The Untold History of Coley’s Toxins Cancer Therapy—and Why It Matters Today
- The Bioregulatory Medicine Institute
- 11 minutes ago
- 12 min read
BRMI Staff
The history of Coley’s Toxins cancer therapy occupies a remarkable place at the crossroads of cancer biology, medical innovation, and bioregulatory philosophy. Long before immunotherapy transformed modern oncology—and decades before the scientific world understood cytokines, heat-shock proteins, or the tumor microenvironment—physicians witnessed something extraordinary: certain cancers regressed following acute bacterial infections accompanied by high fever. These observations, which once puzzled clinicians, hinted at a deeper truth about the body’s innate healing intelligence.
Dr. William Bradley Coley, later known as the “Father of Immunotherapy,” became the first to systematically harness this phenomenon. His work foreshadowed many of today’s most cutting-edge cancer strategies and continues to resonate profoundly within bioregulatory medicine, which views fever, immunity, and terrain as central to the restoration of health.
Before Coley: The Early German Discoveries That Sparked a Medical Revolution
The origins of bacterial fever therapy predate Coley’s work. In the late 19th century, German physicians W. Busch and F. Fehleisen published cases in which erysipelas infections—caused by Streptococcus pyogenes—were followed by dramatic tumor regressions. Their accounts were meticulous, clearly documenting both the infections and the subsequent disappearance of malignant growths.
Although their reports generated curiosity, they never evolved into a formal treatment strategy. But their observations laid the groundwork for a revolutionary idea: fever may have anticancer potential. It was an idea waiting for a pioneer.
A Tragic Beginning: How a Young Surgeon Became a Pioneer
When Dr. William Coley arrived at Memorial Hospital in New York in 1890, he was a newly minted Harvard-trained surgeon eager to make a difference. His first major patient, 17-year-old Bessie Dashiell, had a malignant bone tumor—likely Ewing’s sarcoma. Despite aggressive intervention, she died within ten weeks from widespread metastasis. The brutality and speed of her illness left Coley searching for answers.
Why would a vibrant young patient deteriorate so rapidly? And why did conventional surgery fail?
His grief became motivation. Coley retreated into the hospital archives, determined to uncover patterns or clues that might illuminate why some cancers behaved so aggressively—and why a few rare tumors spontaneously regressed.
A Surgeon on Foot: Coley’s Tireless Search Through the Manhattan Tenements
Among the records, Coley discovered a case that would change his life. A German immigrant with an inoperable neck tumor had been declared hopeless—until he developed erysipelas. Soon after the infection and high fever, the tumor vanished. The man recovered fully.
Coley needed confirmation. He spent weeks walking through Manhattan’s crowded tenements, searching for the patient. When he finally found him—alive, healthy, and cancer-free—Coley knew he had uncovered more than anecdote. He had glimpsed a therapeutic principle embedded within human biology.
The Birth of Coley’s Toxins: Harnessing Biological Fire
Believing fever to be the catalyst, Coley began injecting cancer patients with Streptococcus pyogenes to induce controlled erysipelas. Although effective in generating fever, the live bacteria posed significant risks. Coley soon developed a safer alternative: a mixture of heat-killed Streptococcus pyogenes and Serratia marcescens—a formulation later termed Coley’s Toxins.
This mixture reliably triggered:
fever
chills
inflammatory activation
heightened immune surveillance
And, remarkably, tumor regressions often followed.
One of the most celebrated cases was 16-year-old John Ficken, who had a massive abdominal tumor. With repeated toxin injections, each producing high fever and rigors, the tumor shrank steadily. Within months, it was barely detectable. Ficken went on to live another 26 years.
The First U.S. Cancer Research Endowment: How Philanthropy Fueled Coley’s Work
Coley’s early successes attracted attention—not only from the medical community but from philanthropic families. The Rockefellers provided small initial grants, but in 1902, Coley secured a major research endowment from the Huntington family. This funding became the first major cancer research grant in U.S. history, supporting Coley’s work and legitimizing cancer research itself at a time when the field was still emerging.
Clashing Titans: The Heated Conflict Between Coley and James Ewing
Coley’s work, however, met fierce resistance from one of the era’s most influential figures: Dr. James Ewing, a leading cancer pathologist and later the namesake of Ewing’s sarcoma. Ewing championed radiation therapy and opposed any competing treatments, particularly those he believed lacked scientific grounding.
