burzynski

• Question:-Does anyone have info or first hand experience with the Burzynski Clinic?
  My friend is researching treatment options for a non-cancerous astrocytoma.
  
  Answer:-Yes....they are wonderful and are best known for help in brain tumors. Currently in FDA trials for antineoplastons treatments. They helped my little brother, when everyone else said there was nothing that could be done for him!! Basically told us to just let him die. We could not accept that answer, so we explored alternative treatments. After LOTS of research found that Burzynski clinc was our best option. That was 5 years ago and he is doing great now!
• Question:-Have you researched the Burzynski documentary on antineoplastin cancer therapy?
  What does your research show regarding this issue? Readers please note the difference between unfounded opinion without reference and real information. If you don't know about this one starting point is to watch the doc on the website at the following address. Admins I am NOT posting just to promote the film, I have NO affiliation with them and will not profit from posting here, but sometimes there is money interests in such things:
  
  http://burzynskimovie.com/
  
  Answer:-Yes, I have researched it. It doesn't work.
• Question:-Is Dr Stanislaw Burzynski legitimate?
  I hear of people saying he's a fake and his treatment doesn't work, but on YouTube I've seen people commenting on his videos saying that they were treated at his clinic successfully.
  
  What do you think and have you had any personal experiences with the Burzynski Clinic?
  
  Answer:-Burzynski claims to cure cancer with extracts from human urine.
  
  There shouldn't really be any need to say more, but here goes.
  
  Burzynski is actually an MD (though his claim to a PhD is apparently dubious); however he had no specialty training in cancer and had no preclinical or clinical cancer research experience when he announced his 'cure for cancer' 35 years ago.
  
  His ''antineoplastons" -the substances he has isolated from human urine which he claims cure cancer - have never been shown to have any effect on cancer; attempts to replicate his claimed results by the National Cancer Institute, the Japanese National Cancer Institute and Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals failed.
  
  Be wary of unsubstantiated testimonials about miracle cancer cures. You have no way of knowing whether the person ever had cancer in the first place, much less has been cured.
  
  And you have no way of knowing whether, if genuine, they are still alive.This is from Orac's Respectful Insolence blog:
  
  ''...Dr. Burzynski first gained fame for his antineoplastons back in 1988, when Sally Jesse Raphael featured four "miracle" patients of Burzynski, who, according to her, had had incurable cancer and failed conventional therapies but were then cancer-free, thanks to Dr. Burzynski. Unfortunately, four years later in 1992, Inside Edition followed up these four patients:
  
  'In 1992, "Inside Edition" reported that two of the four patients had died and a third was having a recurrence of her cancer. (The fourth patient had bladder cancer, which has a good prognosis.) The widow of one of Raphael's guests stated that her husband and five others from the same city had sought treatment after learning about Burzynski from a television broadcast -- and that all had died of their disease. In 1995, a federal grand jury indicted Burzynski for mail fraud and marketing an unapproved drug. The indictment charged that he had billed insurance companies using procedure codes for chemotherapy, even though his treatment was not chemotherapy. He was tried in 1997 but not convicted.' ''
  
  ***EDIT***
  
  Oh looky! A total of 8 answers, all from people who joined YA on the same day specifically to answer this question!
  
  Suspicious? You decide!
• Question:-Dr Burzynski has a non-toxic gene therapy that repairs cells instead of destroying them, where can I get it?
  
  
  Answer:-Here you go:
  
  http://www.cancermed.com/
• Question:-Does the Burzynski Clinic in Houston, Tx have a 800 number?
  
  
  Answer:-go to yellowpages.com
• Question:-Seeking information from cancer patients of Dr. S.R. Burzynski in Houston: did he Help?
  My mother is considering treatment with Dr. Burzynski and as her support person I am trying to get her additional information to help her make decisions related to her colon cancer, which has traveled to her lungs, and now bones. As a widow on Medicare, she is trying to make sound health and financial decisions. Is this clinic worth it?
  
  Answer:-Hi Mischka
  
  Ive never been to his clinic, but I know he doesnt use standard methods (chemo, drugs, ect) and that is good. I know the FDA has fought battles in court with him and he won a 14 year case (another plus). They want to stop people like this because they actually help people get better with uncommon methods that dont generate sales like drugs and chemo.
  
