4.5 Review

A patent review of selective CDK9 inhibitors in treating cancer

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON THERAPEUTIC PATENTS
卷 33, 期 4, 页码 309-322

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13543776.2023.2208747

关键词

Cancer; CDK9; inhibitors; Mcl-1; transient inhibition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dysregulation of CDK9 protein is closely associated with the proliferation and differentiation of various cancers, and targeting CDK9 is considered a promising strategy for antitumor drug development. The development of selective CDK9 inhibitors has gained increasing attention due to the potential side effects of pan-CDK9 inhibitors.
IntroductionThe dysregulation of CDK9 protein is greatly related to the proliferation and differentiation of various cancers due to its key role in the regulation of RNA transcription. Moreover, CDK9 inhibition can markedly downregulate the anti-apoptotic protein Mcl-1 which is essential for the survival of tumors. Thus, targeting CDK9 is considered to be a promising strategy for antitumor drug development, and the development of selective CDK9 inhibitors has gained increasing attention.Areas coveredThis review focuses on the development of selective CDK9 inhibitors reported in patent publications during the period 2020-2022, which were searched from SciFinder and Cortellis Drug Discovery Intelligence.Expert opinionGiven that pan-CDK9 inhibitors may lead to serious side effects due to poor selectivity, the investigation of selective CDK9 inhibitors has attracted widespread attention. CDK9 inhibitors make some advance in treating solid tumors and possess the therapeutic potential in EGFR-mutant lung cancer. CDK9 inhibitors with short half-life and intravenous administration might result in transient target engagement and contribute to a better safety profile in vivo. However, more efforts are urgently needed to accelerate the development of CDK9 inhibitors, including the research on new binding modes between ligand and receptor or new protein binding sites.

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