
==== Front
Signal Transduct Target Ther
Signal Transduct Target Ther
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy
2095-9907
2059-3635
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39013849
1856
10.1038/s41392-024-01856-7
Review Article
Exploring treatment options in cancer: tumor treatment strategies
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0623-9093
Liu Beilei 123
Zhou Hongyu 2
Tan Licheng 2
Siu Kin To Hugo 2
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4485-6017
Guan Xin-Yuan xyguan@hku.hk

12345
1 https://ror.org/047w7d678 grid.440671.0 0000 0004 5373 5131 Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, China
2 https://ror.org/02zhqgq86 grid.194645.b 0000 0001 2174 2757 Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
3 https://ror.org/02zhqgq86 grid.194645.b 0000 0001 2174 2757 State Key Laboratory for Liver Research, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
4 grid.450259.f 0000 0004 1804 2516 Advanced Energy Science and Technology Guangdong Laboratory, Huizhou, China
5 https://ror.org/02xe5ns62 grid.258164.c 0000 0004 1790 3548 MOE Key Laboratory of Tumor Molecular Biology, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
17 7 2024
17 7 2024
2024
9 17523 1 2024
24 4 2024
29 4 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Traditional therapeutic approaches such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy have burdened cancer patients with onerous physical and psychological challenges. Encouragingly, the landscape of tumor treatment has undergone a comprehensive and remarkable transformation. Emerging as fervently pursued modalities are small molecule targeted agents, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), cell-based therapies, and gene therapy. These cutting-edge treatment modalities not only afford personalized and precise tumor targeting, but also provide patients with enhanced therapeutic comfort and the potential to impede disease progression. Nonetheless, it is acknowledged that these therapeutic strategies still harbour untapped potential for further advancement. Gaining a comprehensive understanding of the merits and limitations of these treatment modalities holds the promise of offering novel perspectives for clinical practice and foundational research endeavours. In this review, we discussed the different treatment modalities, including small molecule targeted drugs, peptide drugs, antibody drugs, cell therapy, and gene therapy. It will provide a detailed explanation of each method, addressing their status of development, clinical challenges, and potential solutions. The aim is to assist clinicians and researchers in gaining a deeper understanding of these diverse treatment options, enabling them to carry out effective treatment and advance their research more efficiently.

Subject terms

Drug development
Drug development
issue-copyright-statement© West China Hospital, Sichuan University 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Cancer has become a crucial public health challenge. Daily, over 52,900 individuals are diagnosed with cancer, and more than 27,000 people lose their lives to this disease.1 It is estimated that by 2040, there will be 28 million new cases and 16.2 million deaths worldwide.2 The best strategy for continuously reducing global cancer mortality is the widespread implementation of precise and individualized treatment and increased investment in advancing cancer drug research. The cancer treatment timeline documents the evolution of therapies over the past 170 years, highlighting the transformative treatments that have emerged to enhance clinical outcomes and improve patients’ quality of life. Starting from the early use of general anesthesia in surgical resections in the mid-1800s, to Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen’s invention of X-rays at the end of the 19th century,3 which initiated the era of combining radiation with surgery for cancer treatment, to the breakthroughs in chemotherapy during World War II (WWII),4 and the recent advancements in immunotherapy and gene therapy, each milestone has played a pivotal role in the ongoing fight against cancer.

In 1990, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of BCG for the intravesical instillation treatment of superficial bladder cancer.5 In 1997, the FDA approved Rituximab, the first targeted therapy for B-cell lymphomas,6 marking the beginning of a new era of targeted treatments. Two years later, Trastuzumab was introduced, becoming the first targeted therapy for breast cancer by targeting the HER2 protein,7 significantly impacting treatment strategies. The year 2001 saw another milestone with the FDA approval of Imatinib,8 the first kinase inhibitor, which revolutionized the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia and other rare gastrointestinal tumors. In 2003, Gefitinib became the first targeted therapy approved for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC),9 followed by Erlotinib in 2004,10 expanding the options for NSCLC patients. Also in 2004, Bevacizumab11 was approved as the first “anti-angiogenic” drug, demonstrating a new approach to cancer therapy by targeting the blood supply to tumors. That same year, Rigvir12 was approved in Latvia for melanoma treatment. Subsequent years saw a steady stream of targeted drugs, with Sorafenib13 in 2005 for renal cell carcinoma. In 2011, Carl June’s successful application of CAR-T cell therapy for leukemia treatment marked a significant step forward in immunotherapy.14 The 2014 FDA approval of Pembrolizumab and Nivolumab for the treatment of melanoma, along with the accelerated approval of Trametinib and Dabrafenib for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma, marked a new beginning in cancer immunotherapy.15–17 Preventive measures also advanced, with the approval of the nine-valent Gardasil 9 vaccine in December 2014,18 offering broader protection against HPV strains associated with cervical cancer. The approval of T-VEC in 2015 and Delytact in 2021 for melanoma and malignant glioma, respectively, highlighted the resurgence of oncolytic viruses as a cancer treatment modality.19,20 The 2020 s have seen further advancements with the FDA approval of Sotorasib, the first small molecule inhibitor targeting specific KRAS gene mutations.21 In 2021, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines highlighted the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab as the preferred first-line treatment option for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).22 This recommendation underscores the importance of immunotherapy and anti-angiogenic therapy in the frontline management of this aggressive form of cancer, reflecting the evolving landscape of cancer care and the continuous efforts to improve patient outcomes (Fig. 1). As of December 2021, there were 107 operational proton and heavy ion therapy centers worldwide, including 12 carbon ion therapy centers.23Fig. 1 The milestone of cancer therapy development. This timeline illustrates the significant advancements in cancer therapy over the past 170 year. Beginning with the adoption of general anesthesia for surgical procedures in the mid-1800s and the groundbreaking invention of X-rays by Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen in the late 19th century, which paved the way for radiation therapy combined with surgery, the field of oncology has witnessed a series of transformative treatments.Key developments include the introduction of chemotherapy during World War II, the advent of immunotherapy, and the more recent progress in gene therapy. The 1990s marked a turning point with the FDA approval of BCG for bladder cancer treatment and Rituximab for B-cell lymphomas, initiating the era of targeted therapies. Trastuzumab and Imatinib further revolutionized the treatment of breast cancer and chronic myeloid leukemia, respectively. The new millennium brought targeted therapies for non-small cell lung cancer with drugs like Gefitinib and Erlotinib, and the first anti-angiogenic drug, Bevacizumab, which targeted tumor blood supply. Rigvir’s approval in Latvia for melanoma treatment signified the global reach of cancer advancements. The successful application of CAR-T cell therapy by Carl June in 2011 and the FDA approval of Pembrolizumab and Nivolumab in 2014 for melanoma treatment highlighted the potential of immunotherapy. Preventive measures also evolved, as evidenced by the approval of the nine-valent Gardasil 9 vaccine, offering broader protection against HPV strains linked to cervical cancer. The resurgence of oncolytic viruses was evident with the approval of T-VEC and Delytact for melanoma and malignant glioma, respectively. The 2020 s have introduced targeted therapies for KRAS gene mutations with Sotorasib and the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab as a preferred first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, as endorsed by the NCCN guidelines in 2021. This figure encapsulates the continuous innovation and dedication to enhancing cancer care, reflecting the dynamic nature of the fight against cancer and the pursuit of improved patient outcomes. This figure was created with Biorender.com

Now, the field of oncology is experiencing a proliferation of tumor drugs, leading to a flourishing phase in the oncology drug market. According to Frost & Sullivan, the global anti-tumor drugs market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 4.20% from 2022 to 2029, with an estimated market size of USD 94,340 million in 2022 and projected to reach USD 125,825.86 million by 2029.24 With the thriving development of tumor basic research in cell targets, signaling pathways, immune escape, etc., there are several trends in the development of tumor drugs. Firstly, the functions of tumor drugs are becoming increasingly specialized. Tumor drugs are no longer limited to chemotherapy-based tumor killing, such as Alkylating agents (e.g., Mechlorethamine, Cyclophosphamide),25 but also include differentiation in angiogenesis inhibition (e.g., EGFR inhibitors like Lapatinib and Gefitinib and VEGFR inhibitors e.g., Sunitinib, Sorafenib),25 tumor metabolism regulation (e.g., IDO1 inhibitors, IDH1 and IDH2 inhibitors),26 and restoration of self-immunity (e.g., anti-CD20 antibodies (rituximab and obinutuzumab).27 The combination of various drugs makes tumor therapy more precise and effective. Secondly, there is a gradual shift in tumor drugs from small molecules to large molecules. The evolution includes small molecule inhibitors (e.g., Imatinib, Lapatinib, and Neratinib), peptides (including Sandostatin, Lutathera, Kyprolis, and Zoladex), antibody drugs (e.g., trastuzumab deruxtecan [Enhertu] and Trastuzumab emtansine [T-DM1]), and cell therapies (comprising various chimeric antigen receptor [CAR]-T cells, NK cells, macrophages, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte [TIL] therapy). The design and preparation of tumor drugs have become more complex, and the preparation methods have advanced. Thirdly, tumor drugs are shifting from inhibiting tumor cell functions (e.g., tumor neoantigen suppression, surface receptor inhibition) to regulating self-immune activation, such as with Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs). Fourthly, the treatment landscape has expanded from monotherapy to combination therapies, encompassing a variety of immunomodulators, anti-angiogenic drugs, chemotherapies, and targeted therapies. Lastly, a diverse array of treatments, including previously ‘undruggable’ targets, peptide drugs, monoclonal antibodies, ADCs, cell therapies, gene therapy, neoantigen and cancer vaccines, oncolytic viruses, immunologic adjuvants, innate immunity activators, proton therapy, carbon ion therapy, photothermal and photodynamic therapy, and anti-angiogenesis therapy, is reshaping the old cancer drug market and ushering in a more diversified era of tumor treatment.

In this review, we will introduce different types of anti-tumor drugs based on the principles of drug classification. We will analyze these different anti-tumor drug strategies from the perspective of their mechanisms of action, development history, basic design principles, advantages, disadvantages, and current existing bottlenecks. We aim to contribute to the translation of basic scientific research into clinical drug selection.

Small molecule inhibitors

Small molecule inhibitors can interfere with or block the activity of specific molecules by interacting with them. These molecules are typically proteins, which play important roles in cell signaling, gene expression, and metabolism. By binding to target molecules, small molecule inhibitors can disrupt their normal function, thereby interfering with disease progression or treating certain conditions.

Artificial intelligence and cryo-EM for protein structure analysis

Computational modeling has become an important tool in small molecule drug discovery, enabling faster and more successful identification of drug candidates. Computational methods are applied at three main stages of small molecule drug discovery, including the initial identification of active substances (i.e. lead compound discovery) through large-scale exploration of chemical space and the use of molecular docking, hit-to-lead compound selection using machine learning and physics-based methods to refine lead compounds, and multi-parameter optimization of lead compounds using physics-based, structure-based, QSAR, and machine learning methods to achieve the desired target product features.28 These methods allow for a balance of potency, selectivity, and ADMET properties to support the efficacy relationship required for in vivo pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics under tolerable exposure. By integrating computational modeling with experimental validation, more efficient and successful drug discovery can be achieved.

In the step of initial identification of active substances, structure biology is crucial for small molecular inhibitor discovery. With the availability of atomic resolution data on the active or regulatory sites of proteins, the design of drug structures becomes feasible. At present, three main techniques are used in structural biology research: X-ray crystallography, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and cryo-EM.29 X-ray crystallography reveals atomic details for small, crystalline complexes up to 150 kD but is limited for larger or membrane proteins.30 NMR can analyze smaller proteins (up to 50 kD) in solution without crystals, needing isotope labeling.31 Cryo-EM determines structures of large complexes and membrane proteins without crystallization, capturing various conformations for easier structural analysis, which is highly convenient for elucidating structures.

Due to structural analysis using cryo-EM of biologically important macromolecules becomes increasingly complex, Artificial intelligence (AI) and cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) have emerged as powerful tools to solve this problem. The current workflow for cryo-EM combined with AI includes particle identification, three-dimensional reconstruction, resolution enhancement, automated high-throughput analysis, pattern recognition, drug design assistance, and data interpretation as well as hypothesis generation. Since cryo-EM AI processes biological proteins while maintaining their bioactivity, a lower electron dose is used to reduce radiation damage.32–34 Noisy images with low contrast were generated, making it difficult to discern details from the raw micrographs. With machine learning models, such as DeepPicker,35 DeepEM,36 and convolutional neural networks (CNNs), AI are trained to recognize and classify different types of particles. Through deep learning of two-dimensional image data, feature extraction, and classification of key information, AI can construct initial models for the targeted proteins. Further iterative optimization, parameter adjustments—such as particle orientation, position, and scaling—and resolution enhancement lead to the final acquisition of high-resolution 3D protein models suitable for research and drug development. Based on the established models, AI can perform high-throughput data analysis, decipher protein conformations, calculate molecular binding affinities, predict, and explore interactions between small molecules and proteins, and assist in discovering and optimizing potential drug candidates. Finally, by predicting the function of drugs and the generated protein structures, the inhibitory efficacy of small molecule drugs on proteins is evaluated. The application of AI in cryo-EM has significantly increased the speed and quality of data analysis, accelerating the entire process from raw data to final structural determination, and bringing revolutionary changes to the fields of structural biology and drug discovery.

The advantage and disadvantage of small molecular inhibitors

As of 2023, the US FDA has approved 72 small molecule therapeutic protein kinase inhibitors for cancer.37 There are 57 anti-solid tumor drugs.37 For example, Imatinib (Glivec), as the first small molecular inhibitor specifically designed to address the mechanisms of tumor formation, has heralded a new epoch in cancer therapy with its successful development and application. Ithas been approved for the treatment of eight different diseases, including certain types of leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST).38 Imatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets specific abnormal protein kinases involved in the growth and proliferation of cancer cells. Its approval for multiple indications highlights its efficacy and versatility in treating various types of solid tumors.38

Compared to other drugs, small molecule drugs have simpler and less expensive synthesis and preparation processes. They are often administered orally, which is more convenient for patients and has fewer side effects. However, small molecule drugs target proteins, typically enzymes or receptors, which may result in limited inhibitory effects on membrane proteins and secretory proteins. Additionally, due to the influence of metabolism, it is challenging to adjust the dosage of small molecule inhibitors to achieve optimal efficacy. In particular, the challenge of undruggable proteins which has hampered the design of drugs that target many oncogenes.

Strategies for undruggable proteins

It has been reported that notable and infamous players in cancer initiation and progression, which are not treatable by conventional therapies, include transcription factors (such as p53, MYC, E2F, or Kruppel-like factor 4 (KLF4)), phosphatases (such as PP2δ, PP2A, or PTP1B), and the well-known RAS family. Despite being identified as the first human mutated cancer gene in 1982, the RAS family has remained undruggable.39 It wasn’t until 2013 that Shokat first reported the feasibility of using small molecule covalent binding to target the KRASG12C mutant (one of the most common RAS mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)).40 New inhibitors targeting the KRASG12C mutation, such as Adagrasib41 and Sotorasib,42 have shown clinical efficacy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, and the FDA has approved these drugs for the treatment of patients with KRASG12C mutated NSCLC. However, not all RAS mutations are G12C, and compounds targeting other KRAS subtypes beyond G12C are also in development, which are commonly found in NSCLC, pancreatic cancer, and colorectal cancer.43 Compared to RAS, other fusion transcription factors commonly seen with pediatric cancers have been deemed undruggable due to large protein–protein interaction (PPI) interfaces or their lack of deep protein pockets.44 Based on the various characteristics of existing undruggable proteins, current drug design strategies include covalent modulation, allosteric inhibition, Proteolysis-targeting chimeras (PROTAC) and Molecular Glue Degraders (MGDs).45

Covalent modulation

Covalent modulation refers to the binding of small molecule inhibitors to their targets through the formation of irreversible covalent bonds (i.e., chemical bonds) to alter their activity and function. The interaction between the drug molecule and the target is highly stable until the covalent bond is broken by specific biochemical processes, such as metabolism. This approach enables drug design for proteins that lack surface pockets. It is important to highlight the KRAS family of genes, which have been synonymous with undruggable targets. KRAS, as a widely acting gene, frequently undergoes mutations in various cancers. The G12C mutation, for instance, accounts for approximately 25% of mutations in non-small cell lung cancer.46 Normal KRAS protein functions as a GTPase, binding to GTP in its active state and switching back to an inactive state by binding to its hydrolysis product GDP after GTP hydrolysis.47 KRAS mutations (such as the G12C mutation) reduce the GTPase activity of the KRAS protein, causing it to persistently bind to GTP, thereby continuously activating downstream signaling pathways, such as MAPK/ERK and PI3K/AKT, promoting tumor proliferation.48 Due to the relatively smooth surface of the KRAS protein, which lacks obvious pockets, and its propensity to bind GTP, the development of drugs that competitively inhibit KRAS binding to GTP has been challenging. Moreover, the development of drugs targeting downstream signaling molecules such as RAF, MEK, ERK, and PI3K has also encountered significant difficulties.49 Research on KRAS-related inhibitors has been on hold. AMG 510 (Sotorasib), approved by the FDA in 2021, is the first small molecular inhibitor targeting specific KRAS gene mutations.50 It leverages the unique chemical properties of the cysteine (Cys) residue in the KRAS G12C mutant to covalently bind to this residue, locking KRAS G12C in an inactive state and preventing it from binding to GTP, thereby inhibiting KRAS-mediated downstream signaling pathways and suppressing tumor growth.51 The launch of AMG 510 signifies a milestone in the “undruggable” proteins’ history. Currently, drugs produced using covalent binding methods target both EGFR and P53. These include EGFR inhibitors Afatinib, Dacomitinib, and Osimertinib, as well as P53 inhibitor KG13. Clinical trials for other targets are also underway.

Allosteric inhibition

Allosteric inhibition refers to inhibitors bind to allosteric sites on proteins to change the protein’s conformation, thereby altering its biological function. Allosteric modulation is prevalent in various intricate cellular activities, such as Signal Transduction, Enzymatic Catalysis, Cellular Metabolism, and Gene Regulation.52 G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and protein kinases are two large classes of molecules related to numerous cellular activities. For example, Asciminib53 (ABL001) is an allosteric inhibitor for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) that locks BCR-ABL1 in an inactive conformation by binding to the myristoyl pocket (STAMP), overcoming drug-resistant mutations such as the T315I mutation. Cobimetinib is a MEK kinase inhibitor, used for treating melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations.54 SHP099 is an allosteric inhibitor that inhibits SHP2’s activity by binding to multiple structural domain interfaces of SHP2. In terms of design, allosteric modulator target high-entropy, low-conservation allosteric sites, and their significant variability determines that the corresponding allosteric drugs have higher selectivity.55 Unlike traditional inhibitors, which rely on competitive occupancy, these protein-protein interactions drugs bind with a transient nature, allowing low doses of the medication to achieve the desired effect and exhibiting greater resistance to drug resistance. However, allosteric inhibitors also face challenges. Firstly, allosteric inhibition is highly dependent on protein model analysis, thus requiring increased computational power and algorithmic improvements to assist in identifying allosteric sites. Secondly, drug-resistant mutations and species differences in animal models and human may cause changes in the binding of allosteric inhibitors to their sites, requiring further in-depth research to circumvent this issue.

PROTACs

PROTACs are a strategy that utilizes protein degradation mechanisms to eliminate target proteins by simultaneously connecting the target protein with an E3 ubiquitin ligase to form a ternary complex molecule for the degradation of the target protein. The development of anticancer PROTACs primarily uses ligands for E3 ligases such as CRBN, VHL, MDM2, IAPs, AhR, DCAF15, DCAF16, RNF4, and RNF114.56–62 These ligands are tumor-specific to prevent off-target toxicity of PROTACs. Currently, PROTACs have been developed for various targets to combat solid tumors and malignant hematological cancers, such as those targeting AR (Bavdegalutamide63 (also known as ARV-110), CC-94676,64 AC176,65 HP518,66 and ARV-76667), ER (ARV-47168 and AC68269), and BTK (NX-2127,70 NX-5948,71 BGB-16673,72 and HSK2911673). These drugs have entered clinical trial stages, with Bavdegalutamide (NCT03888612), ARV-471 (NCT04072952), and NX-2127 (NCT04830137) showing their therapeutic effectiveness; the PROTAC targeting MAP4K1 has the potential to be a “first-in-class” therapy mimicking PD-1/PD-L1 targeted therapy; while PROTACs targeting BCL-XL74 and ALK have shown broad-spectrum antitumor activity, effectively killing leukemia and solid tumor cells in both in vitro and in vivo preclinical experiments. Like allosteric inhibition, PROTACs also showed the advantages of low dose, safety and resistance to drug resistance. However, the current size of PROTACs exceeds 1000 Daltons, making tissue and cellular permeability remain as major challenges.

MGDs

MGDs are a class of small molecules that facilitate the interaction between target proteins and E3 ubiquitin ligases, leading to the ubiquitination and subsequent degradation of them. They offer potential advantages over PROTACs, such as improved pharmacokinetic properties, including better membrane permeability, cellular uptake, and blood-brain barrier penetration. Despite their promise, the development of MGDs is largely serendipitous and lacks systematic design approaches, necessitating further theoretical exploration to aid in the rational design of these drugs. Notably, the FDA has greenlit clinical trials for several molecular glue agents, such as MRT-2359 (NCT05546268), a GSPT1-targeting molecular glue for multiple solid tumors, SP-3164 (NCT05979857) for its anti-tumor activity in follicular lymphoma models with expected clinical trials in 2023, and IK-595 (NCT06270082) for advanced solid tumors with RAS-MAPK pathway alterations, set to begin in 2024.75–77

Challenges

With the development of the aforementioned technologies, proteins that were once considered “undruggable” are gradually shedding that label and becoming “yet-to-be-drugged” proteins. The application of small molecule inhibitors has been further expanded. However, the future of small molecule inhibitors still faces many challenges. For instance, patients with EGFR mutations treated with first and second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (such as Gefitinib, Erlotinib, Afatinib, and Dacomitinib) approximately have a 50–60% chance of developing resistance within one year of treatment.78 It is necessary to continue treating patients by replacing other therapeutic methods. Next is the challenge of designing small molecule inhibitors, including the need for further breakthroughs when dealing with highly homologous protein families and “undruggable” targets. Finally, there is the consideration of the safe dosage and metabolic stability of small molecule inhibitors in the body. It is necessary to ensure that small molecule inhibitors are safe and effective within their therapeutic window.

Peptide drugs

Peptide drugs refer to specific therapeutic peptides synthesized chemically, through genetic recombination, or extraction, typically composed of 10–50 amino acids. During the exploratory period before the 1960s, significant advancements were made in peptide drug development. The successful extraction of insulin in 1921 marked a major milestone, leading to improved symptoms in diabetic patients.79 The rapid development period from 1960 to 2000 saw revolutionary advancements in peptide synthesis. The invention of solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) by Robert Bruce Merrifield made synthesis more convenient and faster.80 The 1980s witnessed the emergence of recombinant technology and phage display technology, enabling the production of larger molecular weight peptide drugs and the screening of peptides with specific characteristics from large libraries.81 In the explosive period after 2000, the field of peptide drugs experienced significant growth. Natural peptides were enriched through techniques such as peptidomics from venom and new chemical modification methods.82 This facilitated the discovery of novel peptide drugs. Additionally, the emergence of novel technologies like multifunctional peptides, constrained peptides, conjugated peptides, oral peptides, long-acting formulations, and delivery systems further advanced the field.

Peptide-based imaging and therapeutic approaches

In addition to their pharmaceutical applications, the high affinity of peptides for specific receptors has developed a specific application in the diagnosis and treatment. For example, peptide Scintigraphy and Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) are two important techniques in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Peptide Scintigraphy, as a nuclear medicine imaging technique, uses peptides labeled with radioactive isotopes such as 111In (indium)83 and 68Ga (gallium),84 like 111In-octreotide and 68Ga-DOTATOC, to detect tumor cells. These radiopharmaceuticals circulate through the bloodstream to tumor cells that express specific peptide receptors and are imaged using Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) or Positron Emission Tomography (PET). Peptide Scintigraphy is very useful for assessing the staging, distribution, and treatment response of NETs. Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT) is a targeted therapy that combines the targeting ability of peptides with the cytotoxicity of radionuclides. Therapeutic peptides are labeled with radionuclides such as 90Y (yttrium)85 or 177Lu (lutetium),86 which emit beta particles that are lethal to tumor cells. PRRT is particularly effective for tumors that express somatostatin receptors (SSTRs). Additionally, technetium-99m labeled peptide GX1, which specifically binds to tumor vessels of gastric, colorectal, and glioma tumors, shows promise as a new tumor imaging biomarker.87,88 Copper-64 labeled PD-L1 affinity peptide WL12,89 with PET imaging results indicating that [64Cu] WL12 can be used as a radiotracer to specifically detect tumors expressing PD-L1, providing a basis for the development of tumor immunotherapy strategies.

The advantage and disadvantage of peptide drugs

As of January 2023, there are approximately 180 peptide drugs on the market globally.90 International peptide drugs are mainly distributed in diabetes and cancer. In the list of the top 25 best-selling peptide drugs in 2022, four are anti-tumor medications: Sandostatin and Lutathera from Novartis, Kyprolis from Amgen, and Zoladex from AstraZeneca (Table 1).90–92 Compared to small molecule inhibitors, peptide drugs operate at lower concentrations and offer better effects. Classical therapeutic peptides, such as hormones, growth factors, and ion channel ligands, enhance the specificity of peptide cancer therapy by efficiently triggering intracellular effects through specific receptor binding. Compared to other large biomolecule formulations, peptides exhibit lower immunogenicity and are generally safer. They have good tissue penetration, are easily chemically synthesized, and modified, and are cost-effective to produce with high efficacy. However, the drawbacks of peptide drugs are quite evident. Compared to chemical drugs, peptide-based medications have unstable physicochemical properties, shorter half-lives, are easily cleared by the body, and most cannot be administered orally. Chemical modifications, such as acetylation and methylation of the N-terminus, protect peptides from recognition and clearance by proteases or peptidases. The use of synthetic or non-canonical amino acids, such as α-aminobutyric acid and β-amino acids, as well as the design of isomeric amino acid surrogates, are both helpful for increasing their stability. Notably, many peptide drugs are designed for targeting extracellular proteins due to their poor membrane permeability. To improve passive membrane permeability, chemical modifications like peptide cyclization, N-methylation, and the formation of intramolecular H-bonds, along with novel prodrug strategies, are introduced into peptide drug design. Additionally, peptides linked to ligands of membrane receptors can be increasingly absorbed via active membrane transport. Low oral bioactivity is also a primary obstacle for their therapeutic application. To avoid cleavage in the intestinal tract, combining peptides with several protease inhibitors, as well as with permeation enhancers such as citric acid and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), can increase the efficiency of oral delivery. To decrease renal clearance and extend the half-life of peptides, the molecule’s size is typically enlarged through binding with plasma proteins, such as albumins.93Table 1 Summary of tumor-related peptide drugs ranked in the global top 25 sales of peptide drugs in 2022

Product Name	Company	Disease	Approval Date	2022 sales revenue (in billions USD)	
Sandostatin	Novartis	Tumour	1988	12.38	
Zoladex	AstraZenca	Cancer	1989	9.27	
Decapeptyl	Ipsen	Hormone-dependent prostate cancer	1986	5.57	
Lutathera	Novartis	Gastrointestinal pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor	2017	4.71	

Monoclonal antibody therapy

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are produced by B cells and specifically target antigens. There are five isotypes of mAbs: IgG, IgA, IgM, IgD, and IgE. Because of its extended half-life and high affinity, IgG, —particularly IgG1 and IgG4,isotypes are frequently used in the development of monoclonal antibodies. Since the introduction of the first monoclonal antibody drug, Rituximab, in 1997, immunoglobulins have been potent drugs for cancer treatment in recent decades.94 By 2023, the US FDA has approved 79 therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, of which at least 48 are used for cancer treatment, as summarized in Supplementary Table 1.95 These monoclonal antibodies are a class of proteins that target specific antigens to exert single or multiple effects for eliminating cancers.

Ligands or receptors blockades

The anti-tumor effects of representative receptor blockades, such as trastuzumab (Herceptin) and cetuximab (Erbitux), are primarily achieved by directly interacting with the tumor surface receptors HER-2 and EGFR, respectively. This significantly inhibits the progression and migration of cancer, especially in cases of HER2+ breast cancer (Herceptin),96 metastatic colorectal cancer (Eribitux), and advanced head and neck cancer (Erbitux).97 Two additional HER-2-targeting monoclonal antibodies, margetuximab (Margenza) and pertuzumab (Perjeta), have been approved for the treatment of metastatic HER-2+ breast cancer, either in combination with or as an alternative to Herceptin.98,99

Ligand blockades, such as bevacizumab (Avastin), work by preventing VEGF-A from binding to its receptors, thereby suppressing angiogenesis and neovascularization. As a first-line anti-angiogenic therapy, Avastin has been approved for treating several types of cancer, including colorectal, lung, and ovarian malignancies.11,100

Cytotoxic mAbs

This cytotoxic monoclonal antibody works by targeting antigens, a strategy frequently used in the treatment of hematological tumors. In 1997, the first mAb licensed for the treatment of B-cell lymphoma was rituximab, also known as Rituxan. It induces B cells to become cytotoxic and initiates caspase-independent programmed cell death by directly blocking the CD20 antigen on B lymphocytes. Rituximab-treated B-cell lymphomas have shown improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Compared to 56% for rituximab, the objective response rate for ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin), a CD20-targeting radio-conjugate, was higher at 80%.101

Additionally, cytotoxic antibodies that directly against CD52 (alemtuzumab), CD47, HLA-DR, CD74, and CD99, without the need for caspase, also lead to the death of target cells. Notably, in multicenter clinical studies, the CD52-targeting monoclonal antibody alemtuzumab demonstrated an extended median OS (12–35.8 months), a median PFS (4.7–19.6 months), and an overall response rate (ORR)(31–54%).102 Oncology treatment involving monoclonal antibodies that target CD47, HLA-DR, CD74, and CD99 are still under investigated.

Besides, clinical trials are underway to investigate hhow novel cytotoxic mAbs activate apoptosis-related receptors, such as TNF-related apoptosis inducing-ligand (TRAIL) death receptors DR4 and DR5, leading to Fas- and caspase-dependent cell apoptosis.103

Immune checkpoints blockades (ICIs)

In addition to directly inhibiting tumor antigens, it’s critical to modify anti-tumor immunity. Tumor cells can trick the immune system by abnormally activating inhibitory signals that weaken cytotoxic T cells, leading to a state of immune tolerance and exhaustion. This process has become a promising approach for developing new cancer therapies.

PD-1 (Programmed Death 1) and PD-L1 (Programmed Death-Ligand 1) ICIs are a type of cancer treatment that enhances the immune system’s ability to fight cancer by blocking the proteins cancer cells use to evade immune cells. PD-L1 is a protein that can be upregulated on cancer cells, interacting with PD-1 to effectively ‘instruct’ T cells to stand down and not attack the cancer cells. Notably, Pembrolizumab, Nivolumab, and Cemiplimab are representative anti-PD-1 agents,104 while Atezolizumab, Avelumab, and Durvalumab are examples of anti-PD-L1 agents.105 The use of these drugs has been associated with improved outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and other cancers. This progress marks a significant breakthrough in cancer therapy due to the development of PD-1 and PD-L1 ICIs.

Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), highly expressed in T cells, is an immune inhibitory molecule that interacts with B7 family of ligands (CD80 and CD86) to induce its immunosuppressive effect. In cytotoxic T cells, CTLA-4 competitively shatters the bond between ligands and its co-receptor CD28, thereby destroying its anti-tumor function. Ipilimumab was approved as an anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody (2011) for interrupting B27/CTLA-4 binding andrestoring T lymphocytes cytotoxicity.106 In a HIMALAYA clinical trial, tremelimumab (Imjudo), a CTLA4-targeting monoclonal antibody, coupled with durvalumab led to a longer OS (16.43 months) for liver cancer patients compared to 13.8 months for the sorafenib-treated group.107

T cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain-containing 3 (TIM-3), lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3), and T cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT) represent additional significant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). TIM-3, a transmembrane protein, expressed on the surface of various immune cells, including T cells, macrophages, and dendritic cells. It plays a role in the immune response to intracellular pathogens and has been linked to the suppression of Th1 and pro-inflammatory responses. TIM-3 is one of the most extensively studied immunotherapeutic targets to date; however, no drugs targeting TIM-3 have been marketed internationally or domestically. Novartis’ BMS-986207108 is in Phase 3 clinical trials, while Bristol Myers Squibb’s BMS-986258109 and Incyte/Agenus’ INCAGN2390110 are in Phase 2 clinical trials. In China, Hengrui’s SHR-11702111 and BeiGene’s BGB-A425112 are in Phase 1 clinical trials, and other companies such as Fulong Hanlin and Fanenshi are still in the preclinical stage.

LAG-3 is another immune checkpoint molecule that is upregulated on activated T cells. It binds to MHC class II molecules on antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and transmits inhibitory signals that reduce T cell responses. Similar to PD-1 and CTLA-4, LAG-3 is overexpressed on exhausted T cells within the tumor microenvironment, aiding in cancer cells’ immune evasion. At least 16 drugs targeting the LAG-3 molecule have entered clinical research worldwide, with BMS’s BMS-986016 being the most advanced.113

TIGIT is primarily expressed on the surface of T cells and NK cells, and CD155 on tumor cells is a high-affinity ligand for TIGIT. TIGIT can inhibit immune activation by binding to CD155. Roche’s Tiragolumab and BMS’s BMS-986207114 are examples of independently developed antibody drugs targeting TIGIT, which are still undergoing clinical trials. Additionally, we have listed other ICIs that are currently on the market and their therapeutic effects in patients.

CD24, an emerging class of cancer immunotherapies that modulate immune responses within the tumor microenvironment by targeting the CD24 protein. CD24 is a cell surface molecule that is highly expressed on various cancer cells but has low expression on normal cells. It binds to the Siglec-10 receptor on macrophages, sending a “do not eat me” signal that helps tumor cells evade immune system surveillance and clearance.115 By blocking this signaling pathway, anti-CD24 monoclonal antibodies can enhance the phagocytic activity of macrophages against tumor cells and potentially activate a broader immune response. Several drugs targeting CD24 are currently in development. IMM47, developed by YiMab, is a pioneering anti-CD24 monoclonal antibody in China for clinical trials, showing tumor eradication in preclinical studies.116 Pheast Therapeutics, founded by a key figure in CD24 research, has raised substantial funds for drug development.117 OncoC4 advances a varied pipeline, including CAR-T and bispecific antibodies, towards clinical trials.118 These drugs target the CD24 protein to enhance immune responses against tumors.

The advantages, disadvantages and challenges of mAbs

In contrast to traditional therapies like chemotherapy and radiotherapy, which are effective in killing tumor cells but also cause damage to normal cells, monoclonal antibodies therapy targets cancer cells with high specificity and reduced toxicity to health cells. Several benefits have been highlighted for mAbs therapy in treating cancers. Firstly, monoclonal therapeutic antibodies are engineered to target specific antigens or proteins with high specificity and affinity, which allows for increased effectiveness and more precise targeted treatment for patients. Secondly, due to their high specific mode of action, monoclonal antibodies pose a lower risk of side effects on health cells. Thirdly, mAbs are fast-responders, and their therapeutic effects could be observed within a short time. Last but not least, several mAbs are immune modifiers, sustaining the long-term activity of immune cells. This activated immune response might persist beyond the duration of treatment, offering long-term therapeutic protection against relapse.

However, mAbs also face several challenges and limitations. The first challenge pertains to high production costs. Monoclonal immunoglobulins are large (~150 kDa) multimeric proteins that contain numerous disulfide bonds and N-linked glycosylation sites, requiring complicated eukaryotic machinery for mass production with high purity in vitro. Large amounts of mAbs are required to achieve clinical efficacy, leading to high productions costs. Alternatively, other production systems, like microorganisms and plants, are under evaluation to lower the cost.119,120

Another unavoidable drawback for therapeutic drugs, including mAbs, is antibody-related side effect. The causes of these sides effects stem from following mechanisms: inherent immunogenicity, suppressive effects on other cells, and over- or long-term activation of immune system. Numerous strategies have been devised to mitigate these side effects. For example, the first therapeutic mAbs are derived from murine system, resulting in poor immune response and a plethora ofside effects. Substitution with a fully human Fc fragment or alternative engineered formats addresses immunogenic inaccessibility. Several mAbs, such as trastuzumab, rituximab, daratumumab, target specific proteins and elicit antibody-dependent cytotoxicity like complement (e.g., C1q) system activation or cell-mediated cytotoxicity via Fc domain interaction with Fcγ receptors (FcγR) on effector cells.120 This additional immune activation enhances therapeutic effectiveness and extends cytotoxicity. Exploring alternative antibody isotype mAbs, like panitumumab, an anti-EGFR IgG2 antibody for treating colon cancer, and engineering the Fc region through mutagenesis, such as producing defucosylated mAbs, present potential approaches to augment Fc affinity for its Fc receptors, hence diminishing antibody-dependent cytotoxicity.121

Importantly, low penetration efficiency and long half-life remain a challenge for therapeutic mAbs. It’s reported that no more than 20% administered dose may penetrate the target sites, with the majority remaining in the bloodstream. The remaining antibodies could interact with various types of cells including endothelial cells, monocytes, barrier sites through binding with its Fc-neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn). An extended serum half-life is associated with increased risks of immune-related adverse effects. The large molecule size of mAbs limits tumor penetration and reduces the rate of renal clearance. Besides, FcRn helps to extend the half-life of mAbs and protects them from the clearance of lysosome. Novel antibody engineering technologies are designed to overcome these shortcomings. For example, scFv fragment was developed with short half-life for imaging;122 medium size (~60 kDa) Diabodies have demonstrated rapid tumor uptake and clearance, suitable for imaging and radioimmunotherapy;123 and small antibody fragment, such as single variable domains or chemically modified antibodies e.g., anti-TNFα PEGylated Fab fragment124 or fusion antibody fragments with peptides,125 are under investigation. Other engineering methods, including fusions with effector proteins, bispecific antibodies, and intrabodies, hold promise for achieving the desired therapeutic benefits while minimizing side effects.

Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs)

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are a unique class of drugs formed by conjugating monoclonal antibodies, which specifically target antigens, with cytotoxic small molecule drugs (Fig. 2a). This innovative system is often referred to as a “biological missile” as it mimics the concept of a missile, where the antibody serves as the “guidance system” and the toxin acts as the “warhead”. This allows for precise and targeted “strikes” on specific tissue targets within the human body. Once the ADC drug enters the bloodstream, the antibody component recognizes and binds to the specific antigen present on the target cell. Subsequently, the ADC-antigen complex is internalized by the target cell through endocytosis. Within the cell, the toxin is released after being degraded by lysosomes, ultimately leading to the apoptosis of the target cell (Fig. 2b).Fig. 2 Composition of ADCs and Mechanism of Action in Targeting Cells. a Composition of ADCs. ADCs are composed of an antibody, a linker, and a toxin. The antibody serves as the backbone of the ADC, required to conjugate with the other two components for specific targeted endocytosis within the human body. Therefore, the demands for this part include low immunogenicity and targeting specificity. The linker is the component within the system that connects the antibody to the toxin. The toxin, the element that ultimately kills the tumor, is attached to the linker and travels with the antibody to the target site to exert its effect. b Mechanism of Action of ADCs Targeting Cells. ADCs exert their therapeutic effects through a process that begins with the specific binding of the antibody component of the ADC to antigens on the surface of tumor cells. Upon binding, the ADCs trigger endocytosis, a cellular process where large molecules are internalized into vesicles. These vesicles, known as endosomes, mature by moving through the cell and eventually fuse with lysosomes, where the ADCs are broken down. The cytotoxic drug component, which is linked to the antibody via a cleavable or non-cleavable linker, is then released into the lysosome or directly into the cytoplasm, where it exerts its toxic effects on the tumor cell, leading to cell death. In some cases, the released drug can also affect neighboring tumor cells through a bystander effect, enhancing the overall therapeutic impact. c The five core elements that influence the effectiveness of ADCs. The table outlines the requirements for various components and synthesis processes of ADC. Initially, the selection of ADC antigen substances must prioritize high specificity and low exfoliative and endocytic effects to ensure targeted action. The antibody, a key component of ADCs, demands high affinity, rapid internalization, low immunogenicity, and reliance on ADCC (Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity) and CDC (Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity) mechanisms, along with a prolonged half-life for effective targeting and action. The linker should exhibit high stability to prevent rupture during circulation, enable specific release in the target area, and be hydrophilic and degradable for bystander effects. The toxin should have potent cytotoxicity, the ability to undergo structural remodeling, a clear mechanism of action, resistance to degradation within cells, strong hydrophobicity for membrane permeability to induce bystander effects, and a short half-life. The coupling method affects drug uniformity and loading, requiring optimal DAR (Drug-Antibody Ratio) values and the implementation of site-specific conjugation strategies. This figure was created with Biorender.com

Five core elements of ADCs

The effectiveness of ADCs is influenced by five core elements: target antigen, antibody, linker, toxin, and coupling method (Fig. 2c).

The target antigen for an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) must possess high specificity to ensure precise targeting of cancer cells rather than normal cells, exhibit low exfoliative properties to minimize shedding of the antigen into the bloodstream, and have effective endocytosis capabilities to facilitate the internalization of the ADC into the cancer cells, thereby enhancing the drug’s therapeutic impact.

As the precision guidance component of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), antibodies specifically target and deliver the toxin carrier function. They can recognize tumor cell surface target antigens with high specificity, delivering the payload to the tumor cells and mediating the localization and endocytosis of the antibody-drug conjugate within the tumor cells. The ideal antibody characteristics necessitate prolonged circulation half-life, low immunogenicity, cell permeability, and relies on ADCC (Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity) and CDC (Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity) killing mechanisms.126 IgG1 is the primary antibody scaffold utilized in ADCs. These IgG1 antibodies boast a prolonged blood half-life, enhanced FcγR binding efficiency, potent ADCC and CDC effects, and a reduced propensity to form oligomers.127 Employing humanized or human monoclonal antibodies significantly diminishes immunogenicity and alleviates autoimmune effects. Addressing the issue of antibody endocytosis involves adjusting the antibody’s size to ensure sufficient cellular penetration without jeopardizing its half-life.

The linker must possess high stability, ensuring no rupture during the cycling process, enable specific release in the target area, exhibit high hydrophilicity, and be degradable to exert bystander effects.128 Linkers can be divided into two main categories based on their performance: cleavable linkers (chemical cleavage linkers, enzyme catalyzed cleavage linkers, photo-cleavable linkers) and non-cleavable linkers (sulfide bond linkers, maleimide bond linkers); cleavable linkers are a prerequisite for exerting bystander killing effect, hence becoming the mainstream trend of ADC linkers. The development directions of ADC linkers are to increase hydrophilicity (reduce ADC clearance rate, broaden compatibility with hydrophobic toxins) and increase the effective payload number on a single linker.128

The toxin must exhibit strong cytotoxicity, high structural remodeling capability, a clear mechanism, non-degradability within cells, demonstrate strong hydrophobicity, and possess membrane permeability to induce bystander effects, while having a short half-life.128 The coupling method impacts drug uniformity and loading, necessitating suitable DAR (Drug-Antibody Ratio) values and attempted fixed-point coupling.128

FDA approved ADC drugs

Currently approved ADC drugs primarily target specific proteins overexpressed on tumor cells. HER2 is the most prominent target for ADC development globally, and Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (Kadcyla), Trastuzumab deruxtecan (Enhertu), and Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), which are designed to target HER2-positive cancer cells, have been approved for use in treating HER2-positive breast cancer and other types of cancer. DS-8201 (Trastuzumab Deruxtecan) is a novel antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) composed of a humanized anti-HER2 antibody and an irinotecan-class chemotherapy drug. It has demonstrated promising antitumor activity in various types of cancer, including breast cancer, gastric cancer, and colorectal cancer. Particularly in patients with breast cancer that exhibits low expression of HER2, DS-8201 has shown a significant improvement in therapeutic outcomes compared to other treatment options. Based on the results of the DESTINY-Breast04 study, the FDA has granted accelerated approval for the use of DS-8201 in the treatment of HER2-low expressing breast cancer.129 As of March 2024, the FDA has approved a total of 15 ADC drugs and there are over 500 clinical trials in progress. The details of 15 FDA approved ADC drugs as shown in the Table 2.130–133Table 2 Summary of ADC drugs approved by the FDA as of march 2024

Drug	Maker	Target	Toxin	Linker	Indications	DAR	Approval Date	Effect	
Mylotarg	Pfizer	CD33	Calicheamicin	hydrazone	AML	2 ~ 3	2000	Only Chemotherapy mPFS: 9.5 months, Combined Chemotherapy mPFS: 17.3 months	
Adcetris	Seagen	CD30	MMAE	dipeptide	Hodgkin’s lymphoma	4	2011	2-year PFS at 82.1%, Control at 7.2%, progession risk lowered by 34%	
Kadcyla	Roche	HER2	DM1	organic sulphide	Early-stage and metastatic HER2+ breast cancer	3.5	2013	mPFS at 6.2 months, control at 3.3 months; ORR at 31.3% vs. 8.6%	
Besponsa	Pfizer	CD22	Calicheamicin	hydrazone	BCP-ALL	5 ~ 7	2017	CR at 80.%, Chemotherapy at 29.4%, mOS at 7.7 vs. 6.7 months	
Lumoxiti	AstraZeneca	CD22	PE38	mc-VC-PABC	HCL	/	2018	ORR at 75%, CR at 36%	
Polivy	Roche	CD79β	MMAE	dipeptide	LBCB	3.5	2019	CR at 40, control at 19%, mOS at 12.4 vs. 4.7 months	
Enhertu	Daiichi Sankyo	HER2	Dxd	Boc-Gly-Gly-Phe-Gly-OH	Breast/Stomach Cancer	8	2019	mOS at 12.5 months, Chemotherapy at 8.4 mpnths, ORR at 41% vs. 11%	
Padcev	Seagen	Nectin-4	MMAE	mc-VC-PABC	Bladder Cancer	4	2019	mOS at 12.9 months, Chemotherapy at 9.0 months	
Trodelvy	Immunomdecis	TROP-2	SN38	CL2A	TNBC	8	2020	mPFS at 4.8 months, Chemotherapy at 1.7 months; mOS at 11.8 vs. 6.9	
Belenrep	GSK	BCMA	MMAF	Not Cleavable	multiple myeloma	4	2020	ORR at 32%, mPFS at 11 months, mOS at 11.8 vs. 6.9	
Akalux	Rakuten Medical	EGFR	IRDye700DX	N/A	Head and Neck Cancer	/	2020	ORR at 43.3%, CR at 13.3%	
Zynlonta	ADC Therapeutics	CD19	PBD	dipeptide	LBCB	2.3	2021	ORR at 48.3%, CR at 24.8% (Including failed CAR-T patients)	
RC48 -ADC	RemeGen	HER2	MMAE	mc-VA-PABC	Stomach cancer	3.5	2021	ORR at 40%, mPFS at 6.3 months	
Tivdak	Genmab/Seagen	TF	MMAE	Enzyme-cleaved	Cervical cancer	4	2021	OOR at 24%, DOR at 8.3 months	
Elahere	ImmunoGen	FRα	DM4	Non-cleavable	ovarian cancer	3.4	2022	ORR 42.3%, mPFS 5.62 months, OS 16.5 months	
Trastuzumab Deruxtecan	Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca	HER2	Deruxtecan	Chemical cleavable	Breast cancer	8	2022	ORR 43.2%, DCR 79.5%, mPFS 5.6 months, 12.8 months	
mPFS Median Progression-Free Survival, ORR Objective Response Rate, CR Complete Response, DCR Disease Control Rate, DOR Duration of Response, mOS Median Overall Survival, PFS Progression-Free Survival, LBCB Large B-Cell Lymphoma, BCP-ALL B-Cell Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, HCL Hairy Cell Leukemia, TNBC Triple-Negative Breast Cancer, EGFR Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor, BCMA B-Cell Maturation Antigen, MMAE Monomethyl auristatin E, TROP-2 Trophoblast Cell Surface Antigen 2, TF Tissue Factor, HER2 Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2, FRα Folate Receptor Alpha. Data accessed on 24th March 2024

The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of ADC drugs

As demonstrated above, the greatest advantage of ADCs lies in their reliance on the specific binding of antigen-antibody targeting. This helps to reduce systemic toxic side effects that are characteristic of chemotherapy treatments. Additionally, unlike conventional monoclonal antibodies, ADCs exert their tumor-killing function through the toxin carried by the linker, which allows for greater design flexibility. Furthermore, ADCs can be tailored to target a variety of cancers based on the selection of antigens and antibodies. Moreover, the design of ADCs permits precise control of the ratio of drug to antibody (DAR, Drug-to-Antibody Ratio), which aids in optimizing therapeutic efficacy and safety.

