4.8 Review

Targeting regulated cell death in tumor nanomedicines

期刊

THERANOSTICS
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 817-841

出版社

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/thno.67932

关键词

Regulated cell death; Tumor therapy; Nanomedicine; Sensitized apoptosis; Nanomaterials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanomedicines have great potential in anticancer therapy, but they are limited by self-protection mechanisms and treatment resistance of cancer cells. Recent studies have shown that regulating cell death can enhance the therapeutic efficiency of tumors. This article introduces various strategies of regulated cell death-mediated synergistic tumor nanotherapeutics and discusses the coordination mechanisms.
Nanomedicines hold great potential in anticancer therapy by modulating the biodistribution of nanomaterials and initiating targeted oxidative stress damage, but they are also limited by the inherent self-protection mechanism and the evolutionary treatment resistance of cancer cells. New emerging explorations of regulated cell death (RCD), including processes related to autophagy, ferroptosis, pyroptosis, and necroptosis, substantially contribute to the augmented therapeutic efficiency of tumors by increasing the sensitivity of cancer cells to apoptosis. Herein, paradigmatic studies of RCD-mediated synergistic tumor nanotherapeutics are introduced, such as regulating autophagy-enhanced photodynamic therapy (PDT), targeting ferroptosis-sensitized sonodynamic therapy (SDT), inducing necroptosis-augmented photothermal therapy (PTT), and initiating pyroptosis-collaborative chemodynamic therapy (CDT), and the coordination mechanisms are discussed in detail. Multiangle analyses addressing the present challenges and upcoming prospects of RCD-based nanomedicines have also been highlighted and prospected for their further strengthening and the broadening of their application scope. It is believed that up-and-coming coadjutant therapeutic methodologies based on RCDs will considerably impact precision nanomedicine for cancer.

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

4.8
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