3.8 Review

Combined Anti-Cancer Strategies Based on Anti-Checkpoint Inhibitor Antibodies

期刊

ANTIBODIES
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antib9020017

关键词

therapeutic antibodies; immune checkpoint inhibitors; cancer; microenvironment

资金

  1. Associazione Italiana Ricerca contro il Cancro (AIRC) [IG-19036]
  2. Associazione Italiana Ricerca contro il Cancro (AIRC) (Grant AIRC 5 ~ 1000, Project ISM)
  3. Fondazione Regionale per la Ricerca Biomedica (Regione Lombardia) [2015-0042 FRBB]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of cancer came of age in 1997, with the approval of anti-CD20 Rituximab. Since then, a wide variety of antibodies have been developed with many different formats and mechanisms of action. Among these, antibodies blocking immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the field, based on the novelty of their concept and their demonstrated efficacy in several types of cancer otherwise lacking effective immunotherapy approaches. ICI are expressed by tumor, stromal or immune cells infiltrating the tumor microenvironment, and negatively regulate anti-tumor immunity. Antibodies against the first discovered ICI, CTLA-4, PD-1 and PD-L1, have shown significant activity in phase III studies against melanoma and other solid cancers, alone or in combination with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. However, not all cancers and not all patients respond to these drugs. Therefore, novel antibodies targeting additional ICI are currently being developed. In addition, CTLA-4, PD-1 and PD-L1 blocking antibodies are being combined with each other or with other antibodies targeting novel ICI, immunostimulatory molecules, tumor antigens, angiogenic factors, complement receptors, or with T cell engaging bispecific antibodies (BsAb), with the aim of obtaining synergistic effects with minimal toxicity. In this review, we summarize the biological aspects behind such combinations and review some of the most important clinical data on ICI-specific antibodies.

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

3.8
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