in 1906 during which
the tumors entirely disappeared without further
recurrence for 46 years. 36

A patient with inoperable bone cancer received six
months of toxin therapy in 1909 and went on to live a
normal life without recurrence for 42 years. 37

During his career, Coley treated about one thousand
cancer patients with comparable or better results than
the best treatments available today. However, Coley did
not understand how his therapy worked and therefore had
no scientific model to guide its proper implementation.
He made changes in treatment protocol based solely on
personal observations. He learned it was necessary for
patients to experience a strong reaction including a high
fever and chills in order to benefit from the therapy. He
also learned through experience that different patients
required different amounts of toxin, so he began with
small doses, then gradually built up the strength until
he observed the desired reaction. Some of this
dose-variable effect was due to the various preparations
of Coley Toxins available over the years. Each contained
the same mixture of two killed bacteria, but varied
greatly in potency. In particular, the commercially
available Coley Toxins made by Parke Davis & Company
between 1899 and 1951 were often of poor quality. 38

Finally, after hundreds of patients and years of follow
up, Coley learned that the therapy must be continued for
some months after apparent recovery or else there was an
increased risk the cancer would return.

These observations, perfectly sensible in hindsight, came
slowly after years of experience. By the time Coley
appreciated the importance of quality control in the
manufacture of the toxins and exactly how they should be
administered, he was nearing the end of his career. There
were few physicians willing to revisit an old therapy
without a satisfactory medical explanation, let alone one
that required months of treatment and constant
surveillance, when radiation therapy was well understood
and straightforward to administer. After Coley’s death in
1936, the use of the toxins gradually dwindled until by
the end of the 1950s, when chemotherapy was considered
the anticancer treatment of the future, Coley Toxins were
almost, but not quite, forgotten.

In the United States, perhaps the last recorded use of
Coley Toxins as a primary cancer treatment occurred in
the 1960s. In this case, a 69-year-old man with colon
cancer that had spread to his liver and lungs was in such
a hopeless condition he was expected to survive less than
one week. As a last resort, a doctor in Oklahoma City
administered eight daily doses of Coley Toxins and each
time the patient experienced the healing bouts of high
fever and chills. This period of treatment is far short
of the amount of time usually required to assure a
long-lasting response. Nevertheless, one week after
completion of the toxin therapy, the man returned home,
his weight and strength increased, and complete
regression occurred. The man was free of disease when
last traced eight years after receiving the toxin
therapy.39


Perhaps the last recorded use of Coley Toxins as a
primary cancer treatment anywhere in the world occurred
in China during the 1980s. An adult male had terminal
liver cancer involving large tumors in both lobes of the
liver. The man received 68 injections of Coley Toxins in
34 weeks. By the end of this course of treatment, all of
the tumors had completely regressed. 40


The examples that have been described are but a small
sample of the Coley Toxins cases documented in the medi
cal literature.41

These accounts are so compelling that readers can be
easily seduced into unwarranted conclusions about the
efficacy of a forgotten therapy more than one hundred
years old. By themselves, Coley Toxins are not the cure
for cancer. To keep a reasonable perspective, it is
useful to remember that about half the time toxin therapy
did not work. It can be argued that many of these
failures were due to weak versions of the toxins or
improper administration, but a similar argument can be
made for the shortcomings of any cancer treatment. For
whatever reason, Coley Toxins failed about fifty percent
of the time. In that respect, this historical therapy is
no better than its modern replacements. On the other
hand, when Coley Toxins did work, more patients went on
to live a normal life or enjoyed longer periods of
disease-free survival.

For example, of 896 patients treated with Coley Toxins in
one retrospective study, 33 had breast cancer. Of these
patients, 13 had operable cancer that had not widely
spread and all 13 survived at least five years. The
remaining 20 patients had inoperable, widely spread
disease. Of these, 65% survived at least five years. 42

In comparison, five-year survival of women with widely
spread breast cancer at Yale-New Haven Hospital was about
7% in the 1920s and improved to about 15% in the 1950s.
43

More recently, according to the American Cancer Society,
20% of women diagnosed with widely spread breast cancer
in 1989-1996 survived five years. 44

As we have seen, Coley Toxins were a highly effective
anticancer treatment. As we shall see, Coley Toxins work
by stimulating a powerful immune response. By itself, a
powerful immune response is sufficient to cure some
cancers in some patients but cannot cure all cancers in
all patients. A powerfully stimulated immune system is
only part of the answer because cancer cells are
frequently able to hide from the immune system. The
immune system cannot kill what it cannot see. The
remaining part of the answer, training the immune system
to recognize hidden cancer cells, is the subject of
ongoing research that is beginning to yield tangible
results. However, before we discuss the end of cancer, we
must start with its beginnings.


FOOTNOTES

1
Richardson MA, Ramirez T, Russell NC, Moye LA. Coley
toxins immunotherapy: a retrospective review. Alt Ther
Health Med 1999; 5:42; comparison of 128 Coley cases with
1,675 controls from the official registry of the National
Cancer Institute.

2
Coley WB. The treatment of malignant tumors by repeated
inoculations of Erysipelas, with a report of ten original
cases. Am J Med Sci 1893; 105:487-511.

3
Nauts HC. Bacteria and cancer – antagonisms and
benefits. Cancer Surv 1989; 8(4):713-23.

4
Hall, Stephen S. A Commotion in the Blood. London:
Little, Brown and Company, 1997. An excellent and
readable account of Coley’s life.

5
Nauts HC. Bacteria and cancer – antagonisms and
benefits. Cancer Surv 1989; 8(4):718; Coley WB. The
treatment of malignant tumors by repeated inoculations of
Erysipelas, with a report of ten original cases. Am J Med
Sci 1893; 105:487.

6
Coley WB. The treatment of malignant tumors by repeated
inoculations of Erysipelas, with a report of ten original
cases. Am J Med Sci 1893; 105:487-8.

7
Coley WB. Late results of the treatment of inoperable
sarcoma by the mixed toxins of erysipelas and Bacillus
prodigiosus. Am J Med Sci 1906; 131:375.

8
Busch W. Aus der sitzung der medicinischen section vom
13 November 1867. Berl Klin Wochenschr 1868; 5:137.

9
Hobohm U. Fever and cancer in perspective. Cancer
Immunol Immunother 2001; 50(8):391-6.

10
Fehleisen F. Über die Züchtung der Erysipelkokken auf
künstlichem Nährboden und die Übertragbarkeit auf den
Menschen. Dtsch Med Wochenschau 1882; 8:553.

