Autopiotherapy, etc. -- coined, or standard?

[nomadreid]

TL;DR Summary

In an article cited, a number of terms are used that I do not find via a Google search; the article was written in English by Russians, and perhaps these terms are just incorrectly translated from Russian, or maybe they are just coined, or pseudoscience, or some combination. Are these standard terms in English?

In the article https://medicia.ru/en/immunoterapiya-pri-lechenii-raka-immunoterapiya-chto-nuzhno/, terms such as "autopiotherapy" are used which Google does not give elsewhere. Many legitimate standard terms, of course, are not known to Google. But I did not find, for example, "autopiotherapy" for the re-introduction of a patient's pus, anywhere except on this page. Given that this is an English variation of a Russian page, could someone tell me whether, on the example of "autopiotherapy", this is (a) a mistranslation (because a simple transliteration from the Russian), for which there is a proper term in English (pus transplant?), (b) a coined word that is valid but not yet widespread because the field is new or very restricted, or (c) pseudoscientific technobabble?
If possible, the same question for any of the other unfamiliar terms on that page. Thanks.

 

[Andy Resnick]

terms such as "autopiotherapy"

It's mis-spelled; the correct spelling is 'autopyotherapy'. I found a reference from 1923...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(01)22864-5/fulltext

 

[nomadreid]

Ah, a fourth possibility that I hadn't thought of! Thanks very much, Andy Resnick! Wow, 1923... with the correct spelling, there are still not many references to it around, but at least I know that it is a legitimate word. (Whether the associated practice is any good is another question, of course, but as Michael Ende said at the end of his chapters in "The Never-Ending Story", "...but that is another story and shall be told another time.")