|
|
|
|
|
|
Shark Cartilage as an Angiogenesis Inhibitor and Potential Aid in the Fight Against Cancer and other Angiogenesis-Dependent Diseases
Study of Shark Cartilage from Harvard Medical School
As early as the 1970s, Dr. Judah Folkman of the Harvard Medical School suggested inhibiting new blood vessel formation as a way to fight cancer. In 1983, two researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology published a study showing that shark cartilage contains a substance that significantly inhibits the development of blood vessels that nourish solid tumors, thereby limiting tumor growth.? Working independently, medical researchers at Harvard University Medical School found that if one could inhibit angiogenesis--the development of a new blood network--one could prevent the development of tumor-based cancer and metastasis. In his book, SHARKS DON'T GET CANCER--HOW SHARK CARTILAGE COULD SAVE YOUR LIFE, Dr. I. William Lane ties together these two important findings regarding shark cartilage and angiogenesis. Dr. Lane also recounts his own involvement in the search for a truly effective treatment of tumor-based cancer and examines the work of researchers who have conducted studies that indicate that shark cartilage can be effective in reducing cancer related tumors and also reduce the inflammation and pain associated with other conditions, such as arthritis, psoriasis and enteritis.
Shark Cartilage: "What Are the Theories for Prevention and Treatment of Cancer and Other Diseases Involving Neovascularization?" Recently, shark cartilage has generated intense interest in both public and medical circles because of the theoretical justification for its clinical use in diseases, including cancer, psoriasis, age-related macular degeneration and arthritis, which involve neovascularization (angiogenesis). This interest is further fueled by clinical trials and recent patents which have demonstrated its anti-tumor activity and its ability to relieve pain and inflammation associated with tumor activity and diseases involving angiogenesis. For a review of the recent patents dealing with this aspect of shark cartilage, see our section on the Latest Developments in Shark Cartilage Technology.
While there are many publications outlining the theories supporting why scientists believe shark cartilage has so many therapeutic benefits, public interest in shark cartilage was first generated by writings and research first tied together by Dr. I. William Lane. We have asked Dr. Lane, and he has been gracious enough to allow us to reprint one of his early papers on the therapeutic benefits of shark cartilage. This article, which follows, is not nearly as informative as his book, SHARKS DON'T GET CANCER.? However, in this relatively-brief article, Dr. Lane provides a cogent summary of much of the early research and many of the theories on the therapeutic benefits of shark cartilage.
Shark Cartilage Therapy -- A Personal History of its Development I. William Lane, Ph.D.
The use of shark cartilage in the complementary treatment of non-responsive solid cancer tumors has become widely used worldwide; approximately 25,000 patients are using the therapy today. Initially, shark cartilage usage was strictly patient-driven, but more recently it is suggested by doctors when conventional cancer therapies have not helped patients. Certainly, most oncologists will agree that, despite the progress in treating cancer, the lack of a real breakthrough is frustrating and many oncologists state they themselves would not use chemotherapy if they develop cancer. In fact, many calls that come in to me are from physicians on behalf of themselves or members of their families. Yet, they are reluctant to recommend shark cartilage to patients because of concerns relating to malpractice suits…
My position from the outset has been--and continues to be--"Does it work?" rather than "How does it work?" The latter is important, of course, but the research to date confirms that it works in a nontoxic noninvasive way. I hope that the NIH and other organizations will collaborate to study how shark cartilage works. My own premise is that its effect is based on the angiogenic inhibition according to the Folkman theory or possibly an angiogenic modulation as shown by the Cuban pathologic slides…
Sharks don’t get cancer논문에 대한 참고 문헌
1.Lane, I.W., Comac, L. Sharks Don't Get Cancer . Garden City, NY. Avery Publishing Group, 1992, updated 1993. 2. Prudden, J.F., Balassa, L. The Biological Activity of Bovine Cartilage Preparations. Semin Arthritis Rheum 3:287-321, 1974. 3. Prudden, J.F. The Treatment of Human Cancer with Agents Prepared from Bovine Cartilage. J Biol Response Modifiers 4:551-584, 1985. 4. Rosen, J., Sherman, W.T., Prudden, J.F., Thorbecke* G.J. Immunoregulatory Effects of Catrix. J Biol Response Modifiers 7:498-512, 1988. 5. Lee, A., Langer, R. Shark Cartilage Contains Inhibitors of Tumor Angiogenesis. Science 221:1185-1187, 1983. 6. Folkman, J., Tumor Angiogenesis: a Possible Control Point in Tumor Growth. Ann Intern Med 82:96-100, 1975. 7. Folkman, J. Klagsbrun. Angiogenic Factors. Science 235:442-447, 1987. 8. D'Amore, P.A., Angiogenesis as a Strategy for Antimetastasis. Semin Thrombosis Hemostasis 14:73-77, 1988. 9. Lane, I.W. Shark Cartilage: Its Potential Medical Applications. J Advan Med 4:263-271, 1991. 10. Lane, I.W., Contreras, Jr., E. High Rate of Bioactivity (Reduction in Tumor Size) Observed in Advanced Cancer Patients Treated with Shark Cartilage Material. J Naturopathic Med 3:85-88, 1992. 11. Ibid., ref. 1, pp. 99-100. 12. Fernandez-Britto, J., Lane, I.W. Angiogenesis Modulation in Peritumoral Connective Tissue by Cartilage from Shark, the Cuban Experience. XVII World Congress of Anatomic and Clinical Pathology , 1993, Mexico. 13. Lane, I.W.Current Medical Implications of Shark Cartilage VIII International Congress on Senology (Breast Diseases) , 1994, Brazil. William Lane, Ph.D., is Founder and chairman of Cartilage Consultants, Short Hills, New Jersey. He is also a coauthor of Sharks Don't Get Cancer , a summary of his research with shark cartilage as a treatment for cancer, for which he received a U. S. patent in 1991.?
