Destruction of an advanced malignant tumour by direct electrical current-case report

doi:10.4236/health.2010.29154

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Vol.2, No.9, 1049-1053 (2010) Health

doi:10.4236/health.2010.29154

Destruction of an advanced malignant tumour by direct

electrical current-case report

Chima Oji1*, John Ani2

1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ebonyi State University Teaching Hospital, Abakaliki, Nigeria;

*Corresponding Author: chimaoji@gmail.com

2Ntasiobi Specialist Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria

Received 6 December 2009; revised 14 May 2010; accepted 24 May 2010.

ABSTRACT

We carried out a study on the effect of low-level

direct current on cancer by using it to treat a

woman who had a large malignant squamous

cell carcinoma of the sinus cavity. We used a

device that produced low-level direct current

and passed the current through the tumour via a

4 × 4 cm flat aluminium foil and a needle elec-

trode that was insulated along its entire length

except for the portion actually inserted into the

tumour. The treatment was eight hourly daily

and lasted for eight weeks. The therapy resulted

in the total remission of the tumour and a feel-

ing of wellness by the patient. This finding im-

plies promising therapeutic potential for the use

of direct electrical current as a simple, effective,

low cost alternative for the treatment of cancer.

Keywords: Destruction; Malignant Tumour; Human

Patient; Direct Electrical Current

1. INTRODUCTION

Many clinical cases of cancer do not respond to the

conventional approaches of surgery, chemotherapy, ra-

diotherapy, hormone therapy and biological therapy. The

disadvantages of these cancer treatment modalities in-

clude damage to healthy cells and the resulting signifi-

cant side effects, such as hair loss, fatigue, hormonal

changes that may affect fertility and libido, blood clots,

flu-like symptoms, and/or complex, risky, expensive

surgical procedures. Consequently, a new cancer treat-

ment modality, which uses a device that is minimally

invasive, and provides effective treatment without major

side effects, is on demand. One of the newer techniques

that researchers and clinicians are investigating for its

potential role in clinical therapy is electrotherapy, [1-5]

Eaton [6] suggested as early as 1776 that electricity

might have a role in the treatment of tumours. He re-

ported the case of a patient with a breast tumour whom

lightning struck and her tumour retarded. Other investi-

gators of that era used the available electronic techniques

to treat tumours with electricity and narrated positive

results [6]. Humphrey and Seal [7] reported that a grow-

ing foetus or a growing uterine tumour would cause the

uterus to be electronegative with respect to the abdomi-

nal surface. In the guinea pig and mouse, the tumour is

also negative. This supports the many findings that a

growing region is electronegative with respect to a

slower growing or non-growing region in the same or-

ganism, irrespective of plant or animal [7]. The presence

of direct current (DC) surface electro-potentials that a

microvolt meter can detect and measure, characterizes

living tissues [8]. Humphrey and Seal [7], Schauble et al

[8] and Habal [9] described the necrosis and retardation

of tumour growth in three solid tumour models when

they passed low-level direct current through the tumours.

According to Weber [10], a cell must replicate its deoxy-

ribonucleic acid (DNA) strand for it to divide. The

building blocks of this strand are four bases that are in

short supply in a healthy, resting cell. On the other hand,

the building blocks of a related molecule, ribonucleic

acid (RNA), are always in great abundance because

many cellular functions need RNA. When a cell is ready

to divide, an enzyme called ribonucleotide reductase

(RR), converts building blocks of RNA into those of

DNA. The enzyme RR is therefore pivotal for cell

growth. The activity of this enzyme is thus tightly linked,

much more than that of any other enzyme, to neoplastic

transformation and progression. Kulsh [11] promulgated

the hypothesis that a novel way of arresting the activity

of this all-important enzyme in cell growth lies in the

fact that the active site of RR contains a stable tyrosyl

free radical, which is essential for its activity [12]. Kulsh

[11] surmised that free-floating electrons, which are eas-

ily available in the form of direct electric current, could

neutralize or destroy such free radicals. Direct current

C. Oji et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 1049-1053

1050

electrotherapy should therefore result in inhibition of RR

and cessation of malignant cell proliferation. Low-level

surface DC electrotherapy would act selectively on can-

cerous growth since the concentration of the target en-

zyme RR is exponentially higher in cancerous cells, as

compared to healthy quiescent cells [10]. Metastasized

cancer should also be treatable by direct current electro-

therapy since even in the metastatic state, the biochemi-

cal mechanism of cell division involving the enzyme RR

remains the same notwithstanding the organ microenvi-

ronment.

In view of the fact that both the direction and the

spread of electric current can be controlled, thereby lim-

iting the effects to a defined area, we believe that the

exploration of this phenomenon holds great promise. It

should also be possible to deliver the current to areas of

the body that are not accessible to surgery.

