4.5 Review

An updated patent review of VEGFR-2 inhibitors (2017-present)

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON THERAPEUTIC PATENTS
卷 31, 期 11, 页码 989-1007

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13543776.2021.1935872

关键词

Patent; angiogenesis; VEGFR-2; inhibitors; anticancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The VEGFR-2 signaling pathway plays a critical role in angiogenesis and has become an important target for treating angiogenesis-related diseases. Current treatment methods may face challenges such as poor response, development of resistance, and serious adverse effects, so combining different treatment methods and utilizing nanomedicine may enhance efficacy, reduce side effects, and lower costs.
Introduction: Angiogenesis is a vital process for cellular functions in both physiological and pathophysiological conditions and is one of the hallmarks of cancer progression and metastasis. VEGF/VEGFR-2 signaling pathway has been recognized as the most critical factor in promoting angiogenesis. Hence, several VEGFR-2 inhibitors have been clinically tested and/or approved for the treatment of angiogenesis-related diseases. Areas covered: This review covered reports in the patent literature in the period 2017 to the end of 2020 on the small-molecule inhibitors and antibodies of VEGFR-2 and their potential use as therapeutics for several types of cancers, angiogenesis-related disorders, and Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases. Expert opinion: VEGF inhibition has attracted considerable attention as a potential approach for antiangiogenic therapy during the last two decades. However, the effectiveness of this approach may be limited by several issues such as weak response, resistance development, and serious adverse effects. Therefore, the combination of anti-angiogenic therapy with chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, together with the proper utilization of nanomedicine-based approaches, may have a synergistic effect on improving the efficiency of therapy, reducing side effects and lowering the cost.

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