4.7 Review

Pancreatic cancer

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 171, 期 4, 页码 849-858

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bph.12401

关键词

pancreatic cancer; PDAC; chemotherapy resistance; midkine; tumour; therapy; Notch; gemcitabine

资金

  1. 'Roggenbuck Foundation', Hamburg, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, it has become clear that the current standard therapeutic options for pancreatic cancer are not adequate and still do not meet the criteria to cure patients suffering from this lethal disease. Although research over the past decade has shown very interesting and promising new therapeutic options for these patients, only minor clinical success was achieved. Therefore, there is still an urgent need for new approaches that deal with early detection and new therapeutic options in pancreatic cancer. To provide optimal care for patients with pancreatic cancer, we need to understand better its complex molecular biology and thus to identify new target molecules that promote the proliferation and resistance to chemotherapy of pancreatic cancer cells. In spite of significant progress in curing cancers with chemotherapy, pancreatic cancer remains one of the most resistant solid tumour cancers and many studies suggest that drug-resistant cancer cells are the most aggressive with the highest relapse and metastatic rates. In this context, activated Notch signalling is strongly linked with chemoresistance and therefore reflects a rational new target to circumvent resistance to chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Here, we have focused our discussion on the latest research, current therapy options and recently identified target molecules such as Notch-2 and the heparin-binding growth factor midkine, which exhibit a wide range of cancer-relevant functions and therefore provide attractive new therapeutic target molecules, in terms of pancreatic cancer and other cancers also. Linked ArticlesThis article is part of a themed section on Midkine. To view the other articles in this section visit

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