  Ive been eduacating people many years myself and learned everything from my teacher at herbdoc.com. He has healed thousands of patients with herbs, hydrotherapy, education on diet and drinking water. He had a clinic for 20 years in Malibu before the FDA shut him down for healing to many patients.
  
  I would go with your gut feeling and if it feels right go to the clinic, if not keep searching for other answers. The answers are out there, but you must have an open mind and accept the answer that fits for you.
  
  Best of health to you both
• Question:-So apparently Burzynski's treatment does work?
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18224398
  
  That's from a study done in Japan, and the article WASN'T edited by Burzynski.
  
  There are more studies here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?myncbishare=mdacclib&holding=mdacclib_fft&dr=abstract&term=Antineoplaston%20therapy
  
  So they were right all along? The FDA really was trying to shut him down or what?
  thinkingtime: What do you mean? Burzynski is responsible for creating antineoplastons, the link I showed you is a study from Japan where they apparently independantly test his antineoplastons? If they work, how can that not have something to do with Burzynski?
  
  You see, I was at first skeptical of Burzynski, but after seeing this, I wonder if there really is some truth behind this whole antineoplaston thing...
  "We have also characterized a novel mechanism through which all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) and antineoplaston, anticancer drug, caused cell growth inhibition in breast cancer cells through effects on intracellular pathways"
  
  "Antineoplaston caused the down-regulation of PKCalpha protein expression, resulting in inhibition of ERK MAPK phosphorylation, with resultant inhibition of Rb phosphorylation leading to G(1) arrest"
  
  That's quoted directly from the first link I sent you. Burzynski created antineoplastons, and they're saying that it works. How is that not proof that at least some aspects of antineoplastons work?
  
  I know that some of the stuff about him is suspcious, such as his credinitials, but he might have been on to something here. After all, that is a government website I showed you, and the study WASN'T by Burzynski, which means it's very unlikely he somehow altered the article.
  
  Answer:-Cancer is a collective term for approximately 200 different diseases. Every cell type in your body can (in principle) develop into its own type of cancer. On top of that individual cancer cells in every cancer are also different from one another. So a compound that may damage one cancer cell may do nothing another cancer cell. This is how resistance to chemotherapy develops. The sensitive cells are mopped up leaving the rest behind.
  
  As you can see in the abstract they examined a cancer cell line. In a cancer cell line, all the cancer cells are identical. This is one reason why you can't deduce from a cell line study that it will work in patients. And even in more realistic situations where you treat rats/mice that has been given cancer, you can't be sure that the effect you observe automatically translates into an effect on human cancers. A comparison of drug performance in animal models with subsequent clinical trials shows that drugs which reduce tumor bulk by less than 60% do not show efficacy in human trials: http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v84/n10/pdf/6691796a.pdf
  
  You can see that the cell line study was published back in 2008. Why haven't the group presented any data on patients since then? One realistic possibility is, that despite of promising effect on cell lines it didn't work on patients.
  
  To know if it works in humans, you need to do controlled studies. There simply is no way around it.
  
  In addition to avoid problems with resistance, you also need to tolerate a sufficient amount of the drug. If you take a look at the Mayo study (lo_mcg's link), you can see that they experienced serious toxic effects resulting in the need for dose reduction.
  
  So where are we today? Well - research has not been suppressed. Antineoplastons have not been shown to work on cancer outside Burzynski's clinic. My red flags are still up.
• Question:-Burzynski Clinic? Gene Therapy?
  So a friend of ours recently recommended that we try to to get some information about this institute for treatment.
  
  However, the website seems kind of vague and I don't even know if they treat small cell lung cancer outside of trials or not... Upon further research I noticed that they have been doing the antineoplastins trials for years now and nobody can really confirm or deny that it is working.
  
  The COST of treatment is INSANE. Of course, I know that any form of cancer treatment and medicine is a bit out there... but they ask for $500 just to look at your records, $1000 for the consult, then a DEPOSIT of $10,000 for 'treatment', and $5000 - $10,000 for medicine deposits.. as well as a monthly fee of a few thousand.
  
  I'm just not sure how I feel about it at all. I am not the patient here, it's my mom.. but before we get our hopes up on anything I am trying my hardest to research the options. I have heard of gene-therapy and that there are several trials out there that HAVE gotten good results. I think I am most un-nerved by the fact that this particular clinic isn't affiliated with any insurance companies and the FDA took YEARS to allow the trials to move to phase three.
  