The main drawbacks of ADCs, such as their low internalization, low efficiency, and target-off toxicity, should be addressed by creating more effective ADCs, such as the introduction of bispecific ADCs. For example, ZW38, an asymmetric bispecific CD19-directed CD3 T cell engager antibody, has a significantly higher affinity (>30-fold) to CD3 + T cells than CD19 + B cells. It is specifically designed to mediate effective T cell-guided targeting B cell reduction while eliciting a more “controlled” T cell activation compared to blinatumomab, thereby leading to lower toxicity.134 Another preclinical study has proved that bispecific ADCs for EGFR/c-MET and HER2/PRLR exhibit improved internalization, increased affinity, and decreased toxicity.135,136 Additionally, striking a balance between therapeutic activity within a confined DAR and the toxicity of payloads presents another challenge. Novel approaches to alter payloads with versatile functional groups, such as amine or thiol groups, will provide new perspectives on addressing this issue.128 Meanwhile, several site-specific conjugation techniques are being developed to generate homogeneous ADCs, which aim to increase efficiency and decrease toxicity.137

The development of ADCs still faces challenges. Certain types of cancer lack effective neoantigens. For instance, the discovery and validation of neoantigens are time-consuming, and the expression of antigens varies among individuals. Additionally, tumors may alter the expression of their surface antigens to evade the immune system’s attack, which can make it difficult to identify suitable antibodies. Furthermore, ADCs undergo complex metabolic processes. Due to their diverse designs, ADCs lack uniform metabolic properties. Even ADCs targeting the same antigen may exhibit differences in plasma stability, in vivo metabolism, PK/PD relationships, and adverse reactions owing to variations in antigen epitope recognition, linker sites, coupling chemistry, and the choice of small molecule toxins.138,139 Additionally, ADCs still have toxicities, such as on-target/off-tumor toxicity and off-target/off-tumor toxicity, with the latter being caused by the premature release of toxins into the bloodstream, non-tumor tissues, or the tumor microenvironment.140 Furthermore, the mechanisms of ADC resistance have not been thoroughly studied, and the production and quality control of ADCs also pose difficulties, all of which affect the production and clinical application of ADC drugs.

Cell therapy

Cell therapy, also known as cellular therapy, is a cutting-edge approach in medicine that utilizes living cells to against cancers. Ongoing research and advancements in cell therapy continue to pave the way for revolutionary breakthroughs in healthcare, providing hope for patients in need of novel and effective treatment options. Currently, popular tumor cell therapies include Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy (CAR-T), T-Cell Receptor Modified T cells (TCR-T), Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TIL), Chimeric Antigen Receptor-Modified Natural Killer (CAR-NK) cells, T-Cell Receptor Modified T-Cells (TCR-T) and Chimeric Antigen Receptor-Modified Macrophages (CAR-M).

CAR-T

The treatment principle of CAR-T involves extracting the patient’s own T cells, using gene editing technology to transfect the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) gene, expanding the modified T cells in vitro, and then infusing them back into the patient. The CAR structure consists of three distinct domains: the extracellular domain, the transmembrane domain, and the intracellular domain. The extracellular domain of CAR includes the antigen recognition domain, also known as the single-chain variable fragment (scFv), and the hinge region. The scFv is composed of the variable regions of both the light and heavy chains of an antibody, connected by a peptide linker. CARs are being developed to target various tumor-associated antigens such as CD19, CD20, CD22.141 The hinge region connects the scFv to the transmembrane domain. The transmembrane domain serves as a link between the extracellular domain and the intracellular signaling domain of the CAR. Commonly used transmembrane domains are derived from proteins such as CD4, CD8α, CD28, and CD3ζ (Fig. 3a).141Fig. 3 The composition and generation of CAR-T. a Illustrates the structure and mechanism of action of a Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR). The CAR is composed of three main domains: the extracellular domain, which includes the antigen recognition domain (scFv) and the hinge region; the transmembrane domain that anchors the receptor in the cell membrane; and the intracellular domain responsible for signaling. The scFv is engineered to recognize specific tumor-associated antigens, such as CD19, CD20, and CD22. The hinge region allows for flexibility in the CAR’s structure, while the transmembrane domain links the extracellular recognition capabilities to the intracellular signaling pathways. The intracellular domain typically contains co-stimulatory motifs that enhance T cell activation upon antigen recognition. b The therapeutic process of CAR-. Genetically engineered CAR-T cells are infused into the patient, where they specifically recognize and bind to tumor antigens via their CARs. This interaction leads to the activation of the CAR-T cells and the release of cytotoxic molecules, such as perforin and granzyme B, which induce apoptosis in the tumor cells. c The evolution of CAR-T. It outlines the five generations of CAR-T cell development. First-generation CAR-T cells had basic signaling domains but lacked co-stimulatory signals, resulting in limited in vivo proliferation and clinical efficacy. Second-generation CAR-T cells included additional co-stimulatory domains, significantly improving their potency and persistence. Third-generation CAR-T cells further enhanced tumor lysis and cytokine secretion by incorporating dual co-stimulatory molecules. Fourth-generation CAR-T cells were designed with controllable suicide genes and pro-inflammatory cytokines for enhanced solid tumor targeting. Fifth-generation CAR-T cells, or “off-the-shelf” universal CAR-T cells, are created by CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing to generate allogeneic T cells, addressing potential GVHD issues. This figure was created with Biorender.com

The mechanism of CAR-T cell therapy involves several key steps. CAR-T cells are genetically engineered T cells that are designed to target specific antigens present on the surface of tumor cells. Once infused into the patient’s body, CAR-T cells recognize and bind to these tumor antigens through theCAR. This binding triggers the activation of the CAR-T cells, leading to the release of cytotoxic effector molecules such as perforin and granzyme B. These substances directly induce apoptosis, or programmed cell death, in the tumor cells (Fig. 3b). Furthermore, CAR-T cells can recruit other immune cells, such as natural killer cells and macrophages, to the tumor site.142 This recruitment is achieved through the secretion of cytokines by the CAR-T cells. The immune cells work together to attack and eliminate the tumor cells. One of the remarkable features of CAR-T cell therapy is the potential to form memory T cells. These memory T cells can persist in the body after the initial treatment and provide long-term protection against the recurrence of tumor cells. This memory response contributes to the sustained anti-tumor effects of CAR-T cell therapy. Understanding the mechanism of CAR-T cell therapy is crucial for its successful application in treating various types of cancer.

The development process of CAR-T has gone through five generations. The first-generation CAR-T cells contained intracellular signaling domains but lacked co-stimulatory molecules.143 These CAR-T cells had limited proliferation in vivo and were not effective in killing tumor cells on a large scale, resulting in unsatisfactory clinical trial outcomes. The second-generation CAR-T cells added a co-stimulatory domain (CD28, 4–1BB, OX40, etc.) to the intracellular domain. After the single-chain antibody on the extracellular domain recognized the tumor cells and bound to the tumor antigen, the T cells could simultaneously receive antibody stimulation signals and co-stimulatory signals.144 This made the second-generation CAR-T cells far more potent than the first-generation, with longer survival time and enhanced proliferation and tumor-killing ability. The third-generation CAR-T cells incorporate two co-stimulatory molecules simultaneously to enhance tumor lysis ability and increase cytokine secretion, thereby boosting the killing power against tumors. Common combinations include CD28 + 4–1BB or CD28 + OX40 as dual co-stimulatory molecules.145 Whether the third-generation CAR-T cells are superior to the second-generation ones still needs to be proven in clinical trials. The design of fourth-generation CAR-T cells involve adding controllable suicide genes and pro-inflammatory cytokines (such as IL-12, IL-15, IL-18) to the CAR structure, which allows for controlled survival time of CAR-T cells in the body and enhances the efficacy in killing solid tumors.142 The fifth-generation CAR-T cells, known as “off-the-shelf” universal CAR-T cells, are designed to disrupt the TCR genes and HLA class I genes of T cells using CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (Fig. 3c). This generates allogeneic universal CAR-T cells and eliminates graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) concerns.142

The challenges and strategies about CAR-T cell therapy

In addition to the practical challenges of cost issues, limitations in meeting inclusion criteria, and unforeseen challenges during the gap period between leukapheresis and infusion, there are also ongoing technical barriers that need to be overcome in the field of CAR-T therapy (Fig. 4).Fig. 4 The challenges and strategies about CAR-T cell therapy. The main challenges currently faced in CAR-T therapy include: Antigenic drift, Systemic cytokine toxicities, Lack of effective targets for solid tumors, Tumor microenvironment suppression and epitope expansion, Tumor barrier, Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), and Host immune rejection, along with their corresponding primary solutions. This figure was created with Biorender.com

Antigenic drift

Antigenic drift is an immunotherapy resistance commonly observed in CAR-T therapy. Although, phase I trials of CD19 CAR T cells in patients with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) showed response rates between 70% and 90%, there are 7–25% patients resulting in CD19 antigen loss. Other studies demonstrated that loss of BCMA and GPRC5D is observed in 4% and 35% myeloma patients after treatment with BCMA CAR-T and GPRC5D CAR-T, respectively.146

To overcome these challenges, various strategies have been explored. One approach is the use of dual-target CAR-T, which targets multiple antigens simultaneously. In CD19 CAR-T therapy, it is generally accepted to use a combination of CD19 with CD22, BCMA, and CD20.147 A bispecific CAR-T (CD19–22.BB.z-CAR) dual-targeting CD19 and CD22 was investigated in a phase I study for patients with large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) and relapsed/refractory B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). For both B-ALL and LBCL, the complete response (CR) rates were 29% and 100%, respectively. Minimal residual disease-negative (MRD-) complete remission was attained by 88% of R/R B-ALL patients. Four (29%) patients with LBCL and five (50%) patients with B-ALL exhibited low or negative CD19 expression at the time of progression after the treatment.148 A similar result was shown in 13 B-ALL patients, where 84.6% of patients achieved CR with dual CD19xCD22 CAR-T cell (SCRI-CAR19x22) therapy, and 95% were MRD-. In three out of the four relapses, CD19 expression remained negative.149 Aftertreatment with CD19/BCMA dual-targeting Fastcar-T GC012F for patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (R/R B-NHL), the 3-month overall response rate was 100%, with 77.8% (7/9) reaching CR and no relapse was noted within the follow-up period.150

Another strategy is tandem CAR-T, where a single CAR construct contains two single-chain variable fragments (scFvs) to target different antigens on one cancer cell surface. In a phase I clinical investigation, by day 28 following therapy with tandem bispecific anti-CD20, anti-CD19 (LV20.19) CAR T cells, 18 (82%) of the R/R B-ALL patients experienced an overall response, with 14 (64%) achieving a CR, and 4 (18%) having a partial response (PR). Remarkably, patients who experienced treatment failure or relapsed did not exhibit loss of the CD19 antigen.151 In Dai et al.’ study, after receiving another bispecific tandem CD19/CD22 CAR-T therapy, the patients demonstrated a favorable outcome, with a high MRD- complete response rate (100%) reached in B-ALL patients (n = 6); However, one patient relapsed at 5 months post-treatment with decreased CD22 density and negative CD19 expression.152 Additionally, the combination of different single-target CAR-T therapies is being investigated. These strategies aim to enhance the efficacy and durability of CAR-T therapy and improve outcomes for patients. Sequential administration of two single-target CAR-T therapies, such as the CAR22/19 cocktail CAR-T therapy, was investigated by Huang et al.153 Among the 50 R/R B-ALL patients, 48 (96%) achieved CR or complete remission with incomplete count recovery (CRi) with 47 (94%) obtaining MRD- CR/CRi. 23 individuals relapsed, but none of them exhibited evidence of CD19 or CD22 antigen loss.

Systemic cytokine toxicities

Upon infusion, CAR-T cells become activated and rapidly proliferate, causing a massive release of cytokines and triggering non-specific inflammatory reactions. These may lead to systemic cytokine toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS), haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH)/macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). To address these toxicities, one approach is modifying the CAR structure by replacing murine counterparts with humanizing or fully human antibody fragments, aiming to reduce immunogenicity and improve safety. Also, targeting specific cytokines associated with severe CRS, such as IL-6 and IL-1, has been explored [37]. Anti-inflammatory drugs such as tocilizumab and siltuximab can inhibit the action of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and the interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R), thereby reducing the CAR-T-associated CRS without impairing CAR-T activities or causing T cell apoptosis.154–159

Inhibiting the inflammatory cascade initiated by GM-CSF (granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor) has also shown promise in mitigating cytokine toxicities effects.160 GM-CSF inhibitors such as Lenzilumab and Mavrilimumab can block the action of GM-CSF, thereby reducing the activation of inflammatory cells and the release of inflammatory cytokines.161

Lack of Effective Targets for solid tumors

Unlike the targets for hematologic malignancies that are mostly single and specific, tumor-specific antigens (TSA) are rare in solid tumors. Common tumor-associated antigen (TAA) targets include CEA, HER2, GPC3, EpCAM, etc. are often expressed on vital organs, which severely limit the application of CAR-T in solid tumors.162 The continuous discovery of highly expressed and CAR-T-developable targets has led to rapid growth of clinical pipelines, such as GPC3 highly expressed in liver cancer, CLDN18.2 highly expressed in gastric and pancreatic cancer, EGFRvIII in glioblastoma.163,164

Tumor microenvironment suppression and epitope expansion

In solid tumor, immune checkpoint such as PD-1, TIM-3, or CTLA-4 are commonly overexpressed and may cause the exhaustion of CAR-T cells. The tumor microenvironment (TME) contains immunosuppressive cells such as regulatory T cells (Tregs), myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), and M2 macrophages. These cells release cytokines like transforming growth factor-beta (TGFβ) and interleukin-10 (IL-10) within solid tumors, which diminish the effectiveness of CAR-T cells in fighting tumors.165 To overcome this, strategies include combining CAR-T cells with immune checkpoint inhibitors such as PD-1 inhibitors in immunotherapy and genetically modifying CAR-T cells to enhance their immune response and resistance to inhibitory factors, thereby improving their anti-tumor activity.166 Several clinical trials on the combination of CAR-T and immune checkpoints blockades are summarized in Table 3.Table 3 Representative clinical trials for the combination of ICIs and CAR-T therapy

Clinical Trials No.	Phase	No. Infused Patients	Combination regimens	Cancer Type	Preliminary Results		
			ICI	CAR-T Target			
NCT01822652	I	11	Pembrolizumab	GD2	Neuroblastoma	6 PD, 2 CR (after salvage), 5 SD	
NCT02414269	I	27	Pembrolizumab	Mesothelin	Malignant pleural diseases, comprising metastatic lung and breast cancers and malignant pleural mesothelioma	2 CR, 8 SD (>6mons)	
NCT03287817	I	19	Pembrolizumab	CD19/22 dual target	r/r DLBCL	64% ORR, 55% CRR	
NCT03630159	Ib	4	Pembrolizumab	CD19	r/r DLBCL	1 PR, 2 PD	
NCT03726515	I	7	Pembrolizumab	EGFRvIII	EGFRvIII + , MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma	Low efficacy, 7 PD, median PFS: 5.2mons, median OS: 11.8months	
NCT04991948	Ib	Estimated 34	Pembrolizumab	NKG2D	Colorectal Cancer	2 Deaths reported. Paused	
NCT04995003	I	Estimated 25	Pembrolizumab or nivolumab	HER-2	Advanced Sarcoma	NA	
NCT04003649	I	Estimated 60	Nivolumab and Ipilimumab	IL13Ra2	Glioblastoma	NA	
NCT04539444	II	16	Tislelizumab	CD19/22 dual target	R/R B-NHL	CR 11, 1-year PFS: 68.8%, 1-year OS: 81.3%	
NCT04381741	Ib	8	Tislelizumab	CD19	R/R DLBCL	4 CR, 1 PR, 2 PD	
NCT02926833	I/II	28	Atezolizumab	CD19	DLBCL	75% ORR, 46% CR, 29% PR,7%SD, 14%PD	
NCT02706405	I	29	Durvalumab	CD19	R/R LBCL	35% ORR, 27% CR	
NCT03310619	I/II	Estimated 77	Durvalumab, Nivolumab, Relatlimab	CD19	R/R aggressive B-cell NHL	NA	
R/R DLCBL Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma, R/R B-NHL relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, R/R LBCL Relapsed/Refractory Large B Cell Lymphoma, CR complete response, PR partial; response, PD progression disease, SD stable disease, ORR overall response rate, PFS progression-free survival, OS overall survival, NA not applicable

Tumor barrier

The immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and physical tumor barriers, such as the tumor stroma, can restrict the infiltration and migration of CAR-T cells, limiting their effectiveness in treating solid tumors. One main reason is the lack of relevant receptors on CAR-T cells that match the chemokines secreted by solid tumors, which hinders their homing ability to the tumor site. Strategies include utilizing delivery routes other than systemic administration, such as intrathoracic injection, which has demonstrated superiority in treating malignant pleural mesothelioma.167 Another approach involves genetic modification of CAR-T cells to enhance their penetration, such as expressing heparinase, an enzyme that degrades HSPG, which can enhance tumor infiltration and anti-tumor activity.168

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and host immune rejection

Allogeneic CAR-T therapies face two main challenges: graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and host immune rejection of foreign cells, both of which can limit the effectiveness and persistence of anti-tumor activity. To address these challenges, most allogeneic CAR-T therapies use gene editing to knock out endogenous T cell receptors (TCRs) and other proteins that may trigger host immune rejection. Gene editing tools like TALENs, ZFNs, or CRISPR/Cas9 are commonly used to target the TRAC gene and permanently knock out proteins that elicit immune rejection.169 However, gene editing also carries potential safety risks such as off-target effects and chromosomal abnormalities. Another strategy involves CD52 gene knockout to provide allogeneic T cells with resistance to lymphocyte depletion.170 Disrupting the B2M locus can also prevent host immune system destruction of allogeneic cells by preventing the formation of HLA-1 molecules on T cell surfaces and avoiding recognition as foreign entities.171

CAR-NK

CAR-NK involves introducing a CAR into NK cells, enabling them to specifically recognize and eliminate tumor cells. The cytotoxicity mechanisms of CAR-NK cells primarily include the secretion of cytotoxic granules such as Perforin and Granzyme, which directly kill target cells172 (Fig. 5a). Additionally, CAR-NK cells can express tumor necrosis factors like FasL and TRAIL, which induce apoptosis in target cells by binding to them.173 Another mechanism is ADCC, where CAR-NK cells express FcγRIII (CD16) receptors that bind to the Fc region of tumor antigen-specific antibodies.174 This activation leads to cytotoxicity and mediates the killing of target cells (Fig. 5a).Fig. 5 Other kind of cell therapy. a Preparation of CAR-NK and the mechanisms of CAR-NK cell. The preparation of CAR-NK cells involves isolating NK cells from sources such as umbilical cord blood or hematopoietic stem cells, followed by genetic modification to integrate a CAR construct that includes an antigen recognition domain. These cells are then expanded in vitro before being infused back into the patient. Once in the body, CAR-NK cells utilize their CAR to recognize and bind to specific tumor antigens, leading to their activation and the subsequent release of cytotoxic granules and cytokines to eliminate cancer cells. Additionally, the Fc receptor CD16 on NK cells can mediate ADCC, further enhancing their tumoricidal activity. b Preparation of TIL. The preparation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) involves isolating immune cells from a patient’s tumor tissue, where they have naturally infiltrated. The process typically includes surgical removal of the tumor mass, followed by the mechanical and enzymatic dissociation of the tissue to obtain a single-cell suspension. The cells are then cultured in vitro, and the TILs, which are often CD8+ T cells, are selectively expanded through various techniques, such as interleukin-2 (IL-2) stimulation. Once a sufficient number of TILs are obtained, they are infused back into the patient as part of the adoptive cell transfer therapy, aiming to boost the immune system’s ability to target and destroy cancer cells. c The structure comparation between TCR-T and CAR-T. TCR-T cells are genetically modified to express a specific T-cell receptor that recognizes MHC-presented antigens, allowing them to target a broad range of tumor-associated antigens, including those derived from intracellular proteins. In contrast, CAR-T cells are engineered to express a chimeric antigen receptor that includes an antibody-derived antigen-binding domain, enabling them to target cell surface antigens without MHC restriction. d The overview of CAR-M (workflow and generation). Once inside the patient’s body, the CAR-M cells use their CAR to identify and attach to tumor cells, which triggers the activation of the macrophages, leading to the subsequent engulfment and destruction of the tumor cells. Additionally, they secrete pro-inflammatory cytokines that recruit other cells from the immune microenvironment to join in the attack against the tumor. CAR-Ms are differentiated into first and second generations. The second generation includes an extra CD3 domain compared to the first, endowing it with enhanced pro-inflammatory properties and sustained M1 macrophage activation. This figure was created with Biorender.com

CAR-NK cell therapy offers several advantages over other cell therapies. Firstly, NK cells are widely available from various sources such as NK92 cell lines, PBMC, CD34 + HPC, UCB cells, and iPSC.175 Among them, NK92 cell lines are commonly used in clinical trials due to their unlimited proliferation capacity in vitro, ease of genetic modification, and no need for patient blood extraction. Secondly, CAR-NK cells are safer than other cell therapies due to their short survival time, reducing damage to non-tumor cells, and lower risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), as they produce mainly IFNγ and GM-CSF, which reduces the risk of CRS.176 Finally, CAR-NK cells are easier to produce for off-the-shelf use, as allogeneic NK cells do not express individual-specific TCR, and the risk of GVHD is much lower than that of allogeneic T cell therapy, making it more suitable for industrialization and large-scale production177 (Fig. 5a). Preclinical studies have examined several candidate targets for engineered CAR-NK therapy, including CD19 and CD22 for B-cell malignancies; CD38 and CD138 for multiple myeloma (MM); CD3, CD5, and CD7 for T-cell malignancies; and CD24, EGFR, HER-2 and NKG2D for solid tumors. There are ongoing clinical trials to assess the potential of CAR-NK (Table 4). In case of cord blood-derived CAR CD19-NK treatment for B-cell malignancies, one completed clinical trial (NCT03056339) demonstrated a promising efficacy with an ORR of 48.6%, and 1-year OS, and 1-year PFS rate of 68% and 32%, respectively. This suggests CAR-NK as a potential alternative for oncology treatment.178Table 4 Representative clinical trials on CAR-NK cell therapy for oncology treatment

Clinical trial No.	Phase	Estimated Enrolled Participants	Target	Source of NK cells	Malignancies	Preliminary Results	
NCT00995137	I	14	CD19	Peripheral blood	B-AML	NA	
NCT01974479	I	20	CD19	Peripheral blood	B-AML	Suspended	
NCT03056339	I/II	37	CD19	Cord blood	CD19 + B cell tumors	48.6% ORR, 1-year OS: 68%, 1-year PFS: 32%	
NCT03383978	I	42	HER-2	NK-92	Glioblastoma	NA	
NCT03415100	I	30	NKG2D ligands	Peripheral blood	Metastatic Solid Tumours	NA	
NCT03656705	I	2	Unknown	NK92	NSCLC	NA	
NCT03692663	Early Phase I	9	PSMA	Unknown	mCRPC	NA	
NCT03824964	Early Phase I	10	CD19/CD22	Unknown	R/R BCL	NA	
NCT03692767	Early Phase I	9	CD22	Unknown	R/R BCL	NA	
NCT03690310	Early Phase I	9	CD19	Unknown	R/R BCL	NA	
NCT03692637	Early Phase I	30	Mesothelin	Peripheral blood	EOC	NA	
NCT04245722	I	98	CD19 ± CD20 antibody (rituximab or obinutuzumab)	iPSC	R/R BCL or CLL	1 case repored PR	
NCT04623944	I	90	NKG2D ligands	Peripheral blood	R/R AML or Myelodysplastic Syndromes	4 CR/Cri	
NCT05215015	Early Phase I	18	CD33/CLL1	Unknown	AML	NA	
NCT04639739	Early Phase I	9	CD19	Unknown	NHL	NA	
NCT03940833	I/II	20	BCMA	NK92	Multiple Myeloma	NA	
NCT03940820	I/II	20	ROBO	Unknown	Solid tumors	NA	
NCT03941457	I/II	9	ROBO1	Unknown	Pancreatic Cancer	NA	
NCT03383978	I	42	HER2	NK92	Recurrent HER2-positive Glioblastoma	NA	
NCT05336409	I	75	CD19	iPSC	Relapsed or Refractory CD19-Positive B-Cell Malignancies	NA	
NCT04747093	I/II	12	CD19	Induced-T cell-like NK cells	Refractory B Cell Malignancies	NA	
NCT04796675	I	27	CD19	Cord blood	AML, CLL, NHL	NA	
NCT04887012	I	25	CD19	Peripheral blood	Refractory/Relapsed B-cell NHL	NA	
NCT05020678	I	150	CD19	Peripheral blood	R/R NHL, CLL or B-ALL	8 CR, 3 PD, 1 SD	
NCT05137275	Early Phase I	56	Trophoblast glycoprotein 5T4	Unknown	Locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors	NA	
NCT05008536	Early Phase I	27	BCMA	Umbilical & Cord Blood	Relapsed and refractory MM	NA	
NCT05247957	I	9	NKG2D	Cord blood	Recurrent refractory AML	NA	
NCT05213195	I	38	NKG2D	Unknown	Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer	NA	
NCT04847466	II	55	PD-L1 combined with pembrolizumab and N-803	NK-92	Advanced gastric or head and neck cancer	NA	
NCT05008575	I	27	CD33	Unknown	R/R AML	6 of 10 MRD-negative CR	
NCT05194709	Early Phase I	40	Trophoblast Glycoprotein 5T4	Unknown	Advanced Solid Tumors	NA	
NCT05379647	I	24	CD19 + CD20 antibody (rituximab)	iPSC	R/R BCL	NA	
NCT05182073	I	168	BCMA	iPSC	MM	NA	
NCT05110742	I/II	48	CD5	Cord Blood	Relapsed/ Refractory Hematological Malignances	NA	
NCT05092451	I/II	94	CD70	Cord Blood	Relapse/ Refractory Hematological Malignances	NA	
NCT05336409	I	75	CD19	iPSC	CD19-Positive B-Cell Malignancies	NA	
Data obtained from clinicaltrial.gov (Accessed on 24th March 2024)

TIL therapy

TIL therapy involves isolating TIL cells from tissue near the tumor, amplifying them in vitro with growth factor IL-2, and then reinfusing them into the patient’s body to expand the immune response and treat primary or metastatic tumors (Fig. 5b).179 TIL therapy focuses on identifying T cells that effectively target cancer’s specific mutations. After isolating these T cells, which are capable of specifically recognizing the tumor’s mutated cells, they are utilized to mount a cell-mediated immune response. This response primarily involves the direct destruction of tumor cells through the release of cytotoxins.

TIL therapy offers distinct advantages over other cell therapies. Notably, TILs are derived from tumor tissue, unlike the majority of cell therapies which originate from blood. This difference significantly influences the immune cells’ tumor recognition capabilities: over 60% of TILs can identify tumors, in contrast to less than 0.5% of blood-derived immune cells.180 Furthermore, TILs (Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes) exhibit enhanced specificity due to their well-adapted chemokine receptor systems, which facilitate more effective infiltration into tumor tissues. These TILs are capable of selectively targeting tumor-specific T cells, effectively overcoming tumor heterogeneity without engaging normal tissues. Their high degree of tumor specificity enables TILs to identify and precisely target a range of tumor antigens.

TILs therapy is now being investigated as a potential second-line treatment for a number of malignancies, most notably advanced/metastatic melanoma. Concluding from a meta-analysis involving 13 trials (published from 1988 to 2016), TIL+ recombinant IL-2 treatment for metastatic melanoma, excluding uveal melanoma, was found to have an ORR of 41% and an overall complete response rate (CRR) of 12%. The ORR for the high-dose IL-2 group was 43%, while for the low-dose group was 35%.181In a phase 2 clinical trial, TIL treatment was effectively used to treat uveal melanoma; 35% (7/20) of patients showed an ORR, with 1 patient obtaining CR and 6 patients achieving PR.182 In a recent clinical trial, TIL in combination with high-dose IL-2 treatment for metastatic melanoma demonstrated an 80% disease control rate and a 36% ORR. Surprisingly, in this trial, patients with immunotherapy-refractory melanoma achieved an ORR and DCR of 41% and 81% respectively, suggesting that TIL therapy may offer a viable alternative for treating anti-PD-1 failure.183 A multi-center, randomized, Phase 3 clinical trial compared TIL therapy with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma. The results showed that patients receiving TIL therapy had better ORR (49% vs. 21%), longer OS (25.8 months vs. 18.9 months), and longer PFS (7.2 months compared to 3.1 months for ipilimumab).184 These findings suggested that for patients with advanced melanoma, TIL treatment may be more effective than immunotherapy. Future research should focus more on the complexity and variability of TIL preparations and assess the efficacy of TIL therapy in combination with immune checkpoint blockades.

TCR-T

TCR-T is a gene editing technology that introduces the genes of T-cell receptors (TCRs) into the patient’s own T cells. This enables the expression of exogenous TCRs that can specifically recognize tumor antigens and have the activity of killing tumor cells. The TCR is a heterodimer composed of two transmembrane peptide chains, an α chain, and a β chain. Each chain contains a constant region and a variable region. The variable region recognizes and binds to antigen-presenting MHC molecules.185 TCRs bind with CD3 to form the TCR-CD3 complex, which activates T cells by recognizing and binding antigens presented by MHC molecules, promoting T-cell proliferation and differentiation186 (Fig. 3b).

CAR-T therapy uses artificially designed single-chain antibody fragments (CARs) to recognize antigens only on the surface of tumors and activate T cells through intracellular co-stimulatory molecules. TCR-T therapy, on the other hand, can recognize both surface and internal antigens of tumors, making it more suitable for solid tumor treatment. TCR-T therapy relies on affinity-optimized or naturally occurring TCRs to recognize antigens presented by tumor MHC molecules, transmitting stimulating signals through the TCR-CD3 complex. TCR-T therapy possesses the capability to recognize an extensive repertoire of hundreds or even thousands of intratumoral antigens, rendering it highly potent against solid tumors (Fig. 5c). Moreover, TCR-T cell therapy closely mimics the functionality of endogenous T cells in the human body.

Tumor-associated antigen (TAA), including tissue differentiation antigen (TDA), cancer germline antigen (CGA), and tumor-specific antigen (TSA), which comprise mutation-associated neoantigen, viral antigen and alternative tumor-specific antigens, represent two major classes of targets for TCR-T targets. The treatment with TDA-targeting TCR-T cell therapy has shown disappointing preliminary outcomes in multiple clinical trials, with an ORR of less than 30%.187 In a Phase 2 clinical trial using MAGE-A4-targeting TCR-T cell treatment for advanced solid tumors, encouraging findings were reported, including a median OS of 15.4 months, a median PFS of 3.8 months, and an estimated 1-year OS rate of 90%.188 Clinical trials continue to evaluate additional therapeutic targets, such as TSA, neoantigen, or viral antigen. Published data demonstrated that 50% of patients in a clinical trial using viral protein HPV-16 E7 TCR-T cell treatment for metastatic HPV-associated cancers had a positive response.189 In addition, results from eight ongoing clinical trials investigating the combination of anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 and TCR-T cell treatment for metastatic solid tumors are not yet available.

CAR-M

With the advancement in macrophage-based scientific research, CAR-M has emerged as a new direction in cellular therapy. A key distinction between macrophages and T cells is that macrophages are the first responders in the body’s defense against viral infections. In 2018, Dr. Saar Gill and Dr. Michael Klichinsky, CAR-T cell therapy experts from the University of Pennsylvania, founded Carisma Therapeutics with a focus on developing CAR-M therapy for cancer treatment.190 In 2020, they published a paper in the journal Nature Biotechnology introducing a HER2-targeting CAR-M. In a SKOV3 human ovarian cancer mouse model, CAR-M demonstrated effective tumor killing and extended overall survival in mice.191 Additionally, CAR-M exhibited the ability to resist TAM-mediated polarization towards M2 macrophages and actively convert them into M1 macrophages.192 Macrophages recognize and engulf specific cancer cells through CAR while activating downstream inflammatory pathways. This leads to recruitment and activation of antigen-presenting cells and T cells. The body can maintain a long-lasting memory of the killing process to prevent tumor cell resurgence. At present, CAR-M is developing rapidly. The first-generation macrophage CAR uses TIR to replace CD3ζ in CAR-T, enhancing M1 polarization and immune activation. Second-generation CAR-M connects TIR and CD3ζ, leading to strong immunity and extended M1 activation193 (Fig. 5d). However, several technical challenges remain to be addressed. Firstly, a significant limitation is the restricted number of cells that can be procured for use. While T cells and NK cells from patients can be expanded in vitro, macrophages do not proliferate in this setting. Recently, Jin Zhang’s team published their findings in Nature Immunology, demonstrating that CAR-iM can be generated from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and effectively eliminate tumors through cytoburial mechanisms.194–197 This research offers a potential solution to the issue of cell population limitation. Secondly, like CAR-T, CAR-M may also face challenges such as migration and inhibition within the tumor microenvironment, which need further research and investigation.

Clinical trials of CAR-M treatment are being considered for research involving humans. According to recently published research, three patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma and ovarian cancer experienced stable disease following intraperitoneal delivery of mesothelin-targeting CAR-M, which was generated from PBMC.198 In another study, three out of four patients (75%) with HER2-overexpressing solid tumors showed good tolerance and response to treatment with another anti-HER2 CAR M (CT-0508), achieving stablilization of their conditions within an eight-week follow-up.199 Other two clinical trials NCT05007379 (patients’ organoid derived-CAR-M for breast cancer) and NCT05138458 (PBMC derived-CAR-M for refractory/ relapsed T-cell lymphoma) are still ongoing.

The comparison between different cell therapy

The cellular therapies mentioned utilize diverse technologies and demonstrate their respective potentials in cancer treatment. CAR-T cell therapy is renowned for its significant efficacy in certain hematological cancers but may induce severe cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and has limited effectiveness against solid tumors; CAR-NK cell therapy is considered a potential alternative due to its lower toxicity and CRS risks, yet its clinical application is still in the early stages; TIL therapy leverages immune cells extracted directly from tumors, offering high tumor specificity, but the preparation process is complex and costly; TCR-T therapy can recognize a broad range of tumor antigens, particularly intracellular antigens, but its development and manufacturing are more complex and clinical data are limited; CAR-M therapy enhances the tumor-engulfing capabilities of macrophages and may improve the tumor microenvironment, but as an emerging therapy, its clinical applications and long-term outcomes still require further research and validation. Overall, these cellular therapies in cancer treatment warrant further exploration in the future, while also facing technical challenges, safety concerns, and cost-effectiveness considerations.

Genetic therapy

According to the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (ASGCT), gene therapy is described as “the introduction, removal, or modification of a person’s genetic code to treat or cure a disease.” This therapeutic approach involves directly introducing genetic material (usually DNA or RNA) into cells to alter genetic information and biological functions. Although it has shown promise in preclinical research and early-phase clinical trials, it still faces many challenges, including ensuring the safety of the treatment, improving the efficiency of gene delivery, and avoiding immune responses.

mRNA

From May 2005 to March 2024, in total, there are at least 150 clinical studies related to oncology mRNA, including 89 clinical studies on mRNA drugs, 40 studies on mRNA therapies targeting dendritic cells (DCs), 18 studies on neoantigens, two studies on the treatment of HBV-positive HCC, and 1 study on the modulation of immune factors (Supplementary Table 2). Among them, the development of research targeting neoantigens has progressed rapidly since the onset of the COVID-19. Thirteen related clinical trials took place between 2022 and March 2024. Furthermore, 53.9% (48/89) of mRNA drug studies have seen an explosion in activity since the start of COVID-19. These results highlight the fervent pace of mRNA research. mRNA has shown promising efficacy in encoding neoantigens for cancer vaccines, tumor-associated antigens (TAAs) for activating dendritic cells, tumor suppressor factors for inhibiting tumor progression, CAR for engineered T-cell therapies, and genome-editing proteins for gene therapy. We have the details of mRNA vaccines in the following part.

mRNA therapy is an emerging medical technology that uses mRNA-based molecules to treat or prevent diseases. Compared to other therapies, mRNA technology has numerous advantages. It can produce a variety of vaccines and therapeutic drugs in a shorter time frame. The production cycle for mRNA, from In Vitro Transcription (IVT) to the preparation of mRNA-LNP complexes, takes approximately 10 days.200 Upon administration into the organism, mRNA does not integrate into the host genome, therefore, the risk of mutations can be avoided. It degrades in the body after a brief period of action, resulting in no long-term toxicity. Moreover, mRNA therapy does not require a viral vector, which also reduces the risk of infection.

However, there are also some disadvantages of the mRNA treatment. First, delivering mRNA molecules to specific cells or tissues presents challenges and requires effective delivery systems, such as lipid nanoparticles (LNPs). Secondly, naked mRNA molecules are less stable in vitro and are susceptible to degradation by RNases, necessitating higher-quality storage and transportation systems. Thirdly, while mRNA therapies are generally considered to have low immunogenicity, in some cases, they may activate the immune system, leading to adverse reactions. Fourthly, targeting tissues other than the liver (which is the primary target for mRNA therapies) requires improved delivery systems. Additionally, the long-term effects and safety of mRNA therapies are not yet fully established.

ZFNs technology

Genome-editing modalities, including zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), and the CRISPR/Cas9 system, enable targeted genome modification in eukaryotic cells. They induce double-strand DNA breaks (DSBs) at specific loci and leverage cellular repair mechanisms, such as non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) or homology-directed repair (HDR), to precisely edit genetic sequences.201–203 Moreover, the emergence of Prime Editing has expanded the scope of precise genetic manipulation. These methods have significantly advanced cancer gene identification, tumor cell epigenetic regulation, targeted delivery systems, the development of oncological animal models, and the clinical application of cancer immunotherapy and prophylaxis.204–206

Zinc-finger nucleases (ZFNs) represent a sophisticated gene-editing platform that integrates the sequence-specific recognition of zinc finger proteins (ZFPs) with the DNA cleavage function of the FokI nuclease. This technology enables the precise targeting and cleavage of predetermined genomic sequences, thereby triggering the cell’s intrinsic repair machinery to execute site-specific genetic modifications (Fig. 6a).207 Predominantly, naturally occurring restriction enzymes recognize palindromic sequences of 4–6 base pairs (bp), whereas a solitary zinc-finger module, comprising approximately 30 amino acids, discerns a 3-bp DNA segment.208 By arranging multiple zinc-finger modules in a tandem array, ZFNs can discern sequences ranging from 9 to 18 bp, thereby achieving remarkable specificity within the expansive human genomic landscape, which encompasses approximately 6.8 billion base pairs.209 This advancement has been pivotal for the accurate localization of genetic sequences across the human genome.210Fig. 6 Various modes of genome editing. a ZFNs: By designing multiple zinc finger proteins to bind with specific DNA sequences, they guide the nuclease to cut the target gene, achieving precise gene editing through NHEJ and HDR. b TALENs: Specific transcription activator-like effector molecules are fused with nuclease domains. Two TALEN modules are necessary to bind to the target site, with a FokI nuclease fused to the DNA-binding domains, enabling precise gene editing through NHEJ and HDR. c CRISPR-Cas9: This system employs the Cas9 protein, guided by RNA molecules, to enable precise DNA cleavage at specific target sequences. It achieves accurate gene editing through NHEJ and HDR. d Base editing: an advanced form of Cas genome editing that enables the substitution of specific bases without inducing double-stranded breaks. This technique is categorized into two main types: C•G to T•A Base Editors (CBEs) and A•T to G•C Base Editors (ABEs). e Prime editing: The procedure involves constructing a prime editor complex, which includes a Cas domain, an RT (reverse transcriptase) domain, and a pegRNA. This complex searches for the DNA segment containing the target mutation and introduces a nick just in front of the mutation site. The nicked DNA strand then serves as a primer for DNA synthesis within the RT complex. The corrected, nicked strand is preferentially used over the original diseased strand, and the cell’s natural DNA repair mechanisms subsequently remove the diseased strand. This figure was created with Biorender.com

Furthermore, the strategic pairing of two ZFNs with distinct sequence specificities can facilitate cleavage at non-inverted repeat sites within a genome, provided they are correctly positioned and oriented.209 In the realm of cancer therapeutics, ZFNs have been harnessed to modulate both tumor cells and T cells. A clinical trial has documented the efficacy of ZFN-603 and ZFN-758 in treating high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN).211,212 Additionally, the employment of adeno-associated virus serotype 6 (AAV6) as a delivery vector has enabled the efficient correction of CCR5 or AAVS1 in CD8 and CD4 T cells.213

Despite ZFNs’ potential in cancer therapy, they encounter several clinical challenges. The synthesis of ZF proteins is less modular than the CRISPR system, necessitating intricate protein engineering for the design and assembly of DNA recognition sequences, which is both technically demanding and costly. Moreover, ZFNs are susceptible to off-target effects and non-specific binding. To mitigate these issues, researchers have engineered single-residue substitutions within the FoKI domain, which maintain on-target activity while diminishing off-target efficiency, exemplified by a 98% reduction in TRAC gene expression in T cells.201 However, ZFNs exhibit lower efficiency compared to other gene-editing modalities, such as CRISPR/Cas9. With the advent of CRISPR/Cas9, ZFNs have receded from the forefront of gene therapy for cancer. Nonetheless, ZFNs retain a significant role in specific applications where extreme sequence specificity is paramount, particularly in gene-editing tasks that require high precision.

TALEN technology

Followed the footstep of ZFNs technology, the TALEN technology was developed in 2010.214 TALEN is composed of a non-specific DNA cleavage domain and a sequence-specific DNA-binding domain, which contains a highly conserved repeat sequence from transcription activator-like effector (TALE). Two TALEN modules are required to bind to the target site, and a FokI nuclease is fused to the DNA-binding domains to cleave DNA (Fig. 6b). The DNA binding domain of TALENs is composed of reiterated TALE modules, wherein the 12th and 13th amino acids within each module dictate the precise DNA binding site. By strategically altering these amino acids, TALENs can be engineered to recognize virtually any DNA sequence with high specificity. Also, because the TALENs must bind to adjacent target sites simultaneously to elicit a DSB, this reduces the chance of off-target effects compared to other technologies.

In contrast to ZFNs, which utilize a 30-amino-acid motif to bind three base pairs of DNA, TALENs necessitate 33–35 amino acids to identify a single base pair.215 This disparity in size can impede the co-delivery of both TALEN monomers within a single viral vector, particularly when packaging capacity is constrained. Furthermore, the propensity for instability in tandemly repeated sequences, as observed in TALENs, presents challenges for viral vector-based delivery. It is well known that multiple sequence repeats in TALEN genes hampers the use of lentiviral vectors. The lentiviral vectors can efficiently package TALEN-encoding mRNAs, but recombination during reverse transcription impedes successful delivery.216 Adenoviral systems are recommended as a valuable TALENs gene delivery platform.217

Although TALEN technology is not currently the prevalent method in the application of CAR-T therapy for cancer, it has been employed in specific research initiatives. A salient study from 2015 demonstrated the strategic use of TALENs to inactivate the TCR and CD52 genes within the CAR19-T cells, thereby averting the host’s immune rejection typically encountered in autologous CAR-T therapies and advancing the prospect of allogeneic CAR-T cell transplantation in CAR19 T treatment.218 Additionally, there’s a clinical trial about designated TALENs (T27 and T512) targeting HPV16 E6 and E7 to induce cell apoptosis in CIN.219 In summary, TALENs offer straightforward design and broad gene-targeting capabilities, but their potential in cancer therapy necessitates further exploration.

