
Cell Cycle Synchronous Chemotherapy
Optimizing Chemotherapy by Tumor Specific Phase Enrichment, Phase Synchronization, and Meeting Requirements for Achieving Curative Outcome.
Slide 1: Opening Slide
CELL CYCLE SYNCHRONOUS CHEMOTHERAPY
(CCSC protocols)
Presentation at Stanford Genome Technology Center
Presentation of September 2, 2004, Updated 2006, 2007
by Mark Zamoyski
e-mail: zamoyski@metricmail.com
© 2004-2007 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc. , all rights reserved
Slide 2: Seminar Synopsis
The Slide Show combines molecular biology, mathematics, and cytokinetics of tumor growth, kill back, and regrowth to reveal why todays chemotherapy fails to cure most cancers.
The seminar identifies existing drugs that can be used to prevent this failure.
potential fast cure for more than a third of cancers,
including breast and prostate cancer
bloodless surgery for non malignant growths,
including endometriosis and enlarged prostate
Return to Slide Show Index
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 3: Cancer Status / Stats
Surgery provides 80% of todays survival benefit.
Leaves remaining 20% from:
Radiation Therapy
Chemotherapy
Other
Todays Chemotherapy is not curative.
It only extends survival by a few months of misery.
Stage IV survival rates:
1% lung cancer
5% colon cancer
14% breast cancer
Return to Slide Show Index
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 4: Molecular Biology of Cancer
Cancer is the accumulation of several independent genetic accidents (mutations) in growth control pathways in a single aberrant cell.
That aberrant cell, and all of its progeny, are hard wired to relentlessly grow and divide (cycle).
Growth Control Pathways are used for population density management
Cells produce and release protein growth factors (~ 50 known)
Known causes of mutations:
Cells also possess combinations of growth factor receptors
Cells also produce proteins that inhibit growth
Population Density is a balance between stimulators and inhibitors of growth
In Cancer, mutations tip the balance in favor of growth
DNA replication errors during cell division (~ 3 per division)
Chemical Carcinogens (DNA damage)
Electromagnetic radiation (covalent bond breakage)
Roughly 15% of cancer mutations trace back to viral origins
Return to Slide Show Index
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 5: Growth Control Pathways (1 of 3)
Growth factor docking with a receptor triggers intracellular cascades that result in activation of the Cell Cycle Control System . Return to Slide Show Index

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 6: Growth Control Pathways (2 of 3)
The Cell Cycle Control System is driven by production and combination of Cyclin/CDK proteins. Return to Slide Show Index

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 7: Growth Control Pathways (3 of 3)
The Cyclin/CDK complexes activate transcription factors for cell growth and division. Return to Slide Show Index

