‘Pharmacogenetics or Pharmacogenomics’ (PG) is one of the most practiced cancer therapeutic strategies, tailored for individualized patients. Despite its popularity and rapid advancements in the field, many obstacles for cancer therapy PG still need to be overcome. By borrowing scientific systems from other disciplines such as cancer diagnosis, and therapeutic information from the diversity of tumor origins, categories and stages, cancer therapy PG may hopefully be improved. Furthermore, to quickly acquire genetic and pathologic information and seek therapeutic interventions, possible breakthroughs may come from beyond – changing the cancer therapeutic landscapes. The next generations of PG protocols and hospital routines for searching deadly cancer pathogenic pathways versus drug-targeting predictions are of great clinical significance for the future. Yet, progress of cancer therapy PG is entering into a bottleneck stage owing to simple model of relevant techniques and routines. Promoting or even innovating present PG modular is very necessary. This perspective highlights this issue by introducing new initiatives and ideas.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

1 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J. Clin. 65(1), 5–29 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2 Ali I, Rahis-ud-din, Saleem K et al. Social aspects of cancer genesis. Cancer Ther. 8(1), 6–14 (2011).
Google Scholar
3 Meyer UA. Pharmacogenetics–5 decades of therapeutic lessons from genetic diversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5(9), 669–676 (2004).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4 Huang RS, Ratain MJ. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics of anticancer drugs. CA Cancer J. Clin. 59(1), 42–55 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5 Watters JW, Mcleod HL. Cancer pharmacogenomics: current and future applications. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1603(2), 99–111 (2003).• One of the earliest articles to introduce all possibilities of cancer-related genes of its time.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
6 Efferth T, Volm M. Pharmacogenetics for individualized cancer chemotherapy. Pharmacol. Ther. 107(2), b155–b176 (2005).• Discusses cancer therapy.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7 Lu DY, Lu TR, Chen XL, Ding J. Chapter 13: individualized cancer chemotherapy. In: Hypotheses in Clinical Medicine. Shoja MM, Agutter PS, Tubbs RS et al. Eds). Nova Science Publisher, USA, 199–216 (2013).• Introduces all prototypes of personalized cancer therapy for current and future applications.
Google Scholar
8 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY. Personalized cancer therapy: a perspective. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. Drug Res. 4(2), 108–118 (2014).
Google Scholar
9 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY, Che JY. Individualized cancer therapy. Innovations Pharm. Pharmacother. 2(4), 458–469 (2014).
CASGoogle Scholar
10 Lu DY. Personalized Cancer Chemotherapy: An Effective Way of Enhancing the Outcomes in Clinics. Lu DY (Ed.). Woodhead Publishing, Elsevier, UK (2014).• Latest ideas of personalized cancer therapy.
Google Scholar
11 Liu MZ, McLeod HL, He FZ et al. Epigenetic perspectives on cancer chemotherapy response. Pharmacogenomics 15(5), 699–715 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12 Gupta GP, Massague J. Cancer metastasis: building a framework. Cell 127, 679–695 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13 Talmadge JE, Fidler IJ. The biology of cancer metastasis: historical perspective. Cancer Res. 70(14), 5649–5669 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14 Lu DY, Lu TR, Cao S. Cancer metastases and clinical therapies. Cell Dev. Biol. 1(4), e110 (2012).
Google Scholar
15 Valastyan S, Weinberg RA. Tumor metastasis: molecular insights and evolving paradigms. Cell 147(2), 275–292 (2011).• Important article to introduce tumor metastasis and possible interventions.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY, Cao S. Cancer metastases treatments. Curr. Drug Ther. 8(1), 24–29 (2013).
CASGoogle Scholar
17 Farrar WL. Cancer Stem Cells. Farrar WL (Ed.). Cambridge University Press, NY, USA (2011).
Google Scholar
18 Yakisich JS. Challenges and limitations of targeting cancer stem cells and/or the tumour microenvironment. Drug Ther. Studies 2(1), e10 (2012).
Google Scholar
19 Park TS, Donnenberg VS, Donnenberg AD et al. Dynamic interactions between cancer stem cells and their stromal partners. Curr. Patholobiol. Rep. 2(1), 41–52 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
20 Chaffer CL, Weinberg RA. A perspective on cancer cell metastasis. Science 331(6024), 1559–1564 (2011).• Important article to interpret both cancer metastasis and cancer stem cells.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21 Visvader JE, Lindeman GJ. Cancer stem cells in solid tumours: accumulating evidence and unresolved questions. Nat. Rev. Cancer 8(10), 755–768 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22 Magee JA, Piskounova E, Morrison SJ. Cancer stem cells: impact, heterogeneity, and uncertainty. Cancer Cell 21(3), 283–296 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23 Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer, the next generation. Cell 144(5), 646–674 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24 Poste G, Doll J, Fidler IJ. Interactions among clonal subpopulations affect stability of the metastatic phenotype in polyclonal population of B16 melanoma cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 78(10), 6226–6230 (1981).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25 Gupta SC, Sung B, Prasad S, Aggarwal BB. Cancer drug discovery by repurposing: teaching new tricks to old dogs. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 34(9), 507–517 (2013).
Google Scholar
