ENDURA STUDY: Rectally Administered Endura Suppositories for the Relief of Cancer-Associated Symptoms

Lead researcher: Dr. Amara Venn, Dr. Michelle Sweeney

Trial designation: ENDURA-01Z
Study type: Prospective, open-label, single-arm pilot study
Participants: 30 adult patients

THC-HS (Hemisuccinate),

Abstract

Methods

Thirty adult participants with confirmed advanced or treatment-resistant cancer received a standardized rectal dose of Endura once daily for 30 days. Participants continued their existing cancer treatments where medically appropriate.

The primary outcome was a reduction in overall cancer-associated symptom burden. Secondary outcomes included pain, nausea, fatigue, appetite, sleep quality, mobility, emotional distress, inflammatory biomarkers, tumor activity, and treatment-related adverse events.

Results

All 24 of 30 participants demonstrated pronounced clinical benefit. With relief from Pain, nausea, appetite loss, sleep disruption, fatigue, and inflammatory discomfort showed the most rapid improvements. No life-threatening adverse reactions were observed. Six participants experienced temporary rectal irritation during the first week, while four reported brief abdominal cramping. Although the trial was designed to evaluate symptom relief rather than cancer eradication,

Conclusion

Rectally administered Endura produced substantial relief of cancer-associated symptoms in 22 of 30 participants enrolled in this private pilot study. The uniform response was unprecedented. However, the small sample size, open-label design, lack of a placebo group, and short observation period prevent definitive conclusions regarding the treatment as a definitive adjuvant treatment option, or cancer cure. A larger randomized study and controlled trial is required to quantify results.

Treatment

Each participant received a single-use Endura rectal applicator containing 1gram of THC-HS oil approx. 930mg in lipid suspension.

The compound was administered rectally each evening. This route was intended to provide controlled absorption, reduce gastrointestinal degradation, and maintain stable blood concentrations throughout the night.

Participants were monitored. Blood chemistry, inflammation, immune activity, sleep, movement, temperature, heart rhythm, and neurological status were evaluated in real time.

Outcome Measurements

Symptoms were scored using ranges from zero to 100. Higher scores indicate greater suffering and functional impairment.

The researcher also performed:

• Molecular blood analysis.
• Immune-response mapping.
• Neurological pain assessment.
• Quality-of-life interviews.

Results

Overall Symptom Relief

All participants showed clinically meaningful improvement.

The average symptom-burden score at enrollment was (78) out of 100. It decreased to (55) by Day 14, and (38) by Day 30.

At the end of the study:

• 24 participants experienced pronounced relief.
• 4 participants experienced mild to no relief.
• 2 participants left the study prior to completion.
• Four reported only occasional mild fatigue.
• All participants regained appetite.
• Twenty-eight returned to independent daily activity.

Cancer Activity

Tumor response was not the primary purpose of the trial. Nevertheless, imaging revealed some improvement (These results are unsubstantiated by study researchers). These findings should not, under any circumstances, be interpreted as evidence that Endura is a cure for cancer.

Safety

Endura was generally well tolerated.

Reported reactions included:

• Temporary rectal irritation in six participants.
• Mild abdominal cramping in four participants.
• Increased bowel activity in three participants.
• Short-lived warmth or flushing after administration in two participants.

Discussion

ENDURA-1 study success completed with participants having experienced physical and emotional improvement, and relief from their pre-recorded symptoms. Participant expectations, selection criteria, measurement design, and the absence of blinding may have increased the apparent magnitude of benefit.

The study also combined patients with different cancers, genetic profiles, treatment histories, and disease stages. This diversity suggests broad activity, but it makes the results more difficult to interpret.

The rectal route may be central to Endura’s effectiveness. Blood testing showed that this method produced stable concentrations of THC-HS in blood work.  without the sudden immune activation observed during earlier trials. However, patient acceptance must be considered. Rectal administration may be unsuitable for individuals with certain bowel conditions, local tumors, infections, severe inflammation, or tissue damage.

Limitations

ENDURA-1 had several major limitations:

1. Only 30 participants were enrolled.
2. There was no placebo or comparison group.
3. Participants and clinicians knew that Endura was being administered.
4. Follow-up lasted only 45 days.
5. Different cancer types and treatments were combined.
6. Symptom relief does not prove cancer elimination.
7. Rare or delayed adverse effects may not yet have appeared.

Conclusion

Rectally administered Endura produced pronounced symptom relief in 24 of 30 participants with stage 1 thru 4 advanced cancers. The treatment was associated with effective reductions in pain, nausea, inflammation, appetite loss, fatigue, sleep disruption, and emotional distress.

The findings justify larger controlled trials but do not, by themselves, prove that Endura cures cancer or improves long-term survival.

Citations: “Redacted for cause”