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 8: Examples of Common Mutations
Mutations can occur anywhere along growth control pathways. Overexpression of growth factor receptors (slide 5)
RAS transduction molecule malformed to be always active (slide 5)
Rb gene frequently missing in lung, breast, and bladder cancers (slide 7). About 50% of cancers have defects in the P53 gene (slide 7)
Return to Slide Show Index ~ 50 chemotherapeutic agents available for use today Most chemotherapeutics used today are Cell Cycle Active Cytotoxic
The phase distribution for a typical cycling human cell is shown below Return to Slide Show Index Dose limiting toxicity
Maximum Tolerated Dose
Bone marrow toxicity is dose-limiting for most chemotherapeutics From a molecular biology perspective, for a phase specific chemotherapeutic:
Return to Slide Show Index ( per Harrisons Principles of Internal Medicine, 14th ed. P. 528) Cancer growth is logarithmic
Tumor Kill Back: Each administration of chemotherapy kills a constant percentage of the tumor
Return to Slide Show Index To be curative, you must get below the 1 surviving cell number
Computing bone marrow recovery under Skipper:
S-Phase Cytotoxics and Skipper:
Return to Slide Show Index A tumor follows a Gompertzian growth curve (not linear) Density Related Stasis 1: Pressure restricts blood flow impairing nutrient and oxygen delivery
Density Related Stasis 2: Upregulation of density dependent inhibition pathways in cancer cells (e.g. P27 on slide 7)
Density Related Stasis 3: Ambient Growth Factor (GF) depletion / progressively unfavorable GF/GFR ratio
Endocrine Related Stasis
Return to Slide Show Index Gompertzian Growth implies heterogeneity of cell cycle times in a tumor (PDT is an average) Gompertzian Curve implies that chemotherapy itself alters cycle time by Gompertzian Acceleration
Return to Slide Show Index Used Irinotecan Phase III colon cancer trials (7 day AIs, 4 administrations per cycle) Results - Wall of numbers (Table 2, Pat. 6,486,146), cancer population cell count progression by treatment arm, shown below:
Results - compared to actual median survival, shown graphically below:
Return to Slide Show Index Corrected Model for conventional, asynchronous regimen and 10 bil. cell tumor mass Return to Slide Show Index Can only expect survival increase of ~ 1/2 PDT per administration of S-Phase cytotoxic (when PDT < AI) Return to Slide Show Index Objectives of the CCSC Protocols Return to Slide Show Index Endocrine Dependence (ED) is a trait inherent in the cell type from which the cancer arose
Return to Slide Show Index Step 1): S-Phase Cytotoxic + Anti Cytostatic used to de-populate the tumor and remove density related stasis points
Step 2): Cytostatic used to limit regrowth / re-establishment of stasis and to aggregate survivors where desired
Step 3): Anti Cytostatic used to release cells into the S-Phase
Step 4): An S-Phase Cytotoxic is used to kill the released cells Steps 2 - 4 are repeated to re-aggregate survivors and kill them, progressively reducing the tumor to where all cells will be cycling and available for killing Return to Slide Show Index One Cytotoxic administration = 1 Skipper cycle
Population asynchronicity is removed by phase aggregation
Gompertzian acceleration does not result in asynchronicity, cells just get to the road block faster (i.e. the synchronization point)
Return to Slide Show Index Maximum tolerated dose is replaced by minimum efficacious dose
Uses cancer accelerants for further dose reduction
Todays Maximum tolerated dose is a bad tradeoff
Return to Slide Show Index 184,200 new cases of breast cancer
180,400 new cases of prostate cancer
36,100 new cases of ovarian cancer
Same principles could provide bloodless surgery for other growths
Return to Slide Show Index Molecular biology indicates receptor blockers (antibodies) would be cytostatic (slide 5) Molecular biology predicts antagonistic function of trastuzumab and cell cycle active cytotoxics, when used as it was in Phase III human clinical trials
Return to Slide Show Index Patent applications are currently pending in this area and a signed NDA is required prior to disclosure. The website slides will be updated as appropriate.
Return to Slide Show Index Patent applications are currently pending in this area and a signed NDA is required prior to disclosure. The website slides will be updated as appropriate.
Return to Slide Show Index Patent applications are currently pending in this area and a signed NDA is required prior to disclosure. The website slides will be updated as appropriate.
Return to Slide Show Index Patent applications are currently pending in this area and a signed NDA is required prior to disclosure. The website slides will be updated as appropriate.
Return to Slide Show Index Curative result cannot be expected from today's 7 or 21 day regimens
~ 10 % of cancers do not over express telomerase Higher (14%) breast cancer survival likely due to ED related S-Phase crawl Return to Slide Show Index Curative result cannot be expected from today's 7 or 21 day regimens Fast Cure for many cancers potentially already available No matter how magnificent of an anti cancer molecule you develop, it will fail to work magnificently if not administered properly Return to Slide Show Index
DISCLAIMER AND IMPORTANT NOTICE: The Compositions and Methods presented on this website are all in preclinical trial stages. They are based only on our understanding of the proposed underlying mechanisms of action and on any available coincidental corroborative empirical evidence, any of which may in fact turn out not to be correct, or may be prevented from functioning as envisioned because of other factors or mechanisms of action not contemplated or considered, or may even cause harm because of factors or mechanisms of action not anticipated. The process of obtaining FDA approvals has not been started in any of the areas disclosed on this website. The disclosures here are purely for scientific information exchange purposes, representing one scientific point of view, and are not intended to suggest, or be used for, any proposed medical treatments. © 2002 - 2007 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc.
Cell preferentially takes up more ambient growth factors
Intracellularly mimics elevated level of growth factors
Example: HER2 (EGF receptor) overexpressed in ~ 25% of breast cancers, 30% of NSC lung cancers, and in ovarian cancer.
Example: EGFR overexpressed in ~ 50% of glioblastomas (brain cancer).
Transmits false grow signal to nucleus
Found in ~ 25% of cancers
P53 prevents cell division or kills cells with DNA damage
Its absence allows genetic mutations to accumulate
Many chemotherapeutics rely on P53 for their cytotoxic affect
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 9: Chemotherapy Overview
Typically 7 or 21 day administration intervals (AIs)
Typically 4 - 12 administrations per regimen most are S-Phase Cytotoxic
The S-Phase is the part of the cell cycle when DNA is being Synthesized
Cells in or passing through the susceptible phase are killed
Chemo kills both cancer and normal actively cycling cells
"The Big 4" normal actively cycling cells: bone marrow, gastrointestinal, hair, and skin
Frequent turnover cells include ovaries, testes, thymus, lymph nodes and spleen