11
Hobohm U. Fever and cancer in perspective. Cancer
Immunol Immunother 2001; 50(8):391-6.

12
Coley WB. The treatment of malignant tumors by
repeated inoculations of Erysipelas, with a report of ten
original cases. Am J Med Sci 1893; 105:487-511.

13
Coley WB. Late results of the treatment of inoperable
sarcoma by the mixed toxins of erysipelas and Bacillus
prodigiosus. Am J Med Sci 1906; 131:375-430.

14
Ibid., p 378-9.

15
Coley WB. Late results of the treatment of inoperable
sarcoma by the mixed toxins of erysipelas and Bacillus
prodigiosus. Am J Med Sci 1906; 131:393-4; Nauts HC,
Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A review of the influence of
bacterial infection and of bacterial products (Coley’s
toxins) on malignant tumors in man. Acta Med Scand Suppl
1953; 276:21-2.

16
Nauts HC, McLaren JR. Coley toxins – the first
century. Adv Exp Med Biol 1990; 267:483-500.

17
Table of Successful Cases Treated by Other Surgeons:
Coley WB. Late results of the treatment of inoperable
sarcoma by the mixed toxins of erysipelas and Bacillus
prodigiosus. Am J Med Sci 1906; 131:422-8.

18
American Cancer Society appeal for funding. Website of
the Illinois State and University Employees Combined
Appeal, http://www.secaillinois.org/acs.hlm accessed
December 17, 2002.

19
Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer
Statistics, 2001. CA Cancer J Clin 2001; 51:15-36.

20
Understanding prognosis and cancer statistics.
National Cancer Institute web site,
http://cis.nci.gov/fact/8_2.htm accessed December 17,
2002.

21
Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Markham,
Ontario: Thomas Allen & Son, 1989, p 316.

22
Table I-3, SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1973-1999.
National Cancer Institute website www.seer.cancer.gov.
Accessed April 2, 2003.

23
Clegg LX, Li, FP, Hankey BF, et al. Cancer survival
among US whites and minorities. Arch Intern Med 2002;
162:1985-93.

24
Table I-2, SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1973-1999.
National Cancer Institute website www.seer.cancer.gov.
Accessed April 2, 2003. These statistics, by the way,
have been age-adjusted to make today’s numbers comparable
with those of 1950; otherwise the increased chance of
dying from cancer would be even greater

25
Nauts HC, Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A review of the
influence of bacterial infection and of bacterial
products (Coley’s toxins) on malignant tumors in man.
Acta Med Scand Suppl 1953; 276:27-8; Coley WB. Late
results of the treatment of inoperable sarcoma by the
mixed toxins of erysipelas and Bacillus prodigiosus. Am J
Med Sci 1906; 131:398-9.

26
Nauts HC, Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A review of the
influence of bacterial infection and of bacterial
products (Coley’s toxins) on malignant tumors in man.
Acta Med Scand Suppl 1953; 276:22-5.

27
Quote from: Hall, Stephen S. A Commotion in the Blood.
London: Little, Brown and Company, 1998, p 118. An
excellent account of Coley’s life.

28
5-year survival in metastatic cervical cancer is 15%
for white women and 7% for black women. Greenlee RT,
Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer Statistics,
2001. CA Cancer J Clin 2001; 51:34.

29
Nauts HC, Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A review of the
influence of bacterial infection and of bacterial
products (Coley’s toxins) on malignant tumors in man.
Acta Med Scand Suppl 1953; 276:28-30.

30
Ibid., p 39-40.

31
Nauts HC, McLaren JR. Coley toxins – the first
century. Adv Exp Med Biol 1990; 267:486.

32
Nauts HC, Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A review of the
influence of bacterial infection and of bacterial
products (Coley’s toxins) on malignant tumors in man.
Acta Med Scand Suppl 1953; 276:59-61.

33
Ibid., p 75-7.

34
Nauts HC, McLaren JR. Coley toxins – the first
century. Adv Exp Med Biol 1990; 267:488.

35
Nauts HC, Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A review of the
influence of bacterial infection and of bacterial
products (Coley’s toxins) on malignant tumors in man.
Acta Med Scand Suppl 1953; 276:30-2.

36
Ibid., p 40-2.

37
Ibid., p 51-3.

38
Ibid., p 93-6.

39
Nauts HC. Bacteria and cancer – antagonisms and
benefits. Cancer Surv 1989; 8(4):718-9.

40
Ibid., p 720.

41
A critical analysis of 30 inoperable cases treated
with Coley Toxins: Nauts HC, Fowler GA, Bogatko FH. A
review of the influence of bacterial infection and of
bacterial products (Coley’s toxins) on malignant tumors
in man. Acta Med Scand Suppl 1953; 276:1-103; also see
extensive list of references in: Wiemann B, Starnes CO.
Coley’s toxins, tumor necrosis factor and cancer
research: a historical perspective. Pharmacol Ther 1994;
64(3):529-64.

42
Nauts HC. Bacterial pyrogens: beneficial effects on
cancer patients. Biomedical Thermology 1982; 690.

43
Todd M, Shoag M, Cadman E. Survival of women with
metastatic breast cancer at Yale from 1920 to 1980. J
Clin Oncology 1983; 1(6):406-8.

44
By race, 22% of white and 15% of black women with
metastatic breast cancer survived five years. Greenlee
RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer Statistics,
2001. CA Cancer J Clin 2001;
51:15-34.






MB Fluid Bacterial substances and cytokines
MBVax Bioscience Inc.
www.mbvax.com

Version: 15Sept06 2
Bacterial Substances


MB Fluid consists of a mixture of two types of killed bacteria: Streptococcus pyogenes is
Gram-positive (meaning a triphenylmethane dye called Gram stain is not decolorized by
ethanol) and Serratia marcescens is Gram-negative (the Gram stain is decolorized).

Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria contain different sets of substances that
stimulate the innate immune system:

• Gram-negative bacteria contain unmethylated CpG DNA sequences, the
endotoxin lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and peptidoglycan (PGN).
• Gram-positive bacteria also contain unmethylated CpG DNA sequences and
peptidoglycan (PGN), but do not contain LPS.
• Gram-positive bacteria also contain exotoxins, lipoteichoic acid (LTA),
streptolysin O (SLO) and cytoplasmic membrane-associated protein (CAP).
• In addition, both types of bacteria contain other, unidentified immune stimulatory
substances.


