4.6 Review

Proteasome inhibitors in cancer therapy

Journal

NATURE REVIEWS CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages 417-433

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.206

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. MD Anderson Cancer Center SPORE in Multiple Myeloma [P50 CA142509]
  2. MD Anderson Cancer Center Support Grant [P30 CA016672]
  3. National Cancer Institute [U10 CA032102, R01 CA184464, CA194264]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ubiquitin proteasome pathway was discovered in the 1980s to be a central component of the cellular protein-degradation machinery with essential functions in homeostasis, which include preventing the accumulation of misfolded or deleterious proteins. Cancer cells produce proteins that promote both cell survival and proliferation, and/or inhibit mechanisms of cell death. This notion set the stage for preclinical testing of proteasome inhibitors as a means to shift this fine equilibrium towards cell death. Since the late 1990s, clinical trials have been conducted for a variety of malignancies, leading to regulatory approvals of proteasome inhibitors to treat multiple myeloma and mantle-cell lymphoma. First-generation and second-generation proteasome inhibitors can elicit deep initial responses in patients with myeloma, for whom these drugs have dramatically improved outcomes, but relapses are frequent and acquired resistance to treatment eventually emerges. In addition, promising preclinical data obtained with proteasome inhibitors in models of solid tumours have not been confirmed in the clinic, indicating the importance of primary resistance. Investigation of the mechanisms of resistance is, therefore, essential to further maximize the utility of this class of drugs in the era of personalized medicine. Herein, we discuss the advances and challenges resulting from the introduction of proteasome inhibitors into the clinic.

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