CRISPR therapy

CRISPR/Cas9 therapy

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-CRISPR-associated protein (Cas)9 (CRISPR/Cas9) is a revolutionary gene-editing technology that allows researchers to make precise and efficient edits in the genome of cells. CRISPR-related gene-editing technology is presently regarded as one of the most prominent tools. The most used CRISPR system is the Type II CRISPR-Cas9 system from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9). It involves the utilization of the Cas9 protein, which is directed by RNA molecules, to facilitate precise DNA cleavage at targeted sequences. After the DNA cleavage, the cell’s inherent repair pathways can be harnessed to either incorporate or excise genetic material (Fig. 6c). This CRISPR-based therapeutic intervention holds promise in the treatment of genetic disorders through the rectification of pathogenic mutations and has additionally been investigated as a prospective therapeutic strategy for malignancies.

CRISPR has become a highly refined technology for gene editing in ex vivo adoptive T-cell therapies. Numerous clinical studies have employed CRISPR to eliminate PD1 expression on T cells to enhance their anti-cancer properties.220–225 But since this technology is still very new, only one clinical trial (NCT02793856)—a dose-escalation study of ex vivo knocked-out, expanded, and selected PD-1 knockout T cells from autologous origin—has been completed. Others are ongoing. One ongoing clinical trial (NCT03545815) evaluates the feasibility and safety of CRISPR-Cas9 mediated PD-1 and TCR gene-knocked out chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells in phase 1 patients with mesothelin-positive multiple solid tumors. Another ongoing trial (NCT03081715) plans for 16 advanced esophageal cancer patients to receive two cycles of CRISPR knockout PD-1 engineered T cell infusion. Knocking out HLA in allogeneic T cells to reduce immune rejection is also a common procedural approach.226 A clinical study initiated on March 20, 2024 (NCT06321289), employs the CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing tool to simultaneously knock out the endogenous receptor α constant (TRAC), human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A/B, CIITA, and programmed death 1 (PD-1) genes in T cells from healthy donors to observe the reduction in GvHD toxicity with this strategy. Additionally, CRISPR-Cas9 serves as a mainstream technology for synthetic lethal screening of drugs, aiding in the development of anticancer drugs. Current exploration areas mainly include intrinsic cellular mechanisms, such as interactions between BRCA-PARP227 and BRAF-EGFR.228

However, applying CRISPR directly in the body raises several key issues, including precise targeting to avoid unintended effects, preventing unnecessary immune reactions, and ensuring the long-term efficacy and stability of the treatment. It is crucial to select an appropriate in vivo delivery system. Clinical trials using AAVs as a delivery system for CRISPR in vivo cancer treatment in patients have not yet been conducted. However, preclinical studies have shown a wealth of potential applications in brain tumors,229,230 lung cancer,231–233, and liver cancer.234–236

Base editing

Base editing is a modified Cas genome editing method that can replace specific bases without any double-stranded breaks. It is split into two classes: C•G to T•A Base Editors (CBEs) and A•T to G•C Base Editors237 (ABEs). CBEs consist of 3 components: Cas9n for DNA locus binding, a cytidine deaminase enzyme to transform cytosine to uracil, and an Uracil Glycosylase Inhibitor (UGI) to protect the uracil intermediate from Uracil DNA Glycosylase237,238 (UDG). ABEs consist of Cas9n and an adenosine deaminase.237,239 The Cas9n first binds to the target locus, allowing the cytidine deaminase or adenosine deaminase to deaminate C or A respectively, nicking the top strand, and allowing the cell’s indigenous DNA repair systems tothe DNA to repair the damage and edit the DNA to the correct base237,239 (Fig. 6d).

The fusion of rat APOBEC1 (rAPOBEC1) and Cas9 constitutes the earliest version of the cytosine base editor (BE1). Subsequently, by introducing UGI and modifying the activity of Cas9, researchers have developed more efficient versions of CBE, such as BE2, BE3, and BE4. Improved Cas9 variants such as eCas9, Cas9-HF are used to decrease off-target base editing237,240; BE3-Gam and BE4-Gam, where the Gam protein protects DSBs in DNA, are used to reduce accidental locus-based indels and increase product purity, and many other variants are produced.241

Base editing can be used in a cancer therapeutic setting by improving CAR-T technology or direct base editing. Studies have shown that autologous CAR-T cells may be produced through multiplex gene KO using base editors when combined with cell sorting. A current limitation of CAR-T therapy is the cost of allogenic CAR-T cells being used. The use of autologous CAR-T cells would require KO of MHC I and II, which can be done much more efficiently with BE combined with cell sorting.242 Alternatively, one study by Sayed et al. shows the potential of modifying genetic mutations in cancer cells using base editing by correcting KRAS and TP53 mutations on cancer organoids.243

Prime editing

Prime editing is a new modified Cas genome editing method that is able to search and replace the targeted gene without the need for double-strand breaks or donor DNA.244 The procedure works by constructing a Prime Editor complex (PE) with a Cas nickase domain and Reverse Transcriptase (RT) domain along with a pegRNA, which will have its search domain and replace domain on the same strand,244 with a spacer on the 5’ end and the primer binding site and edit template on the 3’ end. The Prime Editor complex searches for the DNA with the target mutation and nicks the strand just in front of the mutation.244The nicked DNA strand then primes for DNA synthesis in the RT complex.244 The corrected nicked strand is preferentially preferred over the diseased original strand, and the cell’s indigenous DNA repair mechanisms will excise the diseased strand.244 The PE will search for the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) and align the photospacer with the spacer on the pegRNA.244 The PAM strand will be nicked and the 3’ side of the pegRNA will hybridize with the PAM strand, allowing the RT to polymerize edited DNA on the target site.244 The PE will then leave the strand, leaving the edited DNA with a 3’ flap containing the edit.244 The 3’ flap replace the original unedited strand, leaving the unedited 5’ flap to be removed.244 The mismatched DNA strand is then repaired to incorporate the edit244 (Fig. 6e).

The advantages of prime editing are multifold. It is capable of executing all different types of single-base substitutions, multiple-base substitutions, and small indels.245 It also has high editing and on-target precision, above contemporary CRISPR-Cas9 and other base editing methods.245 However, prime editing also involves many complicated steps, and despite having fewer moving parts than the other methods. Hence, many of the first developmental efforts involved improvements to the PE system. The first version of PE, hereby called PE1, have a low efficiency, and subsequent versions developed incorporated improved RT domains (PE2),244 optimized pegRNAs(PE3, G-PE, sPE, ePE),244,246 improved nicking strategy (PE3, PE3b),244 the addition of transient expression of a dominant MMR protein (MLH1dn) (PE4,PE5),247 addition of the sgRNA for nicking, enhanced nuclear localization (PE*, PEmax),246,247 and many other modifications. A possible drawback of the PE system may include genotoxicity to hematopoietic stem cells, according to Fiumara et al., that while the PE system have a higher accuracy that Cas9 and Base Editing, PE can still induce DNA DSBs and deletions at the target site.248

Prime editing is a versatile tool with many potential applications in cancer modelling and therapy. A study by Liu et al. has demonstrated the use of prime editing in cancer modeling by increasing tumor burden through somatic engineering, mutating the β-catenin gene with PE2* to increase tumor formation rates.249 A recent study by Davis et al. has confirmed that prime editing can be delivered and successfully executed in the mouse brain, liver, and heart using dual AAV delivery, suggesting a possible therapy for hard-to-reach areas;250 meanwhile, a study by Abuhamad et al. is able to revert TP53 mutation using prime editing breast cancer cells.251 A study by Jang et al. has similarly been able to correct oncogenic G12 and G13 KRAS mutations with prime editors in HEK293T/17 and human cancer cells in vitro.252 Currently, Prime Medicine, a start-up created by the original inventors of prime editing A. Anzalone and D. Li, had made some headway by multiplexing Prime Editing with PASSIGE, creating CAR-T cells by non-viral one-step delivery with high efficiency.253

Delivery system

Currently, adeno-associated viruses (AAV) and lipid nanoparticles (LNP) are among the most advanced delivery systems in clinical use.

AAV delivery system

AAV, a single-stranded DNA virus without an envelope, has a genome length of approximately 4.7 kilobases (kb) and features two T-shaped inverted terminal repeats (ITRs). The genome encodes multiple proteins, including Rep and Cap proteins, which play roles in viral replication, assembly, and packaging. Different AAV subtypes have different tissue specificity. Selecting appropriate AAVs can achieve efficient gene delivery in specific tissues, thereby providing more precise and effective means for gene therapy. For example, the AAV9 subtype has a higher affinity for the heart and liver, while the AAV2 subtype exhibits greater selectivity for retinal cells.254 AAVs are widely present in humans and animals and is generally considered non-pathogenic. It has become the preferred delivery vector for gene therapy due to its broad host range, low immunogenicity, low cytotoxicity, multiple serotypes, and low frequency of integration into the host genome. However, there’s some limitations of the AAV delivery system. First of all, AAV’s limited packaging capacity and gene length restriction restrict its ability to carry payloads larger than 5 kb such as the SpCas9 protein. To overcome this problem, smaller CRISPR constructs, such as SaCas9, Nme2Cas9, Cas12f, Cas12j, sgRNA, etc., were used.255 Also, the approach to split the payload into two separate constructs allowed for more efficient packaging and delivery using viral vectors such as AAVs. Another strategy involves the use of overlapping AAV vectors, which can enhance the recombination efficiency and encourage natural homologous recombination (HR) between the vectors. Additionally, trans-splicing vectors are utilized to achieve precise and controlled gene expression. These vectors contain a splicing donor sequence that can be spliced into the target gene, leading to the production of a functional protein. Split inteins, on the other hand, are used to facilitate the splicing of two protein fragments, allowing for the reconstitution of a functional protein. Another concern with AAVs treatment is its potential impact on the liver. Reports indicate that AAV vectors have a high affinity for the liver.256 When targeting the liver, a lower dose is required, whereas higher doses are needed to treat other tissues. However, clinical trials with higher doses of AAVs have raised the risk of liver-related side effects. Several children died from liver function abnormalities after receiving high doses of AT132 (3×10^14 vg/kg in 2020; 1.3×10^14 vg/kg in 2021).257 In 2022, Novartis reported that two children died from acute liver failure after treatment with Zolgensma.258 Five Airedale terriers with hemophilia A developed cellular proliferation in the liver after receiving AAV8 delivery of the FVII gene.259 These issues have sparked controversy surrounding AAV therapy. Reducing the dosage of AAVs is a reliable measure to lower the risk. Sharif Tabebordbar et al. found that MyoAAV can be used for treatment with smaller doses, especially MyoAAV2A-CK8 for mouse treatment, which is 100 times lower than the dose used in the AT132 study.260 ASC Therapeutics has enhanced the secretion efficiency of therapeutic proteins by special gene modifications and optimization of the cellular unfolded protein response (UPR), thereby reducing the required dose of AAV in gene therapy.261 These approaches offer innovative ways to optimize the delivery and expression of therapeutic genes, providing researchers with tools to fine-tune gene expression and enhance the efficacy of gene therapies.

LNP delivery system

Lipid nanoparticle (LNP) systems have shown promise in the delivery of CRISPER therapeutics. These systems are composed of four main lipid components: ionizable lipids, helper lipids, cholesterol, and polyethylene glycol (PEG)-ylated lipids. These components form the structure that encapsulates and protects mRNA molecules, enabling them to resist degradation in the body and effectively deliver to target cells through the bloodstream. Compared to viral vectors, LNPs have numerous advantages. First, they have strong design flexibility because they are composed of four lipids, and the ratio of different lipids can be adjusted to achieve various effects. Additionally, they can anchor other ligands onto their own carriers. For example, tumor-specific antigens (TSAs) or hydrophobic antibody derivatives can be anchored on the surface of functionalized LNPs to enhance their targeting capabilities.262 Second, as a non-viral carrier, LNP generally has better safety and lower immunogenicity compared to viruses. Moreover, LNPs possess an innate adjuvant effect, which can promote CD4 + T helper 1 (TH1) mediated anti-cancer responses.263

For its disadvantage, the current side effects of LNPs mainly fall into three categories: allergic reactions, immune responses, and liver effects. At the same time, due to capacity limitations, LNPs have certain constraints when delivering complex genes and base editing. At present, the issue of liver burden can be addressed by optimizing the ionizable lipid and reducing the dosage. The percentage of PEG-lipids, cholesterol, and helper lipids, such as 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, can be adjusted to enhance its stability and reduce toxicity.264

LNP, as a delivery system for mRNA vaccines, has been successfully used for prophylactic vaccines against pathogens and is being tested in clinical trials in oncology The targeting efficiency of different LNPs in combination with sgRNA within various tissues in patients needs additional research. One preclinical data has demonstrated that targeted sgPLK1-cLNPs significantly enhance survival rates, achieving an 80% improvement in ovarian tumor mice models.265 The other two target PLK1 in A375 tumor-bearing mice266 and HepG2 tumor bearing mice267 didn’t show sufficient response. The application of LNPs for the delivery of CRISPR in cancer therapy is still in its early stages and requires further research and clinical trials to validate its safety and efficacy.

PNPs delivery system

In addition to lipid nanoparticles, polymer nanoparticles (PNPs) are another promising delivery system for gene therapeutics. PNPs are widely used as drug delivery systems, offering controlled release of drugs, enhancing the solubility of poorly soluble drugs, and targeted delivery to tissues or cells. A critical advantage of PNPs is similar to LNPs for customization and integration of diverse physicochemical characteristics to enhance their effectiveness. Moreover, PNPs are easy to be engineered as carriers, creating drug delivery systems that are both non-toxic and biocompatible. Several studies have been conducted on the use of PNPs as carriers for CRISPR in cancer applications. One study reported that they successfully established a co-delivery PNPs system composed of sg-VEGFR2 and Cas9, which led to more than 70% suppression of HepG2-induced HCC tumor progression.268 Additionally, Wu et al. utilized an sgHMGA2 PNPs system to achieve high-efficiency delivery (95%) and editing (82%) in gastric cancer.269 This system was shown to decrease immune responses in mice that actively targeted breast cancer tumor cells, aiding in the prevention of tumor re-growth upon re-challenge. Moreover, this approach was found to induce immunological memory, conferring resistance to lung metastatic spread.270 As the application of PNPs in gene editing is still in its infancy, no adverse events have been reported to date.

Challenges to gene editors

In the development of gene therapies, simplicity of design is important, but it must be balanced with the complexity of achieving tropism and avoiding off-target effects. Long-term nuclease expression requires longer safety studies due to mutations, and in vivo characterization is necessary to account for species differences between NHPs, mice, and humans.263 Delivering therapies to organs other than the liver requires further study, and the limitations of different delivery systems must also be considered.

Neoantigen and cancer vaccine

Genomic instability and mutations are fundamental characteristics of tumorigenesis, enabling the hallmark capabilities of cancer, including the maintenance of proliferative signaling and resistance to cell death.271 Concurrently, mutations can generate aberrant peptides that are presented by the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), which may activate anti-tumor adaptive immunity by lymphocytes.272,273 This process underlies the principle of neoantigens and cancer vaccines. Given the unique expression of neoantigens in tumor cells, they are regarded as an ideal target for tumor vaccines.

Neoantigen identification and validation

Genetic alterations in cancer may result from single nucleotide variants, insertions, deletions, gene fusions, and oncogenic virus infections.274–277 Thanks to the development of multi-omics technologies, including genome sequencing and mass spectrometry for the proteome, it is now possible to efficiently screen for potential neoantigens in a large pool. Through next-generation sequencing data of tumor genomes or transcriptomes compared to normal ones, neoantigens can be preliminarily predicted in silico.278 Subsequently, computational algorithms that analyze the binding affinity between MHC molecules and the predicted neoantigens/peptides are used to select optimal candidates.279,280 Following bioinformatic prediction, experimental validation should be conducted to assess the TCR recognition of the peptide-MHC (pMHC) complexes using T cells derived from patients or healthy donors281,282 (Fig. 7). However, reports indicate that only a few bioinformatically predicted neoantigens/peptides are recognized by T cells,281 leading to controversy regarding the reliability of these predictions. An alternative approach to obtain immunogenic neoantigens/peptides involves loading autologous antigen-presenting cells (APCs), such as dendritic cells (DCs), with tumor lysates and validating them ex vivo by co-culturing the lysate-pulsed DCs with T cells.283Fig. 7 The process of cancer vaccine development. The preparation of cancer vaccines is a meticulous process involving multiple steps, aimed at developing vaccines that can stimulate the immune system to target cancer cells. This process begins with the selection and identification of specific tumor antigens, followed by the design of the vaccine, which may include peptides, recombinant proteins, genetic vectors, or dendritic cells. Subsequently, the vaccine undergoes immunological testing in vitro and is evaluated for its safety and efficacy in animal models. After successfully passing preclinical research, the vaccine proceeds to human clinical trials, including Phase I, II, and III trials, to assess its safety, immunogenicity, and therapeutic effectiveness. This figure was created with Biorender.com

Vaccination

After screening and validation, immunogenic neoantigens can be used in various forms of vaccines, including peptides, nucleic acid-based vaccines, and lysate-pulsed dendritic cells (DCs).

Peptide vaccines

Peptides are the most common form of cancer vaccines, consisting of either a single synthetic peptide or a mixture of several synthetic peptides.284–286 Clinical trials have confirmed that personalized peptide-based vaccines can induce tumor-specific immunity and long-term immune memory across various cancer types.287–289 To enhance the immune response, immunoadjuvants are often used in conjunction with peptide-based vaccines,290,291 as will be discussed in detail in the relevant section.

mRNA vaccines

mRNA vaccines have proven to be an efficient and safe therapeutic method during the COVID-19 pandemic, indicating a promising future in cancer immunotherapy. Compared to peptide-based vaccines, mRNA vaccines can encode full-length neoantigens or carry multiple neoantigens on a single mRNA molecule.292 To ensure stability and intracellular delivery, nanoparticles, such as lipids, are often used to facilitate the transport of mRNA vaccines.293 Several mRNA cancer vaccines have recently completed Phase I/II trials. Autogene cevumeran, an mRNA vaccine containing 20 personalized neoantigens delivered by lipoplex nanoparticles, showed T-cell expansion in 8 out of 16 pancreatic cancer patients in a Phase I study, with benefits in recurrence-free survival (RFS) after vaccination.294 Another personalized mRNA vaccine, mRNA-4650, contains 20 neoantigens based on sequencing data from individual patients. A Phase I/II study involving four patients with metastatic gastrointestinal cancer who received mRNA-4650 vaccination showed no objective clinical responses, although the vaccine elicited T-cell responses against predicted neoepitopes.295 Therefore, enhancing the immunogenicity, stability, and delivery methods of mRNA vaccines should be considered.

DNA vaccines

Similar to mRNA-based cancer vaccines, DNA vaccines are constructed using an expression vector, such as a plasmid, to encode the neoantigens identified through sequencing,296 which are more stable and easier to store and transport. Due to these advantages, DNA vaccines are increasingly applied in clinical practice. In 2014, a Phase I study focusing on a plasmid-based mammaglobin-A (MAM-A) DNA vaccine reported that the vaccine was efficient in eliciting cytotoxic antigen-specific T cells, and vaccinated breast cancer patients experienced prolonged PFS compared to those who did not receive vaccination due to HLA-screening failure.297 Another plasmid-based DNA vaccine targeting insulin-like growth factor binding protein-2 (IGFBP-2) also presented an activation effect on the T helper-1 immune response in ovarian cancer patients, as both IFNγ-secreting T cells and T-bet positive T cells were increased after immunization.298 A double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial targeting human papillomavirus (HPV) proteins in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) provided more compelling evidence of the therapeutic effects of DNA vaccines.299 Furthermore, one Phase IIb study aimed to assess VGX-3100, a double plasmid vaccine encoding HPV protein E6 and E7. After 36 weeks of follow-up, the result showed a significant difference in histopathological regression between the two groups (49.5% of the VGX-3100 group (107 patients) and 30.6% (36 patients) of the placebo group), indicating the potential of VGX-3100 as a non-surgical treatment option for patients with CIN2/3.

Dendritic vaccines

Since the dendritic cell is the key antigen-presenting cell to stimulate adaptive immunity,300 neoantigen-loaded dendritic cells (DCs) provide a direct way to initiate anti-tumor immunity.301 Whole-tumor lysate is the most used method for neoantigen loading. DCVax-L, an autologous whole-tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccine, demonstrated improved survival both in patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma.302 Additionally, synthetic peptides, based on sequencing and prediction analysis, can be used for antigen loading. A pilot study explored the efficacy of the personalized peptide-loaded dendritic cell vaccine, Neo-DCVac, in patients with advanced lung cancer.283 The T-cell response assay verified a strong increase in IFNγ secretion and cytotoxicity, thereby strengthening the efficiency of tumor therapy.

The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of cancer vaccine

Unlike other types of drugs, cancer vaccines are preventive in nature. Therefore, their first advantage is that they can effectively suppress the occurrence of tumors. In addition, research has shown that cancer vaccines have the potential to stimulate long-term immune memory, providing patients with lasting protection and reducing the risk of cancer recurrence. However, the main disadvantage of cancer vaccines is based on the issue of neoantigens. Due to the individual variability of antigens and the interference of the immune microenvironment, the efficacy of cancer vaccines targeting neoantigens exhibits inconsistencies.

Though great success has been achieved, it remains a pressing issue to be addressed in cancer vaccine. The most worrisome problem is the immunogenicity of the vaccine, as a considerable part of patients still showed no response to various cancer vaccines. One practical method is to add adjuvant along with vaccines to enhance innate immune response. Improving the form or sequence of synthetic peptides to enhance their efficiency of binding to MHC is another solution that could be taken into consideration.

Oncolytic virus

The history of oncolytic viruses (OVs) can be traced back to the early 20th century. An Italian woman suffering from cervical cancer was bitten by a dog after being injected with a rabies virus vaccine. Miraculously, the tumor disappeared, and the woman enjoyed a cancer-free survival for 8 years.303 Though the underlying mechanisms of this phenomenon were uncertain at that time, physicians began to use rabies virus vaccines to treat patients with cervical cancer. A hundred years have passed, and OVs therapy has come into a new era, achieving significant success in treating a broad range of tumor types.

Oncolytic mechanisms

Oncolytic viruses can kill tumor cells through several direct and indirect mechanisms according to the design concepts. OVs tend to recognize surface markers that are abnormally overexpressed on cancer cells and then enter those targeted cells. The recognition pattern depends on the virus types and modification strategies. CD46 is often upregulated on tumor cells from leukemia, gastrointestinal cancers, gynecological cancers, and lung cancer,304 which can be recognized by measles viruses and some subtypes of adenoviruses.305 The most commonly used vector, herpes simplex viruses, utilize the herpesvirus entry mediator (HVEM) and nectin-1 to enter tumor cells.306,307

Normal cells will induce the interferon pathway to limit viral replication after infection, while tumor cells are often deficient in this defensive mechanism.308,309 Therefore, after entering tumor cells, OVs begin to rapidly replicate, finally leading to tumor cell lysis and releasing new viruses to infect surrounding tumor cells.310 Accompanying cell lysis, damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), along with tumor antigens, are released into the tumor microenvironment (TME) and are subsequently sensed by antigen-presenting cells (APCs), including dendritic cells (DCs) and macrophages.311–313 Once sensing these signals, APCs will stimulate T cells to induce adaptive immunity and tumor-specific cytotoxicity, thus triggering a systematic anti-tumor immune response.314

Besides the common mechanisms, OVs can induce oncolytic effects through different modification methods, which will be discussed in the following parts.

Clinic application

Despite the long history of oncolytic viruses (OVs), most of the products are in clinical trial stages. Studies on OVs targeting other malignancies, including multiple myeloma, pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, and pediatric cancers, are ongoing, with details provided in Table 5.Table 5 Summary of OVs under clinical investigation for the treatment of cancer

Name	Vector	Insertion gene	Deletion gene	Phase	malignancies	Ref	
T-VEC (Talimogene Laherparepvec)	HSV-1	human GM-CSF	ICP34.5, ICP47	I/II/III	melanoma, breast cancer, sarcoma, head and neck, colorectal cancer	315,317–319	
G47Δ	HSV-1		α47	I/II	glioma	20,324	
CAN-3110	HSV-1			I	glioma	471	
OrienX010	HSV-1	human GM-CSF		I	melanoma	472	
OH2	HSV-2	human GM-CSF	ICP34.5, ICP47	I/II	esophageal cancer, colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, melanoma, head and neck cancer, cholangiocarcinoma, ovarian cancer, breast cancer	336	
DNX-2401 (tasadenoturev)	adenovirus	RGD motif	E1A	I/II	glioma	321,322,473	
CRAd-S-pk7	adenovirus	human survivin promoter		I	glioma	338	
VCN-01	adenovirus	E2F1 promoter	E1A	I	retinoblastoma, pancreatic cancer	334,474	
Telomelysin (OBP-301)	adenovirus	human TERT promoter, IRES		I	liver cancer, esophageal cancer, head and neck cancer, lung cancer, neuroendocrine cancer, melanoma, leiomyosarcoma, sarcoma, basal cell carcinoma, salivary gland tumor, breast cancer	475–477	
ICOVIR-5	adenovirus	E2F1 promoter	E1A	I	melanoma, medulloblastoma, astrocytoma, neuroblastoma, thyroid cancer, thymoma, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, sarcoma	339	
enadenotucirev	adenovirus			I	ovarian cancer, colorectal cancer, head and cancer, urothelial cancer, renal cancer, lung cancer	478–480	
ONCOS-102	adenovirus	human GM-CSF	E1A	I/II	pleural mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, colorectal cancer, liver cancer, endometrial cancer, sarcoma, breast cancer	330	
MV-NIS	measles virus	human NIS		I	multiple myeloma	481,482	
MV-CEA	measles virus	human CEA		I/II	glioma, ovarian cancer	483,484	
V937 (CVA21)	coxsackievirus			I/II	melanoma, lung cancer, urothelial cancer, prostate cancer	325,485,486	
ParvOryx	parvovirus			I/II	pancreatic cancer, glioma	487–489	
PVSRIPO (Lerapolturev)	poliovirus	IRES		I	melanoma, glioma	490–492	
REOLYSIN (Pelareorep)	reovirus			I/II	esophageal cancer, prostate cancer, melanoma, pancreatic cancer, breast cancer, stomach cancer, lung cancer, liver cancer, mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, tubal cancer, peritoneal cancer, multiple myeloma	326,493–497	
NTX-010 (SVV-001)	Seneca Valley virus			I/II	small cell lung cancer, carcinoid tumor, adrenal cortical carcinoma, embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma, Wilms’ tumor, ganglioneuroblastoma, neuroblastoma	329,498	
JX-594 (Pexa-Vec)	vaccinia virus	human GM-CSF	thymidine kinase (TK)	I/II	sarcoma, liver cancer, melanoma, colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer, bladder cancer	331,335,499,500	
Data obtained from clinicaltrial.gov

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is the first US FDA-approved OV for patients with recurrent unresectable melanoma, improving the median overall survival to 23.3 months.315 It is derived from herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) and features an insertion of the human granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) gene. This insertion enables local expression of GM-CSF at the tumor site, recruiting antigen-presenting cells (APCs) such as dendritic cells (DCs) and inducing downstream T-cell activation.316 In addition to melanoma, T-VEC’s effects on breast cancer, sarcoma, and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma are being evaluated in clinical trials, with initial results reported.317–319

DNX-2401 is an adenovirus-based OV with a deletion in the E1A gene and an insertion of the RGD sequence, which confers glioma cell selectivity via integrins αvβ3 and αvβ5.320 A phase I study confirmed the efficacy of DNX-2401 in patients with recurrent malignant glioma, noting increased CD8 T-cell infiltration in tumors. Among the participants, 3 out of 20 achieved complete responses and experienced a progress-free survival (PFS) of over 3 years.321 Additionally, a recent study focusing on the combination of DNX-2401 with an immune checkpoint inhibitor has shown initial results indicating a survival benefit in select patients.322

Another OV targeting glioma, G47Δ, is a third-generation engineered HSV-1. It is constructed by deleting the α47 gene and overlapping the US11 promoter from its parental vector, thereby enhancing anti-tumor immunity and reducing replication in normal cells.323 Recent phase I/II studies have shown that G47Δ demonstrates good safety and provides survival benefits for patients with advanced glioma.20,324

The advantage, disadvantage, and challenges for OVs

OVs offer numerous advantages. Firstly, they can selectively replicate within tumor cells while also activating the immune system, enabling them not only to directly kill cancer cells but also to serve as vectors for delivering therapeutic genes. Secondly, due to their inherent defects, tumor cells are more susceptible to viral infections, while normal cells are relatively safe as they possess mechanisms to clear viruses. Moreover, the small size of viral genomes and mature genetic engineering techniques make the efficient and cost-effective modification of oncolytic viruses possible, facilitating the specific targeting of cancer cells. Lastly, the multifaceted oncolytic effects of these viruses, include increasing tumor antigen exposure, modulating the tumor microenvironment, and activating the immune system. As the development of ICIs in tumor therapy, the combination of OVs with ICIs is gaining more attention.325–328 It is practical to find molecular markers to predict the population who would benefit from combination therapy through multi-omics technology.

When it comes to the drawbacks of oncolytic virus therapy, there are several key issues. First, there is the issue of targeting specificity. Although oncolytic viruses are selective, their specificity in targeting tumors needs improvement to ensure effective infection of the intended cancer cells. Second, there is the issue of immune response. Patients may develop an immune reaction to the oncolytic viruses, potentially limiting the treatment’s efficacy and the possibility of its repeated use. Third, determining the appropriate viral dosage for treatment is challenging. Additionally, controlling the effective propagation of the virus within target cells presents difficulties.

Though OVs have shown efficacy in a wide range of malignancies, there remains many challenges to be faced. One is the treatment-related adverse events including some severe reactions such as lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia,20,329, and combination with other therapy may increase the risk.330 It is currently uncertain how OVs caused those adverse events, perhaps related to virus load and tumor necrosis.331 Several measures have been taken to reduce the virulence and risks of adverse events. The most utilized method is insertion or deletion of some specific genes in OVs to limit its replication and infection to normal tissues. For example, retinoblastoma, a common pediatric cancer, often results from retinoblastoma 1 gene (RB1) dysfunction, causing an increase in the abundance of E2F.332,333 According to this genetic change, VCN-01 was constructed by inserting a E2F-responsive element, E2F1 promoter, to enhance the expression of E1A in E2F-sufficient cells while low replication capability in normal cells.334 Another gene-modified OVs, JX-594, was deficient in thymidine kinase (TK) gene and showed a selectivity to tumors with elevated cellular TK abundance.335 Thus, genetic modifications to control the expression of virulence-related or add a switch for replication will be the solution to adverse events.

Another issue that needs to be improved is the administration or delivery way of OVs, since most of the OVs are administrated through intratumoral or intracavitary injection to achieve local concentration, which is easy to perform in some superficial or abdominal cancers.317,336,337 However, malignancies such as glioma are hard to reach due to their anatomical location, which sets obstacles for OVs administration. To address this issue, some new delivery systems were applied. Adenovirus-based CRAd-S-pk7 was loaded by neural stem cell line to enhance its ability to target glioma and migration across the blood-brain barrier, though the injection of viruses was taken after surgical resection.338 Another study loaded the virus, Icovir-5, with autologous, bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and administrated it through intravenous injection upon the tumor-homing effect of MSCs.339 From this perspective, human-derived cells with specific tissue tropism could act as an ideal carrier to take OVs to tumor site.

Immunologic adjuvant and innate immunity activator

Although current cancer immunotherapies primarily focus on enhancing the adaptive immune response, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors to promote T-cell cytotoxicity,340 methods aimed at activating the innate immunity within tumors are gaining more attention. In 1890, the American surgeon William Coley accidentally discovered that a patient with both sarcoma and erysipelas experienced spontaneous tumor regression. This observation encouraged him to use the mixed toxins from Streptococcus erysipelas and Bacillus prodigiosus, known as Coley’s toxins, to treat patients with sarcoma.341 Although some patients experienced regression after receiving Coley’s toxins, skepticism about Coley and his toxins has always persisted.342 Now, it has become clear that the bacterial components may activate the innate immunity and induce an anti-tumor effect.204 Therefore, therapies such as Coley’s toxins and immunologic adjuvants, which aim to stimulate the innate immune system, could represent a novel approach to treating cancer.343

Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)

Despite the fact that intravesical administration of BCG in bladder cancer patients has long been the standard care, backed by solid evidence from clinical practice,344 the underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood. BCG administration can induce the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines from tumor cells and promote immune cell infiltration.345 It is reported that NK cells can be activated by BCG, potentially playing a significant role in the tumoricidal process.346 In addition to stimulating the innate immune response, BCG can also elicit an adaptive immune response against bladder cancer. This may be a consequence of increased antigen-presenting efficiency following the activation of innate immune cells.347 In summary, further efforts should be dedicated to elucidating the immunotherapeutic effects of BCG, which could provide valuable insights for developing novel treatment strategies for other cancer types.

Toll-like receptors (TLRs) agonists

The family of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) comprises several members that are key regulators of innate immunity and initially garnered attention for their role in infections.348 The activation of various TLRs in antigen-presenting cells, such as macrophages and dendritic cells, can induce the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines and subsequently stimulate adaptive immunity in T cells.349

The TLR3 agonist, poly-ICLC, is frequently used as an adjuvant with cancer vaccines and has demonstrated good safety and efficacy.350,351 Similarly, lipopolysaccharide, a major component of Gram-negative bacteria, is the natural ligand for TLR4 and can also be employed as an adjuvant in cancer vaccines.352

In addition to being combined with cancer vaccines, TLR agonists can be administered as monotherapy or neoadjuvant therapy for certain malignancies. A phase I study investigated the efficacy and safety of G100, a synthetic TLR4 agonist, in patients with Merkel Cell Carcinoma.353 Following intratumoral injection, G100 significantly increased the infiltration of T cells, activated the immune response, and led to sustained tumor regression in patients. Motolimod, a TLR8 agonist, when combined with chemotherapy and cetuximab, achieved improved outcomes compared to placebo in patients with HPV-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.354

The advantage, disadvantage and challenge of Immunologic adjuvant and innate immunity activator

Adjuvants and innate immunity activators serve as essential tools in enhancing vaccine efficacy and activating the immune system. Adjuvants enhance the protective power of vaccines by strengthening immune responses in a non-specific manner. They reduce the necessary amount of antigen and meet the immune needs of diverse populations. However, their use is accompanied by safety concerns, including local or systemic adverse reactions, as well as concerns about long-term safety and potential side effects. Innate immunity activators rapidly respond to pathogen infections, particularly promising in antiviral and cancer treatments. Yet, these activators may exhibit a lack of specificity, sometimes leading to excessive inflammatory responses, and resistance issues may arise with long-term use. Consequently, despite the significant potential of adjuvants and innate immunity activators in the medical field, careful consideration is necessary in their development and application to ensure safety and efficacy.

While we have gained some understanding of immunologic adjuvants and innate immunity activators, the complex interactions between innate and adaptive immunity within the tumor microenvironment have not yet been fully deciphered. The challenge of fully elucidating the mechanisms of Coley’s toxins through multidisciplinary approaches remains significant.

Proton therapy and carbon ion therapy

Proton therapy and carbon ion therapy are types of charged particle radiotherapy characterized by the Bragg peak, which offers advantages over conventional photon radiotherapy.355 This means that proton and carbon ion therapy deliver a lower radiation dose to surrounding tissues and reduce adverse effects.356,357 In 1990, the first hospital dedicated to proton therapy opened in Loma Linda,358 and the technology has since matured for cancer treatment. Due to higher costs and the technical demands of heavy ion accelerators, carbon ion therapy is less commonly applied in clinical practice, despite its potential advantages over proton therapy.359

Head and neck cancer

Radiation therapy is an indispensable treatment modality for head and neck cancer. While proton therapy has been shown to have lower toxicity to surrounding tissues compared to photon therapy,360 its efficacy superiority remains controversial.361 A more recent retrospective study evaluated the survival benefits of proton therapy in patients with recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.362 Those who underwent salvage surgery followed by fractionated proton therapy experienced significantly improved local control rates and survival compared to patients who received salvage surgery with photon re-irradiation in previous studies. Two independent centers reported that carbon ion therapy demonstrated certain efficacy and safety in treating locally advanced head and neck cancer, particularly in cases of malignant melanoma and adenoid cystic carcinoma.363,364

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) has shown advantages in safety, with a decreased rate of adverse events in unresectable NSCLC compared to historical data from patients receiving photon radiation therapy.365 A comparative study involving locally advanced NSCLC indicated that intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) delivered lower radiation doses to surrounding organs, including the heart, lung, and esophagus, and resulted in a lower rate of adverse events compared to PSPT, although no significant difference in survival was observed.366 However, a recent study comparing the toxicity of intensity-modulated photon radiotherapy (IMRT) with PSPT concluded that there was no difference in radiation pneumonitis or local failure observed between the two groups.367 Therefore, further explorations and adjustments are necessary to determine the efficacy and safety of proton therapy.

Regarding carbon ion therapy, two dose escalation studies conducted by the National Institute of Radiological Sciences in Japan have investigated its efficacy and safety in patients with stage I NSCLC.368,369 These preliminary results suggest that single-fraction carbon ion therapy is effective and safe, even in elderly patients, although further studies for various stages of patients are needed.

Prostate cancer

Due to the anatomic position of the prostate, radiation-related gastrointestinal and urinary injuries, erectile dysfunction, and hip fractures are distressing adverse events that cause secondary harm to patients. Previous research has shown that the benefits of proton therapy compared to photon radiation in prostate patients are controversial. A retrospective study compared toxicity and disease control rates in nonmetastatic prostate cancer and found that the proton therapy group had a higher rate of gastrointestinal morbidity than the IMRT group, although no difference in the rate of additional therapies between the two groups was observed.370 Another prospective study compared target coverage and doses to organs at risk between proton therapy and IMRT in patients with low-intermediate prostate cancer, also yielding a negative result.371 Data on carbon ion therapy for prostate cancer is limited, as only research groups from Japan and Germany have conducted large-scale cohort studies. According to German data, carbon ion therapy showed lower effectiveness and worse survival compared to proton therapy in patients with primary prostate cancer. The five-year overall and progression-free survival rates in the carbon ion group were 91% and 50%, respectively, compared to 98% and 85% in the proton therapy group.372 However, data from Japan demonstrated better efficacy of carbon ion therapy, with five-year overall survival rates of 100%, 99%, and 96% for low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients, respectively, and biochemical recurrence-free survival rates of 92%, 89%, and 92%, respectively.373 Given the sample size, the results from the Japanese cohort (n = 2157) were more convincing than those from the German cohort (n = 92). However, further research is needed to verify the efficacy and safety of carbon ion therapy in different countries and among diverse populations.

The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of proton therapy and carbon-ion therapy

Radiotherapy, particularly proton therapy and carbon-ion therapy, shows potential advantages in the treatment of head and neck cancer and prostate cancer due to its ability to more precisely concentrate radiation doses on tumor tissue while reducing damage to surrounding healthy tissue. Proton therapy has demonstrated a lower rate of adverse effects in terms of safety, but its efficacy compared to conventional photon therapy remains a matter of debate. Carbon-ion therapy has shown varying results in terms of efficacy and survival rates across studies, indicating the need for further research to confirm its benefits. The widespread application of these two treatment technologies is limited by cost, technical requirements, and availability, but their potential to improve treatment outcomes and reduce side effects continues to drive the medical community to explore and refine these therapeutic methods.

Photothermal and photodynamic therapy

The basic principle of photothermal therapy (PTT) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) involves using photosensitized materials in conjunction with light radiation to target diseases and achieve therapeutic purposes.374 Upon reaching the tumor lesion and being irradiated, photothermal and photodynamic agents convert light energy into heat or chemical energy to destroy tumor cells. PTT is practical in regulating temperature changes by adjusting the light intensity to control cell death,375 whereas the key mechanism of PDT is inducing reactive oxygen species (ROS),376 which is followed by the release of inflammatory mediators and the initiation of an immune response.377,378

Current clinical application

Despite the potential therapeutic value of PTT, clinical studies are still limited. A pilot study explored the safety and efficacy of gold-silica nanoshells (GSNs) in low-intermediate-grade prostate cancer patients.379 GSNs exhibit maximal absorption in the near-infrared light spectrum and convert light energy into heat. In the 15 enrolled patients, after intravenous administration, GSNs accumulated in the prostate lesions due to the abnormal tumor vasculature, followed by subsequent near-infrared laser illumination. After 12 months of follow-up, prostate biopsies showed that 13 of 15 patients were cancer-free at the ablation zones.

Compared to PTT, PDT has been more extensively studied in clinical trials. A phase I study investigated the safety and efficacy of the photosensitizer Visudyne for treating vertebral metastases,380 finding significant pain reduction but no improvement in overall survival. Hypericin is a natural compound with phototoxicity to malignant cells.381 Based on this feature, hypericin is considered as a PDT agent. The FLASH study is a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blinded phase III trial that included patients with early-stage mycosis fungoides and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (MF/CTCL) to examine the therapeutic effect of synthetic hypericin via PDT.382 The results indicated a higher index lesion response rate (ILRR) in the hypericin group compared to the placebo group, and after three cycles of administration, the ILRR increased to 49%.

The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of PTT and PDT

PTT and PDT are two optical treatment methods used for diseases such as cancer. PTT converts light energy into heat to destroy cancer cells in a targeted manner, characterized by minimally invasive nature, the capability for repeated applications, and the absence of surgical intervention. However, it requires precise temperature control to prevent thermal damage to surrounding healthy tissues. PDT relies on the selective interaction of photosensitizers with light to eliminate tumor cells, providing high selectivity and the possibility of triggering an immune response. Nevertheless, patients undergoing PDT are susceptible to photosensitivity post-treatment, and the procedure tends to be costly. Both techniques confront restrictions regarding the depth of light penetration, which can impact their efficacy against larger or more deeply located tumors. Despite these hurdles, PTT and PDT continue to hold significant positions in cancer therapy research due to their distinct therapeutic mechanisms and promising clinical utility.

Anti-angiogenesis therapy

Inducing or accessing vasculature through angiogenesis is one of the hallmarks of cancer.271 Tumor angiogenesis exhibits unique characteristics, including a disordered structure, high permeability, and a lack of pericytes and smooth muscle cells, which differ significantly from angiogenesis under normal physiological conditions, such as embryonic development.383 The process of tumor angiogenesis is complex, regulated by both malignant and non-malignant cells through various pro-angiogenic and anti-angiogenic molecules and pathways in the tumor microenvironment,384 thus providing potential therapeutic targets.

Molecular/pathway/cellular network in tumor angiogenesis

The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family is the group of molecules that has garnered the most research interest in tumor angiogenesis. The VEGF family, encoded by the human genome, consists of five members,385 among which VEGF-A (previously known as VEGF) is the most crucial mediator for activating endothelial cell reprogramming, proliferation, and migration by binding to VEGF receptor 2 (VEGFR2) during tumor angiogenesis.386 Upon binding, VEGFR2 becomes dimerized387 and activates downstream pathways, including RAS, ERK-MAPK, and PI3K-AKT signaling.388–390 In addition to its interactions with endothelial cells, VEGF-A can also influence immune cells through various mechanisms, including impeding dendritic cell maturation,391 increasing the infiltration of regulatory T cells,392 and inducing cytotoxic T cell exhaustion.393

The epidermal growth factor (EGF) family is another crucial component that contributes to tumor angiogenesis through both direct and indirect effects. For example, EGF promotes endothelial cell proliferation by binding to the EGF receptor (EGFR) and increases the secretion of VEGF by human pulmonary smooth muscle cells.394 In addition to the EGF family, the family of fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) and their receptors may play a significant role in tumor angiogenesis, as their overexpression has been observed across a wide range of malignancies with prognostic significance395; however, the underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood.

Translational value in clinical practice and future challenges

Targeting the VEGF-VEGFR signaling pathway is the primary strategy for anti-angiogenic tumor therapy. Bevacizumab was the first FDA-approved monoclonal antibody targeting VEGF-A for colorectal cancer (CRC) therapy and has shown significant improvements in overall and progression-free survival in patients with metastatic CRC.396 With advancements in basic research and clinical trials, bevacizumab is now used for a broader range of solid malignancies, including ovarian cancer,397 glioma,398 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC),22 cervical cancer,11 and renal cell carcinoma.399

Another monoclonal antibody targeting VEGF-VEGFR, ramucirumab, exerts its effect by blocking VEGFR2. It was initially approved for the treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, showing a survival benefit,400 and subsequently for NSCLC,401 CRC,402 and HCC.403

In addition to monoclonal antibody drugs, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have also attracted research interest due to the extensive involvement of tyrosine kinases in the downstream pathways of VEGFR, such as Sorafenib,404–406 sunitinib, lenvatinib, and apatinib.407–409 Also, there are several TKIs directly targeting VEGFR family. Nintedanib is a type of VEGFR-TKI that blocks certain signals inside cells, preventing the growth and spread of fibroblasts. In a phase III trial, it was used with docetaxel to treat advanced NSCLC and significantly improved PFS.410 Apatinib, another VEGFR-2 inhibitor, has shown a 76.7% disease control rate in treating NSCLC patients who did not respond to initial or follow-up treatments.411 Fruquintinib, a newer small molecule inhibitor, has also demonstrated promising results, with a 71% increase in progression-free survival compared to a control group in advanced non-squamous NSCLC treatment.412

The advantages, disadvantages and challenges of anti-angiogenic drugs

Anti-angiogenic drugs effectively inhibit the formation of new blood vessels in tumors, thereby restricting the supply of nutrients and oxygen to cancer cells and slowing down tumor growth. These drugs have a strong targeting ability, with minimal impact on normal cells. When used in combination with other cancer treatments such as chemotherapy and targeted therapies, they can enhance therapeutic effects and delay the development of resistance. However, in some cases, they cause cardiovascular adverse reactions, such as hypertension and heart failure, which presents a limitation in the use of these drugs. Furthermore, although the combination treatment with other drugs is effective, the high cost could be a significant challenge for patients.

