4.1 Review

Molecular targeting in the treatment of either advanced or metastatic bladder cancer or both according to the signalling pathways

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN UROLOGY
卷 18, 期 5, 页码 524-532

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3283097889

关键词

bladder cancer; molecular pathways; targeted therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review An estimated 300 000 new cases of bladder cancer worldwide are diagnosed annually. Although new cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents for either advanced or metastatic bladder cancer or both are used, no improvement in survival has been observed. Indeed, the 5-year survival rate of metastatic bladder cancer is very low (6%). The target-directed approach is an attractive challenge for treating specific genetic alterations involved in progression and metastasis development. This article aims to describe the new targeted therapies available to cure advanced cancer or metastatic bladder cancer or both according to the signalling pathways potentially involved. Recent findings The rapidly expanding understanding of the pathogenesis of bladder cancer at the molecular level has led to the identification of signalling pathways involved in this disease and provided molecular targets for new biological agents directed against tumorigenesis and progression. The recent results of clinical trials have not only highlighted the need to select patients who could benefit from such a therapy but also the fact that oncology has completely entered into a new era. Summary Toxic chemotherapeutic agents are slowly being supplemented by a new generation of drugs that recognize specific targets in or on cancer cells. Recent technological advances in pharmacogenomics and proteomics have led to an improvement in identifying biomarkers predictive of response and thereby to identify patients who would be more likely to respond to such a therapy. There is a real hope to improve both the efficiency and the tolerability of bladder cancer treatment.

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

4.1
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