Thymic peptides for treatment of cancer patients.
Wolf. Elke E; Milazzo. Stefania S; Boehm. Katja K; Zwahlen. Marcel M; Horneber. Markus M
Key Findings
- Purified thymus extracts (pTE) did not improve overall survival, disease‑free survival, or tumor response in cancer patients.
- pTE significantly reduced severe infectious complications (about a 46% risk reduction).
- Thymosin‑alpha‑1 showed a non‑significant trend toward lower death risk and better disease‑free survival, but the data are inconclusive.
Practical Outcomes
- For biohackers, thymosin‑alpha‑1 may modestly lower infection risk during periods of immune stress, but it doesn’t boost longevity, metabolism, or performance and lacks clear dosing guidance. Use is not recommended as a general health supplement without medical supervision.
Summary
In cancer patients, adding thymus extracts or the synthetic peptide thymosin‑alpha‑1 to chemo or radiotherapy didn’t improve survival or tumor shrinkage, but the extracts did cut the chance of serious infections, and thymosin‑alpha‑1 showed a non‑significant hint of better outcomes. Overall, the evidence is weak and the benefits are limited to infection risk in very sick people.
Abstract
Purified thymus extracts (pTE) and synthetic thymic peptides (sTP) are thought to enhance the immune system of cancer patients in order to fight the growth of tumour cells and to resist infections due to immunosuppression induced by the disease and antineoplastic therapy. To evaluate the effectiveness of pTE and sTP for the management of cancer. We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, BIOETHICSLINE, BIOSIS, CATLINE, CISCOM, HEALTHSTAR, HTA, SOMED and LILACS (to February 2010). Randomised trials of pTE or sTP in addition to chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, compared to the same regimen with placebo or no additional treatment in adult cancer patients. Two authors independently extracted data from published trials. We derived odds ratios (OR) from overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates, tumour response (TR) rates, and rates of adverse effects (AE) related to antineoplastic treatments. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis. We identified 26 trials (2736 patients). Twenty trials investigated pTE (thymostimulin or thymosin fraction 5) and six trials investigated sTP (thymopentin or thymosin α(1)). Twenty-one trials reported results for OS, six for DFS, 14 for TR, nine for AE and 10  for safety of pTE and sTP. Addition of pTE conferred no benefit on OS (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.25); DFS (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16); or TR (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.25). Heterogeneity was moderate to high for all these outcomes. For thymosin α(1) the pooled RR for OS was 1.21 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.56, P = 0.14), with low heterogeneity; and 3.37 (95% CI 0.66 to 17.30, P = 0.15) for DFS, with moderate heterogeneity. The pTE reduced the risk of severe infectious complications (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.78, P = 0.0008; I² = 0%). The RR for severe neutropenia in patients treated with thymostimulin was 0.55 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.23,  P = 0.15). Tolerability of pTE and sTP was good. Most of the trials had at least a moderate risk of bias. Overall, we found neither evidence that the addition of pTE to antineoplastic treatment reduced the risk of death or disease progression nor that it improved the rate of tumour responses to antineoplastic treatment. For thymosin α(1), there was a trend for a reduced risk of dying and of improved DFS. There was preliminary evidence that pTE lowered the risk of severe infectious complications in patients undergoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy.
Study Information
pubmed
2011
2011-02-16T00:00:00.000Z
10.1002/14651858.cd003993.pub3