Bacterial DNA

Bacterial DNA contains unmethylated CpG sequences that bind to the human Toll-like
receptor TLR9 (Bauer
1
) and trigger an innate immune response leading to the
secretion of IL-6, IL-10, IL-12, IP-10, TNF-a, IFN-a, IFN-ß and IFN-?.
2
Both CD4-
positive and CD4-negative peripheral blood dendritic precursor cells respond to CpG
DNA, but monocyte-derived DCs did not respond to CpG (Hartmann3
).


Endotoxin (LPS)

LPS activates cells through the pattern recognition receptors CD14 and Toll-like
receptor 2 (TLR2) on monocytes, macrophages, endothelium and polymorphonuclear
neutrophils, thereby inducing the release of TNF-a, IL-6, and nitric oxide (Dziarski
4
,
Matsuura
5
). Nitric oxide is cytostatic and/or cytolytic for tumor cells (Farias-Eisner
6
).
LPS also induces the production of IL-1a, IL-8, IL-10 (Bjork7
), IP-10 (Luster
8
), and
small quantities of TNF-ß (Hackett
9
), and activates the complement pathway (Loos
10
).
LPS is a B cell mitogen and polyclonal activator in mice (Dziarski
11
). Monocyte-
derived DCs are highly sensitive to LPS, but both CD4-positive and CD4-negative
peripheral blood dendritic precursor cells show little response to LPS (Hartmann12
).


Version: 15Sept06 3

Exotoxins (Spe)

Streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxins (Spe) are produced in the cell walls of
Streptococcus pyogenes and secreted into the extracellular environment. Exotoxins
include SpeA, SpeB and SpeC, and a number of other exotoxins including SpeF,
SpeG, SpeZ, SSA, SMEZ and SMEZ-2 (Muller-Alouf
13
). Exotoxins are both
pyrogenic (induces a fever) and mitogenic (induces cellular proliferation). Exotoxins
are pyrogenic because they stimulate the production of cytokines and chemokines.
Exotoxins are mitogenic because they function as “superantigens” which can give rise
to polyclonal activation (Marrack14
, Leonard15
).

Superantigens have the ability to bind to major histocompatibility complex molecules
on antigen-presenting cells and simultaneously to T cell receptors, thereby triggering a
polyclonal expansion of T lymphocytes. The superantigen-mediated T cell activation
process has also been shown to elicit a characteristic pattern of cytokines distinct from
that seen with LPS, including the T cell derived cytokines, IFN-? and IL-2 (Bjork16
).
TNF-ß is induced more efficiently by the superantigens than by LPS (Hackett
17
).

The best-characterized exotoxin, streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxin type A (SpeA),
stimulates the production of:
• Cytokines IL-1a, IL-6, TNF-a, IL-12, IL-10, IP-10;
• Th1 derived cytokines TNF-ß, IFN-?, IL-2;
• Th2 derived cytokine IL-5;
• IL-3, GM-CSF;
• Chemokines IL-8, RANTES and MIP-1-a (Muller-Alouf
18
); and
• Enhances the host antibody response to other antigens (Hanna
19
).


Peptidoglycan (PGN)

Peptidoglycan, a major component of the cell walls of Gram-positive bacteria, induces
the release of TNF-a (Dziarski
20
) IL-8 (Wang21
), IL-1 and IL-6 (Schwandner
22
). PGN
is a B cell mitogen and polyclonal activator in mice (Dziarski
23
). PGN is also a
constituent of the cell walls of Gram-negative bacteria.


Lipoteichoic acid (LTA)

Lipoteichoic acid also binds to CD14 (Dziarski, 1998), inducing release of TNF. LTA
induces TNF-a, IFN-a, IFN-ß and IFN-? in primed mice (Tsutsui
24
); IL-1ß, IL-6 and
TNF in human monocyte cultures (Bhakdi
25
, Keller
26
, Yamamoto27
); IL-8 and MIP-
1a (Gao28
); and IL-12 (Cleveland29
). LTA stimulates mitogenesis of T, but not B,
lymphocytes (Beachey30
), and activates the complement pathway (Loos
31
).


Version: 15Sept06 4
Streptolysin O (SLO)

Streptolysin O, produced by Streptococcus pyogenes, stimulates monocytes to produce
IL-1ß and TNF-a (Hackett
32
), and stimulates bone marrow-derived mast cells to
produce IL-4, IL-6, IL-13, GM-CSF, TNF-a and MCP-1 (Stassen33
), and binds IgG
antibodies to form immune complexes with potent complement-activating capacity
(Bhakdi
34
).


Cytoplasmic membrane-associated protein (CAP)

CAP is found in the cytoplasmic membrane but not in cell walls, peptidoglycan,
lipoteichoic acids, or cytoplasmic soluble fractions. This mitogenic factor produces
polyclonal activation of many classes of T lymphocytes (Itoh35
).


Histone-like protein (HlpA)

HlpA is a constituent of Streptococcus pyogenes. Exposure of macrophages to a
mixture of HlpA and lipoteichoic acid resulted in a synergistic response in the
production of both TNF-a and IL-1 (Zhang36
).


Dependent effects


The immune responses to bacterial substances are complex.

• Bacterial substances can synergistically enhance immune responses.

o TNF alone has a low systemic toxicity in tumor- and pathogen-free mice.
However, TNF given intravenously with nanogram quantities of LPS can
cause lethal shock (Rothstein37
). Additional synergy might be expected to
occur from the presence of LPS and the streptococcal exotoxin itself
(Kim38
), a similar combination of which has been recommended and
exploited as a method for the detection of LPS, the lethality of which was
found to be enhanced by as much as 50,000-fold or more (Bohach39
).
o Synergistic induction of TNF and IL-1 from macrophages has been
observed in vitro under combined treatment with LPS and superantigens
(Parsonnet
40
, Beezhold41
). In terms of IL-1ß production from human
monocytes, SpeA and Streptolysin O together were synergistic: SpeA 193
pg/ml; Streptolysin O, 452 pg/ml; SpeA plus Streptolysin O, 799 pg/ml
(Hacket
42
).
o Streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxins can enhance the host antibody response
to other antigens (Hanna
43
).