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 10: Principles of Chemotherapy - Definitions Toxicity to normal tissue that limits further dose escalation
The dose just below the Dose limiting toxicity
max. tolerated dose equals max. systemic toxicity
max. tolerated dose does not equal an appreciable increase in tumor kill rate (TKR)
max. tolerated dose does not equal curative result
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 11: Principles of Chemotherapy - Skipper Log Cell Kill Model (1 of 2)

Cells / Population Division: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, ...
To be curative, you must get below the single surviving cell number
No growth can occur between administrations
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 12: Principles of Chemotherapy - Skipper Log Cell Kill Model (2 of 2)
For a 10 bil. cell tumor, need 6 cycles for a 99% TKR/cycle chemo.
10 bil. X .01 survivors X .01 X .01 X .01 X .01 X .01 < 1
For a 10 bil. cell tumor, need 8 cycles for a 95% TKR/cycle chemo.
i.e. need to multiply 10 bil. by .05 eight times to get < 1
e.g. 99% bone marrow cell kill = 1% survivors
from 1% to 2% to 4% to 8% to 16% to 32% to 64% to 100% =~ 7 population divisions
at a 24 hr. cycle time, = ~ 7 days to normal population density
A 99% S-Phase Kill Rate (PKR) =~ 32% TKR (tumor kill rate)
Need 4 administrations of the chemotherapeutic, synchronous to the progression of tumor cells through the S-Phase, for 1 Skipper cycle
No cells may slip past the S-Phase before the next administration of chemotherapy
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 13: Gompertzian Tumor Growth
example for a 4 day hard wired cycle time
Population division time(PDT) is 5X slower above the 1cc mass
Low S-Phase fractions are often observed (e.g. 10 -15% vs. 32%) 
Tumor Density Related Stasis

directly counteracts all mutation profiles, across all phases of the cell cycle
also causes angiogenesis inhibition by P27 upregulation in endothelial (blood vessel) cells
manifests as slowed tumor growth

Tips balance back in favor of stasis (i.e. not growing)
Counteracts GF, GF Receptor, transduction and transcription mutations in the G1 phase
Would manifest as slowed tumor growth with low S-Phase fraction

Growing tumor counteracts GF Receptor overexpression mutations
GFR overexpression relies of preferential uptake of ambient growth factors
Growing tumor and fixed ambient growth factor pool leaves unbound / unactivated receptors
Counteracts GF Receptor overexpression (in the G1 phase)
Would manifest as slowed tumor growth with low S-Phase fraction

Endocrine dependent cancers (e.g. estrogen, progesterone, testosterone) require endocrine binding for entry into and progression through the S-Phase
estrogen and progesterone levels vary through the menstrual cycle and nadirs result in stasis
chemotherapy causes ablation of ovaries and testes with resulting downregulation of estrogen and testosterone