Archival records reveal a contentious relationship marked by disagreements and philosophical clashes. Ewing eventually used his authority as Medical Director of Memorial Hospital to ban the use of Coley’s Toxins within the institution.
The irony is striking: Coley was the nation’s most experienced surgeon treating the tumor type later named after Ewing, yet Ewing’s influence virtually erased Coley’s therapy from mainstream practice.
A Rare Admission: JAMA Publicly Recognizes the Promise of Coley’s Toxins
Despite institutional barriers, Coley’s work earned respect from segments of the medical community. In 1934, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) acknowledged that Coley’s Toxins appeared capable of:
preventing or slowing tumor recurrence
inducing remission in advanced inoperable cancers
meriting further scientific study
Such an admission was unusual—and courageous—during an era dominated by radiation therapy.
International Honors: Coley’s Recognition by the Royal College of Surgeons
A year later, in 1935, Coley was inducted as an Honorary Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, becoming only the fifth American ever to receive this honor.
Overseas, Coley’s contributions were recognized as groundbreaking, even as U.S. institutions marginalized his work.
1962: The Regulatory Shift That Silenced Coley’s Therapy in the U.S.
Coley’s Toxins were widely used until the mid-20th century. However, by the 1950s, new cancer treatments—especially radiation and chemotherapy—took center stage. The cultural shift toward antibiotic use and fever suppression further eroded interest in biological therapies.
In 1962, the FDA implemented new regulations requiring that all drugs—even those used for decades—undergo modern efficacy testing. Coley’s Toxins, lacking commercial backing and difficult to standardize, were reclassified as an unapproved “new drug.” This decision effectively made the therapy illegal in the United States. Production ceased, and a half-century of clinical practice disappeared.
The Daughter Who Wouldn’t Let the Truth Die: Helen Coley Nauts’s Monumental Contributions
Coley’s daughter, Helen Coley Nauts, refused to let her father’s legacy be forgotten. With no formal medical training, she dedicated her life to analyzing case histories, publishing 18 monographs, and identifying over 500 documented cases of successful long-term outcomes.
Her scholarship led to the establishment of the Cancer Research Institute (CRI) in 1953—now a global leader in cancer immunology research.
Losing the Wisdom of Fever: How Modern Medicine Silenced a Natural Healing Response
During the mid-20th century, fever became viewed not as a healing mechanism but as a symptom to be suppressed. Antibiotic overuse and routine reliance on antipyretics weakened an appreciation for the body’s natural regulatory responses.
From a bioregulatory perspective, this shift was detrimental. Fever:
increases metabolic and immune activity
activates heat-shock proteins
enhances antigen presentation
disrupts malignant cellular environments
Coley recognized these mechanisms intuitively long before immunology explained them.
Bioregulatory Medicine: Why Coley’s Toxins for Cancer Therapy Still Resonate Today
Bioregulatory medicine understands the body as an interconnected ecosystem capable of profound self-repair. Coley’s work aligns with bioregulatory principles that emphasize:
leveraging natural immune responses
honoring fever as a purposeful process
reawakening the body’s self-regulation
restoring biological terrain
treating cancer as a systemic imbalance, not an isolated mass
Coley’s Toxins acted not just on tumors, but on the entire organism.
Breakthrough Research: Engineered Salmonella and the 2017 Zheng Study
In 2017, researchers expanded upon early work in bacteria-based cancer therapy by engineering a weakened strain of Salmonella typhimurium to secrete flagellin B protein, a potent immune-stimulating molecule normally produced by Vibrio vulnificus. This modification dramatically enhanced the bacteria’s ability to activate the innate immune system directly within the tumor microenvironment.
In several mouse models, the engineered Salmonella induced robust antitumor responses, shrinking tumors without causing systemic toxicity. These findings not only demonstrated impressive tumor-targeting precision, but also reaffirmed Coley’s original intuition that bacteria could be safely re-designed to awaken the immune system in powerful, therapeutic ways.
