4.4 Review

The Landscape of Immunotherapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcoma

期刊

CURRENT ONCOLOGY
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 2144-2158

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30020165

关键词

retroperitoneal sarcoma; immunotherapy; sarcoma immune class; tumor microenvironment; tumor infiltrating lymphocyte; tumor mutational burden

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Significant efforts have been made to understand soft tissue sarcomas, including retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS), which currently lack effective therapies. This review focuses on the relationship between immunotherapy and RPS histologic subtypes. Initial outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibition alone have been disappointing, but subsequent analyses have provided insight into the interplay between sarcomas and immunotherapy, identifying potential targets for future trials. With this insight, combination treatments tailored to the molecular characteristics of RPS show promise for improving response rates and outcomes.
Significant multidisciplinary scientific effort has been undertaken to understand the heterogeneous family of neoplasms that comprise soft tissue sarcomas. Within this family of neoplasms, outcomes for retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) are currently limited given a lack of effective therapies. In this review, we focus on immunotherapy and its relationship with the common RPS histologic subtypes. Although initial outcomes for RPS patients with immune checkpoint inhibition alone have been somewhat disappointing, subsequent analyses on histologies, the tumor microenvironment, sarcoma immune class, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and genetic analysis for tumor mutational burden have yielded insight into the interplay between sarcomas and immunotherapy. Such approaches have all provided critical insight into the environment and characterization of these tumors, with targets for potential immunotherapy in future clinical trials. With this insight, molecularly tailored combination treatments for improving response rates and oncologic outcomes for RPS are promising.

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

4.4
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