Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite being the most frequently altered oncogenic protein in solid tumours, KRAS has historically been considered ‘undruggable’ owing to a lack of pharmacologically targetable pockets within the mutant isoforms. However, improvements in drug design have culminated in the development of inhibitors that are selective for mutant KRAS in its active or inactive state. Some of these inhibitors have proven efficacy in patients with KRASG12C-mutant cancers and have become practice changing. The excitement associated with these advances has been tempered by drug resistance, which limits the depth and/or duration of responses to these agents. Improvements in our understanding of RAS signalling in cancer cells and in the tumour microenvironment suggest the potential for several novel combination therapies, which are now being explored in clinical trials. Herein, we provide an overview of the RAS pathway and review the development and current status of therapeutic strategies for targeting oncogenic RAS, as well as their potential to improve outcomes in patients with RAS-mutant malignancies. We then discuss challenges presented by resistance mechanisms and strategies by which they could potentially be overcome.The RAS oncogenes are among the most common drivers of tumour development and progression but have historically been considered undruggable. The development of direct KRAS inhibitors has changed this paradigm, although currently clinical use of these novel therapeutics is limited to a select subset of patients, and intrinsic or acquired resistance presents an inevitable challenge to cure. Herein, the authors provide an overview of the RAS pathway in cancer and review the ongoing efforts to develop effective therapeutic strategies for RAS-mutant cancers. They also discuss the current understanding of mechanisms of resistance to direct KRAS inhibitors and strategies by which they might be overcome.

Ovarian carcinoma is characterized by heterogeneity at the molecular, cellular and anatomical levels, both spatially and temporally. This heterogeneity affects response to surgery and/or systemic therapy, and also facilitates inherent and acquired drug resistance. As a consequence, this tumour type is often aggressive and frequently lethal. Ovarian carcinoma is not a single disease entity and comprises various subtypes, each with distinct complex molecular landscapes that change during progression and therapy. The interactions of cancer and stromal cells within the tumour microenvironment further affects disease evolution and response to therapy. In past decades, researchers have characterized the cellular, molecular, microenvironmental and immunological heterogeneity of ovarian carcinoma. Traditional treatment approaches have considered ovarian carcinoma as a single entity. This landscape is slowly changing with the increasing appreciation of heterogeneity and the recognition that delivering ineffective therapies can delay the development of effective personalized approaches as well as potentially change the molecular and cellular characteristics of the tumour, which might lead to additional resistance to subsequent therapy. In this Review we discuss the heterogeneity of ovarian carcinoma, outline the current treatment landscape for this malignancy and highlight potentially effective therapeutic strategies in development.Ovarian carcinoma is a highly heterogeneous tumour type, both spatially and temporally. As a consequence, these carcinomas are often associated with poor outcomes. Ovarian carcinoma comprises various subtypes with distinct complex molecular features. The authors of this Review discuss the molecular, cellular and anatomical heterogeneity of ovarian carcinoma, and outline the current and future treatment strategies for this malignancy.

Glycolysis has long been considered as the major metabolic process for energy production and anabolic growth in cancer cells. Although such a view has been instrumental for the development of powerful imaging tools that are still used in the clinics, it is now clear that mitochondria play a key role in oncogenesis. Besides exerting central bioenergetic functions, mitochondria provide indeed building blocks for tumor anabolism, control redox and calcium homeostasis, participate in transcriptional regulation, and govern cell death. Thus, mitochondria constitute promising targets for the development of novel anticancer agents. However, tumors arise, progress, and respond to therapy in the context of an intimate crosstalk with the host immune system, and many immunological functions rely on intact mitochondrial metabolism. Here, we review the cancer cell-intrinsic and cell-extrinsic mechanisms through which mitochondria influence all steps of oncogenesis, with a focus on the therapeutic potential of targeting mitochondrial metabolism for cancer therapy.

High-throughput methods to investigate tumour omic landscapes have quickly catapulted cancer specialists into the precision oncology era. The singular lesson of precision oncology might be that, for it to be precise, treatment must be personalized, as each cancer’s complex molecular and immune landscape differs from patient to patient. Transformative therapies include those that are targeted at the sequelae of molecular abnormalities or at immune mechanisms, and, increasingly, pathways previously thought to be undruggable have become druggable. Critical to applying precision medicine is the concept that the right combination of drugs must be chosen for each patient and used at the right stage of the disease. Multiple puzzles remain that complicate therapy choice, including evidence that deleterious mutations are common in normal tissues and non-malignant conditions. The host’s role is also likely to be key in determining treatment response, especially for immunotherapy. Indeed, maximizing the impact of immunotherapy will require omic analyses to match the right immune-targeted drugs to the individualized patient and tumour setting. In this Perspective, we discuss six key riddles that must be solved to optimize the application of precision oncology to otherwise lethal malignancies.In this Perspective, Wahida et al. consider six riddles in precision oncology that must be solved to achieve better clinical responses to molecular targeted therapies.

Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signalling via FGF receptors (FGFR1–4) orchestrates fetal development and contributes to tissue and whole-body homeostasis, but can also promote tumorigenesis. Various agents, including pan-FGFR inhibitors (erdafitinib and futibatinib), FGFR1/2/3 inhibitors (infigratinib and pemigatinib), as well as a range of more-specific agents, have been developed and several have entered clinical use. Erdafitinib is approved for patients with urothelial carcinoma harbouring FGFR2/3 alterations, and futibatinib and pemigatinib are approved for patients with cholangiocarcinoma harbouring FGFR2 fusions and/or rearrangements. Clinical benefit from these agents is in part limited by hyperphosphataemia owing to off-target inhibition of FGFR1 as well as the emergence of resistance mutations in FGFR genes, activation of bypass signalling pathways, concurrent TP53 alterations and possibly epithelial–mesenchymal transition-related isoform switching. The next generation of small-molecule inhibitors, such as lirafugratinib and LOXO-435, and the FGFR2-specific antibody bemarituzumab are expected to have a reduced risk of hyperphosphataemia and the ability to overcome certain resistance mutations. In this Review, we describe the development and current clinical role of FGFR inhibitors and provide perspective on future research directions including expansion of the therapeutic indications for use of FGFR inhibitors, combination of these agents with immune-checkpoint inhibitors and the application of novel technologies, such as artificial intelligence.FGFR inhibitors are now approved for use in patients with advanced-stage urothelial carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma and myeloid or lymphoid neoplasms that harbour certain FGFR alterations. Nonetheless, challenges such as tolerability and acquired resistance limit the clinical potential of these agents. In this Review, the authors summarize the available clinical data on FGFR inhibitors, describe promising novel agents and highlight future research directions that might optimize the efficacy of FGFR-targeted therapies.

Structural imaging remains an essential component of diagnosis, staging and response assessment in patients with cancer; however, as clinicians increasingly seek to noninvasively investigate tumour phenotypes and evaluate functional and molecular responses to therapy, theranostics — the combination of diagnostic imaging with targeted therapy — is becoming more widely implemented. The field of radiotheranostics, which is the focus of this Review, combines molecular imaging (primarily PET and SPECT) with targeted radionuclide therapy, which involves the use of small molecules, peptides and/or antibodies as carriers for therapeutic radionuclides, typically those emitting α-, β- or auger-radiation. The exponential, global expansion of radiotheranostics in oncology stems from its potential to target and eliminate tumour cells with minimal adverse effects, owing to a mechanism of action that differs distinctly from that of most other systemic therapies. Currently, an enormous opportunity exists to expand the number of patients who can benefit from this technology, to address the urgent needs of many thousands of patients across the world. In this Review, we describe the clinical experience with established radiotheranostics as well as novel areas of research and various barriers to progress.Radiotheranostics enables the clinician to image and then target lesions using the same probe. Despite this appealing potential, interest in the field of radiotheranostics has long been constrained by a lack of expertise, high infrastructure costs and the availability of non-radioactive alternative approaches. Nonetheless, several recent successes have led to renewed research interest. In this Review, the authors summarize the current challenges and opportunities in this rapidly emerging area.

High rates of failure, exorbitant costs, and the sluggish pace of new drug discovery and development have led to a growing interest in repurposing “old” drugs to treat both common and rare diseases, particularly cancer. Cancer, a complex and heterogeneous disease, often necessitates a combination of different treatment modalities to achieve optimal outcomes. The intrinsic polygenicity of cancer, intricate biological signalling networks, and feedback loops make the inhibition of a single target frequently insufficient for achieving the desired therapeutic impact. As a result, addressing these complex or “smart” malignancies demands equally sophisticated treatment strategies. Combinatory treatments that target the multifaceted oncogenic signalling network hold immense promise. Repurposed drugs offer a potential solution to this challenge, harnessing known compounds for new indications. By avoiding the prohibitive costs and long development timelines associated with novel cancer drugs, this approach holds the potential to usher in more effective, efficient, and cost-effective cancer treatments. The pursuit of combinatory therapies through drug repurposing may hold the key to achieving superior outcomes for cancer patients. However, drug repurposing faces significant commercial, technological and regulatory challenges that need to be addressed. This review explores the diverse approaches employed in drug repurposing, delves into the challenges faced by the drug repurposing community, and presents innovative solutions to overcome these obstacles. By emphasising the significance of combinatory treatments within the context of drug repurposing, we aim to unlock the full potential of this approach for enhancing cancer therapy. The positive aspects of drug repurposing in oncology are underscored here; encompassing personalized treatment, accelerated development, market opportunities for shelved drugs, cancer prevention, expanded patient reach, improved patient access, multi-partner collaborations, increased likelihood of approval, reduced costs, and enhanced combination therapy.

