Immune Augmentive Therapy Clinic

IAT Treatment Objectives

The objective of IAT is to restore the cancer patient’s immune competency to a level by which it can control cancer. The body’s own complex tumor fighting system may well be the first, the best, and the last line of defense against cancers. Other than surgical intervention for local tumors, there is generally no cure for most cancers. Restoring the immune system to enable it to destroy cancer cells, therefore, becomes the prime objective in IAT.

Patient Protocol

Typically, patients presenting at the centre demonstrate an imbalance of immune components believed essential to the control of cancer. The protocol established for IAT is designed to modulate critical immune factors. By objectively measuring therapeutic progress, the immunologic attack on cancer tumors can be directed.

IAT is therefore a two-step procedure:

(1) Evaluation-measuring deficiencies of the immune systems, and

(2) Therapy-replenishing deficient factors by self-injection of sera.

Immunological Evaluation

The immune system of each cancer patient receiving IAT is evaluated once or twice daily, five days a week. Blood tests measure relevant immune components. These data reveal the relative activity of the tumor kill process and immune response. IAT is individualized to the patient. Based on serial individual blood tests, a computer program calculates the amount of therapeutic sera required for each patient to optimize immunologic response to tumors.


Here’s some more detail on the background of IAT with a few more technical details.

The method developed and used by Burton is referred to as immuno-augmentative therapy (IAT). It is based on a immunologic model of the immune system that focuses on four plasma protein factors: tumor complement, tumor antibody, blocking protein and deblocking protein.

This model hypothesizes that tumor tissues produce a common antigen, which Burton called tumor complement, and which in turn stimulates the immune system to produce a corresponding tumor antibody. The rate at which this antibody destroys the tumor cells is regulated by the blocking protein. It prevents the liver from becoming overburdened by unmanageable concentrations of necrotic tumor cells.

The antibody becomes effective again in the presence of a deblocking protein which neutralizes the blocking protein and permits the antibody to attack the tumor cell.

Given the dynamic nature of this model, uncontrolled tumor growth could result from an inappropriate concentration of any one of the four proteins. Burton’s analysis of over three thousand patients indicates that there is a cancer protein profile that is distinguished by a depressed level of deblocking protein and tumor complement in conjunction with an elevated level of blocking protein.

Burton’s method is to measure the relative concentrations of these factors in daily readings. We then attempt to achieve optimal levels by a series of injections of the appropriate proteins. The composition of each injection is calculated by computer using formulas developed empirically over thirty years. The calculation draws on clinical examination as well as on blood analysis. Each of these therapeutic interventions is based on the most recent assessment of the patient’s native immune capabilities, the status of the tumor activity, the effects of the most recent therapy, and the accumulated effects of all previous therapy and response.

The goal is to encourage the patient’s immune mechanism to make a broadly based attack on the tumor throughout the body. Unlike chemotherapy, which targets all rapidly multiplying cells, the immunologic response is directed specifically to the tumor. Morever, unlike radiation therapy, attack by a balanced immune system is not sharply localized but can act against metastatic disease in widely separated body sites.

The injections contain naturally occurring proteins and cause none of the side effects of other invasive cancer therapies. Consequently, the therapy need not disrupt the daily routine of a patient. The treatment is useful as an adjunct to surgery, and as a primary therapy in cases where surgery is not indicated.

Blocking Proteins: Preliminary tests suggest that the blocking proteins are pre-albumins. The source is dead tumor cells. Live tumor tissue yields no blocking proteins, in contrast to the high yields from necrotic tumor is directly reflected in the titer of blocking proteins present in blood of the tumor tissue donor. Repeated tests have indicated that the titer of blocking proteins is elevated by tumor destruction due to either immuno-augmentation, radiotherapy, chemotherapy or spontaneous regression. In contrast, surgical excision of tumor does not involve necrosis and decreases the titer of blocking proteins. Surgery should therefore be considered a pro-immune technique.

The alteration of blocking protein titers is used as a measure of the anti-cancer activities of the diverse therapies. Techniques developed by Burton allow the isolation of two blocking protein factors. Isolation and measurement of these discrete factors are able to distinguish between recent and more remote tumor necrosis, refining the ability to measure the responses to recent therapy. They may also serve as indices of short term and long term anti-neoplastic activity of the native immune system.


Tumor Antibody: Tumor antibody fractions contain alpha-2 macroglobulin, IgG, IgM, and IgA. The source is the serum of a donor without cancer. Tumor antibody levels are unaffected by radiation and chemotherapy and may even be greatly elevated in the patient who has received high doses for an extended period. Tumor Complement: The source is the clot obtained from the plasma of a donor with cancer. Tumor complement is probably produced by the reticuloendothelial system after stimulation by a dialyzable substance (peak U.V. abs.292) derived from live tumor tissue. Immuno-electropheresis indicates that the tumor complement does not bind with tumor antibody. The level of tumor complement in the cancer donor’s blood is significantly reduced by extended or heavy doses of chemotherapy or corticosteroids.

Deblocking Protein: The source is the serum of a donor without cancer. Tests indicate that the deblocking protein is an alpha-2 macroglobulin. In vitro and in vivo studies indicate that deblocking protein combines with blocking protein. The resulting decrease in the level of blocking protein enables blocked tumor complement to combine with tumor antibody. The level of deblocking protein is severely depressed by high dose or long term radiation.
Preliminary studies have indicated that the adverse effects of radiation upon the hemopoietic system may be prevented or alleviated by treatment with deblocking protein.

It is significant to note that tumor antibody obtained from numerous normal blood donor sera is able to combine with tumor complement isolated from the blood clots of donors with diverse neoplasms. There is no apparent tumor specificity associated with tumor antibody and tumor complement, when they are properly isolated and refined.

Treatment outcomes

IAT is not represented as a cure for cancer, but rather a means of restoring the system’s natural balance. The restoration of the natural immune system allows the patient’s own body to treat itself. The resulting changes can significantly extend the lives of people with cancer, as borne out by clinic records maintained since 1977. Many times success for patients with advanced metastatic disease is measured by life extension and enhanced quality of life that is many times experienced while undergoing non-toxic IAT provides.

One Trackback

  1. By IAT Clinic Collaboration | BCCGRC on August 23, 2011 at 3:36 am

    […] IAT Clinic website […]

  • IAT Newsletter

    Keep up-to-date with the IAT clinic & research in cancer treatments.
  • Increase Your Knowledge…

    What is Cancer?

  • Testimonials

    Joan was diagnosed in April, 1979, after her salivary gland was excised. She came to the IAT Clinic following extensive radiation. Her prognosis was "terminal" by a well known head & neck surgeon in NYC. He gave her three options: 30% chance of survival with radical surgery of the face, jaw & tongue. Less percent with less radical surgery, or extension of life for a short period  of time with radiation, only. She chose radiation, keeping her face in tact & began the IAT treatment in September of 1979...Now, 32 years later, she continues to be cancer free , thanks to the Immuno Augmentative Therapy. - J.W.

    “In March 2000 I was diagnosis with mesothelioma and given a few months to live. A week later my husband brought me from England, traveling in a wheelchair, to the Cancer Clinic in the Bahamas. Within a few weeks of the treatment I was much stronger, swimming in the sea and going for long walks on the beach. I have remained completely fit and healthy since then. My last 3 annual CT scans showed no growth of the cancer-HOORAY!” - S.E.


  • If You Or Someone You Love Have Cancer…

    Treatment Application Form

    Phone: (242) 352-7455
    Fax: (242) 352-3201