21 | Advanced NSCLC | 44 | Chemotherapy + ketogenic diet + hyperbaric oxygen + mEHT | Mean OS = 42.9 m, PFS = 41 m. No problems were encountered due to fasting, hypoglycemia, ketogenic diet, mEHT or hyperbaric oxygen therapy. | Iyikesici, 2019 [161] , |
22 | Peritoneal carcinomatosis with malignant ascites | 260 | mEHT + traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) compared to intraperitoneal chemoinfusion (ICI) | The Objective response rate (OPR) = 77.7% in study group (mEHT + TCM) vs. OPR = 63.8% in the ICI group. The QoL = 49.2% vs. 32.3% in the active and control group. Adverse effect rate (AER) = 2.3% vs. 12.3%. | Pang, Zhang, et al. 2017 [162] |
23 | Advanced rectal cancer | 76 | mEHT + radiotherapy + chemotherapy | Downstaging + tumor regression, ypT0, and ypN0 was better with mEHT than without. No statistical significance. | You et al. 2020 [163] |
24 | Liver metastasis from colorectal cancer | 80 | Chemotherapy + mEHT | Median OS = 24.5 m, and expected (historical) OS = 11 m. | Hager, et al. 1999 [164] |
25 | Various types of sarcoma | 13 | Radiotherapy + chemotherapy + mEHT | Primary, recurrent, and metastatic sarcomas responded to mEHT, the masses regressed. | Jeung, et al. 2015 [165] |
26 | Soft-tissue sarcoma | 24 | Chemotherapy + mEHT | Pathological response rate (pRR) = 42% in neoadjuvant chemo-hyperthermia treatment median OS = 31 m. | Volovat, Volovat et al. 2014a [166] |
27 | Advanced pancreas carcinoma | 25 | mEHT + chemotherapy + ketogenic diet + oxygen therapy | Mean follow-up = 25.4 m, median OS = 15.8 m, median PFS = 15.8 m. | Iyikesici, 2020a [167] |
28 | Advanced pancreas carcinoma | 26 | Chemotherapy + mEHT | SD = 9 (48%), PR = 4 (21%) PD = 6 (31%) | Volovat, Volovat et al. 2014b [168] |
29 | Advanced pancreas | 106 | mEHT + radiotherapy + chemotherapy | After 3 m, PR = 22 (64.7%), SD = 10 (29.4%), PD = 2 (8.3%) with mEHT after 3 m of the therapy. In group without mEHT in the same time: PR = 3 (8.3%), SD = 10 (27.8%), PD = 23 (34.3%). The median OS = 18 m with mEHT and OS = 10.9 m without mEHT. | Fiorentini, Sarti, et al. 2019ª [169] , |
30 | Advanced pancreas carcinoma | 20 | Enzyme-therapy + immunolo-modulation + hormone therapy + mEHT | Median OS > 10 m. Most patients experienced partially excellent improvement of QoL. | Hager, Süsse, et al. 1994 [170] |
31 | Advanced pancreas carcinoma | 133 (26 + 73 + 34) | Radiotherapy + chemotherapy + mEHT | Two centres PFY (n = 26), HTT (n = 73) control (n = 34). 59% (PFY), 88% (HTT) had distant metastases, conventional therapies failed. Median OS = 12.0 m (PFY), 12.7 m (HTT), 6.5 m (control); 1st y survival 46.2% (PFY), 52.1% (HTT), 26.5% (control) QoL was improved. | Dani, Varkonyi, et al. 2008 [171] |
32 | Ovarian cancer | 19 | mEHT with dose escalation | The mEHT treatment was feasible in patients with recurrent or progressive ovarian cancer without any complication. | Yoo et al. 2019 [163] , |
33 | Metastatic cancers (colorectal, ovarian, breast) | 23 | mEHT + radio-therapy + chemotherapy | OS and time to progression (TTP) were influenced by the number of chemotherapy cycles (p < 0.001) and mEHT sessions (p < 0.001). Bevacizumab-based chemotherapy with mEHT has a favorable tumor response, is feasible and well tolerated for metastatic cancer patients. | Ranieri, et al. 2017 [172] |