4.5 Article

Tislelizumab: an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON INVESTIGATIONAL DRUGS
卷 29, 期 12, 页码 1355-1363

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13543784.2020.1833857

关键词

Tislelizumab; programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1); immunotherapy; Fc gamma receptor (Fc gamma Rs); immune checkpoint inhibitor; non-small cell lung cancer

资金

  1. BeiGene, Ltd.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for most lung cancers worldwide and has a poor prognosis at later stages; programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have provided promising new treatment approaches for these patients. Tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was engineered to minimize binding to Fc gamma R on macrophages to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a mechanism of T-cell clearance and potential resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Tislelizumab has demonstrated clinical activity and is approved in China for treatment of previously treated classical Hodgkin lymphoma and previously treated metastatic PD-L1-high urothelial carcinoma. Areas covered: This review summarizes the clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of tislelizumab in patients with NSCLC and examines the mechanism of action, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profiles of tislelizumab. Expert opinion: Tislelizumab has higher affinity to PD-1 than pembrolizumab and nivolumab, potentially due to its differential PD-1 binding orientation. Tislelizumab demonstrated encouraging efficacy results, long duration of response, and a manageable safety profile across multiple clinical trials in advanced NSCLC. Ongoing trials of drug combinations (e.g. tislelizumab plus angiogenesis inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, or immune agonists) and examining efficacy across the severity of disease will provide opportunities to understand and feature tislelizumab in clinical practice.

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

4.5
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