Version: 15Sept06 5
• Bacterial substances can antagonistically reduce immune responses.

o Peptidoglycan-induced monokine production can be blocked by LPS
(Weidemann44
).

• Bacterial substances can differentially induce proliferation of lymphocytes.

o Exotoxins include the classical Streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxins type A,
B and C, and a number of other exotoxins including type F, type G, type
Z, SSA, SMEZ and SMEZ-2. These exotoxins bind to different T cell
receptor motifs and thereby stimulate the expansion of different polyclonal
populations of T cells (Muller-Alouf
45
).
o Lipoteichoic acid is also mitogenic for T cells. Both T and B lymphocytes
possess a single population of specific binding sites of lipoteichoic acid,
and as a consequence of its binding, lipoteichoic acid stimulates
mitogenesis of T, but not B, lymphocytes (Beachey46
).
o Cytoplasmic membrane-associated protein (CAP) also produces
polyclonal activation of many classes of T lymphocytes (Itoh47
).

• Bacterial substances can differentially induce the maturation of antigen-
presenting dendritic cells (DCs).

o Both CD4-positive and CD4-negative peripheral blood dendritic precursor
cells respond to CpG DNA, but these DCs showed little response to LPS.
In contrast, monocyte-derived DCs did not respond to CpG, but they were
highly sensitive to LPS (Hartmann48
).

• Bacterial substances induce the production of cytokines via different
pathways.

o The LPS receptor – CD14 – also binds lipoteichoic acid, inducing release
of TNF (Dziarski
49
); but peptidoglycan (which also induces TNF)
interacts via a different receptor because blocking CD14 had no influence
on Peptidoglycan induced TNF (Wang50
). In mice, lipoteichoic acid
suppressed Meth A fibrosarcoma tumor growth and Peptidoglycan did not
– also lipoteichoic acid induced TNF in Propionibacterium acnes-primed
mice, but Peptidoglycan did not (Usami
51
).

• Bacterial substances induce the production of cytokines with different
kinetics.

o The kinetics of TNF-a production after stimulation is different for LPS,
Streptolysin O and SpeA. LPS immediately stimulates production, rising
to a max in 24 h then leveling off through 72 h. Production due to SpeA
and Streptolysin O does not begin for 6 h, then rises following similar
Version: 15Sept06 6
patterns until 48 h, then SpeA continues to rise while Streptolysin O falls
and at 72 h is comparable to its level at 12 h (Hackett,
52
Fast
53
). Cytokines


The biological activity of MB Fluid can be described in terms of the cytokines and other
substances that mediate the immune response.


GM-CSF

Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating-factor is a cytokine that stimulates
proliferation of granulocytes and macrophages, activates macrophages and promotes
the differentiation and maturation of dendritic cells. Activated T cells, macrophages,
endothelial cells and bone marrow stromal cells produce GM-CSF.

Oncolytic properties of GM-CSF

In the treatment of cancer, GM-CSF produced a 50% reduction in tumor volume in
a soft tissue sarcoma patient (Steward54
). Injection of a murine tumorigenic T-
leukemia cell line expressing mGM-CSF into pre-established tumors of syngenic
mice led to a significant regression of these tumors (Hsieh55
). Furthermore,
syngenic mice injected with melanoma cells or cells transfected with a recombinant
GM-CSF gene either completely rejected the tumor cells or developed tumors with
a mean volume fifty-times smaller than the control (Armstrong56
).


IL-1a, IL-1ß

There are two forms of the cytokine interleukin-1, IL-1a and IL-1ß, coded by separate
genes and showing only 30% structural homology. Nevertheless, these two cytokines
bind the same receptors and have the same function: to induce and promote
inflammatory reactions. IL-1 is produced by activated macrophages, and in smaller
quantities by neutrophils, epithelial cells (especially keratinocytes), and endothelial
cells.

Oncolytic properties of IL-1

When human IL-1ß was introduced into B16 mouse melanoma cells, the growth of
B16 transfectants injected subcutaneously in syngenic mice was significantly
reduced (Bjorkdahl
57
).


Version: 15Sept06 7
IL-2

The cytokine IL-2 is the major growth factor for antigen-activated T lymphocytes; it
also promotes B lymphocyte proliferation, antibody production, and activates NK
cells. IL-2 is produced by activated T lymphocytes, mostly CD4+
T cells and in
smaller quantities by CD8+
T cells.

Oncolytic properties of IL-2

The FDA approved high-dose IL-2 for treatment of patients with metastatic kidney
cancer in 1992 and for metastatic melanoma in 1998 (Rosenberg58
).


IL-3

IL-3 acts on immature bone marrow progenitors to stimulate the production of
lymphocytes. IL-3 is produced by CD4+
T lymphocytes.


IL-4

IL-4 participates in the activation of B-cells as well as other cell types. It is a co-
stimulator of DNA-synthesis, induces the expression of class II MHC molecules on
resting B-cells, and also enhances both secretion and cell surface expression of IgE
and IgG1. IL-4 also stimulates cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs). IL-4 is secreted by
Th1 cells (T helper cells, type 1).

Oncolytic properties of IL-4

IL-4 augments tumor immunogenicity and enhances the induction of tumor reactive
lymphoid cells in animal models (Krauss
59
). Gene transfer of IL-4 into mouse
tumor cells has been shown to stimulate a strong immune response resulting in the
rejection of the transduced tumor when injected in vivo (Melani
60
). Phase I/II
clinical trials have been conducted in which human autologous dermal fibroblasts
were cultured, transduced with the IL-4 gene, selected, irradiated, and administered
to patients as a vaccine (Elder
61
).

IL-5

The cytokine IL-5 stimulates the growth and differentiation of eosinophils, activates
mature eosinophils, and stimulates the production of B lymphocytes and IgA
antibodies. The principal sources of IL-5 are the Th2 subset of activated CD4+
T
lymphocytes and activated mast cells.



Version: 15Sept06 8
IL-6

IL-6 is a cytokine that plays a major role in inflammation, stimulates the synthesis of
acute phase proteins by hepatocytes, and serves as a growth factor for cells of the B-
cell lineage, especially terminally differentiated Ig-secreting plasma cells.
Mononuclear phagocytes, endothelial cells, fibroblasts, and other cells, in response to
bacterial substances and to other cytokines notably IL-1 and TNF, produce IL-6.