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 14: Gompertzian Growth, Asynchronicity, and Why Chemotherapy Fails
the stasis points (slide 13) would be most pronounced in the dense core, least pronounced at the periphery
cells in the dense core would cycle slower than at the periphery
also, cells next to a blood vessel would cycle faster than ones 6 lengths away
heterogeneity of cycle times implies inherent asynchronicity to 7 or 21 day administration intervals (AIs)
without synchronicity, curative result cannot be expected under the Skipper model Chemotherapeutic tumor de-population removes the density related stasis points (slide 13)
cells accelerate their cycle time until they recrowd
leaves them asynchronous to the regimen
without synchronicity, curative result cannot be expected under the Skipper model
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 15: Clinical Corroboration of Chemotherapeutic Asynchronicity
Used standard S-Phase fraction of 32% and 100% S-Phase kill rate (= 32% tumor kill rate per administration)
asynchronicity of the S-Phase in the cancer cells to successive administrations of S-Phase cytotoxic would mean only a modest increase in life expectancy as the cancer kept regrowing
the increase in life expectancy could be approximated using Skipper log cell kill math: regrowth # = (starting # of cells) X 2 (T / PDT in days)
where T is days between administration of chemotherapy
where a clinically detectable 1cc mass (1 bil. cells) was used as the start point
where an average lethal burden mass of 1 liter (1 trillion cells) was used as the end point
and where the PDT (Population Division Time) was estimated as 19 days based on the best supportive care (BSC) life expectancy (ie. BSC / 10 population divisions)

Clearly not curative
© 2002 - 2007 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 16: Zamoyski Corrected Model of Tumor Kill Back and Regrowth
based on Irinotecan clinical trial observations (i.e. formula of slide 15)

only a delay in progression to lethal burden can be expected
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 17: Simplified Explanation
S-Phase chemo kills ~ 1/3 of the tumor per each administration
The surviving 2/3 needs to grow ~ 50% to restore the original tumor size (33% / 66%)
This only delays the tumors progression to lethal burden by 1/2 population division per administration
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 18: Overview of the CCSC Protocols
Make Chemotherapy Curative
Conformed Cancer Concepts (Pat. 6,486,146 and others pending)
Insure Synchronicity of cytotoxic administrations to the susceptible phase
Minimize Systemic Toxicity
Conformed Cancer Concepts are used to insure synchronicity
Minimum Efficacious Dose Concepts
Cancer Accelerant Concepts The process synchronizes the tumors susceptible phase to administrations of a phase specific cytotoxic
The regimens typically start with a de-populating administration(s) to remove density dependent stasis (slide 13)
Cytostatics are used to prevent re-establishment of density dependent stasis and to phase aggregate tumor cells where desired
Anti-Cytostatics are used to release the aggregated cells
Cytotoxics are used to kill the phase aggregated, released cells
The process is repeated to re-aggregate and kill survivors
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 19: CCSC Protocols for Endocrine Dependent Cancers (EDC)
( Pat. # 6,486,146 and other applications are pending) It is a trait retained by the endocrine dependent cancer (EDC)
Endocrine receptors are formed during the G phase
Endocrine (e.g. estrogen, testosterone) binding to these receptors is required for entry into and progression through the S-Phase
Endocrines can be used as Anti-Cytostatics
Absence of ED receptors in big 4 = tumor specificity for chemotherapy purposes
Provides a method for selectively synchronizing the cancer to the chemotherapy
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 20: CCSC Protocols for Breast Cancers
( Pat. # 6,486,146 and other applications are pending)
Numerous S-Phase cytotoxics available (Harrisons, 15th ed. P. 539 - 540)
cytostatics include estrogen downregulators such as aromatase inhibitors
Anti Cytostatics include exogenous estrogen, estradiol, etc...
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 21: CCSC Protocols and the Skipper Kill Model
PKR = TKR in a conformed tumor
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 22: Taking the Misery Out of Chemotherapy Astronomical increase in normal population kill back for an insignificant increase in tumor kill back