  Does anyone have any alternative places to share? Or has anyone tried this clinic with good results?
  
  We aren't too well on funding at the moment (but we can find ways to cover it.. should we find some form of proof that the treatment DOES work) and I would much rather prefer to spend the money on actually keeping my mother healthy- instead of giving the money to people who are feeding on the hopes of the ill.
  
  We are trying our best to find a way to help my mother and hopefully beat this cancer. Any help on this subject or if someone can even find some kind of research reguarding these treatments.. I would much appreciate it
  
  Answer:-I am sorry to hear about your mom. Your assertion that Burzynski is to be avoided is absolutely correct.
  
  Burzynski treats patients at a private clinic using what he terms antineoplastons, mixtures of peptides, amino acids, and other simple organic substances that are said to promote the body’s natural defenses against cancer. Although he has published several studies of his own, these are of a rather unclear design.
  
  As you already know it isn’t cheap either. And it seems that the price has gone up. Previously Burzynski's patients payed a $6,000 deposit before beginning treatment. Technically, the drug itself is free because it's only used under Phase II trials, but patients pay for incidentals, including consultations, supplies and classes on how to administer the drug. This ran about $7,500-$9,000 a month — out of pocket.
  
  In 1998, Paul Goldberg, editor of The Cancer Letter, a D.C.-based newsletter covering cancer research and drug approval, investigated Burzynski's claims up to that point. He asked three renowned and independent researchers to examine Burzynski's scientific protocols — all three said they could not make sense of the data, saying it did not resemble any commonly accepted models. The article is shown unedited here: http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/burzynski2.html
  
  A Phase II trial in glioma conducted under the auspices of the National Cancer Institute http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/74/2/137.abstract?keytype2=tf_ipsecsha&ijkey=eaf21226703b21cd709dbd7acd5a8e48c199f2aa was halted due to poor accrual, after Burzynski failed to agree with the investigators on possible expansion of the eligibility criteria. Nine patients were accrued, six of whom were able to be evaluated for response. There were no objective responses, and all six showed evidence of tumor progression after treatment durations of between 16 to 66 days. The mean time to treatment failure (progression or discontinuation due to toxicity) was 29 days. All nine patients died before the study closed, all but one death being due to tumor progression. Although the authors of the article claimed that the small sample size precluded "definitive conclusions," the results of the patients in the trial are clearly extremely disappointing.
  
  Sometimes studies such as this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18224398 are presented as evidence that Burzynski-independent studies also show positive effects.
  As you can see in the abstract they examined a cancer cell line. In a cancer cell line, all the cancer cells are identical. This is one reason why you can't deduce from a cell line study that it will work in patients. And even in more realistic situations where you treat rats/mice that have been given cancer, you can't be sure that the effect you observe automatically translates into an effect on human cancers. A comparison of drug performance in animal models with subsequent clinical trials shows that drugs which reduce tumor bulk by less than 60% do not show efficacy in human trials: http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v84/n10/pdf/6691796a.pdf
  
  Another thing worth noticing is, that the cell line study was published back in 2008. Why haven't the group presented any data on patients since then? One realistic possibility is, that despite of promising effect on cell lines it didn't work on patients.
  
  So where are we today? Well - research has not been suppressed. Antineoplastons have not been shown to work on cancer outside Burzynski's clinic.
• Question:-Has anyone heard about a possible Cure for Cancer by S.R.Burzynski down in Houston, TX?
  
  
  Answer:-Stanislaw Burzynski M.D. Ph.D. has a clinic in Houston Texas where he treats various kinds of cancer. Although he has employed this therapy with patients since 1976, his treatment is still not FDA approved and is therefore only available to those patients who meet rigid FDA criteria.
  
  Do a search, there's multiple sites. Read and decide for yourself.
• Question:-Please tell me why a study in Japan revealed that Burzynski's antineoplaston activated tumor-suppressor genes?
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18224398
  How did a so-called quack discover something this big? Could he really be on to something? It's not everyday that a "quack" discovers something that affects cancer cells in a positive way.
  
  What do you think? Do you think that he just got lucky and found something that HAPPENED to influence cancer cells, or do you believe that he really is onto something?
  Samurai Japan: Do you really believe that? Has it ever happened with another "quack" before?
  
  Answer:-