Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
8.8
4.4
Journals
Cancers
Special Issues
Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition
cancers-logo
Submit to Special Issue Submit Abstract to Special Issue Review for Cancers Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition

A special issue of Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694). This special issue belongs to the section "Cancer Therapy".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 June 2026 | Viewed by 12886

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Robert Kleszcz

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Pharmaceutical Biochemistry, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 3, Rokietnicka Street, 60-806 Poznań, Poland
Interests: head and neck cancer; hepatocellular cancer; pancreatic cancer; CNS cancer; colorectal cancer; targeted therapy; Wnt signaling pathway; metabolism of cancer cells social media account
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Jarosław Paluszczak

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Pharmaceutical Biochemistry, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 3, Rokietnicka Street, 60-806 Poznań, Poland
Interests: head and neck cancer; epigenetics; DNA methylation; biomarkers; histone lysine demethylases; targeted therapy; Wnt signaling pathway; metabolism of cancer cells; carcinogenesis
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue is the second edition of the Special Issue “Feature Review for Cancer Therapy”, available at: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/cancers/special_issues/30GWB72QHW.

The molecular diversity in cancers is reflected by the lack of universal treatment options. However, the understanding of the molecular and cellular hallmarks of cancer, presented by Hanahan and Weinberg, has contributed to significant progress in oncological therapies. It has allowed researchers to improve the clinical efficacy of classical cytostatic drugs but has also resulted in the development of new targeted therapeutics. Additionally, our growing comprehension of the role of stem-like cancer cells holds promise for a more robust eradication of tumors by targeting the subpopulation of cells responsible for self-renewal and chemo/radio-resistance. Moreover, the growing understanding of the cross-talk between various cell types that are present in the tumor microenvironment translates into current immunomodulatory and other therapies.

This Special Issue aims to address the recent findings of research devoted to the improvement in oncological therapies, both at the experimental and clinical levels.

Potential topics include, but are not limited to:

  • Current standard treatment of cancer;
  • Current and potential targeted therapy of cancer;
  • Combinations of different therapeutic options;
  • Biomarkers for the improvement in therapy;
  • Natural compounds and their derivatives in cancer therapy;
  • Drug repurposing for cancer therapy;
  • Nanomaterials in cancer treatment;
  • Perspectives for the de-escalation of anticancer therapy.

Dr. Robert Kleszcz
Dr. Jarosław Paluszczak
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Only review articles are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Cancers is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • cancer therapy
  • chemotherapy
  • targeted therapy
  • cancer co-treatment
  • biomarkers
  • natural compounds
  • drug-repurposing
  • nanomaterials

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (7 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Review

