4.6 Review

Combination of NK-based immunotherapy and sorafenib against hepatocellular carcinoma

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages 337-349

Publisher

E-CENTURY PUBLISHING CORP

Keywords

Natural killer cells; sorafenib; hepatocellular carcinoma; combination therapies

Categories

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [R01CA209886, R01-CA241532]
  2. SIR Foundation Pilot Grant [PR-0000000012]
  3. 2019 Harold E. Eisenberg Foundation Scholar Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common liver malignancy in the United States. Sorafenib is an FDA-approved therapy that extends survival time for HCC patients, but only a small percentage of patients are eligible for surgery. Adoptive transfer of NK cells shows promise for clinical cancer treatment.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most frequent malignancy of the liver, which is considered the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Liver transplant and surgical resection are curative treatments for HCC, but only 10-15% of HCC patients are eligible candidates. The FDA-approved sorafenib is a multi-kinase inhibitor systemic therapy for advanced HCC that extends the overall survival by over 3 months when compared with placebo. Adoptive transfer of Natural Killer (NK) cells holds great promise for clinical cancer treatment. However, only limited clinical benefit has been achieved in cancer patients. Therefore, there is currently considerable interest in development of the combination of sorafenib and NK cells for the treatment of HCC patients. However, the mechanism of how sorafenib affects the function of NK cells remains to be comprehensively clarified. In this paper, we will discuss NK cell-based immunotherapies that are currently under preclinical and clinical investigation and its potential combination with sorafenib for improving the survival of HCC patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available