4.6 Review

Novel Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Pathway Inhibitors for Targeted Radionuclide Therapy of Glioblastoma

期刊

PHARMACEUTICALS
卷 14, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ph14070626

关键词

targeted radionuclide therapy; glioblastoma; radiochemistry; theranostics; molecular imaging; tyrosine kinases; radiopharmaceuticals

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glioblastoma, a deadly brain tumor with high treatment resistance, has been explored with receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (RTKIs) to potentially improve prognosis and develop personalized targeted therapy. Approved RTKIs in clinics alongside radiopharmaceuticals in trials offer new avenues for theranostic applications in GB treatment.
Glioblastoma (GB) remains the most fatal brain tumor characterized by a high infiltration rate and treatment resistance. Overexpression and/or mutation of receptor tyrosine kinases is common in GB, which subsequently leads to the activation of many downstream pathways that have a critical impact on tumor progression and therapy resistance. Therefore, receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (RTKIs) have been investigated to improve the dismal prognosis of GB in an effort to evolve into a personalized targeted therapy strategy with a better treatment outcome. Numerous RTKIs have been approved in the clinic and several radiopharmaceuticals are part of (pre)clinical trials as a non-invasive method to identify patients who could benefit from RTKI. The latter opens up the scope for theranostic applications. In this review, the present status of RTKIs for the treatment, nuclear imaging and targeted radionuclide therapy of GB is presented. The focus will be on seven tyrosine kinase receptors, based on their central role in GB: EGFR, VEGFR, MET, PDGFR, FGFR, Eph receptor and IGF1R. Finally, by way of analyzing structural and physiological characteristics of the TKIs with promising clinical trial results, four small molecule RTKIs were selected based on their potential to become new therapeutic GB radiopharmaceuticals.

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