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 23: Applicability of CCSC Endocrine Conformed Regimens
( Pat. # 6,486,146 and other applications are pending) ~ 2/3 are estrogen dependent
~ 1/3 are progesterone dependent most are testosterone dependent
administer as PSA levels start rising to obviate surgery / prevent eventual malignancy many progesterone dependent
endometriosis (estrogen dependent
enlarged prostate (testosterone dependent)
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 24: Incorrect Cytostatic Regimens - Trastuzumab
~ 25% of breast cancers over express HER-2 receptors
trastuzumab is a HER-2 antibody (e.g. Herceptin, a registered trademark of Genentech)
it should prevent docking of ambient growth factors with overexpressed receptors
it should result in G-Phase stasis
Trastuzumab induced G-Phase stasis clinically corroborated by Bunn et. al.
trastuzumab was administered for 4 months and cell cycle active cytotoxics were administered at 21 day intervals during that time period
The cytostatic would prevent cancer cells from cycling
A Cell Cycle Active Cytotoxic requires cells to be cycling in order to kill them
Accordingly, the first administration of the M or S-Phase Cytotoxic would be expected to work as cells were still progressing through the M or S Phase
However, the next 5 administrations of the M or S-Phase cytotoxic would be expected to only cause systemic toxicity, with no commensurate therapeutic benefit, as surviving tumor cells were arrested in the G-Phase
Per Skipper log cell kill math, one would only expect the benefit of ~ 4 mo. of cytostatic + 1 asynchronous cytotoxic kill back

© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 25: Clinical Corroboration - Skipper Math and the Phase III Data
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 26: Corrected Conforming Regimens using Trastuzumab
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 27: Regimens for Non Conformable Cancers (1 of 2)
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 28: Regimens for Non Conformable Cancers (2 of 2)
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 29: Closing Comments / Tie Up of Loose Ends Then why the Sage IV survival rates of 1% for lung cancer or 5% for colon cancer?
Cancers not over expressing telomerase would be subject to cell senescence
the average cell has 50 - 60 cell divisions before telomere reduction results in cell senescence
It takes ~ 40 cell divisions to reach lethal burden
Depending on how many cell divisions were used up by the cell before it went malignant, plus how many population divisions you force the cells to use up because of chemotherapy, you may hit senescence before lethal burden
Would expect between 0 - 10% survival from senescence and the observed 1% and 5% is in this range
Other possibilities: slow mutation profiles, whose fastest rate may coincidentally match the AI
Chemotherapeutic ablation of ovaries in ~ 71% of women
Ablation = estrogen downregulation = S-Phase crawl
Haphazard phase aggregation / Gompertzian acceleration offset
Similar, in part, to what we do much more precisely
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 30: Conclusions / Implications
An expectation corroborated by abysmal Stage IV survival rates
at a minimum, high tumor response rate, low toxicity regimens
© 2002 - 2006 Mark Zamoyski & NexGen Biomedical, Inc., all rights reserved
Slide 31: Speaker Bio
Mark Zamoyski is the principal scientist and founder of NexGen Biomedical. Mark was awarded a patent for cell cycle synchronous chemotherapy for endocrine dependent cancers and has applications issued and pending for tumor specific, cell cycle synchronous protocols for several other cancer characteristics and mutations. Mark also has patents issued and pending for RNAi / PSR compounds for inhalable and topical anti-viral, anti-inflammatory, and antiproliferative treatments for various dermal and pulmonary indications. Mark's more recent work involves identifying a novel etiology / pathogenesis underlying many types of migraines and seizures and accordingly novel etiology based treatment methods. Prior to founding NexGen Biomedical, Mark spent more than a decade with Biomation Corporation and its parent company, where he worked his way up to executive positions including CFO and VP of Sales and Marketing and was involved in the ultimate sale of the company. Mark received both his bachelors and masters degrees from Cornell University in 1977 and 1978, respectively.
Acknowledgments: We wish to thank Dr. Maria Zagorski and Justin John Zamoyski for their help in the preparation and review of the above presentation material.