A Humane and Effective Treatment Approach for Breast Cancer

Neena R. Iyer, MD & David I. Minkoff, MD, LifeWorks Wellness Center, Clearwater, Florida.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in the United States, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer. In fact, one out of every 8 women in the US will receive a breast cancer diagnosis during their lifetime.¹ At LifeWorks Wellness Center, we have successfully treated thousands of breast cancer patients with insulin potentiation therapy (IPT), a protocol developed in the 1930s that delivers only 5 to 25% of the standard dose of chemotherapy with insulin.²

Insulin lowers blood sugar and stimulates cancer cells to divide, increasing susceptibility of these cells to chemotherapy. Low doses of chemotherapy are administered during hypoglycemia, followed by a sugar bolus as the patient eats. This sugar gradient shuttles chemotherapy into cancer cells, which have more sugar transporters than healthy cells.³

Using insulin to target medication to cancer cells allows us to deliver low doses with high efficacy. In contrast to conventional chemotherapy, IPT produces minimal side effects and negligible suppression of immune function. In over twenty years of IPT treatments, we have not had any patients that had to be hospitalized or sent for emergency treatment after IPT infusion. We have seen no deaths as a result of IPT treatments.

Here are two typical cases of breast cancer that achieved excellent results with IPT at our Center.

Case 1

A woman in her 40s came seeking treatment for Stage IIB breast cancer after she underwent a right breast lumpectomy for removal of a 5.6 cm tumor with positive margins. Surgical pathology revealed invasive ductal carcinoma with HER2/neu+, estrogen and progesterone receptor negative (ER-, PR-). Initial PET scan showed nodular thickening in her right breast that was FDG-avid (SUV 2.9), consistent with residual tumor.

Initial pre-treatment labs were notable for elevated CA 15-3 (34.0), normal CA 27-29 (28.5), and circulating breast tumor cells per the RGCC lab. She completed IPT with cisplatin, doxorubicin, and 5-FU, for a total of 10 treatments over 8 weeks. IPT was not increased past 15% per patient preference.

In addition to IPT, she completed 10 weeks of intensive therapies, including ketogenic diet; IVs of vitamin C, curcumin, and ozone; hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT); ozone sauna; and local hyperthermia to her right breast. She was also referred to a biological dentist for root canal extraction.

At the conclusion of her treatment, she had a repeat PET scan that showed that she was in remission, and CA 15-3 declined to 28.4. She continues on our post therapy surveillance and maintenance program and is expected to do very well.

Case 2

A woman in her 30s presented to our Center for treatment of stage IV breast cancer. Initial CT scans revealed a left breast mass (5.4 cm), left axillary lymphadenopathy, and extensive metastasis involving her liver and bones (cervical, thoracic, and lumbar vertebrae; sacrum; pelvis; and ribs). CA 15-3 and 27-29 were not elevated at her initial diagnosis. Left breast biopsy showed invasive ductal carcinoma with ER+ and HER2/neu+. Prior to beginning our cancer program, she had significant pain from her spinal metastases, requiring frequent use of pain medication.

She began IPT at 10% with epirubicin, docetaxel, and 5-FU. She continued trastuzamab (Herceptin) every 3 weeks through her conventional oncologist while receiving IPT. Over the course of 8 weeks, she received a total of 10 IPT treatments, working up to 25%. She also completed treatments with IV vitamin C and curcumin, ozone, HBOT, and hyperthermia to her left breast.

After 3 months of IPT and adjunctive therapies, she had a PET for restaging which showed only faint FDG uptake in the left breast (SUV 1.9), decreased left axillary lymphadenopathy, significantly decreased size of liver metastases, and healing of osteolytic bone lesions. Pain in her spine had resolved at the end of her initial treatment. She continues IPT once per month for maintenance and an oral supplement program for immune support.

Discussion

These two cases of breast cancer, both locally advanced and widely metastatic, responded remarkably well to IPT as part of a comprehensive cancer treatment protocol.

IPT is a key treatment strategy for our cancer patients. In addition, they are prescribed a strict diet, either ketogenic or Paleo, as well as selected pharmaceuticals and supplements with anti-cancer activity. For breast cancer, certain estrogen modulators, including anastrozole or DIM, may also be beneficial. In some cases, IPT may be delivered alongside immunotherapy, such as trastuzumab (Herceptin) for HER2/neu+ breast cancers.

We find that IPT works particularly well in combination with therapies for detoxification and immune system optimization, such as high dose IV vitamin C, ozone therapies, and HBOT. We perform comprehensive testing for environmental toxins, heavy metals, and metabolic dysregulation that may contribute to carcinogenesis. In addition, any patients with toxicity from dental infections, such as root canals or cavitations, are referred to a biological dentist.

As physicians, we aspire to “do no harm”. IPT offers us an opportunity to deliver effective treatment for cancer, while also not causing harm to the patient. Last year alone, our Center delivered over 900 IPT treatments. Our overall response rate for cancer, defined as arrest or reduction of disease burden on imaging, approaches 90%. This includes patients whose disease has progressed on conventional therapies and who then seek out IPT as an alternative treatment with fewer side effects. It is incredibly rewarding to help our patients conquer cancer with this humane and effective approach.

References:

1.    Breast cancer risk in American women. National Cancer Institute. 2020. Accessed August 13, 2023. www.cancer.gov.

2.    Ayre SG, Perez Garcia y Bellon D, Perez Garcia D Jr. Insulin potentiation therapy: a new concept in the management of chronic degenerative disease. Med Hypotheses. 1986 Jun;20(2):199-210.

3.    Szablewski L. Glucose transporters as markers of diagnosis and prognosis in cancer diseases. Oncol Rev. 2022 Feb 22;16(1):561.