4.7 Review

The ups, downs and new trends of IDO1 inhibitors

Journal

BIOORGANIC CHEMISTRY
Volume 110, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bioorg.2021.104815

Keywords

Immunotherapy; Cancer; Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase; Tryptophan 2,3-dioxygenase; Inhibitors; Checkpoint Inhibitor

Funding

  1. Shanghai Jiao Tong University [AF1700037, WF220217002, WH10117001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cancer immunotherapy, although showing significant clinical benefits, still falls short of the expected response rates. While some new IDO1 inhibitors have shown promise in preclinical studies, the failure of clinical trials has raised concerns. However, new trends in targeting IDO1 continue to emerge, aiming to bridge the gap between lab research and clinical applications.
Cancer immunotherapy has become an emerging driving force in the development of innovative strategies to fight against cancer. Despite the significant clinical benefits that many cancer patients have gained, the generally average response rate of similar to 20% is far behind the expectation for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Combination of ICIs with indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase-1 (IDO1) inhibitors is considered as an alternative solution and has proved effective in tremendous preclinical studies. However, the failure of phase III ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 trial seriously dampened the enthusiasm on the rationality of IDO1-targeting strategy. Fortunately, in spite of the ups and downs in the developmental journey of IDO1 inhibitors, multiple new approaches have been proposed to bridge the gap between lab to the clinic. Here, we review the recent advances in the development of small molecule inhibitors targeting IDO1 especially the new trend of IDO1 inhibitors after ECHO-301 clinical trials, including dual or pan-inhibitors targeting IDO1 and TDO or IDO2, apo-IDO1 inhibitors, IDO1 PROTACs, as well as other IDO1 inhibitors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available