A conspicuous and essential point in this article is that

the case we present is not a laboratory experiment but a

stage IV cancer of the TNM (Tumour, Node, Metastasis)

system involving a poor woman in dire condition be-

cause of the advanced nature of the disease and because

she could not afford the cost of conventional surgery.

Furthermore, this is the first time in West Africa that a

human patient received direct current therapy.

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the

application of low-level direct current on patients with

large malignant oral tumours. We are of the opinion that

this novel method of cancer treatment is important in a

developing country because it is low-cost, non-toxic,

non-invasive, site specific, and easy to administer.

2. CASE REPORT

A 60-year-old Nigerian woman presented to our oral and

maxillofacial clinic in 2007. She complained of swelling

of the right face and the palate that began three years

earlier. In addition, she had hearing problems, especially

of the right ear. The tumour has steadily been increasing

in size (Figure 1). She also complained of blockage of

the right nostril, difficulty in breathing and in swallow-

ing, speech impairment and discomfort when chewing.

The swellings were tender to touch and the tumour on

the palate bled occasionally. The patient’s medical his-

tory was benign—she denied fever, chills, weight loss,

vomiting and nausea. She admitted that she had hitherto

patronized unorthodox medical practitioners before a

medical doctor referred her to our maxillofacial unit.

Clinical examination showed an elderly, nervous and

talkative woman with a facial mass on the right side of

the face in moderate respiratory distress. There was also

a large swelling (diameter = 4.5 cm) on the palate (Fig-

ure 1). The lesion did not affect the facial nerve. The

Figure 1. Tumour of the palate before treatment.

radiograph (jug handle or occipitomental view) revealed

lytic bone destruction of the right sinus cavity. The bi-

opsy result reported squamous cell carcinoma. We

therefore made a diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma

(SCC) in stage IV of the TNM (Tumour, Node, Metasta-

sis) system.

After obtaining ethical clearance from the health in-

stitution where we treated the patient; informed consent

from her and extra/intraoral photographs, we started

treatment using the GEIPEa device and the following

materials: custom electrodes, needle electrodes, elec-

trode gel, and sandpaper strips. The device was bat-

tery-powered and provided constant electrical current. In

accordance with the treatment protocol of the GEIPE

Cancer Treatment, we prepared the skin by removing

dead skin cells from the area with very fine sand paper;

cleaning with water; drying and finally rubbing con-

ducting gel on the skin surface. We connected the wires

first to a passive surface electrode, which was an alu-

minium foil plate that measured 4 × 4 cm (extra oral

electrode) and then to an active needle (intra oral elec-

trode). This was a 14-gauge stainless steel injection nee-

dle, whose hub was removed. It was insulated with tight-

fitting silicon tubing that covered the needle except for

the 5 mm tip. The exposed tip had a diameter of 2.25

mm, and a surface area of 0.35 cm2.

We placed the electrodes in such a way that the can-

cerous tissue fell in the path between them by visualiz-

ing a straight line going through the body and through

the tumour. We taped the surface electrode to hold it

down (Figure 2). After sterilizing the tip of the needle,

we inserted it into the tumour so that the exposed tip was

C. Oji et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 1049-1053

1051

Figure 2. Placement of the electrodes.

within the tumour and switched the device on. Initially,

we passed a current of 2 mA and a voltage of 3 V through

the tumour for one hour. After examining the skin and

establishing that there were no adverse reactions, we

increased the time of treatment slowly to a maximum of

eight hours at a time. The GEIPE device, which was

equipped with two ON positions, required that the pa-

tient or a health worker activate the first ON switch and

then the second ON switch after every five minutes. This

was necessary in order to avoid electrolysis and dissolu-

tion of electrodes. Since we found this procedure stress-

ful, we consulted an engineering firm, GODIACb (Nig.)

Ltd that modified the GEIPE device to perform the

switching function automatically.

At the end of each treatment session, we gently

washed the skin with soap and water and placed a mois-

turizer on the area. After the first three days of treatment,

we observed oedema and discoloration of the lesion in

the palate. Seven days later, there was marked necrosis

of the lesion. We carefully removed the necrotic tissue

and the colour of the palate mucosa normalized in the

course of treatment. The extra oral as well as the intra

oral tumour flattened after eight weeks of treatment

(Figure 3), and the patient’s accompanying ailments

disappeared. She left the hospital against our advice ex-

plaining that she felt well and had neither the money nor

the need for further medical attention. This was the rea-

son why we could not execute final radiographic exami-

nations and biopsy. We saw the healthy-looking patient

eighteen months later in the marketplace where she sold

vegetables. She refused our request for her to come for a

check-up.