Primary and acquired drug resistance poses a significant challenge for anti-angiogenic therapy due to various mechanisms. Liver kinase B1 (LKB1), encoded by STK11, is a key factor in responding to stress conditions like hypoxia.413 A retrospective study found that the loss or deficiency of LKB1 in NSCLC leads to primary resistance to bevacizumab, possibly due to metabolic reprogramming in tumor cells.414 Tina et al. used a bevacizumab-resistant mouse xenograft model of human lung cancer and found that upregulated EGFR in stroma led to acquired resistance.415 To overcome drug resistance, basic studies are needed to explore the unrevealed compensatory adjustments and other changes in the tumor microenvironment after administration of anti-angiogenesis therapy, and to identify targetable molecules for combination therapy.

Nanomedicine

With the approval and market introduction of the first nanomedicine (Doxil) by the FDA in 1995,416 the application of nanomedicines in cancer treatment began to gain attention. Nanomedicines are an emerging drug delivery system that leverages nanotechnology to enhance the bioavailability, stability, targeting, and therapeutic efficiency of drugs. These medicines typically refer to drug carriers or drug molecules at the nanoscale (1 to 100 nanometers), which can include traditional small-molecule drugs, peptides, proteins, nucleic acids, or other bioactive molecules.

The application of nanomedicines in cancer therapy encompasses a variety of nanocarriers and nanotechnologies. Currently, common nanomedicines used for tumors include lipid-based nanomedicines, inorganic nanomedicines, and polymer-based nanomedicines. Additionally, viral vectors and ADCs (Antibody-Drug Conjugates) can also be considered forms of nanomedicines, which have been discussed earlier.

Lipid Nanomedicines

Liposomes are vesicles formed by the self-assembly of lipids into one or more concentric bilayers (unilamellar or multilamellar) with an enclosed aqueous compartment, ranging in size from 30 nm to the micrometer scale.417 Leveraging the enhanced permeability and retention (Enhanced Permeability and Retention, EPR) effect, liposome carriers offer the advantages of protecting encapsulated drugs from degradation, extending their half-life, and controlling drug release. By actively or passively delivering drugs to tumor tissues, liposomes contribute to reducing systemic side effects and enhancing cancer treatment. Currently, liposome nanoparticle formulations are among the most widely used nanomedicines. Encapsulating chemotherapy drugs is a common application of liposome nanomedicines, such as Doxorubicin and Paclitaxel. Doxil (liposome-encapsulated Doxorubicin), Myocet (liposome-encapsulated Doxorubicin HCl), and Abraxane (liposome-encapsulated Paclitaxel) have been FDA-approved for treating certain types of cancer, including breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer. The LNPs mentioned earlier are also a type of lipid nanocarrier.

Solid Lipid Nanoparticles (SLNs) are drug carriers with a solid lipid core and surfactant coating, enhancing stability and drug release control. They can encapsulate both hydrophobic and hydrophilic drugs, offering advantages in cancer treatment. For instance, curcumin-loaded SLNs show potent cytotoxicity against SKBR3 breast cancer cells compared to curcumin alone,418 while RGD-modified doxorubicin SLNs enhance tumor targeting and therapeutic efficacy.419

Exosomal nanomedicines, often referred to as natural liposomes, are emerging as a rising star in drug delivery systems. Exosomes are small vesicles released by cells into the extracellular environment, playing a crucial role in cell-to-cell communication and capable of carrying proteins, RNA, DNA, and other biomolecules. Due to their natural characters and biological functions, exosomes have become a promising drug delivery platform. For instance, Rayamajhi et al. revealed that exosomes secreted by macrophages could be used for the delivery of Doxorubicin (a clinical drug) for breast cancer treatment.420 In the future, liposome nanomedicines are expected to see more clinical translation.

Inorganic nanomedicines

Inorganic nanomedicines, which include metal nanoparticles (such as gold, silver, and iron oxides), quantum dots, carbon-based materials (like carbon nanotubes and graphene), and other particles (mesoporous silica, magnetic nanoparticles, and nanoscale calcium materials), are utilized for cancer diagnosis and treatment. As mentioned earlier, gold nanoparticles serve as a medium for photothermal therapy, killing tumor cells through localized heating. Iron oxide nanoparticles (such as Fe3O4 and γ-Fe2O3) can be used as contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to enhance tumor visualization.421 Another kind of nanomedicine uses Titanium dioxide 1(TiO2) and zinc oxide (ZnO) to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS),422 which can kill tumor cells under light exposure. Additionally, certain nanomedicines, such as those containing Fe3 + , SiO2, Pt, and Li, can induce various cell death pathways, including ferroptosis, pyroptosis, autophagy, and necroptosis.423 Certain metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are capable of encapsulating and releasing therapeutic gases, such as nitric oxide (NO), which has antitumor and anti-angiogenic effects. Silica nanoparticles have been shown to activate the immune system and enhance antitumor immune responses. They can activate immune cells through pattern recognition receptors (such as Toll-like receptors, TLRs), thereby promoting the clearance of tumor cells. Recent reports also suggest that inorganic nanomaterials can induce macrophage polarization. Researchers have developed a hollow mesoporous Prussian blue (HMPB) nanosystem disguised by a macrophage membrane.424 The released iron ions promoted the differentiation of M1-like tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) through the interferon regulatory factor 5 (IRF5) pathway, stimulated cytotoxic T cells, and generated an effective antitumor effect.425 The applications and therapeutic strategies involving inorganic nanomedicines are highly innovative and cover a broad range of approaches.

Polymeric Nanomedicines Polymeric nanoparticles

Polymeric Nanomedicines Polymeric nanoparticles, such as poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanoparticles, are widely used in cancer treatment. These nanoparticles can encapsulate drugs, control their release, and enhance drug targeting. PLGA-packed drugs include both chemotherapy agents and immunosuppressants. Dasharath Chaudhari developed paclitaxel (PTX)-loaded adenosine (ADN)-conjugated PLGA nanoparticles to combat triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), which were found to be biocompatible and exhibited improved anti-TNBC activity. Another experiment demonstrated that in a subcutaneous model of MC38 colon cancer,426 PLGA nanoparticle therapy was as effective as treatment with soluble anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody (mAb), resulting in significantly reduced tumor growth.427 In other studies, Chi-Son Chang and colleagues reported that fenbendazole-incorporated PLGA nanoparticles exerted significant anticancer effects in epithelial ovarian cancer cells and xenograft models, including patient-derived xenografts (PDX).428 PLGA has also been involved in preclinical studies for combination therapy. One study justifies additional preclinical safety trials and the clinical evaluation of 177Lu-PLGA(RGF)-CXCR4L as a potential combined treatment for colorectal cancer.429 Guen Tae Kim showed that the antitumor effect of the chemotherapy AC regimen (Adriamycin and cyclophosphamide) was increased by cotreatment with 1-palmitoyl-2-linoleoyl-3-acetyl-rac-glycerol (PLAG) in the MDA-MB-231 TNBC xenograft mouse model.430 Among other polymers, dendrimers, as a special class of polymers, participate in drug transport. G5 PAMAM dendrimers have demonstrated successful folate-receptor-targeted delivery of doxorubicin.431 Another study reported that dendrimer-functionalized nanoparticles delivering the p53 tumor suppressor gene to the tumor site resulted in an improved antiproliferative effect compared to the free naked gene.432

Advantages, disadvantages, and challenges

Nanomedicines offer a multitude of benefits over conventional free-form drugs, providing a more effective approach to drug delivery. By enhancing drug solubility, they safeguard medications from early degradation, which in turn boosts stability and bioavailability. They also minimize off-target interactions within the body, extending the drug’s circulation time and improving therapeutic outcomes. Additionally, nanomedicines increase the concentration of drugs at the site of pathology while simultaneously reducing their presence in healthy tissues, thereby mitigating toxic side effects. The controlled release of drugs and their targeted distribution to specific tissues further optimize pharmacokinetic profiles. Moreover, these advanced systems facilitate the penetration of formidable biological barriers, such as the blood-brain barrier, surmounting obstacles that hinder the delivery of therapeutics.

Although inorganic nanomaterials show great potential in various fields, they also have significant drawbacks. Firstly, these materials may have potential biological toxicity. Due to their high surface area, they may interact unpredictably with biomolecules, leading to cell or tissue damage. Secondly, stability issues in biological systems, such as easy aggregation and sedimentation, or coverage by biomolecules, may reduce their therapeutic effectiveness. Additionally, the distribution, metabolism, and clearance mechanisms of these nanomaterials in the body are not fully understood, affecting the assessment of their safety and efficacy. Lastly, the long-term health and environmental risks of inorganic nanomaterials remain unclear, increasing concerns about their widespread application. Therefore, despite the innovative applications that inorganic nanomaterials may bring, their potential risks must be thoroughly researched and strictly managed before they are used clinically and environmentally.

Currently, the translation of nanomedicines has not progressed as rapidly as the numerous positive preclinical results would have suggested. Key issues related to the clinical development of nanoparticle nanomedicines include biological challenges, biocompatibility and safety, large-scale manufacturing, government regulations, intellectual property (IP), and overall cost-effectiveness compared to current therapies. The cost, in particular, has limited the clinical transfer of this approach.

The combination therapy against tumor

Combination therapy in the field of oncology has achieved significant advancements, becoming a key strategy for enhancing treatment efficacy, combating drug resistance, and extending patient survival. Notably, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors has demonstrated synergistic effects across various types of cancer, improving therapeutic outcomes. The latest data from the IMbrave150 study show that patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) who received the recommended front-line combination therapy of Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab (T + A) had a mOS of 19.2 months compared to 13.4 months with sorafenib. In the Chinese subgroup of patients, the mOS was extended to two years compared to 11.4 months with sorafenib. Moreover, the ORR for this treatment reached 30%.400 Additionally, recent findings suggest that “T+A” regimen paired with TACE (Transarterial Chemoembolization) or HAIC (Hepatic Artery Infusion Chemotherapy) may be a significant research direction for large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Hence, the scientifically sound combination of treatments in clinical practice will benefit more cancer patients.

The year 2023 was a fruitful year for research in combination therapies. In March, Novartis announced that the FDA approved the combination therapy of Tafinlar (dabrafenib) and Mekinist (trametinib), making Tafinlar + Mekinist the first approved targeted combination therapy for the treatment of pediatric patients with low-grade gliomas carrying the BRAF V600E mutation (Supplementary Table 3).433 In May, Professor Ruihua Xu’s team’s SPOTLIGHT study on advanced gastric cancer showed that the combination of zolbetuximab and mFOLFOX6 reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 24.9% (P = 0.0066) compared to the placebo + mFOLFOX6 group, with median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 10.61 months and 8.67 months, respectively.434 In June of the same year, the clinical trial of talazoparib and enzalutamide for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in adults was approved for the first time.435 This combination therapy can reduce the progression and mortality rates by 55% in mCRPC patients with HRR mutations. In November, the JUPITER-02 study, the world’s first clinical study also led by Professor Ruihua Xu’s team comparing first-line immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), confirmed that the treatment with tislelizumab combined with chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (OS) for the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic NPC, with a 3-year OS rate of 64.5%, and a 37% reduction in the risk of death.436 This study set a record for OS benefits in patients with advanced NPC. Additionally, a clinical study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine revealed that first-line treatment with osimertinib-chemotherapy led to significantly longer PFS than osimertinib monotherapy among patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).437 These studies mark significant advancements in combination therapies for cancer treatment.

Combined therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors

From 2006 to March 20, 2024, the US Food and Drug Administration has approved 90 combination therapies for cancer (Supplementary Table 3). The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in conjunction with other treatment modalities is noteworthy. The combination of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab has appeared 8 times, covering various cancers including RCC, melanoma, mesothelioma, and NSCLC et al. Combinations with chemotherapy have emerged 16 times, including Pembrolizumab + Chemotherapy, Atezolizumab + Nab-Paclitaxel, Atezolizumab + Carboplatin + Etoposide, and Nivolumab + Chemotherapy. These combination regimens have become primary first-line options for a range of cancers in clinical practice.

In the latest guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the integration of immunotherapy with other treatment approaches has become an essential component of first-line therapy for various cancers. Considering the findings from the 2021 KEYNOTE-826 study, the administration of Pembrolizumab combined with TP (paclitaxel and cisplatin or paclitaxel and carboplatin) along with optional Bevacizumab has markedly enhanced the OS and PFS for patients battling advanced cervical cancer.438 Following these outcomes, the FDA formally granted approval for this combined treatment approach as the new standard first-line therapy for advanced cervical cancer. The 2023 ASCO meeting presented the 39.1-month follow-up data from the KEYNOTE-826 trial, which indicated that incorporating Pembrolizumab into chemotherapy with or without Bevacizumab significantly lowered the mortality risk by 40% in individuals with a PD-L1 CPS (Combined Positive Score) of 1 or greater, by 37% across the entire studied population, and by 42% in those with a CPS of 10 or higher, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), Pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with high PD-L1 expression, while for those with low or unknown PD-L1 expression levels, combinations of Nivolumab with Ipilimumab and chemotherapy, or Pemetrexed with platinum-based chemotherapy are recommended. The treatment recommendation for advanced melanoma includes the combination of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab. Based on the clinical trials results from CheckMate 214,439 KEYNOTE-426,440 JAVELIN 101,441 CheckMate 9ER,442 first-line treatment recommendations for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) include Nivolumab+Ipilimumab, Pembrolizumab+Axitinib, Avelumabas + +Axitinib, well as the combination of Nivolumab+Cabozantinib. based on the results from the KEYNOTE-B61443 study, the combination of Lenvatinib and Pembrolizumab or Everolimus has shown durable anti-tumor activity in patients with previously untreated non-clear cell RCC (including papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma). The objective response rate (ORR) reached 49%, with 74.6% of patients experiencing responses lasting at least 12 months. The 12-month PFS rate was 63%, and the 12-month overall survival (OS) rate was 82%, indicating promising survival outcomes. These results further support the use of Pembrolizumab and Lenvatinib as a first-line treatment strategy for patients with advanced non-clear cell RCC. For patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), Pembrolizumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy is an option. The first-line treatment recommendation for HCC is the combination of Atezolizumab with Bevacizumab. Pembrolizumab is the first-line treatment choice for colorectal cancer (CRC) with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR). For triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), the first-line treatment recommendation includes the combination of Ipilimumab with chemotherapy.

Combined drug therapy in clinical trials and preclinical basic research for cancer treatment most frequently involves co-administration with immunosuppressants. Inhibitors targeting PD-1 (such as Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab) and inhibitors targeting CTLA-4 (such as Ipilimumab) are star drugs in immunotherapy, and they have been widely studied in the treatment of various solid tumors and hematological cancers. In a phase II/III clinical trial (RELATIVITY-047) examining combination therapy for unresectable or untreated metastatic melanoma, satisfactory improvements are seen with Relatlimab (anti-LAG-3) and Nivolumab (anti-PD-1). With this combination, the 1-year PFS rate increased from 36.0% to 47.7% and the median PFS improved dramatically from 4.6 months to 10.1 months.444 However, further follow-up is required to assess the ultimate therapeutic efficacy.444 In preclinical research, combination therapy involving various treatment modalities has been explored. For instance, Guangji Zhang et al. conducted a study combining Nivolumab and GD2 CAR-T treatment in Glioblastoma. This combination exhibited the highest efficacy, leading to an extension of survival in mice with tumor burden for up to 60 days.445 Another study by Lanqi Gong et al. demonstrated that CD70 blockade, when combined with anti-PD-1 treatment, synergistically reinvigorated T-cell immunity against nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The evaluation of anti-CD70 monotherapy in combination with anti-PD-1 therapy using xenograft-derived organoids and humanized mice showed improved tumor-killing efficacy.446 Additionally, a recent study reported that PD-1 + IL-2 combination therapy significantly alters the differentiation program of PD-1 + TCF-1+ stem-like CD8 + T cells, which merits consideration as a potential regimen for cancer treatment.447 Also, clinical trials of combination ICIs have achieved significant results, and more clinical trials are underway. We have listed some representative combination cancer treatment clinical trials in Table 6. The clinical trials with results showed that patients received more benefits from the combination treatment. Meanwhile, new types of cancer therapy such as oncolytic virus have already started their clinical trials with ICIs.Table 6 Summarized clinical trials of ICIs combinations with other treatments in cancers

Combination	NCT Number	Phase	Conditions	Regime	mOS (m)	mPFS (m)	ORR (%)	
PD-1+cell therapy	NCT02843204	I/II	Malignant Solid Tumour	Pembrolizumab+allogeneic NK cells vs. pembrolizumab	15.5 vs. 13.3	6.5 vs. 4.3	36.4 vs. 18.5	
PD-1+chemotherapy	NCT03189719	III	advanced esophageal cancer and Siewert type 1 gastro-esophageal junction cancer	pembrolizumab+chemotherapy(5-fluorouracil and cisplatin) vs. PLACEBO+chemotherapy	12.4 vs. 9.8	6.3 vs. 5.8	45 vs. 29.3	
PD-1+small molecular inhibitor	NCT02133742	IB	Renal Cell Carcinoma	Axitinib 5 mg + Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) 2 mg	NA	20.9[1]	NA	
CTLA-4+monoclonal antibody	NCT03241173	I/II	Advanced malignancies	INCAGN01949 350 mg + Ipilimumab 1 mg/kg	NA	4.6	0	
PD-1+small molecular inhibitor*2	NCT02130466	I/II	Melanoma/Solid Tumors	Pembrolizumab+Dabrafenib+Trametinib vs. Placebo+Dabrafenib+Trametinib	46.3[2] vs. 26.3	17.0 vs. 9.9	NA	
PD-1 + mRNA vaccine	NCT02529072	I	Malignant Glioma/Astrocytoma/Glioblastoma	nivolumab vs. nivolumab+DC vaccine	8 vs. 15.3[2]	4.3 vs. 6.3	NA	
PD-1+Oncolytic Virus + CTLA-4	NCT03206073	I/II	Colorectal Cancer et al.	1/Arm A1 Pexa-Vec 3 x 10E^8 Plaque-forming Unit (Pfu) + Durvalumab 1500 mg vs. 2/Arm A2 Pexa-Vec 1 x 10E^9 Pfu +Durvalumab 1500 mg vs. 3/Arm B1 Pexa-Vec 3 x 10E^8 Pfu + Durvalumab 1500 mg +Tremelimumab 300 mg vs. 4/Arm B2 Pexa-Vec 1 x 10E^9 Pfu + Durvalumab 1500 mg +Tremelimumab 300 mg	3 vs. 2.3 vs. 2.25 vs. 1.65	0 vs. 8.3 vs. 0 vs. 7.1	NA	
PD-1 + 	NCT03765190	I/II	Neoplasm Metastasis	proton radiation therapy+PD-1 antibody	NA	NA	NA	
PD-1+Photodynamic Therapy	NCT05386056	II	Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma	Pembrolizumab+Photodynamic Therapy	NA	NA	NA	
[1] Upper limit of 95% CI was not reached since a large proportion of participants in the analysis set had their PFS data censored and there were insufficient number of participants with events to calculate the full 95% CI

[2] The upper limit is not estimable due an insufficient number of patients and events. TKI Tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Data obtained fromclinicaltrial.gov (Accessed on 24th March 2024)

Combined strategies in small molecular inhibitors

In the FDA-approved combination therapy, the combination of small molecular drugs appeared 22 times, including Neratinib + Capecitabine, Encorafenib + Cetuximab, Tucatinib + Trastuzumab + Capecitabine, Ibrutinib + Rituximab, and Olaparib + Bevacizumab. This indicates that the combined use of small molecule inhibitors is also commonly employed in clinical practice. In the latest clinical treatment guidelines, the combined use of targeted therapy drugs is tailored to specific cancer types and molecular markers, encompassing a variety of different combinations. For instance, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring EGFR mutations, EGFR inhibitors such as Erlotinib may be combined with anti-angiogenic drugs like Bevacizumab.448 For NSCLC with ALK rearrangements, ALK inhibitors like Crizotinib may be used in conjunction with other treatment modalities.449 In the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer, HER2 inhibitors such as Trastuzumab may be combined with Pertuzumab and chemotherapy.450 The combination of the BRAF inhibitor Dabrafenib with the MEK inhibitor Trametinib has become the standard treatment for melanoma with BRAF V600E/K mutations. In ovarian and breast cancers with BRCA mutations, PARP inhibitors like Olaparib may be combined with chemotherapy.451 CDK4/6 inhibitors such as Palbociclib are used in combination with endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.452 Additionally, IDH1/IDH2 inhibitors like Ivosidenib are used in combination with Azacitidine for leukemias and other solid tumors carrying the respective mutations.453

Due to the wide variety of small molecule inhibitors, its combination with other drugs is very common. While in preclinical research, blocking the oncogene or its signaling pathway by using small molecule inhibitors combined with other treatments is a regular method to test therapeutic efficiency. For example, Liu et al. successfully combined a PI3K inhibitor, the downstream of TROY, with Sorafenib to suppress tumor development in a HCC mouse model.454 Jiang et al. demonstrated that the combination of ARV-771 and romidepsin keep tumor grew more slowly than HDAC or BET agent alone in ESCC xenograft.455 The combination of small molecular inhibitor and CRISPR system as a drug screening system to find neoantigen is also another application in basic research. Zheng et al. integrated the screening of a small-molecule inhibitor library and a druggable CRISPR library, revealing that GSK-J4 exhibits synthetic lethality with donafenib in liver cancer.456

Small molecule inhibitors are frequently incorporated into clinical trials for combination therapies, owing to their lower toxicity profile in humans. One clinical trial showed that the combination of lapatinib plus trastuzumab improved disease-free survival from 1.0 year (lapatinib alone) to 1.9 years, and overall survival from 3.6 to 3.9 years.457 A clinical trial from the New England Journal of Medicine, showed that in a cohort of 44 patients with rare Colorectal Cancer carrying the Mutated KRAS G12C, the combination therapy of Adagrasib and Cetuximab decreased the percentage of grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions compared to Adagrasib monotherapy and increased the drug response rate from 19% to 46%.458 These findings indicate the strong efficacy of the combination.459 These results indicate that the addition of small molecule inhibitors to other treatments can extend patients’ lives.

Combined use of anti-angiogenic drugs

The combination of anti-angiogenic drugs with other treatment regimens is a common clinical practice for medication use. In the FDA approval combination treatment table, the combination of anti-angiogenic therapies is mentioned 14 times, which include: Bevacizumab + Atezolizumab, Ramucirumab + Erlotinib, Axitinib + Pembrolizumab, Lenvatinib + Pembrolizumab, Neratinib + Capecitabine, Tucatinib + Trastuzumab + Capecitabine, and Enfortumab Vedotin-ejfv + Pembrolizumab et al. This suggests the importance of anti-angiogenic drugs as adjuvant therapy for combined anti-tumor therapy.

In the latest clinical guidelines, the combination of anti-angiogenic drugs with other treatment modalities has become part of the first-line treatment regimens for specific cancer patient subgroups. For instance, in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the combination of Bevacizumab with chemotherapy is recommended for patients without EGFR or ALK gene mutations.460 In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), Bevacizumab is also used in conjunction with chemotherapy, especially for those with tumors of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF wild-type status.461 Additionally, for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the combination therapy of Bevacizumab with the immune checkpoint inhibitor Atezolizumab is a first-line option. In the treatment of breast and ovarian cancer, anti-angiogenic drugs may also be combined with chemotherapy or other targeted therapy drugs based on the patient’s hormone receptor status and genetic characteristics. The selection of these combination treatment regimens is based on the analysis of patient biomarkers, genetic testing results, and clinical features to ensure that patients receive the most effective treatment.

The novel mechanism of anti-angiogenesis not only use of anti-VEGF-related products, particularly when combined with other drugs, deserves attention. Kayoko Hosaka et al. discovered how KRAS-mutated epithelial cancers resist anti-angiogenic drugs by using ANG2, overcoming anti-VEGF actions. Combining anti-VEGF and anti-ANG2 treatments showed strong, synergistic effects against these cancers.462 Another recent study reported that MFGE8 activates the ERK/AKT pathway to promote angiogenesis in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Blocking the angiogenesis function of MFGE8 with its neutralizing antibody, combined with cisplatin treatment, could minimize the tumor size in ESCC tumor-burden mice [L]. These preclinical studies provide potential treatment ideas for cancer patients.

Bevacizumab, as a hot drug against angiogenesis, has also been involved in various clinical trials. One clinical trials combined Bevacizumab and Erlotinib in phase II advanced ovarian cancer showed the mPFS reached 25.6 months.463 A recent clinical trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine, based on data from 246 patients with Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, revealed that the median overall survival in the combination therapy group (Trifluridine-Tipiracil plus Bevacizumab) was 10.8 months, which is greater than the 7.5 months in the Trifluridine-Tipiracil monotherapy group, providing a new direction for the treatment of Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.464 Another new drug targeting both VEGFR and EGFR, Rivoceranib, has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in tumor treatment. Clinical trials have indicated that the combination of camrelizumab and rivoceranib significantly improves overall survival and progression-free survival, and provides clinically meaningful benefits for patients with HCC compared to sorafenib alone in a cohort of 543 patients.414 Given the promising clinical activity observed, further exploration of the combination with anti-angiogenic drugs is warranted as a potential alternative to available treatments.

The advantages, disadvantages, and challenges of combination treatment

Even though combination therapies have received multiple FDA approvals and have advantages in overcoming complex diseases and give patients customizable treatment to against tumor. There are still some shortcomings and challenges. First, cancer patients who meet the criteria for combination therapy may need to be further selected to reap benefits while avoiding potential pitfalls. From the combination therapies approved by the FDA and the guidelines, the entry criteria for combination therapy are relatively strict. For instance, the talazoparib + enzalutamide combination therapy approved in November 2023 is specified for the treatment of patients with HRR gene-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. In the pembrolizumab + chemotherapy combination therapy approved on November 25, 2020; it is explicitly stated that TNBC patients must have PD-L1 expression above a certain threshold (CPS ≥ 10) (Supplementary Table 3). Additionally, the combined use of different drugs may not always be compatible, and drug interactions may be affected, with the potential for increased the frequency of adverse events on the patient due to the use of multiple medications. One clinical trial (NCT02660034) reported the occurrence of nausea (63%), fatigue (53%), diarrhea (35%), vomiting (31%), and asymptomatic grade 3–4 hepatic immune-related adverse events (39%) in the cohorts receiving combination treatment with Pamiparib and Tiselizumab.465 Therefore, the selection of drugs and the determination of drug dosages are crucial. Further animal studies and clinical trials are necessary. Moreover, there is an urgent need for predictive biomarkers to guide the entire treatment process. Since the situation with combination therapies differs from monotherapy, in addition to regular imaging tests, some blood test indicators also need to be clearly redefined to accurately describe the patient’s treatment response. For patients, combination therapies inevitably increase drug costs. In the future, how to reduce the cost of combination therapies will also be an important issue for drug combination strategies.

Conclusions and prospectives

The aim of oncology drug research and development is to provide more effective and targeted treatment methods for suppressing tumor growth and metastasis. In this review, we summarize the progress and application of various oncology drugs, which encompass a range of types and mechanisms. The advantages, disadvantages, challenges, and representative drugs or clinical trials related to cancer treatments discussed herein are compiled in the table below, offering a comprehensive overview and comparison of different strategies (Table 7).Table 7 Comprehensive overview of cancer therapy strategies: definitions, advantages, challenges, and comparative analysis with application examples

Treatment options	Description	Advantages	Disadvantages	Challenges	Cancer Applications Examples	
Small molecular inhibitor	Low molecular weight compounds that target specific cellular pathways or enzymes.	Simpler and less expensive synthesis and preparation processes	Limited inhibitory effects on membrane proteins and secretory proteins	Challenges: Undruggable proteins

Solution: Covalent modulation, Allosteric inhibition, PROTACs, MGDs

	Sotorasib: the first small molecular inhibitor targeting specific KRAS gene mutations.	
Peptide drug	Short chains of amino acids that mimic natural peptides or proteins, with therapeutic effects.	High efficiency at low concentrations

Strong specificity

Good safety profile

Easy synthesis

Low cost

	Poor stability

Difficult oral administration

Poor membrane permeability

	Enhancing stability

Facilitating oral delivery

Improving membrane permeability

	Lutathera: for Gastrointestinal pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor	
Monoclonal Antibody Therapy	Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are produced by B cells and specifically target antigens.	High specificity for cancer cells

Reduced toxicity to healthy cells

Fast response and long-term immune activity

	The same with the challenges.	High production costs

Antibody-related side effects

Low penetration efficiency

Long half-life with risks of adverse effects

	Nivolumab: Anti PD-1 agents	
Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs)	Combination of a monoclonal antibody and a cytotoxic drug, targeting with precision.	Specific antigen-antibody targeting reduces systemic toxicity.

Greater design flexibility compared to conventional antibodies.

Customizable for various cancers through antigen and antibody selection.

Precise control of Drug-to-Antibody Ratio (DAR) for optimized efficacy and safety.

	The same with the challenges.	Low internalization and efficiency.

Target-off toxicity.

Balancing therapeutic activity with payload toxicity.

Complex metabolism and lack of uniformity in metabolic properties.

Toxicities, including on-target/off-tumor and off-target/off-tumor effects.

Unclear mechanisms of ADC resistance.

Production and quality control difficulties.

	Akalux: for head and neck cancer	
Cell therapy(CAR-T as an example)	A type of immunotherapy where a patient’s T cells are genetically modified to recognize and kill cancer cells.	Targeted therapy

Durability of response

Enhanced potency

Adaptive immune response

Evolution of CAR-generations

	Complex manufacturing process

Toxicity and safety concerns

Limited proliferation in early generations

Need for clinical validation

solid tumor challenges

Allogeneic concerns

	Challenge: Antigenic drift; System cytokine toxicities; Lack of effective targets for solid tumors; Tumor microenviroment suppression; Tumor barrier; GVHD

Solution:Tandem CAR-T; Inhibit IL-6; New tumor-specific antigens finding; co-treatment; utilize delivery routes; CD52 knockout

	CD19 + CAR-T	
Gene therapy(CRISPR as an example)	CRISPR/Cas9 is a revolutionary gene-editing technology that allows researchers to make precise and efficient edits in the genome of cells.	Precise genome editing.

Efficient and versatile tool.

Potential for treating genetic disorders and cancer.

Enhances T cell therapies.

Aids in drug development.

	Off-target effects.

Immune reactions.

Long-term efficacy.

Delivery system selection

	simplicity of design

studies of longer safety in body

	NCT03545815: evaluates the feasibility and safety of CRISPR-Cas9 mediated PD-1 and TCR gene-knocked out chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells in phase 1 patients with mesothelin-positive multiple solid tumors	
Neoantigen and cancer vaccine	Vaccines designed to stimulate the immune system to recognize and attack cancer-specific neoantigens.	Effective at preventing tumor occurrence.

Potential to stimulate long-term immune memory for lasting protection against cancer recurrence.

	Efficacy is inconsistent due to individual antigen variability and immune microenvironment interference.	Enhancing vaccine immunogenicity, as some patients show no response to vaccines.

Improving synthetic peptide design to increase MHC binding efficiency.

	VGX-3100: a double plasmid vaccine encoding HPV protein E6 and E7.	
Oncolytic virus	Viruses that are genetically modified to infect, kill, and break down cancer cells directly.	Target cancer cells selectively and activate immunity.

Tumor susceptibility due to genetic defects.

Easy genome modification for targeting.

Synergy with ICIs.

	limitation of targeting specificity

issue of immune response

	Improve targeting specificity.

Manage immune reactions.

Optimize dosage.

Address adverse events.

	T-VEC (Talimogene Laherparepvec): for melanoma, breast cancer, sarcoma, head and neck, colorectal cancer

glioma

	
Immunologic adjuvant and innate immunity activator	Substances that enhance the body’s immune response, particularly activating the innate immune system.	Enhance vaccine effectiveness.

Reduce antigen quantities needed.

Prompt immune response to infections.

Versatile for various populations and diseases.

	Potential safety and side effects.

Non-specific immune activation leading to inflammation.

	Risk of resistance with prolonged use.

Unclear mechanisms in tumor environments.

Difficulties in fully understanding adjuvant mechanisms.

	Toll-like receptors (TLRs) agonists	
Proton therapy and carbon ion therapy	High-precision radiotherapy techniques using protons or carbon ions to target tumors with minimal damage to surrounding tissue.	Precise radiation concentration on tumors.

Reduced damage to surrounding healthy tissue.

Lower adverse effects for proton therapy.

	High costs and technical requirements.

Limited availability.

	Debate over efficacy compared to photon therapy.

Varied efficacy and survival results for carbon-ion therapy.

		
Photothermal and photodynamic therapy	Light-based therapies where heat (photothermal) or reactive oxygen species (photodynamic) are used to destroy cancer cells.	PTT: Minimally invasive, repeatable, no surgery needed.

PDT: High selectivity, potential immune response triggered.

	Both: Limited by light penetration depth affecting large or deep tumors.	PTT: Requires strict temperature control to avoid damage.

PDT: Post-treatment photosensitivity, high costs.

	GSNs	
Anti-angiogenesis therapy	Treatments that inhibit the formation of new blood vessels in tumors, cutting off their nutrient supply.	Inhibit tumor growth by restricting nutrient and oxygen supply.

Strong targeting with minimal impact on normal cells.

Enhance effects of other cancer treatments and delay resistance.

	High costs with combination therapies.	Cardiovascular adverse reactions (e.g., hypertension, heart failure).

Primary and acquired drug resistance due to various mechanisms.

	Nintedanib: a type of VEGFR-TKI	
Nanomedicines	Treatments that inhibit the formation of new blood vessels in tumors, cutting off their nutrient supply.	Enhanced solubility and bioavailability

Minimized off-target effects

Targeted drug delivery

Extended circulation time

Controlled release at disease site

Penetration of biological barriers

	Potential toxicity

Stability and aggregation issues

Unclear body mechanisms

Unknown long-term risks

	Biological complexity

Safety and biocompatibility concerns

Manufacturing scalability

Regulatory compliance

Intellectual property management

Cost-effectiveness compared to existing therapies

	Iron oxide nanoparticles (such as Fe3O4 and γ-Fe2O3)	
Combination therapy	The use of two or more therapeutic approaches simultaneously to treat complex diseases more effectively.	Personalized treatment strategies

Potential for increased efficacy against complex diseases

FDA-approved for various cancer types

Targeted treatment for specific genetic mutations (e.g., HRR gene-mutated prostate cancer)

	Strict patient selection criteria

Incompatibility and drug interactions with multiple medications

Increased frequency of adverse events (e.g., nausea, fatigue, diarrhea, vomiting, hepatic immune-related adverse events)

	Critical need for precise drug selection and dosage determination

Requirement for additional animal studies and clinical trials

Urgent need for predictive biomarkers to guide treatment

Redefinition of blood test indicators for accurate treatment response assessment

Increased drug costs for patients

	Atezolizumab with Bevacizumab	
As more foundational research delves into the functions and mechanisms of tumors, the future of cancer treatment looks promising. In addition to the ongoing development and expansion of treatments such as ICIs, gene therapy, CAR-T, cancer vaccines, and oncolytic viruses (OVs), and the shift from traditional frontline care to combination therapies, there are several noteworthy aspects to consider for the future

Firstly, AI technology will penetrate every aspect of cancer therapy

Current research is primarily focused on integrating AI with healthcare to facilitate automated diagnosis in tissue pathology. In June 2023, a study published in JAMA, assessed the diagnostic performance of GPT-4 with complex medical records. Findings indicated that GPT-4 identified the correct diagnosis as the primary diagnosis in nearly 40% of instances and offered accurate potential diagnoses in two-thirds of the cases.466 Microsoft’s recently introduced biomedical model, LLaVA-Med, has the ability to deduce patients’ pathological conditions from imaging such as CT and X-ray. In the realm of cervical cancer screening, Huawei, partnering with KingMed Diagnostic, has developed an AI-assisted model that achieves a high specificity rate exceeding 60%, with an interpretation accuracy for negative slides surpassing 99% and a detection rate for positive abnormalities above 99.9%. These advancements mark merely the beginning. The application of AI in the realm of small molecule inhibitors has been discussed, highlighting its role in enhancing drug design, refining manufacturing processes, and forecasting and assessing outcomes. The convergence of oncology big data with deep learning AI offers a distinctive platform, and the field anticipates innovative findings over the coming decade.

The revelations of the biological principles behind cancer heterogeneity based on multi-omics research are guiding new directions in tumor treatment. Spatial omics, TOF mass spectrometry, and CODEX (CO-Detection by IndEXing) are among the omics studies currently underway in preclinical research. These multi-omics technologies combine molecular characterization with spatial resolution, enabling the dissection of tumor molecular structures and the spatial organization of tumor microenvironments. slide-DNA-seq has been applied to tumor samples, allowing for the spatial resolution of genomic data within intact tissue samples. This method has the potential to identify, locate, and characterize individual clones within the three-dimensional tumor structure, thus holding significant promise for elucidating intra-tumor heterogeneity and the evolution of tumor clones during treatment. Spatial proteomics data is also being used to guide clinical trials. Single-cell sequencing, and spatial transcriptomics have been utilized in clinical trials (NCT0604938) to compare the differences in tumor microenvironment components before and after treatment with CD20 CAR-T therapy for B-cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. The use of multi-omics data to predict the therapeutic effects of drugs based on tumor molecular data can further drive targeted cancer therapy.

New drugs based on the cancer metabolic adaptation theory

Tumors are not only genetic diseases but also metabolic disorders, as evidenced by the fact that even with ample oxygen supply, tumor cells prefer to undergo glycolysis, promoting lactic acid secretion, known as the “Warburg effect“.467 In 1948, Sidney Farber described how the anti-folate drug aminopterin inhibits dihydrofolate reductase, thereby blocking the synthesis of nucleic acids and proteins in acute leukemia in children. Aminopterin became the progenitor of a large class of chemotherapeutic drugs. Since that time, research on drugs targeting tumor metabolism has never ceased. Fatty acid metabolism plays a significant role in the growth and metastasis of tumor cells. Fatty acids are involved not only in the structural synthesis and signal transduction of phospholipids on the surface of cancer cell membranes but also maintain energy requirements through β-oxidation and utilize NADPH to maintain redox balance. Lu Zhimin’s team published research indicating that the gluconeogenic enzyme phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 1 (PCK1) has protein kinase activity and phosphorylates protein substrates using GTP as the phosphate donor, continuously stimulating tumor lipid synthesis to promote tumor progression.468 These data further attracted researchers’ attention to accelerating the development of metabolic-related drugs. However, drugs that block some metabolic pathways can affect the uptake of normal cells, making the development of lipid metabolism drugs exceptionally challenging. For example, clinical development of hexokinase (HK) inhibitors such as 2-deoxyglucose has been halted due to high toxicity or low efficacy.469 To date, only a limited number of drugs targeting cancer metabolism have been successfully applied clinically (FDA-approved enasidenib and Ivosidenib for acute myeloid leukemia), but this situation may change as our understanding of tumors deepens in the future.

New drugs based on the impact of gut microbiota on tumor progression

The digestive tract is a habitat for bacteria, fungi, and viruses. The occurrence and development of many cancers, as well as the efficacy of their immunotherapy, have been reported to be associated with the gut microbiota. Known intestinal carcinogenic bacteria include Salmonella typhi, which is related to gallbladder cancer, and Helicobacter spp., which is associated with primary liver cancer and gastric cancer. Among them, Helicobacter has been identified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the World Health Organization. In January 2024, Jun Yu’s team reported that, in addition to Helicobacter pylori, a non-H. pylori-driven bacterium, S. anginosus,470 promotes the occurrence of gastric tumors, which demonstrates the important role of carcinogenic bacteria. Furthermore, in the research on gut microbiota and immunotherapy, two pioneering studies by the teams of Laurence Zitvogel and Giorgio Trinchieri demonstrated that complete gut microbiota is crucial for activating the innate and adaptive immune systems’ effectiveness against three types of cancer therapies. Zitvogel, Gajewski, and Jennifer Wargo published three parallel studies showing that gut commensal bacteria determine the efficacy of anti-PD-1 ICIs in patients with melanoma and epithelial tumors. These results further revealed the influence of carcinogenic bacteria on the composition of primary resistance to immune therapy. In summary, recent research has shown that gut microbiota is closely related to the occurrence and progression of tumors, and studies on gut microbiota are essential for the prevention and treatment of cancer.

Overall, the future of cancer treatment will be diversified and integrated, combining traditional therapeutic methods with emerging technologies to offer patients a wider range of treatment choices. As our understanding of the complexity of cancer increases, we will be better equipped to tackle this challenge and ultimately achieve the control and cure of cancer.

Supplementary information

Supplementary_Materials

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41392-024-01856-7.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a research grant from the Shenzhen Science and Technology Program (ZDSYS20210623091811035).

