4.6 Review

Anticancer peptide: Physicochemical property, functional aspect and trend in clinical application (Review)

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 678-696

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2020.5099

关键词

therapeutic peptide; anticancer peptide; modified peptide; targeting peptide; cancer; clinical application; clinical trial

类别

资金

  1. BRAND'S Health Research Award 2017 (Cerebos Award 2017)
  2. Children Cancer Fund under the Patronage of HRH Princess Soamsawali
  3. Faculty Staff Development Program of Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Thailand [BHR2017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cancer is currently ineffectively treated using therapeutic drugs, and is also able to resist drug action, resulting in increased side effects following drug treatment. A novel therapeutic strategy against cancer cells is the use of anticancer peptides (ACPs). The physicochemical properties, amino acid composition and the addition of chemical groups on the ACP sequence influences their conformation, net charge and orientation of the secondary structure, leading to an effect on targeting specificity and ACP-cell interaction, as well as peptide penetrating capability, stability and efficacy. ACPs have been developed from both naturally occurring and modified peptides by substituting neutral or anionic amino acid residues with cationic amino acid residues, or by adding a chemical group. The modified peptides lead to an increase in the effectiveness of cancer therapy. Due to this effectiveness, ACPs have recently been improved to form drugs and vaccines, which have sequentially been evaluated in various phases of clinical trials. The development of the ACPs remains focused on generating newly modified ACPs for clinical application in order to decrease the incidence of new cancer cases and decrease the mortality rate. The present review could further facilitate the design of ACPs and increase efficacious ACP therapy in the near future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据