Vanderbilt University Psychology Department
All About Shark Cartilage By: Luke Proskine ? The difference between the two pictures on this website sums up my findings of research on the web and research of medical journals that contain real experiments testing the validity of shark cartilage as a treatment for malignant disease. The first picture is blown way out of proportion, is a cartoon and thus not real, and exaggerates all of the features in the picture. The second picture is an actual photo of a living blue shark swimming in real life through the ocean and unlike the other picture it is very real. In other words, the vast majority of the information placed on the web about shark cartilage is false, exaggerated, and hence not real. The basic question presented here is does the use of shark cartilage have any scientific basis in the treatment of cancer. Sharks have caused great interest among scientists concerning this topic because they have inhabited the ocean for millions of years and are rarely affected by cancer and other disease. Thus, scientists have proposed that the shark's skeleton of cartilage contains a substance that inhibits angiogenesis (the development of new blood net works) and may have a role in the shark's immunity to cancer (Hunt). The growth of solid tumors relies on new vessel growth and angiogenesis is required to deprive the host of nutrition and oxygen. If angiogenesis were inhibited by shark cartilage, degeneration of solid tumor cells would be the end result (Iwaguchi). Such ideas and findings have led to the idea that cartilage could be used for the treatment of tumors in humans, however, conclusive studies are lacking (Hunt).
Human Studies and Results
In addition to animal research, shark cartilage has also been studied in human subjects. In 1993 an entire "60 minutes" broadcast was dedicated to this topic. This show discussed a 16- week trial that was conducted in Cuba to evaluate the efficacy of shark cartilage for cancer treatment (Matthews). Out of twenty-nine patients, three showed response to treatment. The results were claimed to be incredible, however, as mentioned earlier, the NCI did not sponsor further studies based on the inconsistent data. Another study was taken the same year in Lawrenceville, NJ and out of 20 patients using shark cartilage, 10 claimed to have an improved quality of life, including deceased pain and increased appetite after eight weeks (Hunt). Scientists believe, however, that when one gets a dramatic disease such as cancer he or she is searching for anything to help them get better. Shark cartilage fills this emotional void extremely well and thus, can be attributed to some of the success (Markman). These patients that "feel better, gain strength, and experience less fatigue" after taking shark cartilage, just as prayer, meditation, and group therapy may provide important emotional support for some persons dealing with an extremely difficult disease (Markman). In addition, it is extremely unlikely that oral ingestion of this material could have any clinically meaningful effect on the natural history of established cancer because very little is absorbed (Markman). Even if it is absorbed, it will enter the liver, where further breakdown of any active ingredient will take place. Thus, what remains of the pill must somehow reach the tumor, be taken up by the cancer cells, and subsequently either inactivate or kill the malignant cells (Markman). In conclusion, shark cartilage appears to provide many patients with hope and emotional support, but does nothing to the cancer. All of the sensational claims made on the web are definitely not true because of their lack of scientific evidence. Shark cartilage may be used for cancer treatment effectively in the future, however, right now no scientific facts can support the claims of shark cartilage's ability to treat cancer.
All About Shark Cartilage 논문에 대한 참고 문헌
? References ? 1.Hunt, Traci. "Shark cartilage for cancer treatment." American Journal of Health System Pharmacology. Aug 15 1995; 52: 1756, 60. 2.Iwaguchi, T. "A novel angiogenic inhibitor." Cancer Letters. Jun 15 1990; 51:181-6. 3.Langer, Robert. "Shark cartilage contains inhibitors of tumor angiogenesis." Science. 1983; 221:1185-87. 4.Markman, Maurie. "Shark cartilage." Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine. June 1996; 63:179-180 5.Matthews, James. "Media feeds frenzy over shark cartilage as cancer treatment." Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Aug 4 1993; 85:1190-91.
Simone Protective Cancer Center
Simone Protective Cancer Center 123 Franklin Corner Road Lawrenceville, NJ 08648 609-896-2646 I.W. Lane in his book "Sharks Don't Get Cancer" makes the point that one could use Shark Cartilage with any other therapy without conflict, so people considering trying this not-well-proven remedy need not abandon other therapy they may be taking, and indeed they ought not abandon any therapy of proven value in favor of Shark Cartilage. In the below protocol dated May 1993, items in [], are my comments. Numbers in () refer to references cited at the end.
