Frequency cancer therapy uses high-frequency waves to effectively destroy cancer cells and assist the body in fighting back against them, without the risks and side effects associated with traditional cancer treatments. It’s noninvasive and has far fewer adverse side effects.
FM TTFields were significantly more selective at inhibiting TNBC cell growth than uniform TTFields; their peak values dropped below 50% and reached neutropenia levels after 48 h of FM treatment.
It is non-invasive
While there are noninvasive cancer treatments, most require surgery and/or other invasive measures like radiation therapy or chemotherapy. Frequency cancer therapy uses electromagnetic energy to heat up and kill body cells and kill tumors less invasively while simultaneously treating multiple tumors simultaneously – it also has less adverse side effects than traditional radiation therapy methods.
Radiofrequency ablation is a minimally invasive procedure in which an electrode needle is passed through the skin into a tumor site and high-frequency electric current is applied in order to destroy it. A radiologist uses imaging tests to guide their needle into position before passing high frequency power through it to heat tissue and kill cancer cells. Radiofrequency ablation has proven itself successful at treating primary cancers as well as precancerous conditions like Barrett’s Esophagus; additionally it may also help control secondary tumour growth or alleviate symptoms.
Drs. Lisa Tachiki and Shailender Bhatia conducted a recent study which demonstrated how decreasing immunotherapy frequencies could assist advanced melanoma and Merkel cell carcinoma patients stay on lifesaving treatments longer, saving both patient and healthcare system both time and money. While this approach presents many potential advantages, there can be challenges associated with its implementation as well.
Research by this team indicates that using cell-specific frequency parameters as an early cancer detection marker alongside pH, temperature and bioelectric potential parameters could provide a powerful new tool to identify cancer precursors and cancerous tumors more reliably. This represents a crucial step forward towards creating modern tools and techniques capable of accurately diagnosing cancer as soon as it starts spreading to new organs or body locations.
Researchers have created an effective cancer treatment that targets molecular mechanisms driving their development, known as electromagnetic thermotherapy (EMT). EMT is a noninvasive and drug-free method of cancer treatment which operates under the principle that cancer cells are hypersensitive to electromagnetic fields due to strong polarization that creates magnetic fields attracting cancerous molecules.
EMT is an experimental therapy method combining low-intensity ultrasound with sonosensitizers that bind to cancerous cells’ surfaces, sonosensitizers absorbing main radiofrequency radiation, then selectively delivering it to tumor areas to heat and destroy cancerous cells. Similar to photodynamic therapy (PDT), EMT does not cause photosensitivity or harm to surrounding healthy tissues as seen with PDT treatments.
It is safe
Cancer patients must consider multiple factors when making treatment decisions, including how they will feel during and after treatments, how much money will be spent, whether the treatments are effective and whether future outcomes remain unpredictable. Furthermore, to increase survival odds doctors must gain more information about genetic makeup of their tumors so as to select appropriate therapies suited for each patient.
Frequency cancer therapy utilizes electromagnetic fields to target cancerous cells and destroy them without harming surrounding healthy tissue, with minimal side effects and safely targeted tumor treatment that cannot be surgically removed. Although its exact effect on tumor DNA remains unclear, electromagnetic fields appear to disrupt tumor cell growth by altering gene expression levels and thus disrupt tumor growth.
One risk associated with RFA is the possibility that it doesn’t completely eradicate cancer or that it recurs after treatment; there are ways to mitigate this by combining other treatments or having multiple sessions. Another possible side effect may be bleeding during and/or after the procedure; your physician will monitor you closely throughout and after, checking blood pressure, pulse and oxygen levels regularly as well as providing any needed pain relief.
Overall, it makes sense to scan more frequently with rapidly progressing tumors or therapies which are costly or toxic; but for slowly progressive tumors with inexpensive or low-toxic therapies it can be more challenging to determine how often to scan these patients, particularly since systemic therapies often carry significant “opportunity costs,” including delays in switching over to another therapy that could prove more successful.
This approach could save substantial sums of money for low-income patients who might otherwise not afford immunotherapy, provided researchers can demonstrate that their frequency-based dosing regimen is both safe and effective.
It is effective
Radiation therapy is the cornerstone of cancer therapy, but can come with severe side effects. The purpose is to destroy cancer cells while sparing healthy tissues by targeting them directly with radio waves delivered directly into tumours – this procedure is known as radiofrequency ablation or RFA and it’s often combined with surgery or chemotherapy as part of an integrated cancer care strategy.
Studies have demonstrated that cancerous tumors are more likely to return after treatment than noncancerous ones. Furthermore, cancer treatments often cause severe side effects including fatigue and depression. Thankfully, researchers are currently finding new solutions to reduce these side effects such as decreasing radiation dosage or finding better methods of administering it.
Fred Hutch’s Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research recently conducted research that demonstrated how decreasing chemotherapy frequencies may both increase outcomes and cut costs. Their researchers utilized a mathematical model that determines the optimal frequency for each individual, taking inspiration from frequency response analysis methods that use tumor response patterns to predict whether a dose schedule is safe or not.
Researchers conducted experiments to test the efficacy of their new approach by investigating how different frequencies affected tumor growth. After performing several frequency-specific experiments on tumor samples from mice and humans, FM TTFields proved more successful at killing cancer cells than their UM counterparts and in preventing cell proliferation, likely because their range of frequencies prevented any resistance developing to treatment from the tumor itself.
Researchers published their work in Science Advances with hopes that it may help treat more patients and save lives, though it’s too early to tell whether it will actually work in practice as the FDA-approved device is still not yet available in clinics; patients will therefore have to travel for treatment.
It is affordable
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) uses electrical energy to generate heat that destroys cancer cells, often used to treat primary tumors or secondary cancers that have spread from another part of the body. RFA may be combined with surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatments as needed; you may require hospitalization after your procedure and should allow for sufficient recovery time afterward; it varies depending on each case. You can undergo RFA either as an inpatient or as an outpatient. Depending on individual situations and treatments required this could take one or more sessions than needed after receiving RFA treatments; depending upon case specific treatments the amount of recovery time may vary.
ICER’s Evidence Blocks Affordability score correlates with treatment costs, but isn’t always an accurate reflection. This may be due to committee members lacking full insight into individual treatments’ prices; such “price opacity” can result in inaccurate Affordability scores that limit its usefulness for clinicians in identifying high-value treatments.