Author contributions

B.L.L., H.Y.Z., L.C.T., and S.K.T.H. wrote the manuscript and made the figures, B.L.L., H.Y.Z., L.C.T., organized the tables, X.Y.G. conceived, designed, and edited the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the article.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

These authors contributed equally: Beilei Liu, Hongyu Zhou, Licheng Tan.
==== Refs
References

1. Sung H Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries Ca. Cancer J. Clin. 2021 71 209 249 10.3322/caac.21660 33538338
Sung, H. et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. Ca. Cancer J. Clin. 71, 209–249 (2021).33538338 10.3322/caac.21660
2. Worldwide cancer statistics. Cancer Research UK https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/worldwide-cancer (2015).
3. Frankel RI Centennial of Röntgen’s discovery of x-rays West. J. Med. 1996 164 497 501 8764624
Frankel, R. I. Centennial of Röntgen’s discovery of x-rays. West. J. Med. 164, 497–501 (1996).8764624
4. Steinberg FM Raso J Biotech pharmaceuticals and biotherapy: an overview J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 1998 1 48 59 10945918
Steinberg, F. M. & Raso, J. Biotech pharmaceuticals and biotherapy: an overview. J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 1, 48–59 (1998).10945918
5. Commissioner, O. of the. Drug Therapeutics & Regulation in the U.S. FDA https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-history-exhibits/drug-therapeutics-regulation-us (2023).
6. Grillo-López AJ Rituximab: the first monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of lymphoma Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2000 1 1 9 10.2174/1389201003379059 11467356
Grillo-López, A. J. et al. Rituximab: the first monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of lymphoma. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 1, 1–9 (2000).11467356 10.2174/1389201003379059
7. Swain SM Shastry M Hamilton E Targeting HER2-positive breast cancer: advances and future directions Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2023 22 101 126 10.1038/s41573-022-00579-0 36344672
Swain, S. M., Shastry, M. & Hamilton, E. Targeting HER2-positive breast cancer: advances and future directions. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 22, 101–126 (2023).36344672 10.1038/s41573-022-00579-0
8. Sun X Imatinib induces ferroptosis in gastrointestinal stromal tumors by promoting STUB1-mediated GPX4 ubiquitination Cell Death Dis. 2023 14 839 10.1038/s41419-023-06300-2 38110356
Sun, X. et al. Imatinib induces ferroptosis in gastrointestinal stromal tumors by promoting STUB1-mediated GPX4 ubiquitination. Cell Death Dis. 14, 839 (2023).38110356 10.1038/s41419-023-06300-2
9. Sun C Gao W Liu J Cheng H Hao J FGL1 regulates acquired resistance to Gefitinib by inhibiting apoptosis in non-small cell lung cancer Respir. Res. 2020 21 210 10.1186/s12931-020-01477-y 32778129
Sun, C., Gao, W., Liu, J., Cheng, H. & Hao, J. FGL1 regulates acquired resistance to Gefitinib by inhibiting apoptosis in non-small cell lung cancer. Respir. Res. 21, 210 (2020).32778129 10.1186/s12931-020-01477-y
10. Carter, J. & Tadi, P. Erlotinib. in StatPearls (StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island (FL), 2024).
11. Tewari KS Bevacizumab for advanced cervical cancer: final overall survival and adverse event analysis of a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial (Gynecologic Oncology Group 240) Lancet 2017 390 1654 1663 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31607-0 28756902
Tewari, K. S. et al. Bevacizumab for advanced cervical cancer: final overall survival and adverse event analysis of a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial (Gynecologic Oncology Group 240). Lancet 390, 1654–1663 (2017).28756902 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31607-0
12. Hietanen E Koivu MKA Susi P Cytolytic properties and genome analysis of Rigvir® Oncolytic Virotherapy virus and other Echovirus 7 Isolates Viruses 2022 14 525 10.3390/v14030525 35336934
Hietanen, E., Koivu, M. K. A. & Susi, P. Cytolytic properties and genome analysis of Rigvir® Oncolytic Virotherapy virus and other Echovirus 7 Isolates. Viruses 14, 525 (2022).35336934 10.3390/v14030525
13. Sun H TOPK/PBK is phosphorylated by ERK2 at serine 32, promotes tumorigenesis and is involved in sorafenib resistance in RCC Cell Death Dis. 2022 13 450 10.1038/s41419-022-04909-3 35546143
Sun, H. et al. TOPK/PBK is phosphorylated by ERK2 at serine 32, promotes tumorigenesis and is involved in sorafenib resistance in RCC. Cell Death Dis. 13, 450 (2022).35546143 10.1038/s41419-022-04909-3
14. Myers RM Humanized CD19-Targeted Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T cells in CAR-Naive and CAR-exposed children and young adults with relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia J. Clin. Oncol. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2021 39 3044 3055 10.1200/JCO.20.03458
Myers, R. M. et al. Humanized CD19-Targeted Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T cells in CAR-Naive and CAR-exposed children and young adults with relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 39, 3044–3055 (2021).10.1200/JCO.20.03458
15. Bouffet Eric Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Pediatric Glioma with BRAF V600 mutations N. Engl. J. Med. 2023 389 1108 1120 10.1056/NEJMoa2303815 37733309
Bouffet, Eric et al. Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Pediatric Glioma with BRAF V600 mutations. N. Engl. J. Med. 389, 1108–1120 (2023).37733309 10.1056/NEJMoa2303815
16. Carbone David P First-line Nivolumab in Stage IV or recurrent non–small-cell lung cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2017 376 2415 2426 10.1056/NEJMoa1613493 28636851
Carbone David, P. et al. First-line Nivolumab in Stage IV or recurrent non–small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 376, 2415–2426 (2017).28636851 10.1056/NEJMoa1613493
17. Harrington KJ Pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: updated results of the Phase III KEYNOTE-048 Study J. Clin. Oncol. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2023 41 790 802 10.1200/JCO.21.02508
Harrington, K. J. et al. Pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: updated results of the Phase III KEYNOTE-048 Study. J. Clin. Oncol. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 41, 790–802 (2023).10.1200/JCO.21.02508
18. Joura Elmar A A 9-Valent HPV Vaccine against Infection and Intraepithelial Neoplasia in Women N. Engl. J. Med. 2015 372 711 723 10.1056/NEJMoa1405044 25693011
Joura Elmar, A. et al. A 9-Valent HPV Vaccine against Infection and Intraepithelial Neoplasia in Women. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 711–723 (2015).25693011 10.1056/NEJMoa1405044
19. Zhang T Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC): A review of the recent advances in cancer therapy J. Clin. Med. 2023 12 1098 10.3390/jcm12031098 36769745
Zhang, T. et al. Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC): A review of the recent advances in cancer therapy. J. Clin. Med. 12, 1098 (2023).36769745 10.3390/jcm12031098
20. Todo T Intratumoral oncolytic herpes virus G47∆ for residual or recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 2 trial Nat. Med. 2022 28 1630 1639 10.1038/s41591-022-01897-x 35864254
Todo, T. et al. Intratumoral oncolytic herpes virus G47∆ for residual or recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 2 trial. Nat. Med. 28, 1630–1639 (2022).35864254 10.1038/s41591-022-01897-x
21. Skoulidis F Sotorasib for lung cancers with KRAS p.G12C mutation N. Engl. J. Med. 2021 384 2371 2381 10.1056/NEJMoa2103695 34096690
Skoulidis, F. et al. Sotorasib for lung cancers with KRAS p.G12C mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 2371–2381 (2021).34096690 10.1056/NEJMoa2103695
22. Finn RS Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2020 382 1894 1905 10.1056/NEJMoa1915745 32402160
Finn, R. S. et al. Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 382, 1894–1905 (2020).32402160 10.1056/NEJMoa1915745
23. Durante M Debus J Loeffler JS Physics and biomedical challenges of cancer therapy with accelerated heavy ions Nat. Rev. Phys. 2021 3 777 790 10.1038/s42254-021-00368-5 34870097
Durante, M., Debus, J. & Loeffler, J. S. Physics and biomedical challenges of cancer therapy with accelerated heavy ions. Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 777–790 (2021).34870097 10.1038/s42254-021-00368-5
24. Global Anti Tumor Drugs Market Research Report 2023. https://www.marketresearch.com/Bosson-Research-v4252/Global-Anti-Tumor-Drugs-Research-34934738/ (2023).
25. Falzone L Salomone S Libra M Evolution of cancer pharmacological treatments at the turn of the third millennium Front. Pharmacol. 2018 9 1300 10.3389/fphar.2018.01300 30483135
Falzone, L., Salomone, S. & Libra, M. Evolution of cancer pharmacological treatments at the turn of the third millennium. Front. Pharmacol. 9, 1300 (2018).30483135 10.3389/fphar.2018.01300
26. Lemberg KM Gori SS Tsukamoto T Rais R Slusher BS Clinical development of metabolic inhibitors for oncology J. Clin. Invest. 2022 132 e148550 10.1172/JCI148550 34981784
Lemberg, K. M., Gori, S. S., Tsukamoto, T., Rais, R. & Slusher, B. S. Clinical development of metabolic inhibitors for oncology. J. Clin. Invest. 132, e148550 (2022).34981784 10.1172/JCI148550
27. Moreno C Muñoz C Terol MJ Hernández-Rivas J-Á Villanueva M Restoration of the immune function as a complementary strategy to treat Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia effectively J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2021 40 321 10.1186/s13046-021-02115-1 34654437
Moreno, C., Muñoz, C., Terol, M. J., Hernández-Rivas, J.-Á. & Villanueva, M. Restoration of the immune function as a complementary strategy to treat Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia effectively. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 40, 321 (2021).34654437 10.1186/s13046-021-02115-1
28. Sliwoski G Kothiwale S Meiler J Lowe EW Computational methods in drug discovery Pharmacol. Rev. 2014 66 334 395 10.1124/pr.112.007336 24381236
Sliwoski, G., Kothiwale, S., Meiler, J. & Lowe, E. W. Computational methods in drug discovery. Pharmacol. Rev. 66, 334–395 (2014).24381236 10.1124/pr.112.007336
29. Benjin X Ling L Developments, applications, and prospects of cryo‐electron microscopy Protein Sci. Publ. Protein Soc. 2020 29 872 882 10.1002/pro.3805
Benjin, X. & Ling, L. Developments, applications, and prospects of cryo‐electron microscopy. Protein Sci. Publ. Protein Soc. 29, 872–882 (2020).10.1002/pro.3805
30. Tsukamoto Y 150-kD oxygen-regulated protein is expressed in human atherosclerotic plaques and allows mononuclear phagocytes to withstand cellular stress on exposure to hypoxia and modified low density lipoprotein J. Clin. Invest. 1996 98 1930 1941 10.1172/JCI118994 8878445
Tsukamoto, Y. et al. 150-kD oxygen-regulated protein is expressed in human atherosclerotic plaques and allows mononuclear phagocytes to withstand cellular stress on exposure to hypoxia and modified low density lipoprotein. J. Clin. Invest. 98, 1930–1941 (1996).8878445 10.1172/JCI118994
31. Hu Y NMR-based methods for protein analysis Anal. Chem. 2021 93 1866 1879 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03830 33439619
Hu, Y. et al. NMR-based methods for protein analysis. Anal. Chem. 93, 1866–1879 (2021).33439619 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03830
32. Banerjee A Bhakta S Sengupta J Integrative approaches in cryogenic electron microscopy: Recent advances in structural biology and future perspectives iScience 2021 24 102044 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102044 33532719
Banerjee, A., Bhakta, S. & Sengupta, J. Integrative approaches in cryogenic electron microscopy: Recent advances in structural biology and future perspectives. iScience 24, 102044 (2021).33532719 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102044
33. Dhakal A Gyawali R Wang L Cheng J A large expert-curated cryo-EM image dataset for machine learning protein particle picking Sci. Data 2023 10 392 10.1038/s41597-023-02280-2 37349345
Dhakal, A., Gyawali, R., Wang, L. & Cheng, J. A large expert-curated cryo-EM image dataset for machine learning protein particle picking. Sci. Data 10, 392 (2023).37349345 10.1038/s41597-023-02280-2
34. Skalidis I Cryo-EM and artificial intelligence visualize endogenous protein community members Struct. Lond. Engl. 2022 30 575 589.e6
Skalidis, I. et al. Cryo-EM and artificial intelligence visualize endogenous protein community members. Struct. Lond. Engl. 30, 575–589.e6 (2022).
35. Al-Azzawi A Ouadou A Tanner JJ Cheng J AutoCryoPicker: An unsupervised learning approach for fully automated single particle picking in Cryo-EM images BMC Bioinforma. 2019 20 326 10.1186/s12859-019-2926-y
Al-Azzawi, A., Ouadou, A., Tanner, J. J. & Cheng, J. AutoCryoPicker: An unsupervised learning approach for fully automated single particle picking in Cryo-EM images. BMC Bioinforma. 20, 326 (2019).10.1186/s12859-019-2926-y
36. Yu, H., Ma, H., Yang, K., Zhao, Y. & Jin, Y. DeepEM: Deep Neural Networks Model Recovery through EM Side-Channel Information Leakage. in 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Hardware Oriented Security and Trust (HOST) 209–218 (2020). 10.1109/HOST45689.2020.9300274.
37. Roskoski R Properties of FDA-approved small molecule protein kinase inhibitors: A 2023 update Pharmacol. Res. 2023 187 106552 10.1016/j.phrs.2022.106552 36403719
Roskoski, R. Properties of FDA-approved small molecule protein kinase inhibitors: A 2023 update. Pharmacol. Res. 187, 106552 (2023).36403719 10.1016/j.phrs.2022.106552
38. Iqbal N Iqbal N Imatinib: A breakthrough of targeted therapy in cancer Chemother. Res. Pract. 2014 2014 1 9 10.1155/2014/357027
Iqbal, N. & Iqbal, N. Imatinib: A breakthrough of targeted therapy in cancer. Chemother. Res. Pract. 2014, 1–9 (2014).10.1155/2014/357027
39. Karnoub AE Weinberg RA Ras oncogenes: split personalities Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008 9 517 531 10.1038/nrm2438 18568040
Karnoub, A. E. & Weinberg, R. A. Ras oncogenes: split personalities. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 9, 517–531 (2008).18568040 10.1038/nrm2438
40. Ostrem JM Peters U Sos ML Wells JA Shokat KM K-Ras(G12C) inhibitors allosterically control GTP affinity and effector interactions Nature 2013 503 548 551 10.1038/nature12796 24256730
Ostrem, J. M., Peters, U., Sos, M. L., Wells, J. A. & Shokat, K. M. K-Ras(G12C) inhibitors allosterically control GTP affinity and effector interactions. Nature 503, 548–551 (2013).24256730 10.1038/nature12796
41. Jänne PA Adagrasib in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harboring a KRASG12C Mutation N. Engl. J. Med. 2022 387 120 131 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619 35658005
Jänne, P. A. et al. Adagrasib in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harboring a KRASG12C Mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 387, 120–131 (2022).35658005 10.1056/NEJMoa2204619
42. Ferdinandos, S. et al. Sotorasib for Lung Cancers with KRAS p.G12C Mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 2371–2381 (2021).
43. Araujo LH Molecular profile of KRAS G12C-mutant colorectal and non-small-cell lung cancer BMC Cancer 2021 21 193 10.1186/s12885-021-07884-8 33632153
Araujo, L. H. et al. Molecular profile of KRAS G12C-mutant colorectal and non-small-cell lung cancer. BMC Cancer 21, 193 (2021).33632153 10.1186/s12885-021-07884-8
44. Qiu J Chen K Zhong C Zhu S Ma X Network-based protein-protein interaction prediction method maps perturbations of cancer interactome PLOS Genet. 2021 17 e1009869 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009869 34727106
Qiu, J., Chen, K., Zhong, C., Zhu, S. & Ma, X. Network-based protein-protein interaction prediction method maps perturbations of cancer interactome. PLOS Genet. 17, e1009869 (2021).34727106 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009869
45. Dang CV Reddy EP Shokat KM Soucek L Drugging the ‘undruggable’ cancer targets Nat. Rev. Cancer 2017 17 502 508 10.1038/nrc.2017.36 28643779
Dang, C. V., Reddy, E. P., Shokat, K. M. & Soucek, L. Drugging the ‘undruggable’ cancer targets. Nat. Rev. Cancer 17, 502–508 (2017).28643779 10.1038/nrc.2017.36
46. Awad MM Acquired resistance to KRASG12C inhibition in cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2021 384 2382 2393 10.1056/NEJMoa2105281 34161704
Awad, M. M. et al. Acquired resistance to KRASG12C inhibition in cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 2382–2393 (2021).34161704 10.1056/NEJMoa2105281
47. Hansen AL Xiang X Yuan C Bruschweiler-Li L Brüschweiler R Excited-state observation of active K-Ras reveals differential structural dynamics of wild-type versus oncogenic G12D and G12C mutants Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2023 30 1446 1455 10.1038/s41594-023-01070-z 37640864
Hansen, A. L., Xiang, X., Yuan, C., Bruschweiler-Li, L. & Brüschweiler, R. Excited-state observation of active K-Ras reveals differential structural dynamics of wild-type versus oncogenic G12D and G12C mutants. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 30, 1446–1455 (2023).37640864 10.1038/s41594-023-01070-z
48. Cook JH Melloni GEM Gulhan DC Park PJ Haigis KM The origins and genetic interactions of KRAS mutations are allele- and tissue-specific Nat. Commun. 2021 12 1808 10.1038/s41467-021-22125-z 33753749
Cook, J. H., Melloni, G. E. M., Gulhan, D. C., Park, P. J. & Haigis, K. M. The origins and genetic interactions of KRAS mutations are allele- and tissue-specific. Nat. Commun. 12, 1808 (2021).33753749 10.1038/s41467-021-22125-z
49. Lavoie H Gagnon J Therrien M ERK signalling: a master regulator of cell behaviour, life and fate Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2020 21 607 632 10.1038/s41580-020-0255-7 32576977
Lavoie, H., Gagnon, J. & Therrien, M. ERK signalling: a master regulator of cell behaviour, life and fate. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 607–632 (2020).32576977 10.1038/s41580-020-0255-7
50. Research, C. for D. E. and. FDA grants accelerated approval to sotorasib for KRAS G12C mutated NSCLC. FDA https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-grants-accelerated-approval-sotorasib-kras-g12c-mutated-nsclc (2021).
51. Kim D Pan-KRAS inhibitor disables oncogenic signalling and tumour growth Nature 2023 619 160 166 10.1038/s41586-023-06123-3 37258666
Kim, D. et al. Pan-KRAS inhibitor disables oncogenic signalling and tumour growth. Nature 619, 160–166 (2023).37258666 10.1038/s41586-023-06123-3
52. Changeux J-P Christopoulos A Allosteric modulation as a unifying mechanism for receptor function and regulation Cell 2016 166 1084 1102 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.015 27565340
Changeux, J.-P. & Christopoulos, A. Allosteric modulation as a unifying mechanism for receptor function and regulation. Cell 166, 1084–1102 (2016).27565340 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.015
53. Hughes Timothy P Asciminib in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia after ABL Kinase inhibitor failure N. Engl. J. Med. 2019 381 2315 2326 10.1056/NEJMoa1902328 31826340
Hughes Timothy, P. et al. Asciminib in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia after ABL Kinase inhibitor failure. N. Engl. J. Med. 381, 2315–2326 (2019).31826340 10.1056/NEJMoa1902328
54. Larkin J Combined Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib in BRAF-Mutated Melanoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2014 371 1867 1876 10.1056/NEJMoa1408868 25265494
Larkin, J. et al. Combined Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib in BRAF-Mutated Melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 1867–1876 (2014).25265494 10.1056/NEJMoa1408868
55. Chen Y-NP Allosteric inhibition of SHP2 phosphatase inhibits cancers driven by receptor tyrosine kinases Nature 2016 535 148 152 10.1038/nature18621 27362227
Chen, Y.-N. P. et al. Allosteric inhibition of SHP2 phosphatase inhibits cancers driven by receptor tyrosine kinases. Nature 535, 148–152 (2016).27362227 10.1038/nature18621
56. Bondeson DP Catalytic in vivo protein knockdown by small-molecule PROTACs Nat. Chem. Biol. 2015 11 611 617 10.1038/nchembio.1858 26075522
Bondeson, D. P. et al. Catalytic in vivo protein knockdown by small-molecule PROTACs. Nat. Chem. Biol. 11, 611–617 (2015).26075522 10.1038/nchembio.1858
57. Smith AR Pucheault M Tae HS Crews CM Targeted intracellular protein degradation induced by a small molecule: en route to chemical proteomics Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2008 18 5904 5908 10.1016/j.bmcl.2008.07.114 18752944
Smith, A. R., Pucheault, M., Tae, H. S. & Crews, C. M. Targeted intracellular protein degradation induced by a small molecule: en route to chemical proteomics. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 18, 5904–5908 (2008).18752944 10.1016/j.bmcl.2008.07.114
58. Zhang X Crowley VM Wucherpfennig TG Dix MM Cravatt BF Electrophilic PROTACs that degrade nuclear proteins by engaging DCAF16 Nat. Chem. Biol. 2019 15 737 746 10.1038/s41589-019-0279-5 31209349
Zhang, X., Crowley, V. M., Wucherpfennig, T. G., Dix, M. M. & Cravatt, B. F. Electrophilic PROTACs that degrade nuclear proteins by engaging DCAF16. Nat. Chem. Biol. 15, 737–746 (2019).31209349 10.1038/s41589-019-0279-5
59. Winter GE Selective target protein degradation via Phthalimide conjugation Science 2015 348 1376 1381 10.1126/science.aab1433 25999370
Winter, G. E. et al. Selective target protein degradation via Phthalimide conjugation. Science 348, 1376–1381 (2015).25999370 10.1126/science.aab1433
60. Han X Discovery of highly potent and efficient PROTAC degraders of Androgen Receptor (AR) by employing weak binding affinity VHL E3 Ligase ligands J. Med. Chem. 2019 62 11218 11231 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b01393 31804827
Han, X. et al. Discovery of highly potent and efficient PROTAC degraders of Androgen Receptor (AR) by employing weak binding affinity VHL E3 Ligase ligands. J. Med. Chem. 62, 11218–11231 (2019).31804827 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b01393
61. Zhao Q Lan T Su S Rao Y Induction of apoptosis in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells by a PARP1-targeting PROTAC small molecule Chem. Commun. Camb. Engl. 2019 55 369 372 10.1039/C8CC07813K
Zhao, Q., Lan, T., Su, S. & Rao, Y. Induction of apoptosis in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells by a PARP1-targeting PROTAC small molecule. Chem. Commun. Camb. Engl. 55, 369–372 (2019).10.1039/C8CC07813K
62. Hines J Lartigue S Dong H Qian Y Crews CM MDM2-recruiting PROTAC offers superior, synergistic anti-proliferative activity via simultaneous degradation of BRD4 and stabilization of p53 Cancer Res 2019 79 251 262 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-2918 30385614
Hines, J., Lartigue, S., Dong, H., Qian, Y. & Crews, C. M. MDM2-recruiting PROTAC offers superior, synergistic anti-proliferative activity via simultaneous degradation of BRD4 and stabilization of p53. Cancer Res 79, 251–262 (2019).30385614 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-2918
63. Arvinas PROTAC® Protein Degrader Bavdegalutamide (ARV-110) Continues to Demonstrate Clinical Benefit in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer | Arvinas. https://ir.arvinas.com/news-releases/news-release-details/arvinas-protacr-protein-degrader-bavdegalutamide-arv-110.
64. Rathkopf DE First-in-human phase 1 study of CC-94676, a first-in-class androgen receptor (AR) ligand-directed degrader (LDD), in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) J. Clin. Oncol. 2024 42 134 10.1200/JCO.2024.42.4_suppl.134 37972343
Rathkopf, D. E. et al. First-in-human phase 1 study of CC-94676, a first-in-class androgen receptor (AR) ligand-directed degrader (LDD), in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). J. Clin. Oncol. 42, 134 (2024).37972343 10.1200/JCO.2024.42.4_suppl.134
65. A Study of AC176 for the Treatment of Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05241613.
66. A Study to Assess the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Anti-Tumor Activity of Oral HP518 in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05252364.
67. Petrylak DP A phase 2 expansion study of ARV-766, a PROTAC androgen receptor (AR) degrader, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) J. Clin. Oncol. 2023 41 TPS290 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.6_suppl.TPS290
Petrylak, D. P. et al. A phase 2 expansion study of ARV-766, a PROTAC androgen receptor (AR) degrader, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). J. Clin. Oncol. 41, TPS290 (2023).10.1200/JCO.2023.41.6_suppl.TPS290
68. Arvinas and Pfizer Announce PROTAC® Protein Degrader ARV-471 Continues to Demonstrate Encouraging Clinical Benefit Rate in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic ER+/HER2- Breast Cancer | Pfizer. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/arvinas-and-pfizer-announce-protacr-protein-degrader-arv.
69. Lloyd MR Wander SA Hamilton E Razavi P Bardia A Next-generation selective estrogen receptor degraders and other novel endocrine therapies for management of metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: current and emerging role Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 2022 14 17588359221113694 10.1177/17588359221113694 35923930
Lloyd, M. R., Wander, S. A., Hamilton, E., Razavi, P. & Bardia, A. Next-generation selective estrogen receptor degraders and other novel endocrine therapies for management of metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: current and emerging role. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 14, 17588359221113694 (2022).35923930 10.1177/17588359221113694
70. Mato AR NX-2127-001, a First-in-Human Trial of NX-2127, a Bruton’s Tyrosine Kinase-targeted protein degrader, in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and B-cell malignancies Blood 2022 140 2329 2332 10.1182/blood-2022-164772
Mato, A. R. et al. NX-2127-001, a First-in-Human Trial of NX-2127, a Bruton’s Tyrosine Kinase-targeted protein degrader, in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and B-cell malignancies. Blood 140, 2329–2332 (2022).10.1182/blood-2022-164772
71. Robbins DW Nx-5948, a selective degrader of BTK with activity in preclinical models of hematologic and brain malignancies Blood 2021 138 2251 10.1182/blood-2021-147473
Robbins, D. W. et al. Nx-5948, a selective degrader of BTK with activity in preclinical models of hematologic and brain malignancies. Blood 138, 2251 (2021).10.1182/blood-2021-147473
72. Wang H P1219: BGB-16673, A BTK degrader, overcomes on-target resistance from btk inhibitors and presents sustainable long-term tumor regression in Lymphoma Xenograft Models HemaSphere 2023 7 e24358c2 10.1097/01.HS9.0000971772.24358.c2
Wang, H. et al. P1219: BGB-16673, A BTK degrader, overcomes on-target resistance from btk inhibitors and presents sustainable long-term tumor regression in Lymphoma Xenograft Models. HemaSphere 7, e24358c2 (2023).10.1097/01.HS9.0000971772.24358.c2
73. Li J Abstract CT128: Phase 1 study of HSK29116, a Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC) agent, in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies Cancer Res 2023 83 CT128 10.1158/1538-7445.AM2023-CT128
Li, J. et al. Abstract CT128: Phase 1 study of HSK29116, a Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC) agent, in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Cancer Res 83, CT128 (2023).10.1158/1538-7445.AM2023-CT128
74. Khan S A selective BCL-XL PROTAC degrader achieves safe and potent antitumor activity Nat. Med. 2019 25 1938 1947 10.1038/s41591-019-0668-z 31792461
Khan, S. et al. A selective BCL-XL PROTAC degrader achieves safe and potent antitumor activity. Nat. Med. 25, 1938–1947 (2019).31792461 10.1038/s41591-019-0668-z
75. Study of Oral MRT-2359 in Selected Cancer Patients - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05546268.
76. Salarius Pharmaceuticals, LLC. A Phase 1, Open-Label, Multicenter, First-in-Human Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Preliminary Efficacy of SP-3164 in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05979857 (2023).
77. Ikena Oncology. A First-in-Human (FiH) Study of IK-595, an Oral Dual MEK/RAF Inhibitor, in Patients With RAS-or RAF-Altered Advanced Solid Tumors. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06270082 (2024).
78. Gao J Li H-R Jin C Jiang J-H Ding J-Y Strategies to overcome acquired resistance to EGFR TKI in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer Clin. Transl. Oncol. Publ. Fed. Span. Oncol. Soc. Natl Cancer Inst. Mex. 2019 21 1287 1301
Gao, J., Li, H.-R., Jin, C., Jiang, J.-H. & Ding, J.-Y. Strategies to overcome acquired resistance to EGFR TKI in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Clin. Transl. Oncol. Publ. Fed. Span. Oncol. Soc. Natl Cancer Inst. Mex. 21, 1287–1301 (2019).
79. Vecchio I Tornali C Bragazzi NL Martini M The Discovery of Insulin: An important milestone in the history of medicine Front. Endocrinol. 2018 9 613 10.3389/fendo.2018.00613
Vecchio, I., Tornali, C., Bragazzi, N. L. & Martini, M. The Discovery of Insulin: An important milestone in the history of medicine. Front. Endocrinol. 9, 613 (2018).10.3389/fendo.2018.00613
80. Bruce Merrifield. Solid Phase Synthesis, Nobel Lecture. (1984).
81. Li J Zhu Z Research and development of next generation of antibody-based therapeutics Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 2010 31 1198 1207 10.1038/aps.2010.120 20694021
Li, J. & Zhu, Z. Research and development of next generation of antibody-based therapeutics. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 31, 1198–1207 (2010).20694021 10.1038/aps.2010.120
82. Akbarian M Khani A Eghbalpour S Uversky VN Bioactive peptides: synthesis, sources, applications, and proposed mechanisms of action Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 23 1445 10.3390/ijms23031445 35163367
Akbarian, M., Khani, A., Eghbalpour, S. & Uversky, V. N. Bioactive peptides: synthesis, sources, applications, and proposed mechanisms of action. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 23, 1445 (2022).35163367 10.3390/ijms23031445
83. Jiang L 111In-labeled cystine-knot peptides based on the Agouti-related protein for targeting tumor angiogenesis J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012 2012 368075 10.1155/2012/368075 22570527
Jiang, L. et al. 111In-labeled cystine-knot peptides based on the Agouti-related protein for targeting tumor angiogenesis. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012, 368075 (2012).22570527 10.1155/2012/368075
84. Breeman WAP Radiolabelling DOTA-peptides with 68Ga Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2005 32 478 485 10.1007/s00259-004-1702-y 15655678
Breeman, W. A. P. et al. Radiolabelling DOTA-peptides with 68Ga. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 32, 478–485 (2005).15655678 10.1007/s00259-004-1702-y
85. Liu Z Two 90Y-labeled multimeric RGD peptides RGD4 and 3PRGD2 for integrin targeted radionuclide therapy Mol. Pharm. 2011 8 591 599 10.1021/mp100403y 21247151
Liu, Z. et al. Two 90Y-labeled multimeric RGD peptides RGD4 and 3PRGD2 for integrin targeted radionuclide therapy. Mol. Pharm. 8, 591–599 (2011).21247151 10.1021/mp100403y
86. Hofman, M. S. et al. [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Lond. Engl. 397, 797–804 (2021).
87. Lei, Z. et al. Novel peptide GX1 inhibits angiogenesis by specifically binding to transglutaminase-2 in the tumorous endothelial cells of gastric cancer. Cell Death Dis. 9, 579 (2018).
88. Chen K Evaluation of 64Cu labeled GX1: a phage display peptide probe for PET imaging of tumor vasculature Mol. Imaging Biol. 2012 14 96 105 10.1007/s11307-011-0479-1 21360213
Chen, K. et al. Evaluation of 64Cu labeled GX1: a phage display peptide probe for PET imaging of tumor vasculature. Mol. Imaging Biol. 14, 96–105 (2012).21360213 10.1007/s11307-011-0479-1
89. Jiang J Noninvasive evaluation of PD-L1 expression using Copper 64 labeled peptide WL12 by micro-PET imaging in Chinese hamster ovary cell tumor model Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2021 40 127901 10.1016/j.bmcl.2021.127901 33705912
Jiang, J. et al. Noninvasive evaluation of PD-L1 expression using Copper 64 labeled peptide WL12 by micro-PET imaging in Chinese hamster ovary cell tumor model. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 40, 127901 (2021).33705912 10.1016/j.bmcl.2021.127901
90. Dolgin E Radioactive drugs emerge from the shadows to storm the market Nat. Biotechnol. 2018 36 1125 1127 10.1038/nbt1218-1125 30520873
Dolgin, E. Radioactive drugs emerge from the shadows to storm the market. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 1125–1127 (2018).30520873 10.1038/nbt1218-1125
91. Guha M Amgen swallows Onyx whole Nat. Biotechnol. 2013 31 859 860 10.1038/nbt1013-859 24104731
Guha, M. Amgen swallows Onyx whole. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 859–860 (2013).24104731 10.1038/nbt1013-859
92. Kaisary AV Tyrrell CJ Peeling WB Griffiths K Comparison of LHRH Analogue (Zoladex) with Orchiectomy in patients with metastatic prostatic carcinoma Br. J. Urol. 1991 67 502 508 10.1111/j.1464-410X.1991.tb15195.x 1828183
Kaisary, A. V., Tyrrell, C. J., Peeling, W. B. & Griffiths, K. Comparison of LHRH Analogue (Zoladex) with Orchiectomy in patients with metastatic prostatic carcinoma. Br. J. Urol. 67, 502–508 (1991).1828183 10.1111/j.1464-410X.1991.tb15195.x
93. Lamers C Overcoming the shortcomings of peptide-based therapeutics Future Drug Discov. 2022 4 FDD75 10.4155/fdd-2022-0005
Lamers, C. Overcoming the shortcomings of peptide-based therapeutics. Future Drug Discov. 4, FDD75 (2022).10.4155/fdd-2022-0005
94. Keating GM Rituximab: A review of its use in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, low-grade or follicular lymphoma and diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma Drugs 2010 70 1445 1476 10.2165/11201110-000000000-00000 20614951
Keating, G. M. Rituximab: A review of its use in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, low-grade or follicular lymphoma and diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma. Drugs 70, 1445–1476 (2010).20614951 10.2165/11201110-000000000-00000
95. Lu R-M Development of therapeutic antibodies for the treatment of diseases J. Biomed. Sci. 2020 27 1 10.1186/s12929-019-0592-z 31894001
Lu, R.-M. et al. Development of therapeutic antibodies for the treatment of diseases. J. Biomed. Sci. 27, 1 (2020).31894001 10.1186/s12929-019-0592-z
96. Swain SM Pertuzumab, Trastuzumab, and Docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2015 372 724 734 10.1056/NEJMoa1413513 25693012
Swain, S. M. et al. Pertuzumab, Trastuzumab, and Docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 724–734 (2015).25693012 10.1056/NEJMoa1413513
97. Van Cutsem E Cetuximab Plus Irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin As First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Updated Analysis of Overall Survival According to Tumor KRAS and BRAF Mutation Status J. Clin. Oncol. 2011 29 2011 2019 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.5091 21502544
Van Cutsem, E. et al. Cetuximab Plus Irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin As First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Updated Analysis of Overall Survival According to Tumor KRAS and BRAF Mutation Status. J. Clin. Oncol. 29, 2011–2019 (2011).21502544 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.5091
98. Rugo HS Margetuximab Versus Trastuzumab in patients with previously treated HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer (SOPHIA): Final overall survival results from a randomized Phase 3 trial J. Clin. Oncol. 2023 41 198 205 10.1200/JCO.21.02937 36332179
Rugo, H. S. et al. Margetuximab Versus Trastuzumab in patients with previously treated HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer (SOPHIA): Final overall survival results from a randomized Phase 3 trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 41, 198–205 (2023).36332179 10.1200/JCO.21.02937
99. Cortés J Pertuzumab Monotherapy after Trastuzumab-based treatment and subsequent reintroduction of Trastuzumab: Activity and tolerability in patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor Receptor 2–positive breast cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 2012 30 1594 1600 10.1200/JCO.2011.37.4207 22393084
Cortés, J. et al. Pertuzumab Monotherapy after Trastuzumab-based treatment and subsequent reintroduction of Trastuzumab: Activity and tolerability in patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor Receptor 2–positive breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 1594–1600 (2012).22393084 10.1200/JCO.2011.37.4207
100. Goldstein DA First- and second-line Bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a united states–based cost-effectiveness analysis J. Clin. Oncol. 2015 33 1112 1118 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.4904 25691669
Goldstein, D. A. et al. First- and second-line Bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a united states–based cost-effectiveness analysis. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 1112–1118 (2015).25691669 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.4904
101. Townsend W Obinutuzumab Versus Rituximab Immunochemotherapy in previously untreated iNHL: Final results from the GALLIUM Study HemaSphere 2023 7 e919 10.1097/HS9.0000000000000919 37404773
Townsend, W. et al. Obinutuzumab Versus Rituximab Immunochemotherapy in previously untreated iNHL: Final results from the GALLIUM Study. HemaSphere 7, e919 (2023).37404773 10.1097/HS9.0000000000000919
102. Warner JL Arnason JE Alemtuzumab use in relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a history and discussion of future rational use Ther. Adv. Hematol. 2012 3 375 389 10.1177/2040620712458949 23606939
Warner, J. L. & Arnason, J. E. Alemtuzumab use in relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a history and discussion of future rational use. Ther. Adv. Hematol. 3, 375–389 (2012).23606939 10.1177/2040620712458949
103. Fisher JG XPO1 inhibition sensitises CLL cells to NK cell mediated cytotoxicity and overcomes HLA-E expression Leukemia 2023 37 2036 2049 10.1038/s41375-023-01984-z 37528310
Fisher, J. G. et al. XPO1 inhibition sensitises CLL cells to NK cell mediated cytotoxicity and overcomes HLA-E expression. Leukemia 37, 2036–2049 (2023).37528310 10.1038/s41375-023-01984-z
104. Tawbi Hussein, A. et al. Relatlimab and Nivolumab versus Nivolumab in Untreated Advanced Melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 24–34 (2022).
105. Mathieu, L. et al. FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab and Durvalumab in Combination with Platinum‐Based Chemotherapy in Extensive Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer. Oncologist 26, 433–438 (2021).
106. McDermott D Haanen J Chen T-T Lorigan P O’Day S Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma patients surviving more than 2 years following treatment in a phase III trial (MDX010-20) Ann. Oncol. 2013 24 2694 2698 10.1093/annonc/mdt291 23942774
McDermott, D., Haanen, J., Chen, T.-T., Lorigan, P. & O’Day, S. Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma patients surviving more than 2 years following treatment in a phase III trial (MDX010-20). Ann. Oncol. 24, 2694–2698 (2013).23942774 10.1093/annonc/mdt291
107. Sangro, B. et al. Four-year overall survival update from the phase III HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann. Oncol. 35, 448–457 (2024).
108. Moroney, J. et al. 158P Triple blockade of the DNAM-axis with COM701 + BMS-986207 + nivolumab demonstrates preliminary antitumor activity in patients with platinum-resistant OVCA. Immuno-Oncol. Technol. 16, (2022).
109. An Investigational Immunotherapy Study of BMS-986258 Alone and in Combination With Nivolumab in Participants With Solid Cancers That Are Advanced or Have Spread - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03446040.
110. Incyte Corporation. An Umbrella Study of INCMGA00012 Alone and in Combination With Other Therapies in Participants With Advanced or Metastatic Endometrial Cancer Who Have Progressed on or After Platinum-Based Chemotherapy (POD1UM-204). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04463771 (2024).
111. Jiangsu HengRui Medicine Co., Ltd. A Phase I, Multicenter, Open-Label Study of SHR-1702 in Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Myelodysplastic Syndrome. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04443751 (2023).
112. Desai J Bgb-A425, an investigational anti-TIM-3 monoclonal antibody, in combination with tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors: A phase I/II trial in progress J. Clin. Oncol. 2020 38 TPS3146 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.TPS3146
Desai, J. et al. Bgb-A425, an investigational anti-TIM-3 monoclonal antibody, in combination with tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors: A phase I/II trial in progress. J. Clin. Oncol. 38, TPS3146 (2020).10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.TPS3146
113. Ascierto PA Efficacy of BMS-986016, a monoclonal antibody that targets lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3), in combination with nivolumab in pts with melanoma who progressed during prior anti–PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (mel prior IO) in all-comer and biomarker-enriched populations Ann. Oncol. 2017 28 v611 v612 10.1093/annonc/mdx440.011
Ascierto, P. A. et al. Efficacy of BMS-986016, a monoclonal antibody that targets lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3), in combination with nivolumab in pts with melanoma who progressed during prior anti–PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (mel prior IO) in all-comer and biomarker-enriched populations. Ann. Oncol. 28, v611–v612 (2017).10.1093/annonc/mdx440.011
114. Dumbrava, E. et al. 478 COM701 in combination with BMS-986207 (anti-TIGIT antibody) and nivolumab – preliminary results of safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT04570839). J. Immunother. Cancer 9, A508–A508 (2021).
115. Liu Y Emerging phagocytosis checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2023 8 1 42 36588107
Liu, Y. et al. Emerging phagocytosis checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 8, 1–42 (2023).36588107
116. Li, S. et al. IMM47, a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets CD24, exhibits exceptional anti-tumor efficacy by blocking the CD24/Siglec-10 interaction and can be used as monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD1 antibodies for cancer immunotherapy. Antib. Ther. 6, 240–252 (2023).
117. DeFrancesco, L. Pheast Therapeutics: Another bite at the apple. Nat. Biotechnol. 10.1038/d41587-023-00015-7. (2023)
118. Inc, O. OncoC4 to Present Positive Data from Ongoing Phase 1/2 PRESERVE-001 Trial of ONC-392 in Combination with pembrolizumab at SITC 2022. GlobeNewswire News Room https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/11/07/2549654/0/en/OncoC4-to-Present-Positive-Data-from-Ongoing-Phase-1-2-PRESERVE-001-Trial-of-ONC-392-in-Combination-with-pembrolizumab-at-SITC-2022.html (2022).
119. Chames P Van Regenmortel M Weiss E Baty D Therapeutic antibodies: successes, limitations and hopes for the future Br. J. Pharmacol. 2009 157 220 233 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2009.00190.x 19459844
Chames, P., Van Regenmortel, M., Weiss, E. & Baty, D. Therapeutic antibodies: successes, limitations and hopes for the future. Br. J. Pharmacol. 157, 220–233 (2009).19459844 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2009.00190.x
120. Rodríguez-Nava C Mechanisms of action and limitations of monoclonal antibodies and Single Chain Fragment Variable (scFv) in the treatment of cancer Biomedicines 2023 11 1610 10.3390/biomedicines11061610 37371712
Rodríguez-Nava, C. et al. Mechanisms of action and limitations of monoclonal antibodies and Single Chain Fragment Variable (scFv) in the treatment of cancer. Biomedicines 11, 1610 (2023).37371712 10.3390/biomedicines11061610
121. Price TJ Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 569 579 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70118-4 24739896
Price, T. J. et al. Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 15, 569–579 (2014).24739896 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70118-4
122. Lou H Cao X Antibody variable region engineering for improving cancer immunotherapy Cancer Commun. Lond. Engl. 2022 42 804 827 10.1002/cac2.12330
Lou, H. & Cao, X. Antibody variable region engineering for improving cancer immunotherapy. Cancer Commun. Lond. Engl. 42, 804–827 (2022).10.1002/cac2.12330
123. Shimazaki K Diabodies targeting epithelial membrane protein 2 reduce tumorigenicity of human endometrial cancer cell lines Clin. Cancer Res. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2008 14 7367 7377 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1016
Shimazaki, K. et al. Diabodies targeting epithelial membrane protein 2 reduce tumorigenicity of human endometrial cancer cell lines. Clin. Cancer Res. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 14, 7367–7377 (2008).10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1016
124. Holliger P Hudson PJ Engineered antibody fragments and the rise of single domains Nat. Biotechnol. 2005 23 1126 1136 10.1038/nbt1142 16151406
Holliger, P. & Hudson, P. J. Engineered antibody fragments and the rise of single domains. Nat. Biotechnol. 23, 1126–1136 (2005).16151406 10.1038/nbt1142
125. Alderson RF Characterization of a CC49-based single-chain fragment-beta-lactamase fusion protein for antibody-directed enzyme prodrug therapy (ADEPT) Bioconjug. Chem. 2006 17 410 418 10.1021/bc0503521 16536473
Alderson, R. F. et al. Characterization of a CC49-based single-chain fragment-beta-lactamase fusion protein for antibody-directed enzyme prodrug therapy (ADEPT). Bioconjug. Chem. 17, 410–418 (2006).16536473 10.1021/bc0503521
126. Peters C Brown S Antibody–drug conjugates as novel anti-cancer chemotherapeutics Biosci. Rep. 2015 35 e00225 10.1042/BSR20150089 26182432
Peters, C. & Brown, S. Antibody–drug conjugates as novel anti-cancer chemotherapeutics. Biosci. Rep. 35, e00225 (2015).26182432 10.1042/BSR20150089
127. De Taeye SW FcγR binding and ADCC Activity of human IgG Allotypes Front. Immunol. 2020 11 740 10.3389/fimmu.2020.00740 32435243
De Taeye, S. W. et al. FcγR binding and ADCC Activity of human IgG Allotypes. Front. Immunol. 11, 740 (2020).32435243 10.3389/fimmu.2020.00740
128. Wang Z Li H Gou L Li W Wang Y Antibody–drug conjugates: Recent advances in payloads Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2023 13 4025 4059 10.1016/j.apsb.2023.06.015 37799390
Wang, Z., Li, H., Gou, L., Li, W. & Wang, Y. Antibody–drug conjugates: Recent advances in payloads. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 13, 4025–4059 (2023).37799390 10.1016/j.apsb.2023.06.015
129. Takegawa N DS-8201a, a new HER2-targeting antibody-drug conjugate incorporating a novel DNA topoisomerase I inhibitor, overcomes HER2-positive gastric cancer T-DM1 resistance Int. J. Cancer 2017 141 1682 1689 10.1002/ijc.30870 28677116
Takegawa, N. et al. DS-8201a, a new HER2-targeting antibody-drug conjugate incorporating a novel DNA topoisomerase I inhibitor, overcomes HER2-positive gastric cancer T-DM1 resistance. Int. J. Cancer 141, 1682–1689 (2017).28677116 10.1002/ijc.30870
130. axispharm. Antibody-drug conjugates(ADCs) list Approved by FDA(2000-2023). AxisPharm https://axispharm.com/antibody-drug-conjugatesadcs-list-approved-by-fda2000-2022/ (2022).
131. Jin Y Schladetsch MA Huang X Balunas MJ Wiemer AJ Stepping forward in antibody-drug conjugate development Pharmacol. Ther. 2022 229 107917 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2021.107917 34171334
Jin, Y., Schladetsch, M. A., Huang, X., Balunas, M. J. & Wiemer, A. J. Stepping forward in antibody-drug conjugate development. Pharmacol. Ther. 229, 107917 (2022).34171334 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2021.107917
132. Baah S Laws M Rahman KM Antibody–drug conjugates—a tutorial review Molecules 2021 26 2943 10.3390/molecules26102943 34063364
Baah, S., Laws, M. & Rahman, K. M. Antibody–drug conjugates—a tutorial review. Molecules 26, 2943 (2021).34063364 10.3390/molecules26102943
133. Tong JTW Harris PWR Brimble MA Kavianinia I An Insight into FDA approved antibody-drug conjugates for cancer therapy Molecules 2021 26 5847 10.3390/molecules26195847 34641391
Tong, J. T. W., Harris, P. W. R., Brimble, M. A. & Kavianinia, I. An Insight into FDA approved antibody-drug conjugates for cancer therapy. Molecules 26, 5847 (2021).34641391 10.3390/molecules26195847
134. Ng G Spreter T Davies R Wickman G ZW38, a Novel Azymetric bispecific CD19-directed CD3 T cell engager antibody drug conjugate with controlled T cell activation and improved B cell cytotoxicity Blood 2016 128 1841 10.1182/blood.V128.22.1841.1841
Ng, G., Spreter, T., Davies, R. & Wickman, G. ZW38, a Novel Azymetric bispecific CD19-directed CD3 T cell engager antibody drug conjugate with controlled T cell activation and improved B cell cytotoxicity. Blood 128, 1841 (2016).10.1182/blood.V128.22.1841.1841