Cartilage has been used since the 1950s for the promotion of woundhealing (9-10). Bovine cartilage has been administered both orally andparenterally (11) for the treatment of osteoarthritis, acute and chronicskin allergies, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis,regional enteritis, and progressive systemic sclerosis. It has been shownin these studies to have potent anti-inflamatory and antiallergic properties.?In 1963, it was postulated that tumors were dependent upon angiogenesis(12). As the tumor grows, there is an increase in new capillaries thatconverge upon the tumor every time there is an increase in tumor cellpopulation (13). Both bovine and shark cartilage were found to containinhibitors of tumor angiogenesis. Shark cartilage contains many of thesame biochemical activities as bovine cartilage including, lysozymeactivity, cell growth promoting activity [This sounds BAD!], inhibitoryactivity against type I collagenase [I believe collagenases are involvedthe mechanisms of metastasis and invasion], inhibitory activity againstproteases such as trypsin, chymotrypsin, plasmin (14,15)... Shark cartilage has been used to treat osteoarthritis and solid tumors inanimal and human studies (17-19). Other investigators continuedexperiments on angiogenisis, its inhibitors and cartilage activityagainst cancer in vitro, animals, and in humans (20-25). In addition,some non-neoplastic diseases have persistent angiogenesis as theirdominant pathology. These diseases include diabetic retinopathy,retrolental fibroplasia, and neovascular glaucoma, rheumatoid arthritis,hemangiomas, psoriasis, angiofibromas…
In 1985, an investigator reported on the use of bovine cartilage in thetreatment of 31 patients most of whom had advanced cancers. (32) Thefollowing responses were reported: a complete response for 35 percent,complete response with relapse in 26 percent, partial response in 19percent, partial response with relapse in 10 percent, and no change orprogression in 9 percent. The patients studied had cancers of the breast,ovary, cervix, prostate, leiomyosarcoma of the left broad ligament,colorectal, gastric, pancreas, lung, Hodgkins, renal, glioblastoma, basaland squamous cell of the skin…
?Patients with any advanced cancers will be studied. They will beclinically evaluated weekly and objectively at week 6 and 12 withlaboratory or imaging work-up. The use of cartilage will be discontinuedof tumor progression is demonstrated between weels 8 and 12; or itclinical events dictate.?Each patient will also be instructed on the Simone Ten Point Plan [Seehis book Nutrition and Cancer] which will ideally be implemented in everypatient. The patients are to follow the pertinent applicable points ofthe Ten Point Plan. The Ten Point Plan is as follows…
Simone Protective Cancer Center 논문에 대한 참고 문헌
1. Lane, I.W., E. Contreras [Famed latrile... dare I say quack]. 1992High rate of bioactivity observed in cancer patients treated with sharkcartilage material. J. Naturopathic Medicine. 3(1):86-88.? 2. Rauis, J. 1991. Use of shark cartilage in the treatment of secondaryosteoarthritis in the dog. British Small Animal Association Congress,United Kingdom.? 3. Stetler-Stevenson, Wm. Biological basis for neoadjuvant and adjuvanttherapy: tumor invasion and metastasis (TIMP's). Neoadjuvant and AdjuvantTherapy for Selected Malignancies. Mar 5, 1993. UMDNJ.? 4. D'Amore, P. 1988. Angiogenesis as a strategy for antimetastasis.Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis. 2.(1):73-78?22. D'Amore and Klagsbrun. 1989. Angiogenesis factors and mechanisms fromthe pathobiology of neoplasia. Edited Alphonse E. Sirica. Plenum Pub Corpp.513-531? 5. Moses, M., Sudhalter, Langer 1990. Identification of an inhibitor ofneovascularization from cartilage. Science 248:1408-1410.? 6. Sadova, et al. 1977. Inhibition of mammary carcinoma invasivenesswith cartilage derived inhibitor. Surgical Forum. 28499-501.? 7. Pepper et al. 1991. Chondrocytes inhibit endothelelial sproutformation in vitro: evidence for involvement of transforming factor beta.J. Cell. Physiol. 146(1):170-9.? 8. Takigawa et all. 1990. A clonal human chondrosarcoma cell lineproduces an anti-angiogeneic antitumor factor. Antocancer Research.10(2A):311-5.? 9. Takigawa. et al. 1987. A factor and condition medium of rabbit costalchondrocytes inhibits the proliferation of cultured endothelial cells andangiogenesis induuced by B16 melanoma: Its relation withcartilage-derived antitumor factor. Biochem International. 14(2):357-63.? 10. Oikawa, et al. 1990. A novel angiogeneic inhibitor derived fromJapanese shark cartilage. One extraction and estimation of inhibitoryactivities towards tumor and embryonic angiogenesis. Cancer Letters.51(3):181-6.? 11. Prudden, J. 1985. The treatment ofhuman cancer with agents derivedfrom bovine cartilage. J Biol Resp Modif. 4:551-84.? 12. Warshaw, et al. 1971. Small intestinal permeability tomacromolecules: transmission of horseradish peroidase into mesentericlymph and portal blood. Lab Investigation. 25:675-84.?
|
|
|
|
|
|