Figure 3. The palate-eight weeks after onset of

treatment.

3. DISCUSSION

The case that we reported here suggests that direct elec-

tric current can destroy an advanced malignant tumour

within a relatively short span of time (eight weeks).

Many possible mechanisms may account for tumour

destruction by direct current. Kulsh [11] postulated the

enzyme-mediated mechanism for the first time. He,

however, suggested that voltage between 1.2-3 V would

be most beneficial for the disabling of RR through free

radical interactions. Kulsh [11] was of the opinion that

higher voltage for this mechanism would be undesirable

because more and more electrons would engage in elec-

trochemical processes leaving less and less electrons free

as free radicals, and the concentration of toxic electro-

chemical species would increase steadily. In our case, we

used 3 V.

Yen et al. [13] applied direct current of 400 µA at 3

volts for 208.4 minutes (i.e., 5 Coulombs in 5 mL or 1

Coulomb/mL), to a human cancer cell culture. The pH at

the anode decreased to 4.53 and increased to 10.46 at the

cathode. The effect of pH alteration on cells is thus

likely one of the mechanisms of tumour cell destruction.

A 1994 study by Berendson et al. [14], showed that

the main reactions at the anode are the formation of

oxygen, acidification due to liberated hydrogen ions, and,

if platinum is used as anode material, the formation of

chloride. At the cathode, hydrogen is formed and hy-

droxide ions are liberated. Based on calculations, the

authors concluded that the liberated hydrogen ions de-

C. Oji et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 1049-1053

1052

termine the extents of the locally destroyed zone around

the anode and that the destructive effect of chlorine

probably occurs in an inner zone close to the anode.

Though Marino et al. [15] employed a current of 2

mA and a voltage of 3 V in their experiment, they opined

that the pH changes in the tumour tissue—to the extent

that they overcome the body’s buffering capacity—

might be responsible for the observed effects on tumour

growth. They reasoned that the absence of an effect on

tumour growth with AC (alternating current) supports

this view because in this case, the electrochemical events

at each electrode are identical but they do not produce a

pH gradient.

According to Harguindey [16], tumour hyperacidifi-

cation might activate cytolytic mechanisms through in-

creased activity of lysosomes, resulting in the destruc-

tion of tumour tissues. Low pH also inhibits glycolysis

and protein synthesis upon which malignant tissues are

dependent.

A positive potential on metal electrodes leads to cor-

rosion of the metal with the release of metal ions from

the electrode and possible resultant necrosis and metal

toxicity. At the anode, the stainless steel electrode is cor-

roded with the ferrous ions going into solution [8]. In

their experiment with mice, Morris et al. [17] detected

that DC-induced tumour necrosis was polarity specific.

At the anode, it was coagulative and at the cathode, it

was ischemic. They surmised that this was further evi-

dence that the mechanism for tumour destruction was

electrochemical in nature. Taylor et al. [18] noted that

vascular occlusion by thrombosis can be reliably pro-

duced by the passage of an appropriate quantity of elec-

trical current.

It must, however, be noted that DC therapy has its

limitations, namely, its inability to effect a complete re-

mission in many cases. The percentages of total and par-

tial remissions vary from case to case as evidenced by

the works of Turler et al. [19] Kirson et al. [20] and Bar-

bault et al. [21]. Other drawbacks of this therapy its sta-

tionary nature (in the case presented here, the patient

was in the supine position for eight hours daily) and its

duration (again, in our case, the treatment lasted for

eight weeks).

All the papers referenced here agree on one issue,

namely, that DC destroys tumours. There are, however,

diverse views of the way it works. It appears, therefore,

that there is yet no clear understanding of the underlying

mechanisms of action. Nonetheless, we share the belief

of Taylor et al. [18] that there is a great therapeutic po-

tential for the development of this new technology. If

further studies can confirm the beneficial effects of di-

rect electrical current on malignant tissues, as we have

seen in our study and as shown in other studies, then the

application of relatively small amounts of direct electri-

cal current using a variety of purpose-designed delivery

electrodes, could produce an innovative low cost treat-

ment alternative for patients with malignant diseases. We

urge governments and stakeholders in the health care

delivery to encourage and support researchers to con-

tinue these studies.

4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are thankful to Mr. Jay Kulsh, CEO of GEIPEa from whom we

bought the GEIPE device. We also acknowledge Mr. Goddy Oku, CEO

of GODIACb (Nig.) Ltd for modifying the GEIPE device.

a. GEIPE Cancer Treatment: GEIPE, P.O. Box 69264 Los Angeles,

CA 90069. USA.

b. GODIAC: GODIAC (Nig.) Ltd. No. 2 Grant Street, 400001

Enugu, Nigeria.