135. Andreev J Bispecific antibodies and Antibody–Drug Conjugates (ADCs) bridging HER2 and Prolactin Receptor improve efficacy of HER2 ADCs Mol. Cancer Ther. 2017 16 681 693 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-16-0658 28108597
Andreev, J. et al. Bispecific antibodies and Antibody–Drug Conjugates (ADCs) bridging HER2 and Prolactin Receptor improve efficacy of HER2 ADCs. Mol. Cancer Ther. 16, 681–693 (2017).28108597 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-16-0658
136. Sellmann C Balancing selectivity and efficacy of bispecific Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) × c-MET antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates J. Biol. Chem. 2016 291 25106 25119 10.1074/jbc.M116.753491 27694443
Sellmann, C. et al. Balancing selectivity and efficacy of bispecific Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) × c-MET antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 25106–25119 (2016).27694443 10.1074/jbc.M116.753491
137. Sadiki A Site-specific conjugation of native antibody Antib. Ther. 2020 3 271 284 33644685
Sadiki, A. et al. Site-specific conjugation of native antibody. Antib. Ther. 3, 271–284 (2020).33644685
138. Samantasinghar A A comprehensive review of key factors affecting the efficacy of antibody drug conjugate Biomed. Pharmacother. 2023 161 114408 10.1016/j.biopha.2023.114408 36841027
Samantasinghar, A. et al. A comprehensive review of key factors affecting the efficacy of antibody drug conjugate. Biomed. Pharmacother. 161, 114408 (2023).36841027 10.1016/j.biopha.2023.114408
139. Amani N Dorkoosh FA Mobedi H ADCs, as novel revolutionary weapons for providing a step forward in targeted therapy of malignancies Curr. Drug Deliv. 2020 17 23 51 10.2174/1567201816666191121145109 31755387
Amani, N., Dorkoosh, F. A. & Mobedi, H. ADCs, as novel revolutionary weapons for providing a step forward in targeted therapy of malignancies. Curr. Drug Deliv. 17, 23–51 (2020).31755387 10.2174/1567201816666191121145109
140. Tarantino P Ricciuti B Pradhan SM Tolaney SM Optimizing the safety of antibody–drug conjugates for patients with solid tumours Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2023 20 558 576 10.1038/s41571-023-00783-w 37296177
Tarantino, P., Ricciuti, B., Pradhan, S. M. & Tolaney, S. M. Optimizing the safety of antibody–drug conjugates for patients with solid tumours. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 20, 558–576 (2023).37296177 10.1038/s41571-023-00783-w
141. Sterner RC Sterner RM CAR-T cell therapy: current limitations and potential strategies Blood Cancer J. 2021 11 69 10.1038/s41408-021-00459-7 33824268
Sterner, R. C. & Sterner, R. M. CAR-T cell therapy: current limitations and potential strategies. Blood Cancer J. 11, 69 (2021).33824268 10.1038/s41408-021-00459-7
142. Tokarew N Ogonek J Endres S Von Bergwelt-Baildon M Kobold S Teaching an old dog new tricks: next-generation CAR T cells Br. J. Cancer 2019 120 26 37 10.1038/s41416-018-0325-1 30413825
Tokarew, N., Ogonek, J., Endres, S., Von Bergwelt-Baildon, M. & Kobold, S. Teaching an old dog new tricks: next-generation CAR T cells. Br. J. Cancer 120, 26–37 (2019).30413825 10.1038/s41416-018-0325-1
143. Larson RC Maus MV Recent advances and discoveries in the mechanisms and functions of CAR T cells Nat. Rev. Cancer 2021 21 145 161 10.1038/s41568-020-00323-z 33483715
Larson, R. C. & Maus, M. V. Recent advances and discoveries in the mechanisms and functions of CAR T cells. Nat. Rev. Cancer 21, 145–161 (2021).33483715 10.1038/s41568-020-00323-z
144. Chen L Flies DB Molecular mechanisms of T cell co-stimulation and co-inhibition Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2013 13 227 242 10.1038/nri3405 23470321
Chen, L. & Flies, D. B. Molecular mechanisms of T cell co-stimulation and co-inhibition. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 13, 227–242 (2013).23470321 10.1038/nri3405
145. Hirabayashi K Dual-targeting CAR-T cells with optimal co-stimulation and metabolic fitness enhance antitumor activity and prevent escape in solid tumors Nat. Cancer 2021 2 904 918 10.1038/s43018-021-00244-2 34746799
Hirabayashi, K. et al. Dual-targeting CAR-T cells with optimal co-stimulation and metabolic fitness enhance antitumor activity and prevent escape in solid tumors. Nat. Cancer 2, 904–918 (2021).34746799 10.1038/s43018-021-00244-2
146. Munshi NC Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma N. Engl. J. Med. 2021 384 705 716 10.1056/NEJMoa2024850 33626253
Munshi, N. C. et al. Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 705–716 (2021).33626253 10.1056/NEJMoa2024850
147. Cronk RJ Zurko J Shah NN Bispecific chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy for B cell malignancies and multiple myeloma Cancers 2020 12 2523 10.3390/cancers12092523 32899464
Cronk, R. J., Zurko, J. & Shah, N. N. Bispecific chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy for B cell malignancies and multiple myeloma. Cancers 12, 2523 (2020).32899464 10.3390/cancers12092523
148. Spiegel JY CAR T cells with dual targeting of CD19 and CD22 in adult patients with recurrent or refractory B cell malignancies: a phase 1 trial Nat. Med. 2021 27 1419 1431 10.1038/s41591-021-01436-0 34312556
Spiegel, J. Y. et al. CAR T cells with dual targeting of CD19 and CD22 in adult patients with recurrent or refractory B cell malignancies: a phase 1 trial. Nat. Med. 27, 1419–1431 (2021).34312556 10.1038/s41591-021-01436-0
149. Gardner RA Efficacy of SCRI-CAR19x22 T cell product in B-ALL and persistence of anti-CD22 activity J. Clin. Oncol. 2020 38 3035 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.3035
Gardner, R. A. et al. Efficacy of SCRI-CAR19x22 T cell product in B-ALL and persistence of anti-CD22 activity. J. Clin. Oncol. 38, 3035 (2020).10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.3035
150. Chen X CD19/BCMA dual-targeting Fastcar-T GC012F for patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: An update Blood 2023 142 6847 10.1182/blood-2023-185476
Chen, X. et al. CD19/BCMA dual-targeting Fastcar-T GC012F for patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: An update. Blood 142, 6847 (2023).10.1182/blood-2023-185476
151. Shah NN Bispecific anti-CD20, anti-CD19 CAR T cells for relapsed B cell malignancies: a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion trial Nat. Med. 2020 26 1569 1575 10.1038/s41591-020-1081-3 33020647
Shah, N. N. et al. Bispecific anti-CD20, anti-CD19 CAR T cells for relapsed B cell malignancies: a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion trial. Nat. Med. 26, 1569–1575 (2020).33020647 10.1038/s41591-020-1081-3
152. Dai H Bispecific CAR-T cells targeting both CD19 and CD22 for therapy of adults with relapsed or refractory B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia J. Hematol. Oncol. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2020 13 30 10.1186/s13045-020-00856-8 32245502
Dai, H. et al. Bispecific CAR-T cells targeting both CD19 and CD22 for therapy of adults with relapsed or refractory B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J. Hematol. Oncol. J. Hematol. Oncol. 13, 30 (2020).32245502 10.1186/s13045-020-00856-8
153. Tong, C. et al. Optimized tandem CD19/CD20 CAR-engineered T cells in refractory/relapsed B-cell lymphoma. Blood 136, 1632–1644 (2020).
154. Kotch C Barrett D Teachey DT Tocilizumab for the treatment of chimeric antigen receptor T cell-induced cytokine release syndrome Expert Rev. Clin. Immunol. 2019 15 813 822 10.1080/1744666X.2019.1629904 31219357
Kotch, C., Barrett, D. & Teachey, D. T. Tocilizumab for the treatment of chimeric antigen receptor T cell-induced cytokine release syndrome. Expert Rev. Clin. Immunol. 15, 813–822 (2019).31219357 10.1080/1744666X.2019.1629904
155. Bajwa AK Efficacy of Siltuximab for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy toxicities - a multicenter retrospective analysis Blood 2023 142 4502 10.1182/blood-2023-179620
Bajwa, A. K. et al. Efficacy of Siltuximab for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy toxicities - a multicenter retrospective analysis. Blood 142, 4502 (2023).10.1182/blood-2023-179620
156. Maude SL Tisagenlecleucel in children and young adults with B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia N. Engl. J. Med. 2018 378 439 448 10.1056/NEJMoa1709866 29385370
Maude, S. L. et al. Tisagenlecleucel in children and young adults with B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 439–448 (2018).29385370 10.1056/NEJMoa1709866
157. Fitzgerald JC Cytokine release syndrome after chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia Crit. Care Med. 2017 45 e124 e131 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002053 27632680
Fitzgerald, J. C. et al. Cytokine release syndrome after chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Crit. Care Med. 45, e124–e131 (2017).27632680 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002053
158. Jaeger U Portia: A Phase 1b study evaluating safety and efficacy of Tisagenlecleucel and Pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma Blood 2019 134 5325 10.1182/blood-2019-129120
Jaeger, U. et al. Portia: A Phase 1b study evaluating safety and efficacy of Tisagenlecleucel and Pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 134, 5325 (2019).10.1182/blood-2019-129120
159. Choy EH Translating IL-6 biology into effective treatments Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 2020 16 335 345 10.1038/s41584-020-0419-z 32327746
Choy, E. H. et al. Translating IL-6 biology into effective treatments. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 16, 335–345 (2020).32327746 10.1038/s41584-020-0419-z
160. Hamilton JA GM-CSF in inflammation J. Exp. Med. 2020 217 e20190945 10.1084/jem.20190945 31611249
Hamilton, J. A. GM-CSF in inflammation. J. Exp. Med. 217, e20190945 (2020).31611249 10.1084/jem.20190945
161. Lee KM Achuthan AA Hamilton JA GM-CSF: A promising target in inflammation and autoimmunity ImmunoTargets Ther. 2020 9 225 240 10.2147/ITT.S262566 33150139
Lee, K. M., Achuthan, A. A. & Hamilton, J. A. GM-CSF: A promising target in inflammation and autoimmunity. ImmunoTargets Ther. 9, 225–240 (2020).33150139 10.2147/ITT.S262566
162. Martinez M Moon EK CAR T cells for solid tumors: new strategies for finding, infiltrating, and surviving in the tumor microenvironment Front. Immunol. 2019 10 128 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00128 30804938
Martinez, M. & Moon, E. K. CAR T cells for solid tumors: new strategies for finding, infiltrating, and surviving in the tumor microenvironment. Front. Immunol. 10, 128 (2019).30804938 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00128
163. Xie C A phase I study of GPC3 targeted CAR-T cell therapy in advanced GPC3-expressing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) J. Clin. Oncol 2023 41 TPS624 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.4_suppl.TPS624
Xie, C. et al. A phase I study of GPC3 targeted CAR-T cell therapy in advanced GPC3-expressing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). J. Clin. Oncol 41, TPS624 (2023).10.1200/JCO.2023.41.4_suppl.TPS624
164. Qi C Claudin18.2-specific CAR T cells in gastrointestinal cancers: phase 1 trial interim results Nat. Med. 2022 28 1189 1198 10.1038/s41591-022-01800-8 35534566
Qi, C. et al. Claudin18.2-specific CAR T cells in gastrointestinal cancers: phase 1 trial interim results. Nat. Med. 28, 1189–1198 (2022).35534566 10.1038/s41591-022-01800-8
165. Kankeu Fonkoua LA Sirpilla O Sakemura R Siegler EL Kenderian SS CAR T cell therapy and the tumor microenvironment: Current challenges and opportunities Mol. Ther. - Oncolytics 2022 25 69 77 10.1016/j.omto.2022.03.009 35434273
Kankeu Fonkoua, L. A., Sirpilla, O., Sakemura, R., Siegler, E. L. & Kenderian, S. S. CAR T cell therapy and the tumor microenvironment: Current challenges and opportunities. Mol. Ther. - Oncolytics 25, 69–77 (2022).35434273 10.1016/j.omto.2022.03.009
166. Grosser R Cherkassky L Chintala N Adusumilli PS Combination immunotherapy with CAR T cells and checkpoint blockade for the treatment of solid tumors Cancer Cell 2019 36 471 482 10.1016/j.ccell.2019.09.006 31715131
Grosser, R., Cherkassky, L., Chintala, N. & Adusumilli, P. S. Combination immunotherapy with CAR T cells and checkpoint blockade for the treatment of solid tumors. Cancer Cell 36, 471–482 (2019).31715131 10.1016/j.ccell.2019.09.006
167. Kuryk L Novel insights into mesothelioma therapy: emerging avenues and future prospects Front. Oncol. 2022 12 916839 10.3389/fonc.2022.916839 35785199
Kuryk, L. et al. Novel insights into mesothelioma therapy: emerging avenues and future prospects. Front. Oncol. 12, 916839 (2022).35785199 10.3389/fonc.2022.916839
168. Caruana I Heparanase promotes tumor infiltration and antitumor activity of CAR-redirected T lymphocytes Nat. Med. 2015 21 524 529 10.1038/nm.3833 25849134
Caruana, I. et al. Heparanase promotes tumor infiltration and antitumor activity of CAR-redirected T lymphocytes. Nat. Med. 21, 524–529 (2015).25849134 10.1038/nm.3833
169. Atsavapranee ES Billingsley MM Mitchell MJ Delivery technologies for T cell gene editing: Applications in cancer immunotherapy EBioMedicine 2021 67 103354 10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103354 33910123
Atsavapranee, E. S., Billingsley, M. M. & Mitchell, M. J. Delivery technologies for T cell gene editing: Applications in cancer immunotherapy. EBioMedicine 67, 103354 (2021).33910123 10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103354
170. Kamali E Rahbarizadeh F Hojati Z Frödin M CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout of clinically relevant alloantigenes in human primary T cells BMC Biotechnol. 2021 21 9 10.1186/s12896-020-00665-4 33514392
Kamali, E., Rahbarizadeh, F., Hojati, Z. & Frödin, M. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout of clinically relevant alloantigenes in human primary T cells. BMC Biotechnol. 21, 9 (2021).33514392 10.1186/s12896-020-00665-4
171. Sackett SD Genetic engineering of immune evasive stem cell-derived islets Transpl. Int. 2022 35 10817 10.3389/ti.2022.10817 36545154
Sackett, S. D. et al. Genetic engineering of immune evasive stem cell-derived islets. Transpl. Int. 35, 10817 (2022).36545154 10.3389/ti.2022.10817
172. Rosenberg SA Use of tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes and Interleukin-2 in the immunotherapy of patients with metastatic melanoma N. Engl. J. Med. 1988 319 1676 1680 10.1056/NEJM198812223192527 3264384
Rosenberg, S. A. et al. Use of tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes and Interleukin-2 in the immunotherapy of patients with metastatic melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 319, 1676–1680 (1988).3264384 10.1056/NEJM198812223192527
173. Khawar MB Sun H CAR-NK cells: From natural basis to design for kill Front. Immunol. 2021 12 707542 10.3389/fimmu.2021.707542 34970253
Khawar, M. B. & Sun, H. CAR-NK cells: From natural basis to design for kill. Front. Immunol. 12, 707542 (2021).34970253 10.3389/fimmu.2021.707542
174. Du N Guo F Wang Y Cui J NK cell therapy: a rising star in cancer treatment Cancers 2021 13 4129 10.3390/cancers13164129 34439285
Du, N., Guo, F., Wang, Y. & Cui, J. NK cell therapy: a rising star in cancer treatment. Cancers 13, 4129 (2021).34439285 10.3390/cancers13164129
175. Xie G CAR-NK cells: A promising cellular immunotherapy for cancer EBioMedicine 2020 59 102975 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102975 32853984
Xie, G. et al. CAR-NK cells: A promising cellular immunotherapy for cancer. EBioMedicine 59, 102975 (2020).32853984 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102975
176. Chen X Jiang L Liu X Natural killer cells: the next wave in cancer immunotherapy Front. Immunol. 2022 13 954804 10.3389/fimmu.2022.954804 35967421
Chen, X., Jiang, L. & Liu, X. Natural killer cells: the next wave in cancer immunotherapy. Front. Immunol. 13, 954804 (2022).35967421 10.3389/fimmu.2022.954804
177. Pang Z Wang Z Li F Feng C Mu X Current progress of CAR-NK therapy in cancer treatment Cancers 2022 14 4318 10.3390/cancers14174318 36077853
Pang, Z., Wang, Z., Li, F., Feng, C. & Mu, X. Current progress of CAR-NK therapy in cancer treatment. Cancers 14, 4318 (2022).36077853 10.3390/cancers14174318
178. Marin D Safety, efficacy and determinants of response of allogeneic CD19-specific CAR-NK cells in CD19+ B cell tumors: a phase 1/2 trial Nat. Med. 2024 30 772 784 10.1038/s41591-023-02785-8 38238616
Marin, D. et al. Safety, efficacy and determinants of response of allogeneic CD19-specific CAR-NK cells in CD19+ B cell tumors: a phase 1/2 trial. Nat. Med. 30, 772–784 (2024).38238616 10.1038/s41591-023-02785-8
179. Heipertz EL Current perspectives on “Off-The-Shelf” allogeneic NK and CAR-NK cell therapies Front. Immunol. 2021 12 732135 10.3389/fimmu.2021.732135 34925314
Heipertz, E. L. et al. Current perspectives on “Off-The-Shelf” allogeneic NK and CAR-NK cell therapies. Front. Immunol. 12, 732135 (2021).34925314 10.3389/fimmu.2021.732135
180. Tang Y Zhang AXJ Chen G Wu Y Gu W Prognostic and therapeutic TILs of cervical cancer—Current advances and future perspectives Mol. Ther. - Oncolytics 2021 22 410 430 10.1016/j.omto.2021.07.006 34553029
Tang, Y., Zhang, A. X. J., Chen, G., Wu, Y. & Gu, W. Prognostic and therapeutic TILs of cervical cancer—Current advances and future perspectives. Mol. Ther. - Oncolytics 22, 410–430 (2021).34553029 10.1016/j.omto.2021.07.006
181. Dafni U Efficacy of adoptive therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and recombinant interleukin-2 in advanced cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis Ann. Oncol. 2019 30 1902 1913 10.1093/annonc/mdz398 31566658
Dafni, U. et al. Efficacy of adoptive therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and recombinant interleukin-2 in advanced cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann. Oncol. 30, 1902–1913 (2019).31566658 10.1093/annonc/mdz398
182. Chandran SS Treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma with adoptive transfer of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes: a single-centre, two-stage, single-arm, phase 2 study Lancet Oncol. 2017 18 792 802 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30251-6 28395880
Chandran, S. S. et al. Treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma with adoptive transfer of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes: a single-centre, two-stage, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 18, 792–802 (2017).28395880 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30251-6
183. Sarnaik AA Lifileucel, a tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy, in metastatic melanoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2021 39 2656 2666 10.1200/JCO.21.00612 33979178
Sarnaik, A. A. et al. Lifileucel, a tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy, in metastatic melanoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 39, 2656–2666 (2021).33979178 10.1200/JCO.21.00612
184. Rohaan MW Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Therapy or Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2022 387 2113 2125 10.1056/NEJMoa2210233 36477031
Rohaan, M. W. et al. Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Therapy or Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 387, 2113–2125 (2022).36477031 10.1056/NEJMoa2210233
185. Alberts, B. Molecular Biology of the Cell. (Garland science, 2017).
186. Shah K Al-Haidari A Sun J Kazi JU T cell receptor (TCR) signaling in health and disease Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2021 6 412 10.1038/s41392-021-00823-w 34897277
Shah, K., Al-Haidari, A., Sun, J. & Kazi, J. U. T cell receptor (TCR) signaling in health and disease. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 6, 412 (2021).34897277 10.1038/s41392-021-00823-w
187. Baulu E Gardet C Chuvin N Depil S TCR-engineered T cell therapy in solid tumors: State of the art and perspectives Sci. Adv. 2023 9 eadf3700 10.1126/sciadv.adf3700 36791198
Baulu, E., Gardet, C., Chuvin, N. & Depil, S. TCR-engineered T cell therapy in solid tumors: State of the art and perspectives. Sci. Adv. 9, eadf3700 (2023).36791198 10.1126/sciadv.adf3700
188. D’Angelo SP SPEARHEAD-1: A phase 2 trial of afamitresgene autoleucel (Formerly ADP-A2M4) in patients with advanced synovial sarcoma or myxoid/round cell liposarcoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2021 39 11504 10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.11504
D’Angelo, S. P. et al. SPEARHEAD-1: A phase 2 trial of afamitresgene autoleucel (Formerly ADP-A2M4) in patients with advanced synovial sarcoma or myxoid/round cell liposarcoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 39, 11504 (2021).10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.11504
189. Nagarsheth NB TCR-engineered T cells targeting E7 for patients with metastatic HPV-associated epithelial cancers Nat. Med. 2021 27 419 425 10.1038/s41591-020-01225-1 33558725
Nagarsheth, N. B. et al. TCR-engineered T cells targeting E7 for patients with metastatic HPV-associated epithelial cancers. Nat. Med. 27, 419–425 (2021).33558725 10.1038/s41591-020-01225-1
190. Sloas C Gill S Klichinsky M Engineered CAR-Macrophages as Adoptive Immunotherapies for Solid Tumors Front. Immunol. 2021 12 783305 10.3389/fimmu.2021.783305 34899748
Sloas, C., Gill, S. & Klichinsky, M. Engineered CAR-Macrophages as Adoptive Immunotherapies for Solid Tumors. Front. Immunol. 12, 783305 (2021).34899748 10.3389/fimmu.2021.783305
191. Klichinsky M Human chimeric antigen receptor macrophages for cancer immunotherapy Nat. Biotechnol. 2020 38 947 953 10.1038/s41587-020-0462-y 32361713
Klichinsky, M. et al. Human chimeric antigen receptor macrophages for cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 947–953 (2020).32361713 10.1038/s41587-020-0462-y
192. Cheng K Tumor‐associated macrophages in liver cancer: From mechanisms to therapy Cancer Commun. 2022 42 1112 1140 10.1002/cac2.12345
Cheng, K. et al. Tumor‐associated macrophages in liver cancer: From mechanisms to therapy. Cancer Commun. 42, 1112–1140 (2022).10.1002/cac2.12345
193. Lei A A second-generation M1-polarized CAR macrophage with antitumor efficacy Nat. Immunol. 2024 25 102 116 10.1038/s41590-023-01687-8 38012418
Lei, A. et al. A second-generation M1-polarized CAR macrophage with antitumor efficacy. Nat. Immunol. 25, 102–116 (2024).38012418 10.1038/s41590-023-01687-8
194. Zhang L Pluripotent stem cell-derived CAR-macrophage cells with antigen-dependent anti-cancer cell functions J. Hematol. Oncol. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2020 13 153 10.1186/s13045-020-00983-2 33176869
Zhang, L. et al. Pluripotent stem cell-derived CAR-macrophage cells with antigen-dependent anti-cancer cell functions. J. Hematol. Oncol. J. Hematol. Oncol. 13, 153 (2020).33176869 10.1186/s13045-020-00983-2
195. Wang X Metabolic Reprogramming via ACOD1 depletion enhances function of human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived CAR-macrophages in solid tumors Nat. Commun. 2023 14 5778 10.1038/s41467-023-41470-9 37723178
Wang, X. et al. Metabolic Reprogramming via ACOD1 depletion enhances function of human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived CAR-macrophages in solid tumors. Nat. Commun. 14, 5778 (2023).37723178 10.1038/s41467-023-41470-9
196. Xue D Induced pluripotent stem cell-derived engineered T cells, natural killer cells, macrophages, and dendritic cells in immunotherapy Trends Biotechnol. 2023 41 907 922 10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.02.003 36858941
Xue, D. et al. Induced pluripotent stem cell-derived engineered T cells, natural killer cells, macrophages, and dendritic cells in immunotherapy. Trends Biotechnol. 41, 907–922 (2023).36858941 10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.02.003
197. Jirikowski GF Sanna PP Maciejewski-Lenoir D Bloom FE Reversal of Diabetes Insipidus in Brattleboro Rats: Intrahypothalamic Injection of Vasopressin mRNA Science 1992 255 996 998 10.1126/science.1546298 1546298
Jirikowski, G. F., Sanna, P. P., Maciejewski-Lenoir, D. & Bloom, F. E. Reversal of Diabetes Insipidus in Brattleboro Rats: Intrahypothalamic Injection of Vasopressin mRNA. Science 255, 996–998 (1992).1546298 10.1126/science.1546298
198. Annunziata CM Feasibility and preliminary safety and efficacy of first-in-human intraperitoneal delivery of MCY-M11, anti-human-mesothelin CAR mRNA transfected into peripheral blood mononuclear cells, for ovarian cancer and malignant peritoneal mesothelioma J. Clin. Oncol. 2020 38 3014 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.3014
Annunziata, C. M. et al. Feasibility and preliminary safety and efficacy of first-in-human intraperitoneal delivery of MCY-M11, anti-human-mesothelin CAR mRNA transfected into peripheral blood mononuclear cells, for ovarian cancer and malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. J. Clin. Oncol. 38, 3014 (2020).10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.3014
199. Reiss KA A phase 1, first-in-human (FIH) study of the anti-HER2 CAR macrophage CT-0508 in subjects with HER2 overexpressing solid tumors J. Clin. Oncol. 2022 40 2533 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.2533
Reiss, K. A. et al. A phase 1, first-in-human (FIH) study of the anti-HER2 CAR macrophage CT-0508 in subjects with HER2 overexpressing solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 40, 2533 (2022).10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.2533
200. Kang DD Li H Dong Y Advancements of in vitro transcribed mRNA (IVT mRNA) to enable translation into the clinics Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2023 199 114961 10.1016/j.addr.2023.114961 37321375
Kang, D. D., Li, H. & Dong, Y. Advancements of in vitro transcribed mRNA (IVT mRNA) to enable translation into the clinics. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 199, 114961 (2023).37321375 10.1016/j.addr.2023.114961
201. Miller JC Enhancing gene editing specificity by attenuating DNA cleavage kinetics Nat. Biotechnol. 2019 37 945 952 10.1038/s41587-019-0186-z 31359006
Miller, J. C. et al. Enhancing gene editing specificity by attenuating DNA cleavage kinetics. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 945–952 (2019).31359006 10.1038/s41587-019-0186-z
202. Mangeot PE Genome editing in primary cells and in vivo using viral-derived Nanoblades loaded with Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoproteins Nat. Commun. 2019 10 45 10.1038/s41467-018-07845-z 30604748
Mangeot, P. E. et al. Genome editing in primary cells and in vivo using viral-derived Nanoblades loaded with Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoproteins. Nat. Commun. 10, 45 (2019).30604748 10.1038/s41467-018-07845-z
203. Chen, W. C. W. et al. A synthetic transcription platform for programmable gene expression in mammalian cells. Nat. Commun. 13, 6167 (2022).
204. Lundin JI Checkoway H Endotoxin and cancer Environ. Health Perspect. 2009 117 1344 1350 10.1289/ehp.0800439 19750096
Lundin, J. I. & Checkoway, H. Endotoxin and cancer. Environ. Health Perspect. 117, 1344–1350 (2009).19750096 10.1289/ehp.0800439
205. Rafiq S Hackett CS Brentjens RJ Engineering strategies to overcome the current roadblocks in CAR T cell therapy Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2020 17 147 167 10.1038/s41571-019-0297-y 31848460
Rafiq, S., Hackett, C. S. & Brentjens, R. J. Engineering strategies to overcome the current roadblocks in CAR T cell therapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 17, 147–167 (2020).31848460 10.1038/s41571-019-0297-y
206. Morgan, M. A., Lange, L. & Schambach, A. Prime time for base editing in the mitochondria. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 7, 213 (2022).
207. Kim YG Cha J Chandrasegaran S Hybrid restriction enzymes: zinc finger fusions to Fok I cleavage domain Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 1996 93 1156 1160 10.1073/pnas.93.3.1156 8577732
Kim, Y. G., Cha, J. & Chandrasegaran, S. Hybrid restriction enzymes: zinc finger fusions to Fok I cleavage domain. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93, 1156–1160 (1996).8577732 10.1073/pnas.93.3.1156
208. Ichikawa DM A universal deep-learning model for zinc finger design enables transcription factor reprogramming Nat. Biotechnol. 2023 41 1117 1129 10.1038/s41587-022-01624-4 36702896
Ichikawa, D. M. et al. A universal deep-learning model for zinc finger design enables transcription factor reprogramming. Nat. Biotechnol. 41, 1117–1129 (2023).36702896 10.1038/s41587-022-01624-4
209. Paschon DE Diversifying the structure of zinc finger nucleases for high-precision genome editing Nat. Commun. 2019 10 1133 10.1038/s41467-019-08867-x 30850604
Paschon, D. E. et al. Diversifying the structure of zinc finger nucleases for high-precision genome editing. Nat. Commun. 10, 1133 (2019).30850604 10.1038/s41467-019-08867-x
210. Kaina B A genome-wide screening for DNA repair genes: much more players than hitherto known Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2020 5 204 10.1038/s41392-020-00314-4 32934203
Kaina, B. A genome-wide screening for DNA repair genes: much more players than hitherto known. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 5, 204 (2020).32934203 10.1038/s41392-020-00314-4
211. Ding W Zinc finger nucleases targeting the human papillomavirus E7 oncogene induce E7 disruption and a transformed phenotype in HPV16/18-positive cervical cancer cells Clin. Cancer Res. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2014 20 6495 6503 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0250
Ding, W. et al. Zinc finger nucleases targeting the human papillomavirus E7 oncogene induce E7 disruption and a transformed phenotype in HPV16/18-positive cervical cancer cells. Clin. Cancer Res. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 20, 6495–6503 (2014).10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0250
212. Ma, D. Safety Study of Zinc Finger Nucleases ZFN-602 and ZFN-758 in HPV-Infected Subjects. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02800369 (2017).
213. Wang, J. et al. Highly efficient homology-driven genome editing in human T cells by combining zinc-finger nuclease mRNA and AAV6 donor delivery. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, e30 (2016).
214. Joung JK Sander JD TALENs: a widely applicable technology for targeted genome editing Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2013 14 49 55 10.1038/nrm3486 23169466
Joung, J. K. & Sander, J. D. TALENs: a widely applicable technology for targeted genome editing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 14, 49–55 (2013).23169466 10.1038/nrm3486
215. Baker M Gene-editing nucleases Nat. Methods 2012 9 23 26 10.1038/nmeth.1807 22312637
Baker, M. Gene-editing nucleases. Nat. Methods 9, 23–26 (2012).22312637 10.1038/nmeth.1807
216. Mock U Novel lentiviral vectors with mutated reverse transcriptase for mRNA delivery of TALE nucleases Sci. Rep. 2014 4 6409 10.1038/srep06409 25230987
Mock, U. et al. Novel lentiviral vectors with mutated reverse transcriptase for mRNA delivery of TALE nucleases. Sci. Rep. 4, 6409 (2014).25230987 10.1038/srep06409
217. Holkers M Differential integrity of TALE nuclease genes following adenoviral and lentiviral vector gene transfer into human cells Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 41 e63 10.1093/nar/gks1446 23275534
Holkers, M. et al. Differential integrity of TALE nuclease genes following adenoviral and lentiviral vector gene transfer into human cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, e63 (2013).23275534 10.1093/nar/gks1446
218. Qasim W Molecular remission of infant B-ALL after infusion of universal TALEN gene-edited CAR T cells Sci. Transl. Med. 2017 9 eaaj2013 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaj2013 28123068
Qasim, W. et al. Molecular remission of infant B-ALL after infusion of universal TALEN gene-edited CAR T cells. Sci. Transl. Med. 9, eaaj2013 (2017).28123068 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaj2013
219. Ma, D. Safety Study of Transcription Activator-like Effector Nucleases T512 in HPV16-Infected Subjects. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03226470 (2021).
220. She X Immune surveillance of brain metastatic cancer cells is mediated by IFITM1 EMBO J. 2023 42 e111112 10.15252/embj.2022111112 36799040
She, X. et al. Immune surveillance of brain metastatic cancer cells is mediated by IFITM1. EMBO J. 42, e111112 (2023).36799040 10.15252/embj.2022111112
221. Dong MB Systematic Immunotherapy target discovery using genome-scale in vivo CRISPR screens in CD8 T cells Cell 2019 178 1189 1204.e23 10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.044 31442407
Dong, M. B. et al. Systematic Immunotherapy target discovery using genome-scale in vivo CRISPR screens in CD8 T cells. Cell 178, 1189–1204.e23 (2019).31442407 10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.044
222. Chiu, D. K.-C. et al. Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells Up-regulate PVRL1, Stabilizing PVR and Inhibiting the Cytotoxic T-Cell Response via TIGIT to Mediate Tumor Resistance to PD1 Inhibitors in Mice. Gastroenterology 159, 609–623 (2020).
223. Chen Z In vivo CD8+ T cell CRISPR screening reveals control by Fli1 in infection and cancer Cell 2021 184 1262 1280.e22 10.1016/j.cell.2021.02.019 33636129
Chen, Z. et al. In vivo CD8+ T cell CRISPR screening reveals control by Fli1 in infection and cancer. Cell 184, 1262–1280.e22 (2021).33636129 10.1016/j.cell.2021.02.019
224. Hu, Y. et al. Safety and efficacy of CRISPR-based non-viral PD1 locus specifically integrated anti-CD19 CAR-T cells in patients with relapsed or refractory Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a first-in-human phase I study. EClinicalMedicine 60, 102010 (2023).
225. Shakiba M TCR signal strength defines distinct mechanisms of T cell dysfunction and cancer evasion J. Exp. Med. 2022 219 e20201966 10.1084/jem.20201966 34935874
Shakiba, M. et al. TCR signal strength defines distinct mechanisms of T cell dysfunction and cancer evasion. J. Exp. Med. 219, e20201966 (2022).34935874 10.1084/jem.20201966
226. Zhang Y Cyclosporine A-resistant CAR-T cells mediate antitumour immunity in the presence of allogeneic cells Nat. Commun. 2023 14 8491 10.1038/s41467-023-44176-0 38123592
Zhang, Y. et al. Cyclosporine A-resistant CAR-T cells mediate antitumour immunity in the presence of allogeneic cells. Nat. Commun. 14, 8491 (2023).38123592 10.1038/s41467-023-44176-0
227. Tsujino T CRISPR screens reveal genetic determinants of PARP inhibitor sensitivity and resistance in prostate cancer Nat. Commun. 2023 14 252 10.1038/s41467-023-35880-y 36650183
Tsujino, T. et al. CRISPR screens reveal genetic determinants of PARP inhibitor sensitivity and resistance in prostate cancer. Nat. Commun. 14, 252 (2023).36650183 10.1038/s41467-023-35880-y
228. Vojnic M Acquired BRAF rearrangements induce secondary resistance to EGFR therapy in EGFR-mutated lung cancers J. Thorac. Oncol. Publ. Int. Assoc. Study Lung Cancer 2019 14 802 815
Vojnic, M. et al. Acquired BRAF rearrangements induce secondary resistance to EGFR therapy in EGFR-mutated lung cancers. J. Thorac. Oncol. Publ. Int. Assoc. Study Lung Cancer 14, 802–815 (2019).
229. Chow RD AAV-mediated direct in vivo CRISPR screen identifies functional suppressors in glioblastoma Nat. Neurosci. 2017 20 1329 1341 10.1038/nn.4620 28805815
Chow, R. D. et al. AAV-mediated direct in vivo CRISPR screen identifies functional suppressors in glioblastoma. Nat. Neurosci. 20, 1329–1341 (2017).28805815 10.1038/nn.4620
230. Ye L In vivo CRISPR screening in CD8 T cells with AAV–Sleeping Beauty hybrid vectors identifies membrane targets for improving immunotherapy for glioblastoma Nat. Biotechnol. 2019 37 1302 1313 10.1038/s41587-019-0246-4 31548728
Ye, L. et al. In vivo CRISPR screening in CD8 T cells with AAV–Sleeping Beauty hybrid vectors identifies membrane targets for improving immunotherapy for glioblastoma. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1302–1313 (2019).31548728 10.1038/s41587-019-0246-4
231. Dervovic D In vivo CRISPR screens reveal Serpinb9 and Adam2 as regulators of immune therapy response in lung cancer Nat. Commun. 2023 14 3150 10.1038/s41467-023-38841-7 37258521
Dervovic, D. et al. In vivo CRISPR screens reveal Serpinb9 and Adam2 as regulators of immune therapy response in lung cancer. Nat. Commun. 14, 3150 (2023).37258521 10.1038/s41467-023-38841-7
232. Lu Y Safety and feasibility of CRISPR-edited T cells in patients with refractory non-small-cell lung cancer Nat. Med. 2020 26 732 740 10.1038/s41591-020-0840-5 32341578
Lu, Y. et al. Safety and feasibility of CRISPR-edited T cells in patients with refractory non-small-cell lung cancer. Nat. Med. 26, 732–740 (2020).32341578 10.1038/s41591-020-0840-5
233. Deng L Identifying CDC7 as a synergistic target of chemotherapy in resistant small-cell lung cancer via CRISPR/Cas9 screening Cell Death Discov. 2023 9 1 10 10.1038/s41420-023-01315-2 36588105
Deng, L. et al. Identifying CDC7 as a synergistic target of chemotherapy in resistant small-cell lung cancer via CRISPR/Cas9 screening. Cell Death Discov. 9, 1–10 (2023).36588105 10.1038/s41420-023-01315-2
234. Wei L Genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 library screening identified PHGDH as a critical driver for Sorafenib resistance in HCC Nat. Commun. 2019 10 4681 10.1038/s41467-019-12606-7 31615983
Wei, L. et al. Genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 library screening identified PHGDH as a critical driver for Sorafenib resistance in HCC. Nat. Commun. 10, 4681 (2019).31615983 10.1038/s41467-019-12606-7
235. Li L In vitro CRISPR screening uncovers CRTC3 as a regulator of IFN-γ-induced ferroptosis of hepatocellular carcinoma Cell Death Discov. 2023 9 1 11 36588105
Li, L. et al. In vitro CRISPR screening uncovers CRTC3 as a regulator of IFN-γ-induced ferroptosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Cell Death Discov. 9, 1–11 (2023).36588105
236. Benichou E The transcription factor ChREBP Orchestrates liver carcinogenesis by coordinating the PI3K/AKT signaling and cancer metabolism Nat. Commun. 2024 15 1879 10.1038/s41467-024-45548-w 38424041
Benichou, E. et al. The transcription factor ChREBP Orchestrates liver carcinogenesis by coordinating the PI3K/AKT signaling and cancer metabolism. Nat. Commun. 15, 1879 (2024).38424041 10.1038/s41467-024-45548-w
237. Porto EM Komor AC Slaymaker IM Yeo GW Base editing: advances and therapeutic opportunities Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2020 19 839 859 10.1038/s41573-020-0084-6 33077937
Porto, E. M., Komor, A. C., Slaymaker, I. M. & Yeo, G. W. Base editing: advances and therapeutic opportunities. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 19, 839–859 (2020).33077937 10.1038/s41573-020-0084-6
238. Komor AC Kim YB Packer MS Zuris JA Liu DR Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage Nature 2016 533 420 424 10.1038/nature17946 27096365
Komor, A. C., Kim, Y. B., Packer, M. S., Zuris, J. A. & Liu, D. R. Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature 533, 420–424 (2016).27096365 10.1038/nature17946
239. Gaudelli NM Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage Nature 2017 551 464 471 10.1038/nature24644 29160308
Gaudelli, N. M. et al. Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature 551, 464–471 (2017).29160308 10.1038/nature24644
240. Rees HA Improving the DNA specificity and applicability of base editing through protein engineering and protein delivery Nat. Commun. 2017 8 15790 10.1038/ncomms15790 28585549
Rees, H. A. et al. Improving the DNA specificity and applicability of base editing through protein engineering and protein delivery. Nat. Commun. 8, 15790 (2017).28585549 10.1038/ncomms15790
241. Komor AC Improved base excision repair inhibition and bacteriophage Mu Gam protein yields C:G-to-T:A base editors with higher efficiency and product purity Sci. Adv. 2017 3 eaao4774 10.1126/sciadv.aao4774 28875174
Komor, A. C. et al. Improved base excision repair inhibition and bacteriophage Mu Gam protein yields C:G-to-T:A base editors with higher efficiency and product purity. Sci. Adv. 3, eaao4774 (2017).28875174 10.1126/sciadv.aao4774
242. Webber BR Highly efficient multiplex human T cell engineering without double-strand breaks using Cas9 base editors Nat. Commun. 2019 10 5222 10.1038/s41467-019-13007-6 31745080
Webber, B. R. et al. Highly efficient multiplex human T cell engineering without double-strand breaks using Cas9 base editors. Nat. Commun. 10, 5222 (2019).31745080 10.1038/s41467-019-13007-6
243. Sayed S Efficient correction of oncogenic KRAS and TP53 mutations through CRISPR base editing Cancer Res 2022 82 3002 3015 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-21-2519 35802645
Sayed, S. et al. Efficient correction of oncogenic KRAS and TP53 mutations through CRISPR base editing. Cancer Res 82, 3002–3015 (2022).35802645 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-21-2519
244. Anzalone AV Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA Nature 2019 576 149 157 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4 31634902
Anzalone, A. V. et al. Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature 576, 149–157 (2019).31634902 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4
245. Chen PJ Liu DR Prime editing for precise and highly versatile genome manipulation Nat. Rev. Genet. 2023 24 161 177 10.1038/s41576-022-00541-1 36344749
Chen, P. J. & Liu, D. R. Prime editing for precise and highly versatile genome manipulation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 24, 161–177 (2023).36344749 10.1038/s41576-022-00541-1
246. Zhao Z Shang P Mohanraju P Geijsen N Prime editing: advances and therapeutic applications Trends Biotechnol. 2023 41 1000 1012 10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.03.004 37002157
Zhao, Z., Shang, P., Mohanraju, P. & Geijsen, N. Prime editing: advances and therapeutic applications. Trends Biotechnol. 41, 1000–1012 (2023).37002157 10.1016/j.tibtech.2023.03.004
247. Chen PJ Enhanced prime editing systems by manipulating cellular determinants of editing outcomes Cell 2021 184 5635 5652.e29 10.1016/j.cell.2021.09.018 34653350
Chen, P. J. et al. Enhanced prime editing systems by manipulating cellular determinants of editing outcomes. Cell 184, 5635–5652.e29 (2021).34653350 10.1016/j.cell.2021.09.018
248. Fiumara, M. et al. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 1–15 10.1038/s41587-023-01915-4 (2023).
249. Liu P Improved prime editors enable pathogenic allele correction and cancer modelling in adult mice Nat. Commun. 2021 12 2121 10.1038/s41467-021-22295-w 33837189
Liu, P. et al. Improved prime editors enable pathogenic allele correction and cancer modelling in adult mice. Nat. Commun. 12, 2121 (2021).33837189 10.1038/s41467-021-22295-w
250. Davis JR Efficient prime editing in mouse brain, liver and heart with dual AAVs Nat. Biotechnol. 2024 42 253 264 10.1038/s41587-023-01758-z 37142705
Davis, J. R. et al. Efficient prime editing in mouse brain, liver and heart with dual AAVs. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 253–264 (2024).37142705 10.1038/s41587-023-01758-z
251. Abuhamad, A. Y. et al. Reverting TP53 Mutation in Breast Cancer Cells: Prime Editing Workflow and Technical Considerations. Cells 11, 1612 (2022).
252. Jang G Kweon J Kim Y CRISPR prime editing for unconstrained correction of oncogenic KRAS variants Commun. Biol. 2023 6 1 7 10.1038/s42003-023-05052-1 36596887
Jang, G., Kweon, J. & Kim, Y. CRISPR prime editing for unconstrained correction of oncogenic KRAS variants. Commun. Biol. 6, 1–7 (2023).36596887 10.1038/s42003-023-05052-1
253. Pomeroy EJ Multiplex prime editing and PASSIGE TM for non-viral generation of an allogeneic CAR-T cell product Blood 2023 142 4803 10.1182/blood-2023-181869
Pomeroy, E. J. et al. Multiplex prime editing and PASSIGE TM for non-viral generation of an allogeneic CAR-T cell product. Blood 142, 4803 (2023).10.1182/blood-2023-181869
254. Zhou L Yao S Recent advances in therapeutic CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing: mechanisms and applications Mol. Biomed. 2023 4 10 10.1186/s43556-023-00115-5 37027099
Zhou, L. & Yao, S. Recent advances in therapeutic CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing: mechanisms and applications. Mol. Biomed. 4, 10 (2023).37027099 10.1186/s43556-023-00115-5
255. Ahmadi SE Viral vectors and extracellular vesicles: Innate delivery systems utilized in CRISPR/Cas-mediated cancer therapy Cancer Gene Ther. 2023 30 936 954 10.1038/s41417-023-00597-z 36854897
Ahmadi, S. E. et al. Viral vectors and extracellular vesicles: Innate delivery systems utilized in CRISPR/Cas-mediated cancer therapy. Cancer Gene Ther. 30, 936–954 (2023).36854897 10.1038/s41417-023-00597-z
256. Münch RC Off-target-free gene delivery by affinity-purified receptor-targeted viral vectors Nat. Commun. 2015 6 6246 10.1038/ncomms7246 25665714
Münch, R. C. et al. Off-target-free gene delivery by affinity-purified receptor-targeted viral vectors. Nat. Commun. 6, 6246 (2015).25665714 10.1038/ncomms7246
257. Gene Transfer Clinical Study in X-Linked Myotubular Myopathy - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03199469.
258. Morrison C Fresh from the biotech pipeline—2019 Nat. Biotechnol. 2020 38 126 131 10.1038/s41587-019-0405-7 31942049
Morrison, C. Fresh from the biotech pipeline—2019. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 126–131 (2020).31942049 10.1038/s41587-019-0405-7
259. George LA Multiyear Factor VIII Expression after AAV gene transfer for Hemophilia A N. Engl. J. Med. 2021 385 1961 1973 10.1056/NEJMoa2104205 34788507
George, L. A. et al. Multiyear Factor VIII Expression after AAV gene transfer for Hemophilia A. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 1961–1973 (2021).34788507 10.1056/NEJMoa2104205
260. Tabebordbar M Directed evolution of a family of AAV capsid variants enabling potent muscle-directed gene delivery across species Cell 2021 184 4919 4938.e22 10.1016/j.cell.2021.08.028 34506722
Tabebordbar, M. et al. Directed evolution of a family of AAV capsid variants enabling potent muscle-directed gene delivery across species. Cell 184, 4919–4938.e22 (2021).34506722 10.1016/j.cell.2021.08.028
261. Liu Y Cryo-electron tomography of NLRP3-activated ASC complexes reveals organelle co-localization Nat. Commun. 2023 14 7246 10.1038/s41467-023-43180-8 37945612
Liu, Y. et al. Cryo-electron tomography of NLRP3-activated ASC complexes reveals organelle co-localization. Nat. Commun. 14, 7246 (2023).37945612 10.1038/s41467-023-43180-8
262. Smith CC Alternative tumour-specific antigens Nat. Rev. Cancer 2019 19 465 478 10.1038/s41568-019-0162-4 31278396
Smith, C. C. et al. Alternative tumour-specific antigens. Nat. Rev. Cancer 19, 465–478 (2019).31278396 10.1038/s41568-019-0162-4
263. Tam YYC Chen S Cullis PR Advances in Lipid Nanoparticles for siRNA Delivery Pharmaceutics 2013 5 498 507 10.3390/pharmaceutics5030498 24300520
Tam, Y. Y. C., Chen, S. & Cullis, P. R. Advances in Lipid Nanoparticles for siRNA Delivery. Pharmaceutics 5, 498–507 (2013).24300520 10.3390/pharmaceutics5030498
264. Kafil, V. & Omidi, Y. Cytotoxic Impacts of Linear and Branched Polyethylenimine Nanostructures in A431 Cells. BioImpacts BI 1, 23–30 (2011).
265. Rosenblum D CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing using targeted lipid nanoparticles for cancer therapy Sci. Adv. 2020 6 eabc9450 10.1126/sciadv.abc9450 33208369
Rosenblum, D. et al. CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing using targeted lipid nanoparticles for cancer therapy. Sci. Adv. 6, eabc9450 (2020).33208369 10.1126/sciadv.abc9450
266. Zhang L Lipid nanoparticle-mediated efficient delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 for tumor therapy NPG Asia Mater. 2017 9 e441 10.1038/am.2017.185
Zhang, L. et al. Lipid nanoparticle-mediated efficient delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 for tumor therapy. NPG Asia Mater. 9, e441 (2017).10.1038/am.2017.185
267. Li C Ionizable lipid-assisted efficient hepatic delivery of gene editing elements for oncotherapy Bioact. Mater. 2022 9 590 601 34853819
Li, C. et al. Ionizable lipid-assisted efficient hepatic delivery of gene editing elements for oncotherapy. Bioact. Mater. 9, 590–601 (2022).34853819
268. Luo H Stress-release design for high-capacity and long-time lifespan aqueous zinc-ion batteries Mater. Today Energy 2021 21 100799 10.1016/j.mtener.2021.100799
Luo, H. et al. Stress-release design for high-capacity and long-time lifespan aqueous zinc-ion batteries. Mater. Today Energy 21, 100799 (2021).10.1016/j.mtener.2021.100799
269. Wu Z CRISPR/Cas9-3NLS/sgHMGA2@PDA nanosystem is the potential efficient gene editing therapy for gastric cancer with HMGA2 high expression Front. Oncol. 2022 12 978533 10.3389/fonc.2022.978533 36119467
Wu, Z. et al. CRISPR/Cas9-3NLS/sgHMGA2@PDA nanosystem is the potential efficient gene editing therapy for gastric cancer with HMGA2 high expression. Front. Oncol. 12, 978533 (2022).36119467 10.3389/fonc.2022.978533
270. Yu, J. et al. Design of a self-driven probiotic-CRISPR/Cas9 nanosystem for sono-immunometabolic cancer therapy. Nat. Commun. 13, 7903 (2022).