Oncolytic properties of IL-6

In SCID mice bearing human tumors and reconstituted with human CTL,
administration of a recombinant adenoviral vector expressing IL-6 induced human
CTL and inhibited growth and metastasis of the human tumor cells (Saggio62
).


IL-8

IL-8 is a chemokine that attracts neutrophils, basophils, and T cells, but not
monocytes. It is also involved in neutrophil activation and is released from several cell
types in response to an inflammatory stimulus. Leukocytes and several types of tissue
cells produce IL-8.

Oncolytic properties of IL-8

Human IL-8 dramatically inhibited the tumor growth rate of CHO cells in vivo
when injected into nude mice (Hirose
63
).


IL-10

The cytokine IL-10 has potent anti-inflammatory properties. IL-10 is the major
inhibitor of activated macrophages. IL-10 inhibits the production of macrophage-
derived IFN-?, IL-2, IL-3, TNF and GM-CSF, thereby suppressing inflammation and
the Th1 pathway of T helper cell differentiation, and serving as negative feedback in
macrophage activation. IL-10 plays a role in adaptive immunity by enhancing the
proliferation of B lymphocytes. IL-10 is produced by activated macrophages.

Oncolytic properties of IL-10

Gene transfer studies have suggested that IL-10 induced tumor suppression is
mediated via enhanced natural killer (NK) cell activity (Gerard64
, Kundu65
) as well
as inducible isoforms of nitric oxide synthase (Kundu66
).
Version: 15Sept06 9
IL-12

The cytokine IL-12 is the principal mediator of early innate immune responses to
bacterial substances. The biological role of IL-12 is to initiate a series of responses
involving macrophages, NK cells, and T lymphocytes. It is a potent stimulator of the
Th1 pathway of helper T cell differentiation, stimulates production of IFN-? by NK
cells and T lymphocytes, and enhances the cytolytic functions of activated NK cells
and CD8+
cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs). The two principal sources of IL-12 are
activated macrophages and dendritic cells.

Oncolytic properties of IL-12

The antitumor activity of IL-12 is documented by a large set of data from numerous
mouse models (Cavallo67
). Gene transfer studies of IL-12 have been efficient at
reducing tumor growth and even complete eradication of established primary
tumors, as well as reduction of metastases in different tumor models (Hiscox68
).
Also, IL-12 expression at the tumor site generated a long-term protective antitumor
immune response. IL-12 gene transfer is being tested in human clinical trials
(Sun69
).


IL-13

The cytokine IL-13 suppresses macrophage activation and antagonizes IFN-?. IL-13
also induces the differentiation of dendritic cells. Th2 cells and some epithelial cells
produce IL-13.

Oncolytic properties of IL-13

IL-13 gene transfer induces anti-tumor protection due to the stimulation of specific
antitumor effector cells (Lebel-Biany70
).


Interferon

IFN-a and IFN-ß, despite their structural differences, bind the same type I interferon
receptor and are therefore called type I interferon. IFN-a, sometimes called leukocyte
interferon, comprises a family of 20 species of molecules that are produced by a subset
of mononuclear phagocytes. IFN-ß, a single substance produced by a variety of cell
types, most notably fibroblasts, is also called fibroblast interferon.

IFN-?, a single substance, is also called immune interferon or type II interferon. It
exerts numerous biological effects including activating macrophages, enhancing the
expression of class I and class II MHC molecules, promoting the differentiation of
naïve CD4+
T cells to the Th1 subset, inhibiting the proliferation of Th2 cells,
promoting the antibody class switch to IgG subclasses, inhibiting the class switch to
Version: 15Sept06 10
IgE, activating neutrophils, and enhancing the cytolytic activity of NK cells. NK cells,
CD4+
Th1 cells and CD8+
cells produce IFN-?.

Oncolytic properties interferon

IFN-a is an FDA approved treatment for hairy cell leukemia and melanoma, and is
being used as an investigational drug for numerous other cancers.

IFN-? induces macrophages to release NO, which is cytostatic and/or cytolytic for
tumor cells (Farias-Eisner
71
).

All types of interferon enhance the expression of MHC class I antigens and
promote the Th1 pathway of T helper differentiation by target cells, and induce
target cells to display the same class of immune epitopes as displayed by antigen
presenting cells such as dendritic cells, thereby allowing the detection and
destruction of tumor cells that might have otherwise been invisible to the immune
system (Van den Eynde
72
).


IP-10

Interferon-inducible protein-10 is a member of the chemokine family. IP-10 exerts a
chemotactic activity on lymphoid cells such as T cells, monocytes and NK cells. IP-10
is also a potent inhibitor of angiogenesis: it inhibits neovascularization by suppressing
endothelial cell differentiation. IP-10 is an IFN-? inducible protein that is produced
mainly by monocytes, but also by T cells, fibroblasts and endothelial cells.

Oncolytic properties of IP-10

Gene transfer of IP-10 into tumor cells reduced their tumorgenicity, and elicited a
long-term protective immune response (Luster
73
). The angiostatic activity of IP-10
was shown to mediate tumor regression: tumor cells expressing IP-10 became
necrotic in vivo (Sgadari
74
). IP-10 has also been shown to mediate the angiostatic
effects of IL-12 that lead to tumor regression (Tannenbaum75
).


MCP-1

Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) is a chemokine produced by a variety of
hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic cell types. MCP-1 attracts monocytes, T and NK
cells.

Oncolytic properties of MCP-1

Gene transfer of MCP-1 into tumor cells demonstrated antitumor effects
(Manome
76
).
Version: 15Sept06 11


MIP-1a

Macrophage inflammatory protein-1a is a chemokine. MIP-1a attracts monocytes,
neutrophils, eosinophils, dendritic cells, NK, and T cells.

Oncolytic properties of MIP-1a

MIP-1a exerts an antitumoral effect because of its ability to recruit immune cells at
the tumor site. In mice, MIP-1a elicited a long-term immune response that resulted
in protection of the animals against challenge by tumor cells (Nakashima
77
).


RANTES

RANTES is a chemokine that attracts monocytes, dendritic, T and NK cells,
eosinophils and basophils.

Oncolytic properties of RANTES

Tumor cells transduced with the RANTES gene had a reduced ability to form
tumors in vivo, and elicited an anti-tumor immune response that protected animals
from challenge with the parent tumor cells (Mule
78
).