Jump to: Other

24 pages, 1457 KB  
Review
Radioligand Therapy in Meningiomas: Today’s Evidence, Tomorrow’s Possibilities
by Gabor Sipka, Kristof Apro, Istvan Farkas, Annamaria Bakos, Agnes Dobi, Katalin Hideghety, Laszlo Pavics, Sandor Dosa, Bence Radics, Marton Balazsfi, Pal Barzo, Melinda Szolikova and Zsuzsanna Besenyi
Cancers 2026, 18(2), 297; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18020297 - 18 Jan 2026
Viewed by 948
Abstract
Meningiomas are the most common primary intracranial tumors, showing highly heterogeneous behavior and clinical outcomes. While the majority are benign, about one in five meningiomas are classified as higher grade (WHO Grade II–III), characterized by a more aggressive, treatment-resistant pathology. Although surgical resection [...] Read more.
Meningiomas are the most common primary intracranial tumors, showing highly heterogeneous behavior and clinical outcomes. While the majority are benign, about one in five meningiomas are classified as higher grade (WHO Grade II–III), characterized by a more aggressive, treatment-resistant pathology. Although surgical resection remains the first-line therapy, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is emerging as a novel and promising option for advanced, multifocal, or recurrent disease. The theranostic paradigm allows simultaneous detection and treatment of somatostatin receptor-expressing lesions using a single radiopharmaceutical. In this review, we explore the evolving role of PRRT in the management of meningiomas. We provide an integrated overview of preclinical findings—including radiosensitization mechanisms—and summarize the rapidly expanding clinical literature, which in recent years has grown both in patient numbers and in methodological sophistication. Particular emphasis is placed on advances in dosimetry, quantitative imaging, and radiomics, which are beginning to refine patient selection and improve response prediction. Together, current evidence highlights the therapeutic potential of radionuclide therapy in aggressive or refractory meningiomas and underscores the need for further prospective trials to define its optimal clinical application. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 491 KB  
Review
Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer Is Not Solely the Domain of the Oncologist
by Gabriel Samasca, Ioana Badiu Tisa, Calin Lazar, Ciprian N. Silaghi, Diana Deleanu, Adriana Muntean and Iulia Lupan
Cancers 2026, 18(1), 141; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18010141 - 31 Dec 2025
Viewed by 741
Abstract
Adverse effects of chemotherapeutic agents remain a significant clinical challenge in the management of gastric cancer. Across the literature, discussions of chemotherapy consistently document a range of toxicities, underscoring that even when treatment halts disease progression, it can leave substantial clinical sequelae. Chemotherapy [...] Read more.
Adverse effects of chemotherapeutic agents remain a significant clinical challenge in the management of gastric cancer. Across the literature, discussions of chemotherapy consistently document a range of toxicities, underscoring that even when treatment halts disease progression, it can leave substantial clinical sequelae. Chemotherapy can impact virtually every organ system, producing multiorgan toxicity with meaningful implications for patient quality of life and treatment feasibility. When initiating a new chemotherapy regimen, prior lack of therapeutic benefit is often associated with difficult recovery or inability to tolerate subsequent chemotherapy, thereby constraining future therapeutic options. Given these considerations and the current absence of universally personalized treatment, a multidisciplinary team—comprising a medical oncologist, gastroenterologist, and internist—is essential to the planning and execution of chemotherapy regimens. We recommend that these chemotherapy regimens be administered within internal medicine departments, in collaboration with the medical oncologist and gastroenterologist, because in many cases the adverse effects outweigh the potential benefits of chemotherapy. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1035 KB  
Review
SH003 as a Redox-Immune Modulating Phytomedicine: A Ferroptosis Induction, Exosomal Crosstalk, and Translational Oncology Perspective
by Moon Nyeo Park, Md. Maharub Hossain Fahim, Han Na Kang, Hanul Bae, Amama Rani, Fahrul Nurkolis, Trina E. Tallei, Seong-Gyu Ko and Bonglee Kim
Cancers 2025, 17(21), 3519; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17213519 - 31 Oct 2025
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1459
Abstract
Redox dysregulation, ferroptosis evasion, and immune suppression are major barriers in cancer therapy. SH003, a multi-herbal formulation standardized under GMP conditions and evaluated in early-phase clinical studies (NCT03081819; KCT0004770), demonstrated a favorable safety profile supporting its translational potential. Preclinical studies reveal that SH003 [...] Read more.
Redox dysregulation, ferroptosis evasion, and immune suppression are major barriers in cancer therapy. SH003, a multi-herbal formulation standardized under GMP conditions and evaluated in early-phase clinical studies (NCT03081819; KCT0004770), demonstrated a favorable safety profile supporting its translational potential. Preclinical studies reveal that SH003 disrupts mitochondrial homeostasis, triggers endoplasmic reticulum stress apoptosis, and sensitizes resistant tumors to ferroptosis via suppression of the SLC7A11–GPX4 axis and NRF2 destabilization. In parallel, SH003 remodels tumor immunity by attenuating STAT3-driven PD-L1 signaling, promoting macrophage repolarization, and enhancing cytotoxic lymphocyte activity. Exosome-associated microRNAs further suggest SH003’s role in redox–immune communication, although functional validation is pending. Collectively, SH003 represents a clinically tested phytomedicine that integrates ferroptosis induction with immune modulation, offering a biomarker-informed approach to precision oncology. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