271. Hanahan D Hallmarks of cancer: New dimensions Cancer Discov. 2022 12 31 46 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-1059 35022204
Hanahan, D. Hallmarks of cancer: New dimensions. Cancer Discov. 12, 31–46 (2022).35022204 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-1059
272. Chiari R Two antigens recognized by autologous cytolytic T lymphocytes on a melanoma result from a single point mutation in an essential housekeeping gene Cancer Res 1999 59 5785 5792 10582700
Chiari, R. et al. Two antigens recognized by autologous cytolytic T lymphocytes on a melanoma result from a single point mutation in an essential housekeeping gene. Cancer Res 59, 5785–5792 (1999).10582700
273. Wang R-F Wang X Atwood AC Topalian SL Rosenberg SA Cloning genes encoding MHC Class II-restricted antigens: Mutated CDC27 as a tumor antigen Science 1999 284 1351 1354 10.1126/science.284.5418.1351 10334988
Wang, R.-F., Wang, X., Atwood, A. C., Topalian, S. L. & Rosenberg, S. A. Cloning genes encoding MHC Class II-restricted antigens: Mutated CDC27 as a tumor antigen. Science 284, 1351–1354 (1999).10334988 10.1126/science.284.5418.1351
274. Perumal D Mutation-derived Neoantigen-specific T-cell responses in multiple myeloma Clin. Cancer Res. 2020 26 450 464 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2309 31857430
Perumal, D. et al. Mutation-derived Neoantigen-specific T-cell responses in multiple myeloma. Clin. Cancer Res. 26, 450–464 (2020).31857430 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2309
275. Turajlic S Insertion-and-deletion-derived tumour-specific neoantigens and the immunogenic phenotype: a pan-cancer analysis Lancet Oncol. 2017 18 1009 1021 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30516-8 28694034
Turajlic, S. et al. Insertion-and-deletion-derived tumour-specific neoantigens and the immunogenic phenotype: a pan-cancer analysis. Lancet Oncol. 18, 1009–1021 (2017).28694034 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30516-8
276. Mitelman F Johansson B Mertens F Fusion genes and rearranged genes as a linear function of chromosome aberrations in cancer Nat. Genet. 2004 36 331 334 10.1038/ng1335 15054488
Mitelman, F., Johansson, B. & Mertens, F. Fusion genes and rearranged genes as a linear function of chromosome aberrations in cancer. Nat. Genet. 36, 331–334 (2004).15054488 10.1038/ng1335
277. Eckhardt M Multiple Routes To Oncogenesis are promoted by the human Papillomavirus–Host protein network Cancer Discov. 2018 8 1474 1489 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-1018 30209081
Eckhardt, M. et al. Multiple Routes To Oncogenesis are promoted by the human Papillomavirus–Host protein network. Cancer Discov. 8, 1474–1489 (2018).30209081 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-1018
278. HEPAVAC Consortium. Multi-omics discovery of exome-derived neoantigens in hepatocellular carcinoma Genome Med 2019 11 28 10.1186/s13073-019-0636-8 31039795
HEPAVAC Consortium. et al. Multi-omics discovery of exome-derived neoantigens in hepatocellular carcinoma. Genome Med 11, 28 (2019).31039795 10.1186/s13073-019-0636-8
279. De Mattos-Arruda L Neoantigen prediction and computational perspectives towards clinical benefit: recommendations from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group Ann. Oncol. 2020 31 978 990 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.05.008 32610166
De Mattos-Arruda, L. et al. Neoantigen prediction and computational perspectives towards clinical benefit: recommendations from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group. Ann. Oncol. 31, 978–990 (2020).32610166 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.05.008
280. O’Donnell TJ MHCflurry: Open-source Class I MHC binding affinity prediction Cell Syst. 2018 7 129 132.e4 10.1016/j.cels.2018.05.014 29960884
O’Donnell, T. J. et al. MHCflurry: Open-source Class I MHC binding affinity prediction. Cell Syst. 7, 129–132.e4 (2018).29960884 10.1016/j.cels.2018.05.014
281. Wells DK Key parameters of tumor Epitope immunogenicity revealed through a consortium approach improve neoantigen prediction Cell 2020 183 818 834.e13 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.015 33038342
Wells, D. K. et al. Key parameters of tumor Epitope immunogenicity revealed through a consortium approach improve neoantigen prediction. Cell 183, 818–834.e13 (2020).33038342 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.015
282. Roudko V Shared immunogenic poly-epitope frameshift mutations in microsatellite unstable tumors Cell 2020 183 1634 1649.e17 10.1016/j.cell.2020.11.004 33259803
Roudko, V. et al. Shared immunogenic poly-epitope frameshift mutations in microsatellite unstable tumors. Cell 183, 1634–1649.e17 (2020).33259803 10.1016/j.cell.2020.11.004
283. Tanyi JL Personalized cancer vaccine effectively mobilizes antitumor T cell immunity in ovarian cancer Sci. Transl. Med. 2018 10 eaao5931 10.1126/scitranslmed.aao5931 29643231
Tanyi, J. L. et al. Personalized cancer vaccine effectively mobilizes antitumor T cell immunity in ovarian cancer. Sci. Transl. Med. 10, eaao5931 (2018).29643231 10.1126/scitranslmed.aao5931
284. Schoen RE Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MUC1 peptide vaccine for prevention of recurrent Colorectal Adenoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2023 29 1678 1688 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-3168 36892581
Schoen, R. E. et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MUC1 peptide vaccine for prevention of recurrent Colorectal Adenoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 29, 1678–1688 (2023).36892581 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-3168
285. Ott PA An immunogenic personal neoantigen vaccine for patients with melanoma Nature 2017 547 217 221 10.1038/nature22991 28678778
Ott, P. A. et al. An immunogenic personal neoantigen vaccine for patients with melanoma. Nature 547, 217–221 (2017).28678778 10.1038/nature22991
286. Hubbard JM Safety and activity of PolyPEPI1018 combined with maintenance therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: an open-label, multicenter, Phase Ib Study Clin. Cancer Res. 2022 28 2818 2829 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-0112 35472243
Hubbard, J. M. et al. Safety and activity of PolyPEPI1018 combined with maintenance therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: an open-label, multicenter, Phase Ib Study. Clin. Cancer Res. 28, 2818–2829 (2022).35472243 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-0112
287. Hu Z Personal neoantigen vaccines induce persistent memory T cell responses and epitope spreading in patients with melanoma Nat. Med. 2021 27 515 525 10.1038/s41591-020-01206-4 33479501
Hu, Z. et al. Personal neoantigen vaccines induce persistent memory T cell responses and epitope spreading in patients with melanoma. Nat. Med. 27, 515–525 (2021).33479501 10.1038/s41591-020-01206-4
288. Schuhmacher J Vaccination against RhoC induces long-lasting immune responses in patients with prostate cancer: results from a phase I/II clinical trial J. Immunother. Cancer 2020 8 e001157 10.1136/jitc-2020-001157 33184050
Schuhmacher, J. et al. Vaccination against RhoC induces long-lasting immune responses in patients with prostate cancer: results from a phase I/II clinical trial. J. Immunother. Cancer 8, e001157 (2020).33184050 10.1136/jitc-2020-001157
289. Obara W A phase I/II study of cancer peptide vaccine S-288310 in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma of the bladder Ann. Oncol. 2017 28 798 803 10.1093/annonc/mdw675 27998971
Obara, W. et al. A phase I/II study of cancer peptide vaccine S-288310 in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Ann. Oncol. 28, 798–803 (2017).27998971 10.1093/annonc/mdw675
290. Lynn GM Peptide–TLR-7/8a conjugate vaccines chemically programmed for nanoparticle self-assembly enhance CD8 T-cell immunity to tumor antigens Nat. Biotechnol. 2020 38 320 332 10.1038/s41587-019-0390-x 31932728
Lynn, G. M. et al. Peptide–TLR-7/8a conjugate vaccines chemically programmed for nanoparticle self-assembly enhance CD8 T-cell immunity to tumor antigens. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 320–332 (2020).31932728 10.1038/s41587-019-0390-x
291. Ni Q A bi-adjuvant nanovaccine that potentiates immunogenicity of neoantigen for combination immunotherapy of colorectal cancer Sci. Adv. 2020 6 eaaw6071 10.1126/sciadv.aaw6071 32206706
Ni, Q. et al. A bi-adjuvant nanovaccine that potentiates immunogenicity of neoantigen for combination immunotherapy of colorectal cancer. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaw6071 (2020).32206706 10.1126/sciadv.aaw6071
292. Sahin U Personalized RNA mutanome vaccines mobilize poly-specific therapeutic immunity against cancer Nature 2017 547 222 226 10.1038/nature23003 28678784
Sahin, U. et al. Personalized RNA mutanome vaccines mobilize poly-specific therapeutic immunity against cancer. Nature 547, 222–226 (2017).28678784 10.1038/nature23003
293. Zhang H Delivery of mRNA vaccine with a lipid-like material potentiates antitumor efficacy through Toll-like receptor 4 signaling Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 2021 118 e2005191118 10.1073/pnas.2005191118 33547233
Zhang, H. et al. Delivery of mRNA vaccine with a lipid-like material potentiates antitumor efficacy through Toll-like receptor 4 signaling. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 118, e2005191118 (2021).33547233 10.1073/pnas.2005191118
294. Rojas LA Personalized RNA neoantigen vaccines stimulate T cells in pancreatic cancer Nature 2023 618 144 150 10.1038/s41586-023-06063-y 37165196
Rojas, L. A. et al. Personalized RNA neoantigen vaccines stimulate T cells in pancreatic cancer. Nature 618, 144–150 (2023).37165196 10.1038/s41586-023-06063-y
295. Cafri G mRNA vaccine–induced neoantigen-specific T cell immunity in patients with gastrointestinal cancer J. Clin. Invest. 2020 130 5976 5988 10.1172/JCI134915 33016924
Cafri, G. et al. mRNA vaccine–induced neoantigen-specific T cell immunity in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. J. Clin. Invest. 130, 5976–5988 (2020).33016924 10.1172/JCI134915
296. Wang Z Detection of integration of plasmid DNA into host genomic DNA following intramuscular injection and electroporation Gene Ther. 2004 11 711 721 10.1038/sj.gt.3302213 14724672
Wang, Z. et al. Detection of integration of plasmid DNA into host genomic DNA following intramuscular injection and electroporation. Gene Ther. 11, 711–721 (2004).14724672 10.1038/sj.gt.3302213
297. Tiriveedhi V Safety and preliminary evidence of biologic efficacy of a mammaglobin-A DNA vaccine in patients with stable metastatic breast cancer Clin. Cancer Res. 2014 20 5964 5975 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0059 25451106
Tiriveedhi, V. et al. Safety and preliminary evidence of biologic efficacy of a mammaglobin-A DNA vaccine in patients with stable metastatic breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 20, 5964–5975 (2014).25451106 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0059
298. Cecil DL Immunization with a Plasmid DNA vaccine encoding the N-Terminus of insulin-like growth factor binding Protein-2 in advanced ovarian cancer leads to high-level Type I immune responses Clin. Cancer Res. 2021 27 6405 6412 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-1579 34526360
Cecil, D. L. et al. Immunization with a Plasmid DNA vaccine encoding the N-Terminus of insulin-like growth factor binding Protein-2 in advanced ovarian cancer leads to high-level Type I immune responses. Clin. Cancer Res. 27, 6405–6412 (2021).34526360 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-1579
299. Trimble CL Safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of VGX-3100, a therapeutic synthetic DNA vaccine targeting human papillomavirus 16 and 18 E6 and E7 proteins for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial Lancet 2015 386 2078 2088 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00239-1 26386540
Trimble, C. L. et al. Safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of VGX-3100, a therapeutic synthetic DNA vaccine targeting human papillomavirus 16 and 18 E6 and E7 proteins for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial. Lancet 386, 2078–2088 (2015).26386540 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00239-1
300. Steinman RM Decisions about dendritic cells: past, present, and future Annu. Rev. Immunol. 2012 30 1 22 10.1146/annurev-immunol-100311-102839 22136168
Steinman, R. M. Decisions about dendritic cells: past, present, and future. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 30, 1–22 (2012).22136168 10.1146/annurev-immunol-100311-102839
301. Carreno BM A dendritic cell vaccine increases the breadth and diversity of melanoma neoantigen-specific T cells Science 2015 348 803 808 10.1126/science.aaa3828 25837513
Carreno, B. M. et al. A dendritic cell vaccine increases the breadth and diversity of melanoma neoantigen-specific T cells. Science 348, 803–808 (2015).25837513 10.1126/science.aaa3828
302. Liau LM Association of autologous Tumor Lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination with extension of survival among patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent Glioblastoma: A Phase 3 prospective externally controlled cohort trial JAMA Oncol. 2023 9 112 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.5370 36394838
Liau, L. M. et al. Association of autologous Tumor Lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination with extension of survival among patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent Glioblastoma: A Phase 3 prospective externally controlled cohort trial. JAMA Oncol. 9, 112 (2023).36394838 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.5370
303. Mahoney DJ Stojdl DF Laird G Virus therapy for cancer Sci. Am. 2014 311 54 59 10.1038/scientificamerican1114-54 25464663
Mahoney, D. J., Stojdl, D. F. & Laird, G. Virus therapy for cancer. Sci. Am. 311, 54–59 (2014).25464663 10.1038/scientificamerican1114-54
304. Anderson BD Nakamura T Russell SJ Peng K-W High CD46 receptor density determines preferential killing of tumor cells by oncolytic measles Virus Cancer Res 2004 64 4919 4926 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0884 15256464
Anderson, B. D., Nakamura, T., Russell, S. J. & Peng, K.-W. High CD46 receptor density determines preferential killing of tumor cells by oncolytic measles Virus. Cancer Res 64, 4919–4926 (2004).15256464 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0884
305. Jayawardena N Burga LN Poirier JT Bostina M Virus–receptor interactions: structural insights for oncolytic virus development Oncol. Virother. 2019 8 39 56 10.2147/OV.S218494
Jayawardena, N., Burga, L. N., Poirier, J. T. & Bostina, M. Virus–receptor interactions: structural insights for oncolytic virus development. Oncol. Virother. 8, 39–56 (2019).10.2147/OV.S218494
306. Gopinath SCB Analysis of compounds that interfere with Herpes Simplex Virus–host receptor interactions using surface plasmon resonance Anal. Chem. 2013 85 10455 10462 10.1021/ac4025522 24079703
Gopinath, S. C. B. et al. Analysis of compounds that interfere with Herpes Simplex Virus–host receptor interactions using surface plasmon resonance. Anal. Chem. 85, 10455–10462 (2013).24079703 10.1021/ac4025522
307. Yu Z Enhanced Nectin-1 Expression and Herpes oncolytic sensitivity in highly migratory and invasive carcinoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 4889 4897 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0309 16000587
Yu, Z. et al. Enhanced Nectin-1 Expression and Herpes oncolytic sensitivity in highly migratory and invasive carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 4889–4897 (2005).16000587 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0309
308. Karki R ZBP1-dependent inflammatory cell death, PANoptosis, and cytokine storm disrupt IFN therapeutic efficacy during coronavirus infection Sci. Immunol. 2022 7 eabo6294 10.1126/sciimmunol.abo6294 35587515
Karki, R. et al. ZBP1-dependent inflammatory cell death, PANoptosis, and cytokine storm disrupt IFN therapeutic efficacy during coronavirus infection. Sci. Immunol. 7, eabo6294 (2022).35587515 10.1126/sciimmunol.abo6294
309. Gozgit JM PARP7 negatively regulates the type I interferon response in cancer cells and its inhibition triggers antitumor immunity Cancer Cell 2021 39 1214 1226.e10 10.1016/j.ccell.2021.06.018 34375612
Gozgit, J. M. et al. PARP7 negatively regulates the type I interferon response in cancer cells and its inhibition triggers antitumor immunity. Cancer Cell 39, 1214–1226.e10 (2021).34375612 10.1016/j.ccell.2021.06.018
310. Flores EB Aksoy BA Bartee E Initial dose of oncolytic myxoma virus programs durable antitumor immunity independent of in vivo viral replication J. Immunother. Cancer 2020 8 e000804 10.1136/jitc-2020-000804 32581062
Flores, E. B., Aksoy, B. A. & Bartee, E. Initial dose of oncolytic myxoma virus programs durable antitumor immunity independent of in vivo viral replication. J. Immunother. Cancer 8, e000804 (2020).32581062 10.1136/jitc-2020-000804
311. Ma J Characterization of virus-mediated immunogenic cancer cell death and the consequences for oncolytic virus-based immunotherapy of cancer Cell Death Dis. 2020 11 48 10.1038/s41419-020-2236-3 31969562
Ma, J. et al. Characterization of virus-mediated immunogenic cancer cell death and the consequences for oncolytic virus-based immunotherapy of cancer. Cell Death Dis. 11, 48 (2020).31969562 10.1038/s41419-020-2236-3
312. Ye K An armed oncolytic virus enhances the efficacy of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy by converting tumors to artificial antigen-presenting cells in situ Mol. Ther. 2022 30 3658 3676 10.1016/j.ymthe.2022.06.010 35715953
Ye, K. et al. An armed oncolytic virus enhances the efficacy of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy by converting tumors to artificial antigen-presenting cells in situ. Mol. Ther. 30, 3658–3676 (2022).35715953 10.1016/j.ymthe.2022.06.010
313. Bommareddy PK Aspromonte S Zloza A Rabkin SD Kaufman HL MEK inhibition enhances oncolytic virus immunotherapy through increased tumor cell killing and T cell activation Sci. Transl. Med. 2018 10 eaau0417 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau0417 30541787
Bommareddy, P. K., Aspromonte, S., Zloza, A., Rabkin, S. D. & Kaufman, H. L. MEK inhibition enhances oncolytic virus immunotherapy through increased tumor cell killing and T cell activation. Sci. Transl. Med. 10, eaau0417 (2018).30541787 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau0417
314. Ramelyte E Oncolytic virotherapy-mediated anti-tumor response: a single-cell perspective Cancer Cell 2021 39 394 406.e4 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.12.022 33482123
Ramelyte, E. et al. Oncolytic virotherapy-mediated anti-tumor response: a single-cell perspective. Cancer Cell 39, 394–406.e4 (2021).33482123 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.12.022
315. Andtbacka RHI Talimogene Laherparepvec improves durable response rate in patients with advanced melanoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2015 33 2780 2788 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.3377 26014293
Andtbacka, R. H. I. et al. Talimogene Laherparepvec improves durable response rate in patients with advanced melanoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 33, 2780–2788 (2015).26014293 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.3377
316. Ott PA Hodi FS Talimogene Laherparepvec for the treatment of advanced melanoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2016 22 3127 3131 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2709 27146699
Ott, P. A. & Hodi, F. S. Talimogene Laherparepvec for the treatment of advanced melanoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 22, 3127–3131 (2016).27146699 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2709
317. Soliman H Oncolytic T-VEC virotherapy plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in nonmetastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2 trial Nat. Med. 2023 29 450 457 10.1038/s41591-023-02309-4 36759673
Soliman, H. et al. Oncolytic T-VEC virotherapy plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in nonmetastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2 trial. Nat. Med. 29, 450–457 (2023).36759673 10.1038/s41591-023-02309-4
318. Harrington KJ Talimogene Laherparepvec and Pembrolizumab in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (MASTERKEY-232): A multicenter, Phase 1b study Clin. Cancer Res. 2020 26 5153 5161 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-1170 32669371
Harrington, K. J. et al. Talimogene Laherparepvec and Pembrolizumab in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (MASTERKEY-232): A multicenter, Phase 1b study. Clin. Cancer Res. 26, 5153–5161 (2020).32669371 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-1170
319. Kelly CM Objective response rate among patients with locally advanced or metastatic sarcoma treated with talimogene laherparepvec in combination with Pembrolizumab: A Phase 2 clinical trial JAMA Oncol. 2020 6 402 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.6152 31971541
Kelly, C. M. et al. Objective response rate among patients with locally advanced or metastatic sarcoma treated with talimogene laherparepvec in combination with Pembrolizumab: A Phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 6, 402 (2020).31971541 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.6152
320. Fueyo J Preclinical characterization of the antiglioma activity of a Tropism-Enhanced Adenovirus Targeted to the Retinoblastoma Pathway JNCI J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 95 652 660 10.1093/jnci/95.9.652 12734316
Fueyo, J. et al. Preclinical characterization of the antiglioma activity of a Tropism-Enhanced Adenovirus Targeted to the Retinoblastoma Pathway. JNCI J. Natl Cancer Inst. 95, 652–660 (2003).12734316 10.1093/jnci/95.9.652
321. Lang FF Phase I Study of DNX-2401 (Delta-24-RGD) Oncolytic Adenovirus: Replication and immunotherapeutic effects in recurrent malignant Glioma J. Clin. Oncol. 2018 36 1419 1427 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.8219 29432077
Lang, F. F. et al. Phase I Study of DNX-2401 (Delta-24-RGD) Oncolytic Adenovirus: Replication and immunotherapeutic effects in recurrent malignant Glioma. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 1419–1427 (2018).29432077 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.8219
322. Nassiri F Oncolytic DNX-2401 virotherapy plus pembrolizumab in recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 1/2 trial Nat. Med. 2023 29 1370 1378 10.1038/s41591-023-02347-y 37188783
Nassiri, F. et al. Oncolytic DNX-2401 virotherapy plus pembrolizumab in recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 1/2 trial. Nat. Med. 29, 1370–1378 (2023).37188783 10.1038/s41591-023-02347-y
323. Todo T Martuza RL Rabkin SD Johnson PA Oncolytic herpes simplex virus vector with enhanced MHC class I presentation and tumor cell killing Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 2001 98 6396 6401 10.1073/pnas.101136398 11353831
Todo, T., Martuza, R. L., Rabkin, S. D. & Johnson, P. A. Oncolytic herpes simplex virus vector with enhanced MHC class I presentation and tumor cell killing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 98, 6396–6401 (2001).11353831 10.1073/pnas.101136398
324. Todo T Ino Y Ohtsu H Shibahara J Tanaka M A phase I/II study of triple-mutated oncolytic herpes virus G47∆ in patients with progressive glioblastoma Nat. Commun. 2022 13 4119 10.1038/s41467-022-31262-y 35864115
Todo, T., Ino, Y., Ohtsu, H., Shibahara, J. & Tanaka, M. A phase I/II study of triple-mutated oncolytic herpes virus G47∆ in patients with progressive glioblastoma. Nat. Commun. 13, 4119 (2022).35864115 10.1038/s41467-022-31262-y
325. Curti BD Intratumoral oncolytic virus V937 plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: the phase 1b MITCI study J. Immunother. Cancer 2022 10 e005224 10.1136/jitc-2022-005224 36564126
Curti, B. D. et al. Intratumoral oncolytic virus V937 plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: the phase 1b MITCI study. J. Immunother. Cancer 10, e005224 (2022).36564126 10.1136/jitc-2022-005224
326. Mahalingam D Pembrolizumab in combination with the oncolytic virus pelareorep and chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Phase Ib Study Clin. Cancer Res. 2020 26 71 81 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2078 31694832
Mahalingam, D. et al. Pembrolizumab in combination with the oncolytic virus pelareorep and chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Phase Ib Study. Clin. Cancer Res. 26, 71–81 (2020).31694832 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2078
327. Monge C Phase I/II study of PexaVec in combination with immune checkpoint inhibition in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer J. Immunother. Cancer 2023 11 e005640 10.1136/jitc-2022-005640 36754451
Monge, C. et al. Phase I/II study of PexaVec in combination with immune checkpoint inhibition in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. J. Immunother. Cancer 11, e005640 (2023).36754451 10.1136/jitc-2022-005640
328. Chesney JA Talimogene laherparepvec in combination with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone for advanced melanoma: 5-year final analysis of a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II trial J. Immunother. Cancer 2023 11 e006270 10.1136/jitc-2022-006270 37142291
Chesney, J. A. et al. Talimogene laherparepvec in combination with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone for advanced melanoma: 5-year final analysis of a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II trial. J. Immunother. Cancer 11, e006270 (2023).37142291 10.1136/jitc-2022-006270
329. Schenk EL A randomized double-blind Phase II Study of the Seneca Valley Virus (NTX-010) versus Placebo for patients with extensive-stage SCLC (ES SCLC) who were stable or responding after at least four cycles of Platinum-based chemotherapy: North Central Cancer Treatment Group (Alliance) N0923 Study J. Thorac. Oncol. 2020 15 110 119 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.09.083 31605793
Schenk, E. L. et al. A randomized double-blind Phase II Study of the Seneca Valley Virus (NTX-010) versus Placebo for patients with extensive-stage SCLC (ES SCLC) who were stable or responding after at least four cycles of Platinum-based chemotherapy: North Central Cancer Treatment Group (Alliance) N0923 Study. J. Thorac. Oncol. 15, 110–119 (2020).31605793 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.09.083
330. Ponce S ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a randomized phase 2 study investigating clinical outcomes and the tumor microenvironment J. Immunother. Cancer 2023 11 e007552 10.1136/jitc-2023-007552 37661097
Ponce, S. et al. ONCOS-102 plus pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a randomized phase 2 study investigating clinical outcomes and the tumor microenvironment. J. Immunother. Cancer 11, e007552 (2023).37661097 10.1136/jitc-2023-007552
331. Heo J Randomized dose-finding clinical trial of oncolytic immunotherapeutic vaccinia JX-594 in liver cancer Nat. Med. 2013 19 329 336 10.1038/nm.3089 23396206
Heo, J. et al. Randomized dose-finding clinical trial of oncolytic immunotherapeutic vaccinia JX-594 in liver cancer. Nat. Med. 19, 329–336 (2013).23396206 10.1038/nm.3089
332. Cavenee WK Genetic origin of mutations predisposing to Retinoblastoma Science 1985 228 501 503 10.1126/science.3983638 3983638
Cavenee, W. K. et al. Genetic origin of mutations predisposing to Retinoblastoma. Science 228, 501–503 (1985).3983638 10.1126/science.3983638
333. Xiao B Crystal structure of the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein bound to E2F and the molecular basis of its regulation Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 2003 100 2363 2368 10.1073/pnas.0436813100 12598654
Xiao, B. et al. Crystal structure of the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein bound to E2F and the molecular basis of its regulation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 100, 2363–2368 (2003).12598654 10.1073/pnas.0436813100
334. Pascual-Pasto G Therapeutic targeting of the RB1 pathway in retinoblastoma with the oncolytic adenovirus VCN-01 Sci. Transl. Med. 2019 11 eaat9321 10.1126/scitranslmed.aat9321 30674657
Pascual-Pasto, G. et al. Therapeutic targeting of the RB1 pathway in retinoblastoma with the oncolytic adenovirus VCN-01. Sci. Transl. Med. 11, eaat9321 (2019).30674657 10.1126/scitranslmed.aat9321
335. Hwang T-H A mechanistic proof-of-concept clinical trial with JX-594, a targeted multi-mechanistic oncolytic Poxvirus, in patients with metastatic melanoma Mol. Ther. 2011 19 1913 1922 10.1038/mt.2011.132 21772252
Hwang, T.-H. et al. A mechanistic proof-of-concept clinical trial with JX-594, a targeted multi-mechanistic oncolytic Poxvirus, in patients with metastatic melanoma. Mol. Ther. 19, 1913–1922 (2011).21772252 10.1038/mt.2011.132
336. Zhang B Intratumoral OH2, an oncolytic herpes simplex virus 2, in patients with advanced solid tumors: a multicenter, phase I/II clinical trial J. Immunother. Cancer 2021 9 e002224 10.1136/jitc-2020-002224 33837053
Zhang, B. et al. Intratumoral OH2, an oncolytic herpes simplex virus 2, in patients with advanced solid tumors: a multicenter, phase I/II clinical trial. J. Immunother. Cancer 9, e002224 (2021).33837053 10.1136/jitc-2020-002224
337. Annels NE Phase I Trial of an ICAM-1-Targeted Immunotherapeutic-Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) as an oncolytic agent against non muscle-invasive bladder cancer Clin. Cancer Res. 2019 25 5818 5831 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-4022 31273010
Annels, N. E. et al. Phase I Trial of an ICAM-1-Targeted Immunotherapeutic-Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) as an oncolytic agent against non muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 5818–5831 (2019).31273010 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-4022
338. Fares J Neural stem cell delivery of an oncolytic adenovirus in newly diagnosed malignant glioma: a first-in-human, phase 1, dose-escalation trial Lancet Oncol. 2021 22 1103 1114 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00245-X 34214495
Fares, J. et al. Neural stem cell delivery of an oncolytic adenovirus in newly diagnosed malignant glioma: a first-in-human, phase 1, dose-escalation trial. Lancet Oncol. 22, 1103–1114 (2021).34214495 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00245-X
339. Ruano D First-in-human, first-in-child trial of autologous MSCs carrying the oncolytic Virus Icovir-5 in patients with advanced tumors Mol. Ther. 2020 28 1033 1042 10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.01.019 32053771
Ruano, D. et al. First-in-human, first-in-child trial of autologous MSCs carrying the oncolytic Virus Icovir-5 in patients with advanced tumors. Mol. Ther. 28, 1033–1042 (2020).32053771 10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.01.019
340. Chow A Perica K Klebanoff CA Wolchok JD Clinical implications of T cell exhaustion for cancer immunotherapy Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2022 19 775 790 10.1038/s41571-022-00689-z 36216928
Chow, A., Perica, K., Klebanoff, C. A. & Wolchok, J. D. Clinical implications of T cell exhaustion for cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 19, 775–790 (2022).36216928 10.1038/s41571-022-00689-z
341. Coley WB The treatment of inoperable Sarcoma by Bacterial Toxins (the Mixed Toxins of the Streptococcus erysipelas and the Bacillus prodigiosus) Proc. R. Soc. Med. 1910 3 1 48 19974799
Coley, W. B. The treatment of inoperable Sarcoma by Bacterial Toxins (the Mixed Toxins of the Streptococcus erysipelas and the Bacillus prodigiosus). Proc. R. Soc. Med. 3, 1–48 (1910).19974799
342. Brunschwig A The efficacy Of “Coleyʼs Toxin” in the treatment of Sarcoma * An experimental study Ann. Surg. 1939 109 109 113 10.1097/00000658-193901000-00010 17857301
Brunschwig, A. The efficacy Of “Coleyʼs Toxin” in the treatment of Sarcoma * An experimental study. Ann. Surg. 109, 109–113 (1939).17857301 10.1097/00000658-193901000-00010
343. Karbach J Phase I clinical trial of mixed bacterial vaccine (Coley’s Toxins) in patients with NY-ESO-1 Expressing cancers: immunological effects and clinical activity Clin. Cancer Res. 2012 18 5449 5459 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1116 22847809
Karbach, J. et al. Phase I clinical trial of mixed bacterial vaccine (Coley’s Toxins) in patients with NY-ESO-1 Expressing cancers: immunological effects and clinical activity. Clin. Cancer Res. 18, 5449–5459 (2012).22847809 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1116
344. Babjuk M EAU Guidelines on Non–Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder, the 2011 Update Eur. Urol. 2011 59 997 1008 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.017 21458150
Babjuk, M. et al. EAU Guidelines on Non–Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder, the 2011 Update. Eur. Urol. 59, 997–1008 (2011).21458150 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.017
345. Bisiaux A Molecular analyte profiling of the early events and tissue conditioning following intravesical bacillus calmette-guerin therapy in patients with superficial bladder cancer J. Urol. 2009 181 1571 1580 10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.124 19230924
Bisiaux, A. et al. Molecular analyte profiling of the early events and tissue conditioning following intravesical bacillus calmette-guerin therapy in patients with superficial bladder cancer. J. Urol. 181, 1571–1580 (2009).19230924 10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.124
346. Brandau S NK cells are essential for effective BCG immunotherapy Int. J. Cancer 2001 92 697 702 10.1002/1097-0215(20010601)92:5<697::AID-IJC1245>3.0.CO;2-Z 11340575
Brandau, S. et al. NK cells are essential for effective BCG immunotherapy. Int. J. Cancer 92, 697–702 (2001).11340575 10.1002/1097-0215(20010601)92:5<697::AID-IJC1245>3.0.CO;2-Z
347. Stefanini GF Class I and Class II HLA antigen expression by transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: correlation with T-cell infiltration and BCG treatment J. Urol. 1989 141 1449 1453 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)41343-7 2657113
Stefanini, G. F. et al. Class I and Class II HLA antigen expression by transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: correlation with T-cell infiltration and BCG treatment. J. Urol. 141, 1449–1453 (1989).2657113 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)41343-7
348. Kawai T Akira S Toll-like receptors and their crosstalk with other innate receptors in infection and immunity Immunity 2011 34 637 650 10.1016/j.immuni.2011.05.006 21616434
Kawai, T. & Akira, S. Toll-like receptors and their crosstalk with other innate receptors in infection and immunity. Immunity 34, 637–650 (2011).21616434 10.1016/j.immuni.2011.05.006
349. Aleynick M Svensson-Arvelund J Flowers CR Marabelle A Brody JD Pathogen molecular pattern receptor agonists: treating cancer by mimicking infection Clin. Cancer Res. 2019 25 6283 6294 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1800 31123052
Aleynick, M., Svensson-Arvelund, J., Flowers, C. R., Marabelle, A. & Brody, J. D. Pathogen molecular pattern receptor agonists: treating cancer by mimicking infection. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 6283–6294 (2019).31123052 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1800
350. Nooka AK Assessment of safety and immunogenicity of PVX-410 vaccine with or without lenalidomide in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma: a nonrandomized clinical trial JAMA Oncol. 2018 4 e183267 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.3267 30128502
Nooka, A. K. et al. Assessment of safety and immunogenicity of PVX-410 vaccine with or without lenalidomide in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma: a nonrandomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 4, e183267 (2018).30128502 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.3267
351. Hammerich L Systemic clinical tumor regressions and potentiation of PD1 blockade with in situ vaccination Nat. Med. 2019 25 814 824 10.1038/s41591-019-0410-x 30962585
Hammerich, L. et al. Systemic clinical tumor regressions and potentiation of PD1 blockade with in situ vaccination. Nat. Med. 25, 814–824 (2019).30962585 10.1038/s41591-019-0410-x
352. Melssen MM A multipeptide vaccine plus toll-like receptor agonists LPS or polyICLC in combination with incomplete Freund’s adjuvant in melanoma patients J. Immunother. Cancer 2019 7 163 10.1186/s40425-019-0625-x 31248461
Melssen, M. M. et al. A multipeptide vaccine plus toll-like receptor agonists LPS or polyICLC in combination with incomplete Freund’s adjuvant in melanoma patients. J. Immunother. Cancer 7, 163 (2019).31248461 10.1186/s40425-019-0625-x
353. Bhatia S Intratumoral G100, a TLR4 agonist, induces antitumor immune responses and tumor regression in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2019 25 1185 1195 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0469 30093453
Bhatia, S. et al. Intratumoral G100, a TLR4 agonist, induces antitumor immune responses and tumor regression in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 1185–1195 (2019).30093453 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0469
354. Ferris RL Effect of adding Motolimod to Standard combination Chemotherapy and Cetuximab treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: the Active8 randomized clinical trial JAMA Oncol. 2018 4 1583 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.1888 29931076
Ferris, R. L. et al. Effect of adding Motolimod to Standard combination Chemotherapy and Cetuximab treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: the Active8 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 4, 1583 (2018).29931076 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.1888
355. Kjellberg RN Sweet WH Preston WM Koehler AM The Bragg peak of a proton beam in intracranial therapy of tumors Trans. Am. Neurol. Assoc. 1962 87 216 218 14033249
Kjellberg, R. N., Sweet, W. H., Preston, W. M. & Koehler, A. M. The Bragg peak of a proton beam in intracranial therapy of tumors. Trans. Am. Neurol. Assoc. 87, 216–218 (1962).14033249
356. Lomax AJ A treatment planning inter-comparison of proton and intensity modulated photon radiotherapy Radiother. Oncol. 1999 51 257 271 10.1016/S0167-8140(99)00036-5 10435821
Lomax, A. J. et al. A treatment planning inter-comparison of proton and intensity modulated photon radiotherapy. Radiother. Oncol. 51, 257–271 (1999).10435821 10.1016/S0167-8140(99)00036-5
357. Halperin EC Particle therapy and treatment of cancer Lancet Oncol. 2006 7 676 685 10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70795-1 16887485
Halperin, E. C. Particle therapy and treatment of cancer. Lancet Oncol. 7, 676–685 (2006).16887485 10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70795-1
358. Slater JM The proton treatment center at Loma Linda University Medical Center: Rationale for and description of its development Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 1992 22 383 389 10.1016/0360-3016(92)90058-P
Slater, J. M. et al. The proton treatment center at Loma Linda University Medical Center: Rationale for and description of its development. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 22, 383–389 (1992).10.1016/0360-3016(92)90058-P
359. Schulz-Ertner D Tsujii H Particle radiation therapy using proton and heavier ion beams J. Clin. Oncol. 2007 25 953 964 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.7816 17350944
Schulz-Ertner, D. & Tsujii, H. Particle radiation therapy using proton and heavier ion beams. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 953–964 (2007).17350944 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.7816
360. Eekers DBP Benefit of particle therapy in re-irradiation of head and neck patients. Results of a multicentric in silico ROCOCO trial Radiother. Oncol. 2016 121 387 394 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.08.020 27639891
Eekers, D. B. P. et al. Benefit of particle therapy in re-irradiation of head and neck patients. Results of a multicentric in silico ROCOCO trial. Radiother. Oncol. 121, 387–394 (2016).27639891 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.08.020
361. Waddle MR Survival after proton and photon radiation therapy in patients with head and neck cancers: A study of the national cancer database Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 2018 100 1330 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.12.063
Waddle, M. R. et al. Survival after proton and photon radiation therapy in patients with head and neck cancers: A study of the national cancer database. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 100, 1330 (2018).10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.12.063
362. Lee A Evaluation of Proton therapy reirradiation for patients with recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma JAMA Netw. Open 2023 6 e2250607 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.50607 36689229
Lee, A. et al. Evaluation of Proton therapy reirradiation for patients with recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA Netw. Open 6, e2250607 (2023).36689229 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.50607
363. Mizoe J Results of carbon ion radiotherapy for head and neck cancer Radiother. Oncol. 2012 103 32 37 10.1016/j.radonc.2011.12.013 22321201
Mizoe, J. et al. Results of carbon ion radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Radiother. Oncol. 103, 32–37 (2012).22321201 10.1016/j.radonc.2011.12.013
364. Schulz-Ertner D Results of carbon ion radiotherapy in 152 patients Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 2004 58 631 640 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.09.041
Schulz-Ertner, D. et al. Results of carbon ion radiotherapy in 152 patients. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 58, 631–640 (2004).10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.09.041
365. Chang JY Proton Beam Radiotherapy and concurrent chemotherapy for unresectable Stage III non–small cell lung cancer: final results of a Phase 2 study JAMA Oncol. 2017 3 e172032 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.2032 28727865
Chang, J. Y. et al. Proton Beam Radiotherapy and concurrent chemotherapy for unresectable Stage III non–small cell lung cancer: final results of a Phase 2 study. JAMA Oncol. 3, e172032 (2017).28727865 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.2032
366. Gjyshi O Toxicity and survival after intensity-modulated proton therapy versus passive scattering proton therapy for NSCLC J. Thorac. Oncol. 2021 16 269 277 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.10.013 33198942
Gjyshi, O. et al. Toxicity and survival after intensity-modulated proton therapy versus passive scattering proton therapy for NSCLC. J. Thorac. Oncol. 16, 269–277 (2021).33198942 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.10.013
367. Liao Z Bayesian adaptive randomization trial of passive scattering proton therapy and intensity-modulated photon radiotherapy for locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 2018 36 1813 1822 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.0720 29293386
Liao, Z. et al. Bayesian adaptive randomization trial of passive scattering proton therapy and intensity-modulated photon radiotherapy for locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 1813–1822 (2018).29293386 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.0720
368. Karube M Single-fraction carbon-ion radiation therapy for patients 80 years of age and older with Stage I non-small cell lung cancer Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 2016 95 542 548 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.11.034
Karube, M. et al. Single-fraction carbon-ion radiation therapy for patients 80 years of age and older with Stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 95, 542–548 (2016).10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.11.034
369. Yamamoto N A dose escalation clinical trial of single-fraction carbon ion radiotherapy for peripheral Stage I non–small cell lung cancer J. Thorac. Oncol. 2017 12 673 680 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.12.012 28007628
Yamamoto, N. et al. A dose escalation clinical trial of single-fraction carbon ion radiotherapy for peripheral Stage I non–small cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 12, 673–680 (2017).28007628 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.12.012
370. Goldin GH Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, proton therapy, or conformal radiation therapy and morbidity and disease control in localized prostate cancer JAMA 2012 307 1611 10.1001/jama.2012.460 22511689
Goldin, G. H. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, proton therapy, or conformal radiation therapy and morbidity and disease control in localized prostate cancer. JAMA 307, 1611 (2012).22511689 10.1001/jama.2012.460
371. Moteabbed M A prospective comparison of the effects of interfractional variations on proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 2016 95 444 453 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.12.366
Moteabbed, M. et al. A prospective comparison of the effects of interfractional variations on proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 95, 444–453 (2016).10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.12.366
372. Eichkorn T Results of a prospective randomized trial on long-term effectiveness of protons and carbon ions in prostate cancer: LEM I and α/β = 2 Gy overestimates the RBE Radiother. Oncol. 2022 173 223 230 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.06.006 35714806
Eichkorn, T. et al. Results of a prospective randomized trial on long-term effectiveness of protons and carbon ions in prostate cancer: LEM I and α/β = 2 Gy overestimates the RBE. Radiother. Oncol. 173, 223–230 (2022).35714806 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.06.006
373. Nomiya T A multi-institutional analysis of prospective studies of carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A report from the Japan Carbon ion Radiation Oncology Study Group (J-CROS) Radiother. Oncol. 2016 121 288 293 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.10.009 27836119
Nomiya, T. et al. A multi-institutional analysis of prospective studies of carbon ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A report from the Japan Carbon ion Radiation Oncology Study Group (J-CROS). Radiother. Oncol. 121, 288–293 (2016).27836119 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.10.009
374. Ackroyd R Kelty C Brown N Reed M The history of Photodetection and Photodynamic therapy Photochem. Photobiol. 2001 74 656 10.1562/0031-8655(2001)074<0656:THOPAP>2.0.CO;2 11723793
Ackroyd, R., Kelty, C., Brown, N. & Reed, M. The history of Photodetection and Photodynamic therapy. Photochem. Photobiol. 74, 656 (2001).11723793 10.1562/0031-8655(2001)074<0656:THOPAP>2.0.CO;2
375. Pérez-Hernández M Dissecting the molecular mechanism of apoptosis during photothermal therapy using gold Nanoprisms ACS Nano 2015 9 52 61 10.1021/nn505468v 25493329
Pérez-Hernández, M. et al. Dissecting the molecular mechanism of apoptosis during photothermal therapy using gold Nanoprisms. ACS Nano 9, 52–61 (2015).25493329 10.1021/nn505468v
376. Yamamoto N Homma S Sery TW Donoso LA Kenneth Hoober J Photodynamic immunopotentiation: in vitro activation of macrophages by treatment of mouse peritoneal cells with haematoporphyrin derivative and light Eur. J. Cancer Clin. Oncol. 1991 27 467 471 10.1016/0277-5379(91)90388-T
Yamamoto, N., Homma, S., Sery, T. W., Donoso, L. A. & Kenneth Hoober, J. Photodynamic immunopotentiation: in vitro activation of macrophages by treatment of mouse peritoneal cells with haematoporphyrin derivative and light. Eur. J. Cancer Clin. Oncol. 27, 467–471 (1991).10.1016/0277-5379(91)90388-T
377. Agarwal ML Larkin HE Zaidi SI Mukhtar H Oleinick NL Phospholipase activation triggers apoptosis in photosensitized mouse lymphoma cells Cancer Res. 1993 53 5897 5902 8261400
Agarwal, M. L., Larkin, H. E., Zaidi, S. I., Mukhtar, H. & Oleinick, N. L. Phospholipase activation triggers apoptosis in photosensitized mouse lymphoma cells. Cancer Res. 53, 5897–5902 (1993).8261400
378. Gollnick SO Vaughan L Henderson BW Generation of effective antitumor vaccines using photodynamic therapy Cancer Res 2002 62 1604 1608 11912128
Gollnick, S. O., Vaughan, L. & Henderson, B. W. Generation of effective antitumor vaccines using photodynamic therapy. Cancer Res 62, 1604–1608 (2002).11912128
379. Rastinehad AR Gold nanoshell-localized photothermal ablation of prostate tumors in a clinical pilot device study Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 2019 116 18590 18596 10.1073/pnas.1906929116 31451630
Rastinehad, A. R. et al. Gold nanoshell-localized photothermal ablation of prostate tumors in a clinical pilot device study. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 116, 18590–18596 (2019).31451630 10.1073/pnas.1906929116