TNF-a, TNF-ß

Tumor necrosis factor alpha is a cytokine that induces and promotes inflammatory
reactions involving recruitment of neutrophils and monocytes to the site of infection,
and activation of these cells. Additionally, TNF-a stimulates endothelial cells, and also
macrophages, to secrete chemokines that further increases the migration of leukocytes
from blood to tissue. TNF-a also stimulates the secretion of IL-1 by macrophages.
TNF also enhances the antibody response. LPS-activated macrophages, antigen-
activated T lymphocytes, NK cells and mast cells produce TNF-a. The target of TNF-
a is any cell (all human cell types express TNF receptors).

Tumor necrosis factor beta is similar in biological effect and structure to TNF (but it is
a different molecule). Also called Lymphotoxin (LT), TNF-ß is produced by some
antigen-activated T lymphocytes in smaller quantities than the TNF-a made by
macrophages, therefore TNF-ß does not exert systemic effects but acts like a local
promoter of inflammation. TNF-ß is induced more efficiently by the superantigens
than by LPS (Hackett
79
).



Version: 15Sept06 12
Oncolytic properties of TNF

As its name implies, TNF has the ability to destroy tumors. Researchers have
achieved 90% complete response rates by employment of isolated limb perfusion to
deliver high local concentrations of TNF to selected patients with melanoma and
sarcoma (Lienard80
). TNF has been shown to facilitate the in vivo localization of
radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies at the site of the tumor to which they were
directed (Smyth81
).

Version: 15Sept06 13Bacterial Substances and Immune Mediators
Serratia marcescens

Streptococcus pyogenes


CpG


LPS

CpG

Spe

PGN

LTA

SLO

CAP
GM-CSF X X
IL-1 X X X X X
IL-2 X
IL-3 X
IL-4 X
IL-5 X
IL-6 X X X X X X X
IL-8 X X X X
IL-10 X X X X
IL-12 X X X X
IL-13 X
IFN-a X X X
IFN-ß X X X
IFN-? X X X X
IP-10 X X X X
MCP-1 X
MIP-1a X X
RANTES X
TNF-a X X X X X X X
TNF-ß X X

Inducer of mitogenesis, enhancement or maturation of:
T lymphocytes X X X
B lymphocytes X X
Dendritic cells X X X
Complement X X X


Version: 15Sept06 14

References

1
Bauer S, Kirschning CJ, Hacker H, et al. Human TLR9 confers responsiveness to bacterial DNA via
species-specific CpG motif recognition. PNAS 2001; 98(16):9237.

2
“CpG mechanism of action” www.coleypharma.com/wt/coley/cpg_action Accessed Dec 17, 2003.

3
Hartmann G, Weiner GJ, Krieg AM. CpG DNA: a potent signal for growth, activation, and maturation of
human dendritic cells. PNAS 1999; 96:9305.

4
Dziarski R, Tapping R, Tobias PS. Binding of bacterial peptidoglycan to CD14. J Biol Chem 1998;
273:8680.

5
Matsuura M, Kiso M, Hasegawa A. Activity of monosaccharide lipid A analogues in human monocytic
cells as agonists or antagonists of bacterial lipopolysaccharide. Inf and Immunity 1999; 67(12):6286.

6
Farias-Eisner R, Sherman MP, Aeberhard E, Chaudhuri G. Nitric oxide is an important mediator for
tumoricidal activity in vivo. PNAS 1994; 91:9407.

7
Bjork L, et al. Endotoxin and Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin A induce different patterns of cytokines.
Cytokine 1992; 4:513.

8
Luster, A.D., and Leder, P. (1996) IP-10, a CXC chemokine, elicits a potent thymus-dependent antitumor
response in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 178: 1057-1065.

9
Hackett SP, Stevens DL. Superantigens associated with staphylococcal and streptococcal toxic shock
syndrome are potent inducers of tumor necrosis factor-beta synthesis. J Infect Dis 1993; 168:232.

10
Loos M, Clas F, Fischer W. Interaction of purified lipoteichoic acid with the classical complement
pathway. Inf Immunity 1986; 53(3):595.

11
Dziarski R. Studies on the mechanism of peptidoglycan- and lipopolysaccharide-induced polyclonal
activation. Inf Immunity 1982; 35(2):507.

12
Hartmann G, Weiner GJ, Krieg AM. CpG DNA: a potent signal for growth, activation, and maturation of
human dendritic cells. PNAS 1999; 96:9305.

13
Muller-Alouf H, Proft T, Zollner TM, et al. Pyrogenicity and cytokine-inducing properties of
Streptococcus pyogenes superantigens: comparative study of streptococcal mitogenic exotoxin Z and
pyrogenic exotoxin A. Inf and Immunity 2001; 69(6):4141.

14
Marrack P, Kappler J. The staphylococcal enterotoxins and their relatives. Science 1990; 248:705.

15
Leonard BA, et al. Cell and receptor requirements for streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxin T cell
mitogenicity. Infect Immunity 1991; 59:1210.

16
Bjork L, et al. Endotoxin and Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin A induce different patterns of
cytokines. Cytokine 1992; 4:513.

17
Hackett SP, Stevens DL. Superantigens associated with staphylococcal and streptococcal toxic shock
syndrome are potent inducers of tumor necrosis factor-beta synthesis. J Infect Dis 1993; 168:232.

18
Muller-Alouf H, Proft T, Zollner TM, et al. Pyrogenicity and cytokine-inducing properties of
Streptococcus pyogenes superantigens: comparative study of streptococcal mitogenic exotoxin Z and
pyrogenic exotoxin A. Inf and Immunity 2001; 69(6):4141.
Version: 15Sept06 15


19
Hanna EE, Watson DW. Enhanced immune response after immunosuppression by streptococcal
pyrogenic exotoxin. Infect Immun 1973; 7:1009.

20
Dziarski R, Tapping R, Tobias PS. Binding of bacterial peptidoglycan to CD14. J Biol Chem 1998;
273:8680.

21
Wang Q, Dziarski R, Kirschning CJ, et al. Micrococci and peptidoglycan activate
TLR2>MyD88>IRAK>TRAF>NIK>IKK>NF-kappa-B signal transduction pathway that induces
transcription of interleukin-8. Inf Immunity 2001; 69(4):2270.

22
Schwandner R, Dziarski R, Wesche H, et al. Peptidoglycan- and lipoteichoic acid-induced cell activation
is mediated by toll-like receptor 2. J Biol Chem 1999; 274(25):17406.