REFERENCES

[1] Emami, B., Nussbaum, G.N., Hahn, N., Piro, A.J.,

Dntschilo, A. and Quimby, F. (1981) Histopathological

study on the effect of hyperthermia on microvasculature.

International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology

and Physics, 7(3), 343-348.

[2] Lindholm, C.C., Kjellen, E., Landberg, T., Nilsson, P.

and Persson, B. (1982) Microwave induced hyperthermia

and ionizing radiation. Preliminary clinical results. Acta

Radiologica Oncology, 21(4), 241-254.

[3] Rand, R.W., Snow, H.D. and Brown, W.J. (1982) Ther-

momagnetic surgery for cancer. Journal of Surgical Re-

search, 33(3), 177-183.

[4] Urano, M., Rice, L., Epstein, R., Suit, H.D. and Chu,

A.M. (1983) Effect of whole body hyperthermia on cell

survival, metastases frequency, and host immunity in

moderately and weakly immunogenic munne tumors.

Cancer Research, 43(3), 1039-1043.

[5] Widder, K.J., Senyei, A.E. and Seas, B. (1982) Experi-

mental methods in cancer therapeutics. Journal of Phar-

maceutical Sciences, 71(4), 379-387.

[6] Schechter, D.C. (1979) Flashbacks: Containment of tu-

mors through electricity. PA C E , 2(1), 101-114.

[7] Humphrey, C.E. and Seal, E.H. (1959) Biophysical ap-

proach toward tumor repression in mice. Science,

130(3372), 388-390.

[8] Schauble, M.K., Habal, M.B. and Gullick, H.D. (1977)

Inhibition of experimental tumor growth in hamsters by

small direct current. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory

Medicine, 101(6), 294-297.

[9] Habal, M.B. (1980) Effect of applied DC current on ex-

perimental tumor growth in rats. Journal of Biomedical

Materials Research, 14(6), 789-801.

[10] Weber, G.. (1983) Biochemical strategy of cancer cells

and the design of chemotherapy. Cancer Research, 43(8),

3466-3492.

[11] Kulsh, J. (1997) Targeting a key enzyme in cell growth: a

novel therapy for cancer. Medical Hypotheses, 49(4),

297-300.

C. Oji et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 1049-1053

1053

[12] Miklaĉiĉ, D., Fajgelj, A. and Serša, G. (1994) Tumor

treatment by direct electric current: Electrode material

deposition. Biosensors, 35(1), 93-97.

[13] Yen, Y, Li, J.R., Zhou, B.S., Rojas, F., Yu, J. and Chou,

C.K. (1999) Electrochemical treatment of human kb cells

in vitro. Journal of Bioelectromag, 20(1), 34-41.

[14] Berendson, J. and Simonsson, D. (1994) Electrochemical

aspects of treatment of tissue with direct current. Euro-

pean Journal of Surgery, 574(Suppl.), 111-115.

[15] Marino, A.A., Morris, D. and Arnold, T. (1986) Electrical

treatment of lewis lung carcinoma in mice. Journal of

Surgical Research, 41(2), 198-201.

[16] Harguindey, S. (1982) Hydrogen ion dynamics and can-

cer—An appraisal. Medical and Pediatric Oncology,

10(3), 217-236.

[17] Morris, D., Marino, A.A. and Gonzalez, E. (1992) Elec-

trochemical modification of tumor growth in mice. Jour-

nal of Surgical Research, 53(3), 306-309.

[18] Taylor, T.V., Engler, P., Pullan, R.R. and Holt, S. (1994)

Ablation of neoplasia by direct current. British Journal

of Cancer, 70(2), 342-345.

[19] Turler, A., Schaefer, H., Schaefer, N., Maintz, D., Wag-

ner, M., Qiao, J.C. and Hoelscher, A.H. (2000) Local

treatment of hepatic metastases with low-level direct

electric current: Experimental results. Journal of Gas-

troenterology, 35(3 ), 322-328.

[20] Kirson, E.D., Gurvich, Z., Schneiderman, R., Dekel, E.,

Itzhaki, A., Wasserman, Y. and Schatzberger, R. (2004)

Disruption of cancer cell replication by alternating elec-

tric fields. Cancer Research, 64(9), 3288-3285.

[21] Barbault, A., Costa, F.P., Bottger, B., Munden, K.F. and

Bonholt, F. (2009) Amplitude-modulated electromagnetic

fields for the treatment of cancer. Discovery of tumor-

specific frequencies and assessment of a novel therapeu-

tic approach. Journal of Experimental and Clinical Can-

cer Research, 28(51), 1756-1759.