42 pages, 2337 KB  
Review
The Targeted Inhibition of Histone Lysine Demethylases as a Novel Promising Anti-Cancer Therapeutic Strategy—An Update on Recent Evidence
by Jarosław Paluszczak and Robert Kleszcz
Cancers 2025, 17(17), 2798; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17172798 - 27 Aug 2025
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 4117
Abstract
A growing body of evidence confirms that non-mutational epigenetic reprogramming constitutes an important hallmark of cancer, contributing to the heterogeneity and phenotypic plasticity observed in cancers. Among the many epigenetic modulators, histone lysine demethylases (KDMs) have emerged as promising targets for pharmacological inhibition [...] Read more.
A growing body of evidence confirms that non-mutational epigenetic reprogramming constitutes an important hallmark of cancer, contributing to the heterogeneity and phenotypic plasticity observed in cancers. Among the many epigenetic modulators, histone lysine demethylases (KDMs) have emerged as promising targets for pharmacological inhibition in cancer treatment. KDMs were found to be frequently overexpressed and/or hyperactivated in cancer cells, and their inhibition was shown to result in the inhibition of cancer cell growth both in vitro and in vivo. The inhibition of Lysine-specific histone demethylase 1A (LSD1), KDM3, KDM4, KDM5, and KDM6 may affect cell survival, proliferation, motility, and apoptosis induction. Importantly, KDM inhibitors can be used as modulators of anti-cancer immune response and sensitivity to radiation and chemotherapy. This narrative review aims to present the most recent evidence documenting the anti-cancer potential of KDM inhibitors. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

25 pages, 1207 KB  
Review
The Era of Precision Medicine: Advancing Treatment Paradigms for Small Cell Lung Cancer
by Derek A. Corica, Scott D. Bell, Lei Zhao, Nicholas J. Lawler, McKade A. Poirier, Peyton J. Miller, Mark R. Wakefield and Yujiang Fang
Cancers 2025, 17(11), 1847; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17111847 - 31 May 2025
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 3845
Abstract
Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains a challenge prognostically. A clinically silent early stage and predilection for early metastasis leads to over half of patients presenting with metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. Akin to many other cancers, once SCLC metastasizes, current [...] Read more.
Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains a challenge prognostically. A clinically silent early stage and predilection for early metastasis leads to over half of patients presenting with metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. Akin to many other cancers, once SCLC metastasizes, current therapies begin to lose their effectiveness. The future of SCLC rests in innovative treatments aimed at improving patient outcomes. Chemotherapy and radiation remain the backbone treatment for SCLC. Most patients diagnosed with SCLC begin treatment with combination chemotherapy consisting of a platinum analog and topoisomerase inhibitor with or without concurrent radiation. Disease progression or recurrence warrants new treatment approaches. New chemotherapy combinations and advances in radiation precision offer patients novel approaches using the same backbone of treatment used in many other cancers. The introduction of newer therapeutic approaches, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, small molecule targeted therapies, bispecific antibodies, and antibody–drug conjugates offer a bright future for patients with SCLC who fail first-line therapy. This review will focus on advancing treatment paradigms for SCLC in the era of precision medicine. Such a study might be helpful for pulmonologists and oncologists to manage precisely patients with SCLC. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Review