23
Dziarski R. Studies on the mechanism of peptidoglycan- and lipopolysaccharide-induced polyclonal
activation. Inf Immunity 1982; 35(2):507.

24
Tsutsui O, Kokeguchi S, Matsumura T, Kato K. Relationship of the chemical structure and
immunobiological activities of lipoteichoic acid from Streptococcus faecalis (Enterococcus hirae) ATCC
9790. FEMS Microbiol Immunol 1991; 76:211.

25
Bhakdi S, Klonisch T, Nuber P, Fischer W. Stimulation of monokine production by lipoteichoic acids.
Infect Immun 1991; 59:4614.

26
Keller R, Fischer W, Keist R, Bassetti S. Macrophage response to bacteria: induction of marked secretory
and cellular activities by lipoteichoic acids. Infect Immunity 1992; 60:3664.

27
Yamamoto A, Usami H, Nagamuta M, et al. The use of lipoteichoic acid (LTA) from Streptococcus
pyogenes to induce a serum factor causing tumor necrosis. Br J Cancer 1985; 51:739.

28
Gao JJ, Xue Q, Zuvanich EG, et al. Commercial preparation of lipoteichoic acid contain endotoxin that
contributes to activation of mouse macrophages in vitro. Inf Immunity 2001; 69(2):751

29
Cleveland MG, Gorham JD, Murphy TL, et al. Lipoteichoic acid preparations of gram-positive bacteria
induce interleukin-12 through a CD14-dependent pathway. Inf Immunity 1996; 64(6):1906.

30
Beachey EH, et al. Lymphocyte binding and T cell mitogenic properties of group A streptococcal
lipoteichoic acid. J Immunol 1979; 122:189.

31
Loos M, Clas F, Fischer W. Interaction of purified lipoteichoic acid with the classical complement
pathway. Inf Immunity 1986; 53(3):595.

32
Hackett SP, Stevens DL. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome: synthesis of tumor necrosis factor and
interleukin-1 by monocytes stimulated with pyrogenic exotoxin A and streptolysin O. J Infect Dis 1992;
165:879.

33
Stassen M, Muller C, Richter C, et al. The streptococcal exotoxin streptolysin O activates mast cells to
produce tumor necrosis factor alpha by p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase- and protein kinase C-
dependent pathways. Inf Immunity 2003; 71(11):6171.

34
Bhakdi S, Tranum-Jensen J. Complement activations and attack on autologous cell membranes induced
by streptolysin O. Inf Immunity 1985; 48(3):713.

Version: 15Sept06 16

35
Itoh T, Satoh H, Isono N, et al. Mechanism of stimulation of T cells by Streptococcus pyogenes: isolation
of a major mitogenic factor, cytoplasmic membrane-associated protein. Inf and Immunity 1992;
60(8):3128.

36
Zhang L, Ignatowski TA, Spengler RN, et al. Streptococcal histone induces murine macrophages to
product inteleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor alpha. Inf Immunity 1999; 67(12):6473.

37
Rothstein JL, Schreiber H. Synergy between tumor necrosis factor and bacterial products causes
hemorrhagic necrosis and lethal shock in normal mice. PNAS 1988; 85:607.

38
Kim YB, Watson DW. A purified group A streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxin – physicochemical and
biological properties including the enhancement of susceptibility to endotoxin lethal shock. J Exp Med
1970; 131:611.

39
Bohach GA, Schlievert PM. Detection of endotoxin by enhancement with toxic shock syndrome toxin-1
(TSST-1). Meth Enzymol 1988; 165:302.

40
Parsonnet J, Gillis ZA. Production of tumor necrosis factor by human monocytes in response to toxic-
shock-syndrome toxin-1. J Infect Disease 1988; 158:1026.

41
Beezhold DH et al, Synergistic induction of interleukin-1 by endotoxin and toxic shock syndrome toxin-1
using rat macrophages. Infect Immunity 1987; 55:2865.

42
Hackett SP, Stevens DL. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome: synthesis of tumor necrosis factor and
interleukin-1 by monocytes stimulated with pyrogenic exotoxin A and streptolysin O. J Infect Dis 1992;
165:879.

43
Hanna EE, Watson DW. Enhanced immune response after immunosuppression by streptococcal
pyrogenic exotoxin. Infect Immun 1973; 7:1009.

44
Weidemann B, Brade H, Rietschel ET, et al. Soluble peptidoglycan-induced monokine production can be
blocked by anti-CD14 monoclonal antibodies and by lipid A parital structures. Inf Immunity 1994;
62(11):4709.

45
Muller-Alouf H, Proft T, Zollner TM, et al. Pyrogenicity and cytokine-inducing properties of
Streptococcus pyogenes superantigens: comparative study of streptococcal mitogenic exotoxin Z and
pyrogenic exotoxin A. Inf and Immunity 2001; 69(6):4141.

46
Beachey EH, et al. Lymphocyte binding and T cell mitogenic properties of group A streptococcal
lipoteichoic acid. J Immunol 1979; 122:189.

47
Itoh T, Satoh H, Isono N, et al. Mechanism of stimulation of T cells by Streptococcus pyogenes: isolation
of a major mitogenic factor, cytoplasmic membrane-associated protein. Inf and Immunity 1992;
60(8):3128.

48
Hartmann G, Weiner GJ, Krieg AM. CpG DNA: a potent signal for growth, activation, and maturation of
human dendritic cells. PNAS 1999; 96:9305.

49
Dziarski R, Tapping R, Tobias PS. Binding of bacterial peptidoglycan to CD14. J Biol Chem 1998;
273:8680.

50
Wang JE, Jorgensen PF, Almlof M, et al. Peptidoglycan and lipoteichoic acid from Staphylococcus
aureus induce tumor necrosis factor alpha, inteleukin 6 (IL-6), and IL-10 production in both T cells and
monocytes in a human whole bllod model. Inf and Immunity 2000; 68(7):3965.

Version: 15Sept06 17

51
Usami H, et al. Antitumor effects of streptococcal lipoteichoic acids on Meth A fibrosarcoma. Br J
Cancer 1988; 57:70.

52
Hackett SP, Stevens DL. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome: synthesis of tumor necrosis factor and
interleukin-1 by monocytes stimulated with pyrogenic exotoxin A and streptolysin O. J Infect Dis 1992;
165:879.