Clostridium novyi-NT: A Non-Toxic Anaerobe that Destroys Tumors from the Inside Out
Another significant advance came in 2017 when a Johns Hopkins research team investigated Clostridium novyi, a relative of the microbe responsible for botulism. To make the organism safe for therapeutic use, scientists removed its toxin-producing genes, creating a non-toxic strain known as C. novyi-NT. Because this species thrives only in low-oxygen environments, it selectively colonizes and destroys the hypoxic cores of solid tumors while sparing healthy tissues.
The team first injected C. novyi-NT spores directly into brain tumors in rats, observing a strong antitumor response and extended survival. They then advanced their research to evaluate 16 dogs with naturally occurring cancers. The results were striking: six dogs experienced significant tumor reduction, and three achieved complete remission. The researchers concluded that C. novyi-NT can precisely eradicate neoplastic tissue and that further clinical trials are warranted.
Why Bacterial Cancer Therapy Works: Insights from Zhou and Saha
Even with these exciting advances, bacterial cancer therapy presents inherent challenges. Therapeutically effective doses of bacteria can sometimes be toxic, while lowering the dose can diminish efficacy. Systemic infection also poses a risk. However, modern molecular engineering provides solutions that make these therapies far safer and more targeted.
As Shibin Zhou, M.D., Ph.D., associate professor of oncology at Johns Hopkins Medicine, explained:"One advantage of using bacteria to treat cancer is that you can modify these bacteria relatively easily, to equip them with other therapeutic agents, or make them less toxic as we have done here."
Senior study author Saurabh Saha added an especially meaningful comparison to Coley’s original work:"Coley injected his first patient a century ago, and what he saw was almost identical to what we saw in our first patient. Within the same time frame observed by Coley, our patient developed a fever, the tumor started swelling, and then it started to shrink."
He further explained why this occurs:"Oxygen is scarce inside tumors, and these bacteria love areas of low oxygen. They grow and divide and kill the cancer cells. Once they're infecting the tumor, they can induce a strong immune response against tumor cells themselves."
Reflecting on the historical continuity, Saha concluded:"It shows that what was done 120 years ago with Coley’s Toxins deserves to be revisited again today, using bacteria as an adjuvant to stimulate the immune system to fight cancer. I think it’s a very important modality, and one that we should continue pressing forward on to learn more about."
Beyond Coley: The Expanding Frontier of Bacterial-Based Cancer Therapies
The momentum behind microbial oncology has only accelerated. Today, a growing array of natural and genetically modified non-pathogenic bacterial species are being explored for their anticancer potential. These organisms are used to directly kill cancer cells, release tumor-destroying enzymes, deliver therapeutic molecules, enhance the effects of radiation or chemotherapy, and activate powerful innate and adaptive immune responses. Some are even designed to convert harmless pro-drugs into active chemotherapeutic agents directly inside the tumor—a strategy called bacterial gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy.
Species under study include Bifidobacterium, Clostridium perfringens, Mycobacterium bovis (via BCG components), engineered Salmonella, and several others. The wide body of research represented in references 11 through 21 highlights an expanding frontier in which bacteria are used as precision-guided biological tools. This growing field reflects a core truth that Coley recognized more than a century ago: biology itself is one of the most powerful therapeutic forces we possess.
Why Coley’s Toxins Matter Now More Than Ever
Coley’s therapy challenges us to reconsider our assumptions about healing. Fever, inflammation, and microbial challenge are not antagonists—they are ancient therapeutic strategies. Modern medicine, in its quest for control, often suppresses these mechanisms rather than understanding them.
From a bioregulatory standpoint, Coley’s work represents an early, elegant expression of immunologic intelligence—a reminder that the body is not a battlefield but a dynamic terrain capable of extraordinary self-restoration.
Coley was practicing systems-level immunotherapy before the concept existed. Today, as bacterial vectors, hyperthermia, and bioregulatory oncology gain momentum, his work feels more timely than ever.
Q & A: Understanding Coley’s Toxins in Modern Context
Q: What were Coley’s Toxins? A heated mixture of Streptococcus pyogenes and Serratia marcescens designed to safely provoke fever and trigger deep immune activation.
Q: Why was fever central to the therapy? Fever heightens immune vigilance, increases circulation, triggers heat-shock proteins, and creates metabolic stress unfavorable to cancer cells.
Q: Why did mainstream medicine reject it? Institutional politics, the rise of radiation/chemotherapy, and the FDA’s 1962 regulatory changes marginalized the therapy despite decades of documented success.