21 pages, 913 KB  
Systematic Review
Upfront Chemotherapy Versus Immediate Surgery for Operable Pancreatic Cancer: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses
by Michele Ghidini, Giuseppe Ietto, Lorenzo Dottorini, Andrea Celotti, Annamaria De Giorgi, Gianpaolo Balzano, Francesca Senzani, Gianluca Tomasello and Fausto Petrelli
Cancers 2026, 18(9), 1344; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18091344 - 23 Apr 2026
Viewed by 324
Abstract
Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is increasingly investigated in operable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), yet its role in strictly resectable disease remains controversial. Randomized trials have been conducted both in borderline resectable and resectable PDAC and have demonstrated survival advantages, while evidence in [...] Read more.
Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is increasingly investigated in operable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), yet its role in strictly resectable disease remains controversial. Randomized trials have been conducted both in borderline resectable and resectable PDAC and have demonstrated survival advantages, while evidence in strictly resectable tumors remains poor. We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) to comprehensively evaluate the highest level of available evidence on NAT versus upfront surgery in operable PDAC. Methods: We performed an umbrella review of completed SRMAs assessing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and/or chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) in resectable and borderline resectable PDAC. MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception through November 2025. Eligible SRMAs reported at least one clinical outcome, including overall survival (OS), disease-free/event-free survival (DFS/EFS), resection rate, R0 resection, nodal status, or perioperative outcomes. Methodological quality was appraised using AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS tools. Overlap among SRMAs was quantified using the Corrected Covered Area (CCA), and RCT-only evidence was prioritized for causal inference. Evidence credibility was graded using an Ioannidis-style classification framework. Results: Thirty-four SRMAs published between 2010 and 2025 were included. In strictly resectable PDAC, RCT-only meta-analyses showed no definitive OS benefit for NAT compared with upfront surgery (pooled HR approximately 0.85, 95% CI 0.68–1.05), although a significant improvement in EFS was observed (HR approximately 0.77, 95% CI 0.65–0.90). Trial sequential analyses suggested insufficient information size for conclusive OS benefit in resectable disease. Conversely, in pooled resectable and borderline resectable populations, NAT significantly improved OS (HR approximately 0.66, 95% CI 0.52–0.85), with subgroup analyses indicating that the survival advantage was primarily driven by borderline resectable tumors. NAT consistently increased R0 resection and node-negative (pN0) rates and reduced non-curative explorations. However, neoadjuvant strategies were associated with treatment-related attrition and, in some analyses, lower overall resection rates. Comparative evidence suggested improved pathological outcomes with chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, without a consistent survival advantage. Conclusions: Current high-level evidence supports NAT as the preferred strategy for borderline resectable PDAC, demonstrating consistent survival and pathological benefits. In strictly resectable disease, NAT improves disease-control endpoints and pathological surrogates, but a definitive OS advantage has not been consistently demonstrated in RCT-only syntheses. This should not be interpreted as evidence of equivalence between NAT and a surgery-first strategy, given the heterogeneity, limited power, and therapeutic-era effects of the available literature. Treatment decisions in resectable PDAC should therefore be individualized, balancing potential oncologic benefits against attrition risk. Future adequately powered randomized trials employing contemporary multi-agent regimens are needed to clarify the survival impact of NAT in strictly resectable disease. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 638 KB  
Systematic Review
Radiotherapy De-Escalation in Younger Patients with Breast Cancer: Are We There Yet?
by Ioannis Georgakopoulos, Georgios Nikiforos Ntoumas, Pantelis Skarlos, Alexia Sidiropoulou, Georgia Lymperopoulou, Ioanna Kollarou, Konstantina Perdikari, Flora Zagouri and Maria Tolia
Cancers 2026, 18(4), 639; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18040639 - 16 Feb 2026
Viewed by 664
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Radiotherapy de-escalation is an established strategy in the management of early breast cancer, supported by randomized evidence predominantly derived from older patient populations. Younger women remain underrepresented in de-escalation trials, despite exhibiting less favorable clinicopathological characteristics associated with increased locoregional recurrence [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Radiotherapy de-escalation is an established strategy in the management of early breast cancer, supported by randomized evidence predominantly derived from older patient populations. Younger women remain underrepresented in de-escalation trials, despite exhibiting less favorable clinicopathological characteristics associated with increased locoregional recurrence and inferior survival. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the available evidence regarding the safety and implementation of radiotherapy de-escalation strategies in younger patients with early breast cancer. Methods: A literature search following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines was performed to identify studies evaluating radiotherapy de-escalation strategies in younger breast cancer patients. Ongoing and recently completed trials were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. Epidemiological data, randomized trials, and current clinical guidelines were reviewed. Results: Younger age at diagnosis is consistently associated with more aggressive tumor biology, higher rates of nodal involvement, unfavorable molecular subtypes, and worse survival outcomes. Among de-escalation approaches, moderate hypofractionation (15–16 fractions) is supported by randomized evidence and contemporary guidelines and can be applied irrespective of age. In contrast, evidence supporting ultra-hypofractionation, partial breast irradiation, and omission of radiotherapy in younger patients remains less robust, as these strategies have largely been evaluated in older or postmenopausal populations. Conclusions: Radiotherapy de-escalation in younger patients with breast cancer should be approached with caution. While moderate hypofractionation appears safe regardless of age, more aggressive de-escalation strategies lack adequate evidence in women under 50 years, particularly those under 40. Further prospective studies with sufficient representation of younger patients are required to clarify the role of radiotherapy de-escalation in this population. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Review for Cancer Therapy: 2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-7
Back to TopTop