53
Fast DJ, et al. Toxic shock syndrome-associated staphylococcal and streptococcal pyrogenic toxins are
potent inducers of tumor necrosis factor production. Infect Immunity 1989; 57:291.

54
Steward WP, et al. Recombinant human granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (rhGM-CSF)
given as daily short infusions – a phase I dose-toxicity study. Br J Cancer 1989; 59:142.

55
Hsieh CL, Pang VF, Chen DS, Hwang LH (1997). Regression of established mouse leukemia by GM-
CSF-transduced tumor vaccine: implications for cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses and tumor burdens.
Hum Gene Ther 1997 Nov 1;8(16):1843-1854

56
Armstrong, C. A., Botella, R., Galloway, T. H., Murray, N., Kramp, J. M., Song, I. S., and Ansel, J. C.
(1996). Antitumor effects of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor production by melanoma
cells. Cancer Res. 56: 2191-2198.

57
Bjorkdahl, O., Wingren, A. G., Hedhund, G., Ohlsson, L., and Dohlsten, M. (1997) Gene transfer of a
hybrid interleukin-1 beta gene to B16 mouse melanoma recruits leucocyte subsets and reduces tumour
growth in vivo. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. (1997) 44: 273-281

58
Rosenberg SA. Progress in the development of immunotherapy for the treatment of patients with cancer.
J Intern Med 2001; 250(6):462-75.

59
Krauss, J. C., Cameron, M. J., Park, A. N., Forslund, K., and Chang, A. E. (1995). Efficient transduction
of early passage human melanoma to secrete IL-4. J. Immunol. Methods 183: 239-250.

60
Melani, C., Chiodoni, C., Arienti, F., Maccalli, C., Sule-Suso, J., Anichini, A., Colombo, M. P., and
Parmiani, G. (1994). Cytokine gene transduction in tumor cells: interleukin (IL)-2 or IL-4 gene transfer in
human melanoma cells. Nat. Immun. 13: 76-84.

61
Elder, E. M., Lotze, M. T., and Whiteside, T. L. (1996). Successful culture and selection of cytokine
gene-modified human dermal fibroblasts for the biologic therapy of pateints with cancer. Hum. Gene. Ther.
7: 479-487.

62
Saggio I, Ciapponi L, Savino R, et al. Adenovirus-mediated gene transfer of a human IL-6 antagonist.
Gene Ther. 4: 839-845.

63
Hirose K, Hakozaki M, Nyunoya Y, et al. Chemokine gene transfection into tumour cells reduced
tumorigenicity in nude mice in association with neutrophilic infiltration. Br. J. Cancer 1995; 72: 708-714.

64
Gerard, CM, Bruyns C, Delvaux A, et al. Loss of tumorigenicity and increased immunogenicity induced
by interleukin-10 gene transfer in B16 melanoma cells. Hum. Gene. Ther 1996; 7: 23-31.

65
Kundu, N., and Fulton, A. M. (1997). Interleukin-10 inhibits tumor metastasis, downregulates MHC class
I, and enhances NK lysis. Cell. Immunol. 180: 55-61.

66
Kundu N, Dorsey R, Jackson MJ, Guiterrez P, Wilson K, Fu S, Ramanujam K, Thomas E, Fulton AM
(1998) Interleukin-10 gene transfer inhibits murine mammary tumors and elevates nitric oxide. Int J Cancer
76(5):713-9

Version: 15Sept06 18

67
Cavallo F, Di Carlo E, Butera M, et al. Immune events associated with the cure of established tumors and
spontaneous metastases by local and systemic IL-12. Cancer Res 1999; 59:414-21.

68
Hiscox, S. and Jiang, W.G. (1997). Interleukin-12, an emerging anti-tumour cytokine. In Vivo 11: 125-
132.

69
Sun, Y., et al. (1998). Vaccination with IL-12 gene-modified autologous melanoma cells: preclinical
results and first clinical phase I study. Gene Ther. 5: 481-490.

70
Lebel-Biany et al. 1995. Experimental gene therapy of cancer using tumor cells engineered to secrete
interleukin-13. Eur. J. Immunol. 25: 2340-2348.

71
Farias-Eisner R, Sherman MP, Aeberhard E, Chaudhuri G. Nitric oxide is an important mediator for
tumoricidal activity in vivo. PNAS 1994; 91:9407.

72
Van den Eynde BJ, Morel S. Differential processing of class-I-restricted epitopes by the standard
proteasome and the immunoproteasome. Current Opinion in Immunol 2001; 13:147.

73
Luster, A.D., and Leder, P. (1996) IP-10, a CXC chemokine, elicits a potent thymus-dependent antitumor
response in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 178: 1057-1065

74
Sgadari, S., et al. (1996) Interferon-inducible protein-10 identified as a mediator of tumor necrosis in
vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93: 13791-13796

75
Tannenbaum, C.S., Raymond, T., Armstrong, D., Finke, J.H., Bukowski, R.M., and Hamilton, T.A.
(1998) The CXC chemokines IP-10 and Mig are necessary for IL-12-mediated regression of the mouse
RENCA tumor. J. Immunol. 161: 927-932

76
Manome et al. 1995. Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) gene transduction: an effective tumor
vaccine strategy for non-cranial tumors. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 41: 227-235.

77
Nakashima, E., Oya, A., Kubota, Y., et al. A candidate for cancer gene therapy: MIP-1 alpha gene
transfer to an adenocarcinoma cell line reduced tumorigenicity and induced protective immunity in
immunocompetent mice. Pharm Res 1996; 13: 1896-1901.

78
Mule JJ, Custer M., Averbook B, et al. RANTES secretion by gene-modified tumor cells results in loss of
tumorigenicity in vivo: role of immune cell subpopulations. Hum Gene Ther 1996; 7: 1545-1553.

79
Hackett SP, Stevens DL. Superantigens associated with staphylococcal and streptococcal toxic shock
syndrome are potent inducers of tumor necrosis factor-beta synthesis. J Infect Dis 1993; 168:232.

80
Lienard D, Ewalenko P, Delmotte JJ, et al. High does recombinant tumor necrosis factor alpha in
combination with interferon gamma and melphalan in isolation perfusion of the limbs for melanoma and
sarcoma. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10:52-60.

81
Smyth MJ, Pietersz GA, McKenzie IFC. Increased antitumor effect of immunoconjugates and tumor
necrosis factor in vivo. Cancer Res 1988; 48:3607-12.

No comments:

Post a Comment