Background In this first-in-human, Phase 1 study of a microRNA-based cancer therapy, the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of MRX34, a liposomal mimic of microRNA-34a (miR-34a), was determined and evaluated in patients with advanced solid tumours. Methods Adults with various solid tumours refractory to standard treatments were enrolled in 3 + 3 dose-escalation cohorts and, following RP2D determination, expansion cohorts. MRX34, with oral dexamethasone premedication, was given intravenously daily for 5 days in 3-week cycles. Results Common all-cause adverse events observed in 85 patients enrolled included fever (% all grade/G3: 72/4), chills (53/14), fatigue (51/9), back/neck pain (36/5), nausea (36/1) and dyspnoea (25/4). The RP2D was 70 mg/m 2 for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 93 mg/m 2 for non-HCC cancers. Pharmacodynamic results showed delivery of miR-34a to tumours, and dose-dependent modulation of target gene expression in white blood cells. Three patients had PRs and 16 had SD lasting ≥4 cycles (median, 19 weeks, range, 11–55). Conclusion MRX34 treatment with dexamethasone premedication demonstrated a manageable toxicity profile in most patients and some clinical activity. Although the trial was closed early due to serious immune-mediated AEs that resulted in four patient deaths, dose-dependent modulation of relevant target genes provides proof-of-concept for miRNA-based cancer therapy. Clinical trial registration NCT01829971.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells have emerged as a potent therapeutic approach for patients with certain haematological cancers, with multiple CAR T cell products currently approved by the FDA for those with relapsed and/or refractory B cell malignancies. However, in order to derive the desired level of effectiveness, patients need to successfully receive the CAR T cell infusion in a timely fashion. This process entails apheresis of the patient’s T cells, followed by CAR T cell manufacture. While awaiting infusion at an authorized treatment centre, patients may receive interim disease-directed therapy. Most patients will also receive a course of pre-CAR T cell lymphodepletion, which has emerged as an important factor in enabling durable responses. The time between apheresis and CAR T cell infusion is often not a simple journey, with each milestone being a critical step that can have important downstream consequences for the ability to receive the infusion and the strength of clinical responses. In this Review, we provide a summary of the many considerations for preparing patients with B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma or acute lymphoblastic leukaemia for CAR T cell therapy, and outline current limitations and areas for future research.Chimeric antigen receptor T cells have revolutionized the treatment of patients with certain haematological malignancies. Nonetheless, an optimal approach to lymphodepleting chemotherapy and/or bridging therapies has yet to be defined in patients receiving these agents. In this Review, the authors describe the various lymphodepletion and/or bridging therapy strategies used, and highlight the need for prospective comparisons in order to determine the safest and most effective approach.

Drug-tolerant persister (DTP) cell populations were originally discovered in antibiotic-resistant bacterial biofilms. Similar populations with comparable features have since been identified among cancer cells and have been linked with treatment resistance that lacks an underlying genomic alteration. Research over the past decade has improved our understanding of the biological roles of DTP cells in cancer, although clinical knowledge of the role of these cells in treatment resistance remains limited. Nonetheless, targeting this population is anticipated to provide new treatment opportunities. In this Perspective, we aim to provide a clear definition of the DTP phenotype, discuss the underlying characteristics of these cells, their biomarkers and vulnerabilities, and encourage further research on DTP cells that might improve our understanding and enable the development of more effective anticancer therapies.Despite improved effectiveness, most systemic cancer therapies are not curative and most patients will develop acquired resistance that often cannot be explained by the emergence of specific genomic alterations. In this Perspective, the authors describe the potential role of a small population of tumour cells, termed drug-tolerant persister cells, that are able to survive therapy and, on continued treatment exposure, develop stable mechanisms of resistance to systemic therapies.