Q: How does this relate to bioregulatory medicine? Bioregulatory medicine sees fever and immune activation as essential biological processes—not symptoms to suppress—making Coley’s approach deeply aligned with bioregulatory philosophy.
Q: Is bacterial fever therapy still used today? Yes. It remains in use in Germany, Switzerland, Japan, China, Mexico, and other regions, often combined with hyperthermia and integrative cancer approaches.
References
1. Coley WB. The treatment of malignant tumors by repeated inoculations of erysipelas: with a report of ten original cases. Am J Med Sci. 1893 May;105:487–511.
2. Coley WB. The treatment of malignant inoperable tumors with the mixed toxins of erysipelas and bacillus prodigiosus. Brussels: M Weissenbruch; 1914.
3. Coley BL. Neoplasms of Bone. New York: Medical Book Department of Harper & Brothers; 1949. pp. 565–570.
4. Coley-Nauts H, McLaren JR. Coley Toxins – the first century. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1990;267:483.
5. Hall SS. A Commotion in the Blood. New York: Henry Holt and Company, Inc; 1997.
6. Hoption-Cann SA, van Netten JP, et al. Dr William Coley and tumour regression: a place in history or in the future. Postgrad Med J. 2003;79(938):672–680. http://pmj.bmj.com/content/79/938/672.short
7. Frahm M, Felgner S, Kocijancic D, Rohde M, Hensel M, Curtiss R, III, Erhardt M, Weiss S. 2015. Efficiency of conditionally attenuated Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in bacterium-mediated tumor therapy. mBio 6(2):e00254-15. doi:10.1128/mBio.00254-15.
8. Zheng, Jin Hai et al. “Two-Step Enhanced Cancer Immunotherapy With Engineered Salmonella Typhimurium Secreting Heterologous Flagellin”. Science Translational Medicine 9.376 (2017): eaak9537. Web. 9 Feb. 2017. http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/9/376/eaak9537.short
9. Roberts, N. J. et al. “Intratumoral Injection Of Clostridium Novyi-NT Spores Induces Antitumor Responses”. Science Translational Medicine 6.249 (2014): 249ra111-249ra111. Web. 9 Feb. 2017. http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/6/249/249ra111.short
10. S Patyar, R Joshi, DS Prasad Byrav, A Prakash,B Medh, BK Das Bacteria in cancer therapy: a novel experimental strategy. Journal of Biomedical Science 2010 17:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1423-0127-17-21. https://jbiomedsci.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/1423-0127-17-21?site=http:// jbiomedsci.biomedcentral.com
11. King I, Itterson M, Bermudes D: Tumor-targeted Salmonella typhimurium overexpressing cytosine deaminase: a novel, tumor-selective therapy. Methods Mol Biol. 2009, 542: 649-659. https://link.springer.com/protocol/10.1007/978-1-59745-561-9_33
12. Hagihara N, Walbridge S, Olson AW, Oldfield EH, Youle RJ: Vascular protection by chloroquine during brain tumor therapy with Tf-CRM 107. Cancer Res. 2000, 60: 230-234. http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/60/2/230.short
13. Puri RK: Development of a recombinant interleukin-4-Pseudomonas exotoxin for therapy of glioblastoma. Toxicol Pathol. 1999, 27 (1): 53-57. 10.1177/019262339902700111. http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/10367674
14. Fan D, Yano S, Shinohara H, Solorzano C: Targeted therapy against human lung cancer in nude mice by high affinity recombinant antimesothelin single chain Fv immunotoxin. Mol Cancer Ther. 2002, 1: 595-600. http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/1/8/595.short
15. Fujimori M, Amano J, Taniguchi S: The genus Bifidobacterium for cancer gene therapy. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel. 2003, 5: 200-203. http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/11926126
16. Tjuvajev J, Blasberg R, Luo X, Zheng LM, King I, Bermudes D: Salmonella-based tumor-targeted cancer therapy: Tumor amplified protein expression therapy (TAPET) for diagnostic imaging. J Control Release. 2001, 74: 313-315. 10.1016/S0168-3659(01)00340-6. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168365901003406
17. Kokai Kun JF, Benton K, Wieckowski EU, Mcclane BA: Identification of a Clostridium perfringensenterotoxin region required for large complex formation and cytotoxicity by random mutagenesis. Infect Immun. 1999, 67: 5634-5641. http://iai.asm.org/content/67/11/5634.short
18. Michl P, Buchholz M, Rolke M: Claudin-4: a new target for pancreatic cancer treatment using Clostridium perfringens enterotoxin. Gasrtoenterology. 2001, 121: 678-684. 10.1053/gast. 2001.27124. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016508501543498
19. Kominsky SL, Vali M, Korz D: Clostridium perfringens enterotoxin elicits rapid and specific cytolysis of breast carcinoma cells mediated through tight junction proteins claudin 3 and 4. Am J Pathol. 2004, 164: 1627-1633. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016508501543498
20. Ansiaux R, Gallez B: Use of botulinum toxins in cancer therapy. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2007, 16 (2): 209-218. 10.1517/13543784.16.2.209.
