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]