Literature DB >> 11129167

The pursuit of optimal outcomes in cancer therapy in a new age of rationally designed target-based anticancer agents.

E K Rowinsky1.   

Abstract

There have been extraordinary advances in anticancer therapy over the last few decades, particularly for patients with relatively uncommon malignancies, largely because of the advent of nonspecific cytotoxic chemotherapeutics. Although these agents have also brought improved outcomes for patients with many of the more common solid cancers, it is clear that the point of 'diminishing return' has been reached. The recent development of a plethora of rationally designed target-based anticancer agents has opened up new opportunities and extraordinary therapeutic challenges. Since these agents appear primarily to target malignant cells, they can be expected to be less toxic at clinically effective doses than the cytotoxic agents. Among the various types of rationally designed target-based agents are those that target strategic facets of cell growth signal transduction, angiogenesis, metastasis and cell cycle regulation. While the primary therapeutic benefit of these agents is expected to be decreased tumour growth, evidence suggests that objective tumour responses may also be achieved. However, because of their potentially cytostatic properties, the clinical efficacy of such biologically based agents may not be readily demonstrable with traditional phase I and II study methodologies. Additionally, their dose-toxicity relationships are likely to be less steep than those of the nonspecific cytotoxic agents, thereby rendering such concepts as the maximum tolerated dose less meaningful than alternatives such as the optimal biological dose or the biologically effective dose. Those end-points generally considered, both from a regulatory and clinical viewpoint, to be of secondary importance in trials of cytotoxic agents, such as time to disease progression, disease-related symptoms and quality of life, may evolve into primary end-points. Present findings from preclinical studies suggest that the development, evaluation and general clinical use of rationally designed target-based anticancer agents will require a radical departure from the traditional paradigms if the full potential of these new therapies is to be exploited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11129167     DOI: 10.2165/00003495-200060001-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drugs        ISSN: 0012-6667            Impact factor:   9.546


  51 in total

Review 1.  Clinical evaluation of biologically targeted drugs: obstacles and opportunities.

Authors:  A L Boral; S Dessain; B A Chabner
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 3.333

2.  Inhibition of the mitogen activated protein (MAP) kinase cascade potentiates cell killing by low dose ionizing radiation in A431 human squamous carcinoma cells.

Authors:  S Carter; K L Auer; D B Reardon; M Birrer; P B Fisher; K Valerie; R Schmidt-Ullrich; R Mikkelsen; P Dent
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  1998-05-28       Impact factor: 9.867

Review 3.  Epidermal growth factor receptor family and chemosensitization.

Authors:  J Mendelsohn; Z Fan
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1997-03-05       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  The Norton-Simon hypothesis revisited.

Authors:  L Norton; R Simon
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1986-01

5.  Laboratory models: some historical perspective.

Authors:  H E Skipper
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1986-01

6.  A Gompertzian model of human breast cancer growth.

Authors:  L Norton
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1988-12-15       Impact factor: 12.701

7.  Rationale for the use of alternating non-cross-resistant chemotherapy.

Authors:  J H Goldie; A J Coldman; G A Gudauskas
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1982-03

8.  Quality-adjusted survival after treatment for acute myeloid leukemia in childhood: A Q-TWiST analysis of the Pediatric Oncology Group Study 8821.

Authors:  S K Parsons; S Gelber; B F Cole; Y Ravindranath; A Ogden; A M Yeager; M Chang; J Shuster; H J Weinstein; R D Gelber
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Testicular cancer as a model for a curable neoplasm: The Richard and Hinda Rosenthal Foundation Award Lecture.

Authors:  L H Einhorn
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 12.701

10.  Interpatient heterogeneity in expression of CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 in small bowel. Lack of prediction by the erythromycin breath test.

Authors:  K S Lown; J C Kolars; K E Thummel; J L Barnett; K L Kunze; S A Wrighton; P B Watkins
Journal:  Drug Metab Dispos       Date:  1994 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.922

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Neurooncology clinical trial design for targeted therapies: lessons learned from the North American Brain Tumor Consortium.

Authors:  Susan M Chang; Kathleen R Lamborn; John G Kuhn; W K Alfred Yung; Mark R Gilbert; Patrick Y Wen; Howard A Fine; Minesh P Mehta; Lisa M DeAngelis; Frank S Lieberman; Timothy F Cloughesy; H Ian Robins; Lauren E Abrey; Michael D Prados
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 12.300

2.  Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of combined valproic acid/doxorubicin treatment in dogs with spontaneous cancer.

Authors:  Luke A Wittenburg; Daniel L Gustafson; Douglas H Thamm
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-08-12       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Tissue Pharmacokinetic Properties and Bystander Potential of Hypoxia-Activated Prodrug CP-506 by Agent-Based Modelling.

Authors:  Victoria Jackson-Patel; Emily Liu; Matthew R Bull; Amir Ashoorzadeh; Gib Bogle; Anna Wolfram; Kevin O Hicks; Jeff B Smaill; Adam V Patterson
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 5.810

Review 4.  Imaging of EGFR and EGFR tyrosine kinase overexpression in tumors by nuclear medicine modalities.

Authors:  Eyal Mishani; Galith Abourbeh; Martin Eiblmaier; Carolyn J Anderson
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.116

Review 5.  Tolerability of gefitinib in patients receiving treatment in everyday clinical practice.

Authors:  N van Zandwijk
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Anticancer potential of some imidazole and fused imidazole derivatives: exploring the mechanism via epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition.

Authors:  Sourav Kalra; Gaurav Joshi; Manvendra Kumar; Sahil Arora; Harsimrat Kaur; Sandeep Singh; Anjana Munshi; Raj Kumar
Journal:  RSC Med Chem       Date:  2020-07-08

7.  Evaluation of safety and efficacy of gefitinib ('iressa', zd1839) as monotherapy in a series of Chinese patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: experience from a compassionate-use programme.

Authors:  Xin-Lin Mu; Long-Yun Li; Xiao-Tong Zhang; Shu-Lan Wang; Meng-Zhao Wang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2004-08-19       Impact factor: 4.430

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.