21. Puri RK: Development of a recombinant interleukin-4-Pseudomonas exotoxin for therapy of glioblastoma. Toxicol Pathol. 1999, 27 (1): 53-57. 10.1177/019262339902700111. http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/10367674
22. Xu J, Liu XS, Zhou SF, Wei MQ: Combination of immunotherapy with anaerobic bacteria for immunogene therapy of solid tumours. Gene Ther Mol Biol. 2009, 13: 36-52. https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/30312/62336_1.pdf?sequence=1
23. Vogadri F, Martinoli C, Petrovska L, Chiodoni C, Transidico P, Bronte V, Longhi R, Colombo MP, Dougan G, Rescigno M: Cancer Immunotherapy Based on Killing of Salmonella-Infected Tumor Cells. Cancer Res. 2005, 65 (9): 3920-3927. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-3002. http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/9/3920.short
24. Al-Ramadi BK, Fernandez-Cabezudo MJ, El-Hasasna H, Al-Salam S, Attoub S, Xu D, Chouaib S: Attenuated Bacteria as Effectors in Cancer Immunotherapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008, 1138 (1): 351-357. 10.1196/annals.1414.036.
10.1196/annals.1414.036. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1196/annals.1414.036/full
25. Loeffler M, Le'Negrate G, Krajewska M, Reed JC: Attenuated Salmonella engineered to produce human cytokine LIGHT inhibit tumor growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2007, 104 (31): 12879-12883. 10.1073/ pnas.0701959104. http://www.pnas.org/content/104/31/12879.short
26. Hayashi A, Nishida Y, Yoshii S, Kim SY, Uda H, Hamasaki T: Immunotherapy of ovarian cancer with cell wall skeleton of Mycobacterium bovis Bacillus Calmette-Guérin: effect of lymphadenectomy. Cancer Sci. 2009, 100 (10): 1991-1995. 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01271.x. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01271.x/full
27. Yuk JM, Shin DM, Song KS, Lim K, Kim KH, Lee SH, Kim JM, Lee JS, Paik TH, Kim JS, Jo EK: Bacillus calmette-guerin cell wall cytoskeleton enhances colon cancer radiosensitivity through autophagy. Autophagy. 2010, 6 (1): 46-60.
YouTube Videos
The History of Coley's Toxins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StDpsx58Za8
Original Coley’s Toxins Opening | Ralph Moss | Eric Merola https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUgrDEzuiiU Tumor Killing Bacteria https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5TNRW1_VZI
Cancer & Infectious Diseases: Bacterial Proteins/Peptides for Therapy and Prevention https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVs3mt71KkY
Korean scientists modify food poisoning bacteria to fight cancer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fej3RsxXquE
Genetically Modified Salmonella Destroys Brain Cancer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z94yUn33Ylo
Bioregulatory medicine is a total body (and mind) approach to health and healing that aims to help facilitate and restore natural human biological processes. It is a proven, safe, gentle, highly effective, drugless, and side-effect-free medical model designed to naturally support the body to regulate, adapt, regenerate, and self-heal. BRMI is a non-commercial 501(c)(3) foundation and will expand and flourish with your support. Our goal is to make bioregulatory medicine a household term.
This article is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for the direct care of a qualified health practitioner who oversees and provides unique and individualized care. The information provided here is to broaden our different perspectives and should not be construed as medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.
