[Boundless]

. But even if this treatment is given the average survival is just 15 months.

And this is the sad truth about the current state of cancer therapy. Despite a War on Cancer being fought since Nixon, life expectancy for most forms of cancer is increased by perhaps mere weeks, misery from treatment is off scale, and expenses are astronomical.

Prevailing cancer dogma is somatic (gene) theory, which is drilling in what increasingly looks like a dry hole. The genetic chaos of cancer is likely a consequence, and not the cause. All we have to show for the billions invested is advanced gene sequencing tools (which are useful) and what may turn out to be a surplus of gene scientists.

Some (Seyfried, D'Agostino) have kicked somatic to the curb, and are following up on Warburg's (metabolic/mitochondrial) theory from the early 20th. This shows some promise.

If I had a diagnosis of this particular cancer, I would go for:

• deep ketogenic diet
  (to deny the cancer cells the glucose they are highly reliant on)
• restricted calorie diet
  (to reduce glutamine, which cancer cells can use instead of glucose)
• hyperbaric therapy
  (because cancer metabolism is anerobic)
• exogenous ketones
  (to increase blood levels of BHB and AcAc ketone bodies, apparently antagonistic to cancer cells - only one such product is presently available, although more are expected this year)
• I might consider reduced dosage chemo, depending on how hazardous the drug is to mitochondria
  (because the diet approach can shrink tumors, but may not kill them - but anything that trashes mitochondria is setting up a new cancer, as rad does)
• keep an eye on developments
  (which may be rapid, once researchers stop digging in the wrong place)

... for example:
Nature: The M2 splice isoform of pyruvate kinase is important for cancer metabolism and tumour growth

Oncologists are apt to be largely unaware of the above. Anyone who plans to turn down chemo or rad anyway needs keep an eye on what dissenting researchers are up to, and make their own decisions. Fortunately, much of the dietary approach can be done independently by individuals.

In the meantime, a low-carb, high-fat, grain-free diet, with attention to a long list of other adverse junk sold as "food" is apt to be highly prophylactic against getting cancer in the first place. My bet is placed there at the moment.

[TigersEye]

But even if this treatment is given the average survival is just 15 months.

I don't know if you caught it but that wasn't a reference to the new Vacquinol-1 molecule they found.

[Boundless]

Someone emailed about somatic vs. metabolic theory.

Bad news from the TCGA:
http://robbwolf.com/2013/09/19/origin-cancer/

Seyfried’s text “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease” (not cheap):
http://www.bc.edu/schools/cas/biology/facadmin/seyfried.html

A blog by an MD exploring keto diets generally.
http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/war-cancer
http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/way-exploit-metabolic-quirk-cancer

Someone else asked about specific advice on prostate cancer.

Seyfried’s page has a link for further info on using R-KD (restricted calorie ketogenic diet) as therapy. I might add that, even though I’ve read his book, I tend to think that R-KD isn’t the whole answer, nor does Seyfried describe it as a “cure”.

On prostate, I advise being very skeptical of PSA results. Our family has already had experience with false positives. Biopsy is the most reliable. Kallikrein testing looks promising and may be coming to market.

This is all more than I know about it, having stumbled into it while exploring diet & health.