380. Fisher C Photodynamic therapy for the treatment of vertebral metastases: A Phase I clinical trial Clin. Cancer Res. 2019 25 5766 5776 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-0673 31266832
Fisher, C. et al. Photodynamic therapy for the treatment of vertebral metastases: A Phase I clinical trial. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 5766–5776 (2019).31266832 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-0673
381. Chen B De Witte PA Photodynamic therapy efficacy and tissue distribution of hypericin in a mouse P388 lymphoma tumor model Cancer Lett. 2000 150 111 117 10.1016/S0304-3835(99)00381-X 10755394
Chen, B. & De Witte, P. A. Photodynamic therapy efficacy and tissue distribution of hypericin in a mouse P388 lymphoma tumor model. Cancer Lett. 150, 111–117 (2000).10755394 10.1016/S0304-3835(99)00381-X
382. Kim EJ Efficacy and safety of topical Hypericin Photodynamic Therapy for early-stage cutaneous T-cell Lymphoma (Mycosis Fungoides): The FLASH Phase 3 randomized clinical trial JAMA Dermatol. 2022 158 1031 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.2749 35857290
Kim, E. J. et al. Efficacy and safety of topical Hypericin Photodynamic Therapy for early-stage cutaneous T-cell Lymphoma (Mycosis Fungoides): The FLASH Phase 3 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 158, 1031 (2022).35857290 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.2749
383. Folkman J Angiogenesis Annu. Rev. Med. 2006 57 1 18 10.1146/annurev.med.57.121304.131306 16409133
Folkman, J. Angiogenesis. Annu. Rev. Med. 57, 1–18 (2006).16409133 10.1146/annurev.med.57.121304.131306
384. Potente M Gerhardt H Carmeliet P Basic and therapeutic aspects of angiogenesis Cell 2011 146 873 887 10.1016/j.cell.2011.08.039 21925313
Potente, M., Gerhardt, H. & Carmeliet, P. Basic and therapeutic aspects of angiogenesis. Cell 146, 873–887 (2011).21925313 10.1016/j.cell.2011.08.039
385. Apte RS Chen DS Ferrara N VEGF in signaling and disease: beyond discovery and development Cell 2019 176 1248 1264 10.1016/j.cell.2019.01.021 30849371
Apte, R. S., Chen, D. S. & Ferrara, N. VEGF in signaling and disease: beyond discovery and development. Cell 176, 1248–1264 (2019).30849371 10.1016/j.cell.2019.01.021
386. Dvorak HF How tumors make bad blood vessels and stroma Am. J. Pathol. 2003 162 1747 1757 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64309-X 12759232
Dvorak, H. F. How tumors make bad blood vessels and stroma. Am. J. Pathol. 162, 1747–1757 (2003).12759232 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64309-X
387. Ruch C Skiniotis G Steinmetz MO Walz T Ballmer-Hofer K Structure of a VEGF–VEGF receptor complex determined by electron microscopy Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2007 14 249 250 10.1038/nsmb1202 17293873
Ruch, C., Skiniotis, G., Steinmetz, M. O., Walz, T. & Ballmer-Hofer, K. Structure of a VEGF–VEGF receptor complex determined by electron microscopy. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 249–250 (2007).17293873 10.1038/nsmb1202
388. Kawasaki K Ras signaling directs endothelial specification of VEGFR2+ vascular progenitor cells J. Cell Biol. 2008 181 131 141 10.1083/jcb.200709127 18391074
Kawasaki, K. et al. Ras signaling directs endothelial specification of VEGFR2+ vascular progenitor cells. J. Cell Biol. 181, 131–141 (2008).18391074 10.1083/jcb.200709127
389. Takahashi T Ueno H Shibuya M VEGF activates protein kinase C-dependent, but Ras-independent Raf-MEK-MAP kinase pathway for DNA synthesis in primary endothelial cells Oncogene 1999 18 2221 2230 10.1038/sj.onc.1202527 10327068
Takahashi, T., Ueno, H. & Shibuya, M. VEGF activates protein kinase C-dependent, but Ras-independent Raf-MEK-MAP kinase pathway for DNA synthesis in primary endothelial cells. Oncogene 18, 2221–2230 (1999).10327068 10.1038/sj.onc.1202527
390. Ruan G-X Kazlauskas A Axl is essential for VEGF-A-dependent activation of PI3K/Akt: VEGF-dependent activation of PI3K/Akt requires Axl EMBO J. 2012 31 1692 1703 10.1038/emboj.2012.21 22327215
Ruan, G.-X. & Kazlauskas, A. Axl is essential for VEGF-A-dependent activation of PI3K/Akt: VEGF-dependent activation of PI3K/Akt requires Axl. EMBO J. 31, 1692–1703 (2012).22327215 10.1038/emboj.2012.21
391. Gabrilovich DI Production of vascular endothelial growth factor by human tumors inhibits the functional maturation of dendritic cells Nat. Med. 1996 2 1096 1103 10.1038/nm1096-1096 8837607
Gabrilovich, D. I. et al. Production of vascular endothelial growth factor by human tumors inhibits the functional maturation of dendritic cells. Nat. Med. 2, 1096–1103 (1996).8837607 10.1038/nm1096-1096
392. Terme M VEGFA-VEGFR pathway blockade inhibits tumor-induced regulatory T-cell proliferation in colorectal cancer Cancer Res 2013 73 539 549 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-2325 23108136
Terme, M. et al. VEGFA-VEGFR pathway blockade inhibits tumor-induced regulatory T-cell proliferation in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 73, 539–549 (2013).23108136 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-2325
393. Voron T VEGF-A modulates expression of inhibitory checkpoints on CD8+ T cells in tumors J. Exp. Med. 2015 212 139 148 10.1084/jem.20140559 25601652
Voron, T. et al. VEGF-A modulates expression of inhibitory checkpoints on CD8+ T cells in tumors. J. Exp. Med. 212, 139–148 (2015).25601652 10.1084/jem.20140559
394. Sini P The antitumor and antiangiogenic activity of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibition is potentiated by ErbB1 blockade Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 4521 4532 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1954 15958638
Sini, P. et al. The antitumor and antiangiogenic activity of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibition is potentiated by ErbB1 blockade. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 4521–4532 (2005).15958638 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1954
395. Fons P Tumor vasculature is regulated by FGF/FGFR signaling‐mediated angiogenesis and bone marrow‐derived cell recruitment: this mechanism is inhibited by SSR128129E, the first allosteric antagonist of FGFRs J. Cell. Physiol. 2015 230 43 51 10.1002/jcp.24656 24760775
Fons, P. et al. Tumor vasculature is regulated by FGF/FGFR signaling‐mediated angiogenesis and bone marrow‐derived cell recruitment: this mechanism is inhibited by SSR128129E, the first allosteric antagonist of FGFRs. J. Cell. Physiol. 230, 43–51 (2015).24760775 10.1002/jcp.24656
396. Hurwitz H Bevacizumab plus Irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2004 350 2335 2342 10.1056/NEJMoa032691 15175435
Hurwitz, H. et al. Bevacizumab plus Irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 350, 2335–2342 (2004).15175435 10.1056/NEJMoa032691
397. Ray-Coquard I Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2019 381 2416 2428 10.1056/NEJMoa1911361 31851799
Ray-Coquard, I. et al. Olaparib plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Maintenance in Ovarian Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 381, 2416–2428 (2019).31851799 10.1056/NEJMoa1911361
398. Wick W Lomustine and Bevacizumab in Progressive Glioblastoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2017 377 1954 1963 10.1056/NEJMoa1707358 29141164
Wick, W. et al. Lomustine and Bevacizumab in Progressive Glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 1954–1963 (2017).29141164 10.1056/NEJMoa1707358
399. McDermott DF Clinical activity and molecular correlates of response to atezolizumab alone or in combination with bevacizumab versus sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma Nat. Med. 2018 24 749 757 10.1038/s41591-018-0053-3 29867230
McDermott, D. F. et al. Clinical activity and molecular correlates of response to atezolizumab alone or in combination with bevacizumab versus sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma. Nat. Med. 24, 749–757 (2018).29867230 10.1038/s41591-018-0053-3
400. Wilke H Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 1224 1235 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70420-6 25240821
Wilke, H. et al. Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 15, 1224–1235 (2014).25240821 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70420-6
401. Garon EB Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial Lancet 2014 384 665 673 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60845-X 24933332
Garon, E. B. et al. Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet 384, 665–673 (2014).24933332 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60845-X
402. Tabernero J Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study Lancet Oncol. 2015 16 499 508 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70127-0 25877855
Tabernero, J. et al. Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 16, 499–508 (2015).25877855 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70127-0
403. Zhu AX Ramucirumab versus placebo as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib (REACH): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol. 2015 16 859 870 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00050-9 26095784
Zhu, A. X. et al. Ramucirumab versus placebo as second-line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma following first-line therapy with sorafenib (REACH): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 16, 859–870 (2015).26095784 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00050-9
404. Escudier B Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2007 356 125 134 10.1056/NEJMoa060655 17215530
Escudier, B. et al. Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 125–134 (2007).17215530 10.1056/NEJMoa060655
405. Llovet JM Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2008 359 378 390 10.1056/NEJMoa0708857 18650514
Llovet, J. M. et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 359, 378–390 (2008).18650514 10.1056/NEJMoa0708857
406. Brose MS Sorafenib in radioactive iodine-refractory, locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial Lancet 2014 384 319 328 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60421-9 24768112
Brose, M. S. et al. Sorafenib in radioactive iodine-refractory, locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet 384, 319–328 (2014).24768112 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60421-9
407. Li J Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial of Apatinib in patients with chemotherapy-refractory advanced or metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction J. Clin. Oncol. 2016 34 1448 1454 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.5995 26884585
Li, J. et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial of Apatinib in patients with chemotherapy-refractory advanced or metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 1448–1454 (2016).26884585 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.5995
408. Kudo M Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial Lancet 2018 391 1163 1173 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30207-1 29433850
Kudo, M. et al. Lenvatinib versus sorafenib in first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 391, 1163–1173 (2018).29433850 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30207-1
409. Motzer RJ Sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma JAMA 2006 295 2516 10.1001/jama.295.21.2516 16757724
Motzer, R. J. et al. Sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. JAMA 295, 2516 (2006).16757724 10.1001/jama.295.21.2516
410. Reck M Docetaxel plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 1): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 143 155 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70586-2 24411639
Reck, M. et al. Docetaxel plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 1): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 15, 143–155 (2014).24411639 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70586-2
411. Zhang X Efficacy and Safety of Apatinib Plus Vinorelbine in patients with wild-type advanced non–small cell lung cancer after second-line treatment failure: a nonrandomized clinical trial JAMA Netw. Open 2020 3 e201226 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1226 32191330
Zhang, X. et al. Efficacy and Safety of Apatinib Plus Vinorelbine in patients with wild-type advanced non–small cell lung cancer after second-line treatment failure: a nonrandomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw. Open 3, e201226 (2020).32191330 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1226
412. Lu S Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter Phase II Study of Fruquintinib after two prior Chemotherapy Regimens in Chinese patients with advanced nonsquamous non‒small-cell lung cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 2018 36 1207 1217 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.7145 29528793
Lu, S. et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter Phase II Study of Fruquintinib after two prior Chemotherapy Regimens in Chinese patients with advanced nonsquamous non‒small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 1207–1217 (2018).29528793 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.7145
413. Shackelford DB Shaw RJ The LKB1–AMPK pathway: metabolism and growth control in tumour suppression Nat. Rev. Cancer 2009 9 563 575 10.1038/nrc2676 19629071
Shackelford, D. B. & Shaw, R. J. The LKB1–AMPK pathway: metabolism and growth control in tumour suppression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 9, 563–575 (2009).19629071 10.1038/nrc2676
414. Bonanno L LKB1 Expression correlates with increased survival in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy and Bevacizumab Clin. Cancer Res. 2017 23 3316 3324 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2410 28119362
Bonanno, L. et al. LKB1 Expression correlates with increased survival in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy and Bevacizumab. Clin. Cancer Res. 23, 3316–3324 (2017).28119362 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2410
415. Cascone T Upregulated stromal EGFR and vascular remodeling in mouse xenograft models of angiogenesis inhibitor–resistant human lung adenocarcinoma J. Clin. Invest. 2011 121 1313 1328 10.1172/JCI42405 21436589
Cascone, T. et al. Upregulated stromal EGFR and vascular remodeling in mouse xenograft models of angiogenesis inhibitor–resistant human lung adenocarcinoma. J. Clin. Invest. 121, 1313–1328 (2011).21436589 10.1172/JCI42405
416. He H Liu L Morin EE Liu M Schwendeman A Survey of clinical translation of cancer nanomedicines-lessons learned from successes and failures Acc. Chem. Res. 2019 52 2445 2461 10.1021/acs.accounts.9b00228 31424909
He, H., Liu, L., Morin, E. E., Liu, M. & Schwendeman, A. Survey of clinical translation of cancer nanomedicines-lessons learned from successes and failures. Acc. Chem. Res. 52, 2445–2461 (2019).31424909 10.1021/acs.accounts.9b00228
417. Zhang Z Functionalization and higher-order organization of liposomes with DNA nanostructures Nat. Commun. 2023 14 5256 10.1038/s41467-023-41013-2 37644062
Zhang, Z. et al. Functionalization and higher-order organization of liposomes with DNA nanostructures. Nat. Commun. 14, 5256 (2023).37644062 10.1038/s41467-023-41013-2
418. Wang W Resveratrol-Loaded TPGS-Resveratrol-solid lipid nanoparticles for multidrug-resistant therapy of breast cancer: in vivo and in vitro study Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2021 9 762489 10.3389/fbioe.2021.762489 34950642
Wang, W. et al. Resveratrol-Loaded TPGS-Resveratrol-solid lipid nanoparticles for multidrug-resistant therapy of breast cancer: in vivo and in vitro study. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9, 762489 (2021).34950642 10.3389/fbioe.2021.762489
419. Zheng G Zheng M Yang B Fu H Li Y Improving breast cancer therapy using doxorubicin loaded solid lipid nanoparticles: Synthesis of a novel arginine-glycine-aspartic tripeptide conjugated, pH sensitive lipid and evaluation of the nanomedicine in vitro and in vivo Biomed. Pharmacother. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2019 116 109006 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109006 31152925
Zheng, G., Zheng, M., Yang, B., Fu, H. & Li, Y. Improving breast cancer therapy using doxorubicin loaded solid lipid nanoparticles: Synthesis of a novel arginine-glycine-aspartic tripeptide conjugated, pH sensitive lipid and evaluation of the nanomedicine in vitro and in vivo. Biomed. Pharmacother. Biomed. Pharmacother. 116, 109006 (2019).31152925 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109006
420. Rayamajhi S Nguyen TDT Marasini R Aryal S Macrophage-derived exosome-mimetic hybrid vesicles for tumor targeted drug delivery Acta Biomater. 2019 94 482 494 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.05.054 31129363
Rayamajhi, S., Nguyen, T. D. T., Marasini, R. & Aryal, S. Macrophage-derived exosome-mimetic hybrid vesicles for tumor targeted drug delivery. Acta Biomater. 94, 482–494 (2019).31129363 10.1016/j.actbio.2019.05.054
421. Basti H Catechol derivatives-coated Fe3O4 and gamma-Fe2O3 nanoparticles as potential MRI contrast agents J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2010 341 248 254 10.1016/j.jcis.2009.09.043 19853857
Basti, H. et al. Catechol derivatives-coated Fe3O4 and gamma-Fe2O3 nanoparticles as potential MRI contrast agents. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 341, 248–254 (2010).19853857 10.1016/j.jcis.2009.09.043
422. Hwang C Choi M-H Kim H-E Jeong S-H Park J-U Reactive oxygen species-generating hydrogel platform for enhanced antibacterial therapy NPG Asia Mater. 2022 14 1 15
Hwang, C., Choi, M.-H., Kim, H.-E., Jeong, S.-H. & Park, J.-U. Reactive oxygen species-generating hydrogel platform for enhanced antibacterial therapy. NPG Asia Mater. 14, 1–15 (2022).
423. Wang Y Zhang Q Wang B Li P Liu P LiCl treatment induces programmed cell death of Schwannoma cells through AKT- and MTOR-mediated Necroptosis Neurochem. Res. 2017 42 2363 2371 10.1007/s11064-017-2256-2 28397069
Wang, Y., Zhang, Q., Wang, B., Li, P. & Liu, P. LiCl treatment induces programmed cell death of Schwannoma cells through AKT- and MTOR-mediated Necroptosis. Neurochem. Res. 42, 2363–2371 (2017).28397069 10.1007/s11064-017-2256-2
424. Hou L Hybrid-membrane-decorated Prussian blue for effective cancer immunotherapy via tumor-associated macrophages polarization and Hypoxia relief Adv. Mater. Deerfield Beach Fla 2022 34 e2200389 10.1002/adma.202200389
Hou, L. et al. Hybrid-membrane-decorated Prussian blue for effective cancer immunotherapy via tumor-associated macrophages polarization and Hypoxia relief. Adv. Mater. Deerfield Beach Fla 34, e2200389 (2022).10.1002/adma.202200389
425. Wang N Liang H Zen K Molecular mechanisms that influence the macrophage M1–M2 polarization balance Front. Immunol. 2014 5 614 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00614 25506346
Wang, N., Liang, H. & Zen, K. Molecular mechanisms that influence the macrophage M1–M2 polarization balance. Front. Immunol. 5, 614 (2014).25506346 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00614
426. Chaudhari D Exploring paclitaxel-loaded adenosine-conjugated PEGylated PLGA nanoparticles for targeting triple-negative breast cancer Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2023 13 1074 1087 10.1007/s13346-022-01273-9 36528709
Chaudhari, D. et al. Exploring paclitaxel-loaded adenosine-conjugated PEGylated PLGA nanoparticles for targeting triple-negative breast cancer. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 13, 1074–1087 (2023).36528709 10.1007/s13346-022-01273-9
427. Lee CK Anti-PD-L1 F(ab) conjugated PEG-PLGA nanoparticle enhances immune checkpoint therapy Nanotheranostics 2022 6 243 255 10.7150/ntno.65544 35145835
Lee, C. K. et al. Anti-PD-L1 F(ab) conjugated PEG-PLGA nanoparticle enhances immune checkpoint therapy. Nanotheranostics 6, 243–255 (2022).35145835 10.7150/ntno.65544
428. Chang C-S Anti-cancer effect of fenbendazole-incorporated PLGA nanoparticles in ovarian cancer J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2023 34 e58 10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e58 37170725
Chang, C.-S. et al. Anti-cancer effect of fenbendazole-incorporated PLGA nanoparticles in ovarian cancer. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 34, e58 (2023).37170725 10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e58
429. Cruz-Nova P Chemo-radiotherapy with 177Lu-PLGA(RGF)-CXCR4L for the targeted treatment of colorectal cancer Front. Med. 2023 10 1191315 10.3389/fmed.2023.1191315
Cruz-Nova, P. et al. Chemo-radiotherapy with 177Lu-PLGA(RGF)-CXCR4L for the targeted treatment of colorectal cancer. Front. Med. 10, 1191315 (2023).10.3389/fmed.2023.1191315
430. Kim GT PLAG co-treatment increases the anticancer effect of Adriamycin and cyclophosphamide in a triple-negative breast cancer xenograft mouse model Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2022 619 110 116 10.1016/j.bbrc.2022.06.051 35753218
Kim, G. T. et al. PLAG co-treatment increases the anticancer effect of Adriamycin and cyclophosphamide in a triple-negative breast cancer xenograft mouse model. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 619, 110–116 (2022).35753218 10.1016/j.bbrc.2022.06.051
431. Dubey SK Recent advances of dendrimers as multifunctional nano-carriers to combat breast cancer Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2021 164 105890 10.1016/j.ejps.2021.105890 34087355
Dubey, S. K. et al. Recent advances of dendrimers as multifunctional nano-carriers to combat breast cancer. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 164, 105890 (2021).34087355 10.1016/j.ejps.2021.105890
432. Huynh, K.-H. et al. Bioapplications of Nanomaterials. in Nanotechnology for Bioapplications (ed. Jun, B.-H.) 235–255 (Springer, Singapore). 10.1007/978-981-33-6158-4_10 (2021).
433. Novartis Tafinlar + Mekinist approved by FDA for pediatric patients with BRAF V600E low-grade glioma, the most common pediatric brain cancer. Novartis https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis-tafinlar-mekinist-approved-fda-pediatric-patients-braf-v600e-low-grade-glioma-most-common-pediatric-brain-cancer.
434. Shah MA Zolbetuximab plus CAPOX in CLDN18.2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: the randomized, phase 3 GLOW trial Nat. Med. 2023 29 2133 2141 10.1038/s41591-023-02465-7 37524953
Shah, M. A. et al. Zolbetuximab plus CAPOX in CLDN18.2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: the randomized, phase 3 GLOW trial. Nat. Med. 29, 2133–2141 (2023).37524953 10.1038/s41591-023-02465-7
435. FDA approves talazoparib with enzalutamide for HRR gene-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FDA https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/fda-approves-talazoparib-enzalutamide-hrr-gene-mutated-metastatic-castration-resistant-prostate (2023).
436. Mai H-Q Toripalimab Plus chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: The JUPITER-02 randomized clinical trial JAMA 2023 330 1961 1970 10.1001/jama.2023.20181 38015220
Mai, H.-Q. et al. Toripalimab Plus chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: The JUPITER-02 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 330, 1961–1970 (2023).38015220 10.1001/jama.2023.20181
437. Planchard D Osimertinib with or without Chemotherapy in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC N. Engl. J. Med. 2023 389 1935 1948 10.1056/NEJMoa2306434 37937763
Planchard, D. et al. Osimertinib with or without Chemotherapy in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. N. Engl. J. Med. 389, 1935–1948 (2023).37937763 10.1056/NEJMoa2306434
438. Colombo Nicoletta Pembrolizumab for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2021 385 1856 1867 10.1056/NEJMoa2112435 34534429
Colombo, Nicoletta et al. Pembrolizumab for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 1856–1867 (2021).34534429 10.1056/NEJMoa2112435
439. Motzer Robert J Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2018 378 1277 1290 10.1056/NEJMoa1712126 29562145
Motzer Robert, J. et al. Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 1277–1290 (2018).29562145 10.1056/NEJMoa1712126
440. Rini Brian I Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2019 380 1116 1127 10.1056/NEJMoa1816714 30779529
Rini Brian, I. et al. Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 380, 1116–1127 (2019).30779529 10.1056/NEJMoa1816714
441. Motzer Robert J Avelumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2019 380 1103 1115 10.1056/NEJMoa1816047 30779531
Motzer Robert, J. et al. Avelumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 380, 1103–1115 (2019).30779531 10.1056/NEJMoa1816047
442. Choueiri Toni K Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2021 384 829 841 10.1056/NEJMoa2026982 33657295
Choueiri Toni, K. et al. Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 829–841 (2021).33657295 10.1056/NEJMoa2026982
443. Albiges L Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib as first-line therapy for advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-B61): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial Lancet Oncol. 2023 24 881 891 10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00276-0 37451291
Albiges, L. et al. Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib as first-line therapy for advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-B61): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 24, 881–891 (2023).37451291 10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00276-0
444. Tawbi Hussein A Relatlimab and Nivolumab versus Nivolumab in Untreated Advanced Melanoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2022 386 24 34 10.1056/NEJMoa2109970 34986285
Tawbi Hussein, A. et al. Relatlimab and Nivolumab versus Nivolumab in Untreated Advanced Melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 24–34 (2022).34986285 10.1056/NEJMoa2109970
445. Zhang G GD2 CAR-T cells in combination with Nivolumab exhibit enhanced antitumor efficacy Transl. Oncol. 2023 32 101663 10.1016/j.tranon.2023.101663 36966611
Zhang, G. et al. GD2 CAR-T cells in combination with Nivolumab exhibit enhanced antitumor efficacy. Transl. Oncol. 32, 101663 (2023).36966611 10.1016/j.tranon.2023.101663
446. Gong, L. et al. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells promote regulatory T cell development and suppressive activity via CD70-CD27 interaction. Nat. Commun. 14, 1912 (2023).
447. Hashimoto, M. et al. PD-1 combination therapy with IL-2 modifies CD8+ T cell exhaustion program. Nature 610, 173–181 (2022).
448. Cataldo Vince D Gibbons Don L Pérez-Soler R Quintás-Cardama A Treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer with Erlotinib or Gefitinib N. Engl. J. Med. 2011 364 947 955 10.1056/NEJMct0807960 21388312
Cataldo Vince, D., Gibbons Don, L., Pérez-Soler, R. & Quintás-Cardama, A. Treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer with Erlotinib or Gefitinib. N. Engl. J. Med. 364, 947–955 (2011).21388312 10.1056/NEJMct0807960
449. Jóri B The combined therapy of Cabozantinib, Crizotinib, and Osimertinib in a lung cancer patient with acquired MET amplification and resistance mutations Curr. Oncol. 2023 30 8805 8814 10.3390/curroncol30100635 37887535
Jóri, B. et al. The combined therapy of Cabozantinib, Crizotinib, and Osimertinib in a lung cancer patient with acquired MET amplification and resistance mutations. Curr. Oncol. 30, 8805–8814 (2023).37887535 10.3390/curroncol30100635
450. von Minckwitz G Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in early HER2-positive breast cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2017 377 122 131 10.1056/NEJMoa1703643 28581356
von Minckwitz, G. et al. Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in early HER2-positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 122–131 (2017).28581356 10.1056/NEJMoa1703643
451. Spriggs David R Longo Dan L PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer treatment N. Engl. J. Med. 2016 375 2197 2198 10.1056/NEJMe1612843 27959768
Spriggs David, R. & Longo Dan, L. PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer treatment. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 2197–2198 (2016).27959768 10.1056/NEJMe1612843
452. Turner Nicholas C Palbociclib in hormone-receptor–positive advanced breast cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2015 373 209 219 10.1056/NEJMoa1505270 26030518
Turner Nicholas, C. et al. Palbociclib in hormone-receptor–positive advanced breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 373, 209–219 (2015).26030518 10.1056/NEJMoa1505270
453. Montesinos Pau Ivosidenib and Azacitidine in IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia N. Engl. J. Med. 2022 386 1519 1531 10.1056/NEJMoa2117344 35443108
Montesinos, Pau et al. Ivosidenib and Azacitidine in IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 1519–1531 (2022).35443108 10.1056/NEJMoa2117344
454. Liu, B. et al. Targeting TROY-mediated P85a/AKT/TBX3 signaling attenuates tumor stemness and elevates treatment response in hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 41, 1–19 (2022).
455. Jiang Y-Y TP63, SOX2, and KLF5 establish a core regulatory circuitry that controls epigenetic and transcription patterns in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines Gastroenterology 2020 159 1311 1327.e19 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.06.050 32619460
Jiang, Y.-Y. et al. TP63, SOX2, and KLF5 establish a core regulatory circuitry that controls epigenetic and transcription patterns in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cell lines. Gastroenterology 159, 1311–1327.e19 (2020).32619460 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.06.050
456. Zheng C Donafenib and GSK-J4 synergistically induce ferroptosis in liver cancer by upregulating HMOX1 Expression Adv. Sci. Weinh. Baden.-Wurtt. Ger. 2023 10 e2206798
Zheng, C. et al. Donafenib and GSK-J4 synergistically induce ferroptosis in liver cancer by upregulating HMOX1 Expression. Adv. Sci. Weinh. Baden.-Wurtt. Ger. 10, e2206798 (2023).
457. Xu Z Efficacy and safety of lapatinib and trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials BMJ Open 2017 7 e013053 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013053 28289045
Xu, Z. et al. Efficacy and safety of lapatinib and trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open 7, e013053 (2017).28289045 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013053
458. Yaeger, R. et al. Adagrasib with or without Cetuximab in Colorectal Cancer with Mutated KRAS G12C. N. Engl. J. Med. 388, 44–54 (2023).
459. Novartis Pharmaceuticals. A Randomised, Multi-Centre, Open-Label, Phase III Study of Adjuvant Lapatinib, Trastuzumab, Their Sequence and Their Combination in Patients With HER2/ErbB2 Positive Primary Breast Cancer. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00490139 (2021).
460. Socinski MA Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC N. Engl. J. Med. 2018 378 2288 2301 10.1056/NEJMoa1716948 29863955
Socinski, M. A. et al. Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 2288–2301 (2018).29863955 10.1056/NEJMoa1716948
461. Loupakis F Initial Therapy with FOLFOXIRI and Bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 2014 371 1609 1618 10.1056/NEJMoa1403108 25337750
Loupakis, F. et al. Initial Therapy with FOLFOXIRI and Bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 1609–1618 (2014).25337750 10.1056/NEJMoa1403108
462. Hosaka K KRAS mutation-driven angiopoietin 2 bestows anti-VEGF resistance in epithelial carcinomas Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2023 120 e2303740120 10.1073/pnas.2303740120 37428914
Hosaka, K. et al. KRAS mutation-driven angiopoietin 2 bestows anti-VEGF resistance in epithelial carcinomas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2303740120 (2023).37428914 10.1073/pnas.2303740120
463. Srinivasan R Results from a phase II study of bevacizumab and erlotinib in subjects with advanced hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC) or sporadic papillary renal cell cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 2020 38 5004 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.5004
Srinivasan, R. et al. Results from a phase II study of bevacizumab and erlotinib in subjects with advanced hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC) or sporadic papillary renal cell cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 38, 5004 (2020). 5004.10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.5004
464. Prager, G. W. et al. Trifluridine-Tipiracil and Bevacizumab in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 388, 1657–1667 (2023).
465. Friedlander M Pamiparib in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours: results from the dose-escalation stage of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1a/b trial Lancet Oncol. 2019 20 1306 1315 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30396-1 31378459
Friedlander, M. et al. Pamiparib in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours: results from the dose-escalation stage of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1a/b trial. Lancet Oncol. 20, 1306–1315 (2019).31378459 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30396-1
466. Kanjee, Z., Crowe, B. & Rodman, A. Accuracy of a Generative Artificial Intelligence Model in a Complex Diagnostic Challenge. JAMA 330, 78–80 (2023).
467. Liberti MV Locasale JW The Warburg effect: How does it benefit cancer cells? Trends Biochem. Sci. 2016 41 211 10.1016/j.tibs.2015.12.001 26778478
Liberti, M. V. & Locasale, J. W. The Warburg effect: How does it benefit cancer cells? Trends Biochem. Sci. 41, 211 (2016).26778478 10.1016/j.tibs.2015.12.001
468. Xu D The gluconeogenic enzyme PCK1 phosphorylates INSIG1/2 for lipogenesis Nature 2020 580 530 535 10.1038/s41586-020-2183-2 32322062
Xu, D. et al. The gluconeogenic enzyme PCK1 phosphorylates INSIG1/2 for lipogenesis. Nature 580, 530–535 (2020).32322062 10.1038/s41586-020-2183-2
469. Chen J Li G Sun D Li H Chen L Research progress of hexokinase 2 in inflammatory-related diseases and its inhibitors Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2024 264 115986 10.1016/j.ejmech.2023.115986 38011767
Chen, J., Li, G., Sun, D., Li, H. & Chen, L. Research progress of hexokinase 2 in inflammatory-related diseases and its inhibitors. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 264, 115986 (2024).38011767 10.1016/j.ejmech.2023.115986
470. Fu K Streptococcus anginosus promotes gastric inflammation, atrophy, and tumorigenesis in mice Cell 2024 187 882 896.e17 10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.004 38295787
Fu, K. et al. Streptococcus anginosus promotes gastric inflammation, atrophy, and tumorigenesis in mice. Cell 187, 882–896.e17 (2024).38295787 10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.004
471. Ling AL Clinical trial links oncolytic immunoactivation to survival in glioblastoma Nature 2023 623 157 166 10.1038/s41586-023-06623-2 37853118
Ling, A. L. et al. Clinical trial links oncolytic immunoactivation to survival in glioblastoma. Nature 623, 157–166 (2023).37853118 10.1038/s41586-023-06623-2
472. Cui C OrienX010, an oncolytic virus, in patients with unresectable stage IIIC–IV melanoma: a phase Ib study J. Immunother. Cancer 2022 10 e004307 10.1136/jitc-2021-004307 35383116
Cui, C. et al. OrienX010, an oncolytic virus, in patients with unresectable stage IIIC–IV melanoma: a phase Ib study. J. Immunother. Cancer 10, e004307 (2022).35383116 10.1136/jitc-2021-004307
473. Gállego Pérez-Larraya J Oncolytic DNX-2401 virus for pediatric diffuse intrinsic Pontine Glioma N. Engl. J. Med. 2022 386 2471 2481 10.1056/NEJMoa2202028 35767439
Gállego Pérez-Larraya, J. et al. Oncolytic DNX-2401 virus for pediatric diffuse intrinsic Pontine Glioma. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 2471–2481 (2022).35767439 10.1056/NEJMoa2202028
474. Bazan-Peregrino M VCN-01 disrupts pancreatic cancer stroma and exerts antitumor effects J. Immunother. Cancer 2021 9 e003254 10.1136/jitc-2021-003254 35149591
Bazan-Peregrino, M. et al. VCN-01 disrupts pancreatic cancer stroma and exerts antitumor effects. J. Immunother. Cancer 9, e003254 (2021).35149591 10.1136/jitc-2021-003254
475. Heo J Safety and dose escalation of the targeted oncolytic adenovirus OBP-301 for refractory advanced liver cancer: Phase I clinical trial Mol. Ther. 2023 31 2077 2088 10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.04.006 37060176
Heo, J. et al. Safety and dose escalation of the targeted oncolytic adenovirus OBP-301 for refractory advanced liver cancer: Phase I clinical trial. Mol. Ther. 31, 2077–2088 (2023).37060176 10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.04.006
476. Shirakawa Y Phase I dose-escalation study of endoscopic intratumoral injection of OBP-301 (Telomelysin) with radiotherapy in oesophageal cancer patients unfit for standard treatments Eur. J. Cancer 2021 153 98 108 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.04.043 34153720
Shirakawa, Y. et al. Phase I dose-escalation study of endoscopic intratumoral injection of OBP-301 (Telomelysin) with radiotherapy in oesophageal cancer patients unfit for standard treatments. Eur. J. Cancer 153, 98–108 (2021).34153720 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.04.043
477. Nemunaitis J A Phase I Study of Telomerase-specific Replication Competent Oncolytic Adenovirus (Telomelysin) for various solid tumors Mol. Ther. 2010 18 429 434 10.1038/mt.2009.262 19935775
Nemunaitis, J. et al. A Phase I Study of Telomerase-specific Replication Competent Oncolytic Adenovirus (Telomelysin) for various solid tumors. Mol. Ther. 18, 429–434 (2010).19935775 10.1038/mt.2009.262
478. Fakih M Safety and efficacy of the tumor-selective adenovirus enadenotucirev, in combination with nivolumab, in patients with advanced/metastatic epithelial cancer: a phase I clinical trial (SPICE) J. Immunother. Cancer 2023 11 e006561 10.1136/jitc-2022-006561 37094988
Fakih, M. et al. Safety and efficacy of the tumor-selective adenovirus enadenotucirev, in combination with nivolumab, in patients with advanced/metastatic epithelial cancer: a phase I clinical trial (SPICE). J. Immunother. Cancer 11, e006561 (2023).37094988 10.1136/jitc-2022-006561
479. Garcia-Carbonero R Phase 1 study of intravenous administration of the chimeric adenovirus enadenotucirev in patients undergoing primary tumor resection J. Immunother. Cancer 2017 5 71 10.1186/s40425-017-0277-7 28923104
Garcia-Carbonero, R. et al. Phase 1 study of intravenous administration of the chimeric adenovirus enadenotucirev in patients undergoing primary tumor resection. J. Immunother. Cancer 5, 71 (2017).28923104 10.1186/s40425-017-0277-7
480. Machiels J-P A phase 1 dose escalation study of the oncolytic adenovirus enadenotucirev, administered intravenously to patients with epithelial solid tumors (EVOLVE) J. Immunother. Cancer 2019 7 20 10.1186/s40425-019-0510-7 30691536
Machiels, J.-P. et al. A phase 1 dose escalation study of the oncolytic adenovirus enadenotucirev, administered intravenously to patients with epithelial solid tumors (EVOLVE). J. Immunother. Cancer 7, 20 (2019).30691536 10.1186/s40425-019-0510-7
481. Dispenzieri A Phase I trial of systemic administration of Edmonston strain of measles virus genetically engineered to express the sodium iodide symporter in patients with recurrent or refractory multiple myeloma Leukemia 2017 31 2791 2798 10.1038/leu.2017.120 28439108
Dispenzieri, A. et al. Phase I trial of systemic administration of Edmonston strain of measles virus genetically engineered to express the sodium iodide symporter in patients with recurrent or refractory multiple myeloma. Leukemia 31, 2791–2798 (2017).28439108 10.1038/leu.2017.120
482. Packiriswamy N Oncolytic measles virus therapy enhances tumor antigen-specific T-cell responses in patients with multiple myeloma Leukemia 2020 34 3310 3322 10.1038/s41375-020-0828-7 32327728
Packiriswamy, N. et al. Oncolytic measles virus therapy enhances tumor antigen-specific T-cell responses in patients with multiple myeloma. Leukemia 34, 3310–3322 (2020).32327728 10.1038/s41375-020-0828-7
483. Galanis E Carcinoembryonic antigen-expressing oncolytic measles virus derivative in recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 1 trial Nat. Commun. 2024 15 493 10.1038/s41467-023-43076-7 38216554
Galanis, E. et al. Carcinoembryonic antigen-expressing oncolytic measles virus derivative in recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 1 trial. Nat. Commun. 15, 493 (2024).38216554 10.1038/s41467-023-43076-7
484. Galanis E Phase I Trial of Intraperitoneal administration of an oncolytic measles virus strain engineered to express carcinoembryonic antigen for recurrent ovarian cancer Cancer Res. 2010 70 875 882 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-2762 20103634
Galanis, E. et al. Phase I Trial of Intraperitoneal administration of an oncolytic measles virus strain engineered to express carcinoembryonic antigen for recurrent ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 70, 875–882 (2010).20103634 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-2762
485. Andtbacka RHI Clinical responses of Oncolytic Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) in patients with unresectable melanoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2021 39 3829 3838 10.1200/JCO.20.03246 34464163
Andtbacka, R. H. I. et al. Clinical responses of Oncolytic Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) in patients with unresectable melanoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 39, 3829–3838 (2021).34464163 10.1200/JCO.20.03246
486. Rudin CM Phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation study on the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of intravenous Coxsackievirus A21 (V937), with or without pembrolizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumors J. Immunother. Cancer 2023 11 e005007 10.1136/jitc-2022-005007 36669791
Rudin, C. M. et al. Phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation study on the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of intravenous Coxsackievirus A21 (V937), with or without pembrolizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumors. J. Immunother. Cancer 11, e005007 (2023).36669791 10.1136/jitc-2022-005007
487. Geletneky K Phase I/IIa study of intratumoral/intracerebral or intravenous/intracerebral administration of Parvovirus H-1 (ParvOryx) in patients with progressive primary or recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: ParvOryx01 protocol BMC Cancer 2012 12 99 10.1186/1471-2407-12-99 22436661
Geletneky, K. et al. Phase I/IIa study of intratumoral/intracerebral or intravenous/intracerebral administration of Parvovirus H-1 (ParvOryx) in patients with progressive primary or recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: ParvOryx01 protocol. BMC Cancer 12, 99 (2012).22436661 10.1186/1471-2407-12-99
488. Hajda J Phase 2 trial of oncolytic H-1 Parvovirus therapy shows safety and signs of immune system activation in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal Adenocarcinoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2021 27 5546 5556 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-1020 34426438
Hajda, J. et al. Phase 2 trial of oncolytic H-1 Parvovirus therapy shows safety and signs of immune system activation in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal Adenocarcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 27, 5546–5556 (2021).34426438 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-1020
489. Hajda J A non-controlled, single arm, open label, phase II study of intravenous and intratumoral administration of ParvOryx in patients with metastatic, inoperable pancreatic cancer: ParvOryx02 protocol BMC Cancer 2017 17 576 10.1186/s12885-017-3604-y 28851316
Hajda, J. et al. A non-controlled, single arm, open label, phase II study of intravenous and intratumoral administration of ParvOryx in patients with metastatic, inoperable pancreatic cancer: ParvOryx02 protocol. BMC Cancer 17, 576 (2017).28851316 10.1186/s12885-017-3604-y
490. Desjardins A Recurrent Glioblastoma treated with recombinant Poliovirus N. Engl. J. Med. 2018 379 150 161 10.1056/NEJMoa1716435 29943666
Desjardins, A. et al. Recurrent Glioblastoma treated with recombinant Poliovirus. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 150–161 (2018).29943666 10.1056/NEJMoa1716435
491. Beasley GM Phase I trial of intratumoral PVSRIPO in patients with unresectable, treatment-refractory melanoma J. Immunother. Cancer 2021 9 e002203 10.1136/jitc-2020-002203 33875611
Beasley, G. M. et al. Phase I trial of intratumoral PVSRIPO in patients with unresectable, treatment-refractory melanoma. J. Immunother. Cancer 9, e002203 (2021).33875611 10.1136/jitc-2020-002203
492. Beasley GM Multimodality analysis confers a prognostic benefit of a T-cell infiltrated tumor microenvironment and peripheral immune status in patients with melanoma J. Immunother. Cancer 2022 10 e005052 10.1136/jitc-2022-005052 36175036
Beasley, G. M. et al. Multimodality analysis confers a prognostic benefit of a T-cell infiltrated tumor microenvironment and peripheral immune status in patients with melanoma. J. Immunother. Cancer 10, e005052 (2022).36175036 10.1136/jitc-2022-005052
493. Comins C REO-10: A Phase I study of intravenous Reovirus and Docetaxel in patients with advanced cancer Clin. Cancer Res. 2010 16 5564 5572 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1233 20926400
Comins, C. et al. REO-10: A Phase I study of intravenous Reovirus and Docetaxel in patients with advanced cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 16, 5564–5572 (2010).20926400 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1233
494. Galanis E Phase II trial of intravenous administration of Reolysin® (Reovirus Serotype-3-dearing Strain) in patients with metastatic melanoma Mol. Ther. 2012 20 1998 2003 10.1038/mt.2012.146 22871663
Galanis, E. et al. Phase II trial of intravenous administration of Reolysin® (Reovirus Serotype-3-dearing Strain) in patients with metastatic melanoma. Mol. Ther. 20, 1998–2003 (2012).22871663 10.1038/mt.2012.146
495. Noonan AM Randomized Phase 2 trial of the oncolytic Virus Pelareorep (Reolysin) in upfront treatment of metastatic pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Mol. Ther. 2016 24 1150 1158 10.1038/mt.2016.66 27039845
Noonan, A. M. et al. Randomized Phase 2 trial of the oncolytic Virus Pelareorep (Reolysin) in upfront treatment of metastatic pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Mol. Ther. 24, 1150–1158 (2016).27039845 10.1038/mt.2016.66
496. Sborov DW A Phase I trial of single-agent Reolysin in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma Clin. Cancer Res. 2014 20 5946 5955 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1404 25294913
Sborov, D. W. et al. A Phase I trial of single-agent Reolysin in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Clin. Cancer Res. 20, 5946–5955 (2014).25294913 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1404
497. Jiffry J Oncolytic Reovirus (pelareorep) induces autophagy in KRAS-mutated colorectal cancer Clin. Cancer Res. 2021 27 865 876 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-2385 33168658
Jiffry, J. et al. Oncolytic Reovirus (pelareorep) induces autophagy in KRAS-mutated colorectal cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 27, 865–876 (2021).33168658 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-2385
498. Burke MJ Phase I trial of Seneca Valley Virus (NTX‐010) in children with relapsed/refractory solid tumors: A report of the Children’s Oncology Group Pediatr. Blood Cancer 2015 62 743 750 10.1002/pbc.25269 25307519
Burke, M. J. et al. Phase I trial of Seneca Valley Virus (NTX‐010) in children with relapsed/refractory solid tumors: A report of the Children’s Oncology Group. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 62, 743–750 (2015).25307519 10.1002/pbc.25269
499. Toulmonde M Randomized phase 2 trial of intravenous oncolytic virus JX-594 combined with low-dose cyclophosphamide in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma J. Hematol. Oncol. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2022 15 149 10.1186/s13045-022-01370-9 36271420
Toulmonde, M. et al. Randomized phase 2 trial of intravenous oncolytic virus JX-594 combined with low-dose cyclophosphamide in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. J. Hematol. Oncol. J. Hematol. Oncol. 15, 149 (2022).36271420 10.1186/s13045-022-01370-9
500. Toulmonde M Reshaping the tumor microenvironment of cold soft-tissue sarcomas with oncolytic viral therapy: a phase 2 trial of intratumoral JX-594 combined with avelumab and low-dose cyclophosphamide Mol. Cancer 2024 23 38 10.1186/s12943-024-01946-8 38378555
Toulmonde, M. et al. Reshaping the tumor microenvironment of cold soft-tissue sarcomas with oncolytic viral therapy: a phase 2 trial of intratumoral JX-594 combined with avelumab and low-dose cyclophosphamide. Mol. Cancer 23, 38 (2024).38378555 10.1186/s12943-024-01946-8
