4.7 Review

May EPH/Ephrin Targeting Revolutionize Lung Cancer Treatment?

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24010093

关键词

ephrin receptor; EPH; ephrin; lung cancer; treatment; precision medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Erythropoietin-producing hepatocellular receptors (EPHs) and their ligands ephrins play a defining role in the development and progression of lung cancer. Targeting EPHs/ephrins may provide effective treatment options for precision cancer treatment.
Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Erythropoietin-producing hepatocellular receptors (EPHs) comprise the largest receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) family in mammals. EPHs along with their ligands, EPH-family receptor-interacting proteins (ephrins), have been found to be either up- or downregulated in LC cells, hence exhibiting a defining role in LC carcinogenesis and tumor progression. In their capacity as membrane-bound molecules, EPHs/ephrins may represent feasible targets in the context of precision cancer treatment. In order to investigate available therapeutics targeting the EPH/ephrin system in LC, a literature review was conducted, using the MEDLINE, LIVIVO, and Google Scholar databases. EPHA2 is the most well-studied EPH/ephrin target in LC treatment. The targeting of EPHA2, EPHA3, EPHA5, EPHA7, EPHB4, EPHB6, ephrin-A1, ephrin-A2, ephrin-B2, and ephrin-B3 in LC cells or xenograft models not only directly correlates with a profound LC suppression but also enriches the effects of well-established therapeutic regimens. However, the sole clinical trial incorporating a NSCLC patient could not describe objective anti-cancer effects after anti-EPHA2 antibody administration. Collectively, EPHs/ephrins seem to represent promising treatment targets in LC. However, large clinical trials still need to be performed, with a view to examining the effects of EPH/ephrin targeting in the clinical setting.

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

4.7
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