26 Ali I, Haque A, Wani WA et al. Analyses of anticancer drugs by capillary electrophoresis: a review. Biomed. Chromatogr. 27, 1296–1311 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27 Xie HG, Frueh FW. Pharmacogenomics steps forward personalized medicine. Per. Med. 2(4), 325–337 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28 Abraham J, Earl HM, Phroah PD, Caldas C. Pharmacogenetics of cancer chemotherapy. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1766, 168–183 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
29 Deeken JF, Fig WD, Bates SE, Sparreboom A. Toward individualized treatment: prediction of anticancer drug disposition and toxicity with pharmacogenetics. Anticancer Drug 18, 111–126 (2007).• Analyses the relationship between single nucleotide polymorphisms and different race and ethnic groups.
CASGoogle Scholar
30 Patel JN, Fuchs CS, Owzar K, Chen ZH, McLeod HL. Gastric cancer pharmacogenetics: progress or old tripe? Pharmacogenomics 14(9), 1053–1064 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
31 Andre F, Ciccolini J, Spano JP et al. Personalized medicine in oncology: where have we come from and where are we going? Pharmacogenomics 14(8), 931–939 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32 Ramos E, Callier SL, Rotimi CN. Why personalized medicine will fall if we stay the course. Per. Med. 9(8), 839–847 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33 Hertz DL. Germline pharmacogenetics of paclitaxel for cancer treatment. Pharmacogenomics 14(9), 1065–1084 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
34 Brown CC, Havener TM, Medina MM et al. Genome-wide association and pharmacological profiling of 29 anticancer agents using lymphoid cell lines. Pharmacogenomics 15(2), 137–146 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
35 Liu L, Sun M, Song D, Wang Z. The genetic polymorphisms of intercellular cell adhesion molecules and breast cancer susceptibility: a meta-analysis. Mol. Biol. Rep. 40(2), 1855–1860 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36 Nogueira A, Assis J, Catarino R, Medeiros R. DNA repair and cytotoxic drugs: the potential role of RAD51 in clinical outcome of non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Pharmacogenomics 14(6), 689–700 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37 Lu DY, Lu TR, Cao S. Individualized cancer chemotherapy by detecting cancer biomarkers. Metabolomics 2(5), e121 (2012).
Google Scholar
38 Lu DY, Lu TR, Chen XL, Chen EH, Ding J, Xu B. Cancer bioinformatics, its impacts on cancer therapy. Metabolomics 5(2), e133 (2015).
Google Scholar
39 Burt T, Dhillon S. Pharmacogenomics in early-phase clinical development. Pharmacogenomics 14(9), 1085–1097 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40 Collins F. Has the revolution arrived. Nature 464(7289), 674–675 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41 Venter JC. Multiple personal genomes await. Nature 464(7289), 676–677 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42 Lander ES. Initial impact of the sequencing of the human genome. Nature 470(7333), 187–197 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
43 Braggio E, Egan JB, Fonseca R, Stewart AK. Lessons from next-generation sequencing analysis in hematological malignancies. Blood Cancer J. 3, e127 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY. Combination chemical agents with biological means in cancer therapy. Res. Rev. BioSci. 7(4), 153–155 (2013).
CASGoogle Scholar
45 Lu DY, Lu TR, Cao S. Drug combinations in cancer treatment. Clinical Experimental Pharmacol. 3(4), 134 (2013).
Google Scholar
46 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY. Cost–effectiveness considerations of individualized cancer chemotherapy. Adv. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2(5), e121 (2013).
Google Scholar
47 Retel VP, Joore MA, Knauer M, Linn SC, Hauptmann M, van Harten WH. Cost-effectiveness of the 70-gene signature versus St. Gallen guidelines and Adjuvant Online for early breast cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 46(8), 1382–1391 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
48 Garau M, Towse A, Garrison L, Housman L, Ossa D. Can and should value-based pricing be applied to molecular diagnostics. Per. Med. 10(1), 61–72 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
49 Lu DY, Lu TR. Antimetastatic activities and mechanisms of bisdioxopiperazine compounds. Anti-Cancer Agent Med. Chem. 10(7), 564–570 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
50 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY. Development of antimetastatic drugs by targeting tumor sialic acids. Sci. Pharm. 80(3), 497–508 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
51 Suggitt M, Bibby MC. 50 years of preclinical anticancer drug screening: empirical to target-driven approaches. Clin. Cancer Res. 11(3), 971–981 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
52 Talmadge JE, Singh RK, Fidler IJ, Raz A. Murine models to evaluate novel and conventional therapeutic strategies for cancer. Am. J. Pathol. 170(3), 793–804 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
53 Lu DY, Lu TR, Wu HY. An overview of enhancing the international competitiveness for drug researches, development and manufactures in China. Chin. Med. Biotechnol. 4(6), 465–467 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
54 Ruggeri BA, Camp F, Miknyoczki S. Animal models of disease: preclinical animal models of cancer and their applications and utility in drug discovery. Biochem. Pharmacol. 87(2), 150–161 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
55 Lu DY, Chen EH, Lu TR. Anticancer drug development, a matter of money or a matter of idea? Metabolomics 5(2), e134 (2015).
Google Scholar

Vol. 1, No. 4

Metrics

Downloaded 2,613 times

History

Published online 30 October 2015

Published in print November 2015

Information

Keywords

Financial & competing interests disclosure

This work was funded by Shanghai Science and Technology Foundation of High Educations 97A49. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Open access

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

PDF download