4.6 Review

Trial watch: Tumor-targeting monoclonal antibodies for oncological indications

期刊

ONCOIMMUNOLOGY
卷 4, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.4161/2162402X.2014.985940

关键词

bevacizumab; cetuximab; obinutuzumab; ramucirumab; rituximab; trastuzumab

资金

  1. Ligue contre le Cancer (equipe labelisee)
  2. Agence National de la Recherche (ANR)
  3. Association pour la recherche sur le cancer (ARC)
  4. Canceropole Ile-de-France
  5. AXA Chair for Longevity Research
  6. Institut National du Cancer (INCa)
  7. Fondation Bettencourt-Schueller
  8. Fondation de France
  9. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale (FRM)
  10. European Commission (ArtForce)
  11. European Research Council (ERC)
  12. LabEx Immuno-Oncology
  13. SIRIC Stratified Oncology Cell DNA Repair and Tumor Immune Elimination (SOCRATE)
  14. SIRIC Cancer Research and Personalized Medicine (CARPEM)
  15. Paris Alliance of Cancer Research Institutes (PACRI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An expanding panel of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that specifically target malignant cells or intercept trophic factors delivered by the tumor stroma is now available for cancer therapy. These mAbs can exert direct antiproliferative/cytotoxic effects as they inhibit pro-survival signal transduction cascades or activate lethal receptors at the plasma membrane of cancer cells, they can opsonize neoplastic cells to initiate a tumor-targeting immune response, or they can be harnessed to specifically deliver toxins or radionuclides to transformed cells. As an indication of the success of this immunotherapeutic paradigm, international regulatory agencies approve new tumor-targeting mAbs for use in cancer patients every year. Moreover, the list of indications for previously licensed molecules is frequently expanded to other neoplastic disorders as the results of large, randomized clinical trials become available. Here, we discuss recent advances in the preclinical and clinical development of tumor-targeting mAbs for oncological indications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据