Review Open Access Logo

Recent Advancement, Mechanisms of Action and Applications of Tumor-Targeting Peptides

Zaroon 1
Usama Mustafa 2
Hafsa 2
Shakira Aslam 2
Hamid Bashir 2, *
  1. Department of Precision Medicine, University of Campania, Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Italy
  2. Centre for Applied Molecular Biology, 87-West canal, Bank Road, University of the Punjab, Lahore-53700, Pakistan
Correspondence to: Hamid Bashir, Centre for Applied Molecular Biology, 87-West canal, Bank Road, University of the Punjab, Lahore-53700, Pakistan. Email: [email protected].
Volume & Issue: Vol. 12 No. 7 (2025) | Page No.: 7602-7620 | DOI: 10.15419/4sem5685
Published: 2025-07-31

Online metrics


Statistics from the website

  • HTML Views: 64
  • PDF Views: 6
  • XML Views: 2

Statistics from Dimensions

This article is published with open access by BioMedPress. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0) which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. 

Abstract

Tumor targeting peptides (TTPs) have emerged as new therapeutic and diagnostic tools in oncology, due to their low immunogenicity, high specificity, and ability to efficiently penetrate tumor cells and tissues. They exert their effects using various mechanisms such as receptor-mediated targeting, cell-penetrating properties, and enzyme-responsive activation, allowing selective delivery of drugs, nanoparticles, and imaging agents to cancer cells. Advances in peptide engineering, such as D-amino acid incorporation, cyclization, and multivalent designs, have substantially enhanced their stability, affinity, and bioavailability. They are widely utilized in immunotherapy, precision imaging, and targeted drug delivery, thus improving cancer detection and outcomes. Recent developments, including peptide–drug conjugates, hybrid peptide–nanoparticle systems, and peptide-based immune modulators, have significantly broadened the clinical potential of TTPs. This review highlights the fundamental mechanisms, therapeutic applications, and cutting-edge advancements in TTPs, underscoring their role in personalized cancer therapy.

Introduction

Peptides are short chains of amino acids, consisting of 2-50 amino acids, linked by peptide bonds. They play a crucial role in biological processes and have a wide range of applications in medicine, biotechnology, and research1. Many peptides function as hormones, regulating various physiological processes (, insulin, glucagon). Some act as neurotransmitters, transmitting signals in the nervous system (., endorphins)2. Some peptides have antimicrobial activity, serving as natural antibiotics (., defensins). The therapeutic potential of peptides is vast, ranging from cancer treatment and management of metabolic disorders to antiviral therapies and vaccine development3. Advances in peptide synthesis, such as solid-phase peptide synthesis and automated synthesis, have significantly enhanced their production efficiency4, 5. Furthermore, peptide modifications and delivery systems have improved their stability and bioavailability. They also serve as valuable diagnostic tools, contributing to fields such as protein–protein interactions and biomarker identification6. Their applications extend to cosmetics, where they promote collagen production and wound healing7. Despite challenges such as cost-effective production, ongoing innovation in peptide technology continues to expand their utility in medicine, biotechnology, and beyond8.

Peptides can be designed to bind specifically to target molecules, making them highly specific in their action. Generally, peptides have lower toxicity than small-molecule drugs9. Peptides can be easily modified to enhance their stability and activity. They have emerged as promising agents in cancer treatment due to their ability to specifically target cancer cells, modulate the immune response, and deliver therapeutic payloads10. Their versatility and precision make them valuable for developing targeted therapies compared to traditional chemotherapies. Peptides can target specific receptors on cancer cells, delivering cytotoxic agents or inhibiting tumor growth11. Peptides can be conjugated to cytotoxic drugs, directing these drugs specifically to cancer cells, thereby minimizing the damage to healthy cells12. The peptide sequence binds to receptors overexpressed on cancer cells, allowing the drug to be directly released at the cancer site. Peptides designed to bind to tumor-specific antigens or receptors (, EGFR, HER2) enhance the delivery of therapeutic agents (Figure 1 )13. Peptides targeting integrin receptors overexpressed in tumors can deliver imaging or therapeutic agents14. Peptides derived from tumor antigens can be used to stimulate the immune system to recognize and attack cancer cells15. Some peptides have inherent cytotoxic properties, inducing apoptosis and disrupting cancer cell membranes (Figure 1 )16.

Figure 1

Schematic representation of TTP mechanisms: Receptor-mediated targeting, Cell-penetrating peptide internalization, Enzyme-responsive activation.

Mechanism of Tumor Targeting Peptides

Receptor-Mediated Targeting by TTPs for Facilitating Delivery

Receptor-mediated targeting by TTPs leverages the overexpression of specific receptors on the tumor surface. These peptides are specifically designed to bind these receptors, facilitating the targeted delivery of therapeutic agents, imaging compounds, and diagnostic markers directly to the tumor site17. On binding to their target receptor, these peptides can facilitate the internalization of the peptide–receptor complex, allowing for intracellular delivery of therapeutic agents (Figure 2 )18. TTPs are engineered to bind with high affinity and specificity to the receptors that are overexpressed on tumor cells19. This selective binding ensures that the peptide is delivered to tumor cells, sparing healthy tissues. Upon receptor binding, the peptide–receptor complex is internalized by the cancer cell through endocytosis. This internalization allows the payload to be delivered directly into cancer cells, thereby enhancing therapeutic efficiency (Figure 2 )20. Once inside the cell, the therapeutic agent (, drug, toxin, or gene therapy vector) is released, where it can exert its intended effect21.

Figure 2

Mechanism of receptor-mediated endocytosis: TTP binds to overexpressed receptors, Internalization via clathrin-coated vesicles, Endosomal escape, Intracellular release of therapeutic payload.

Most notably, clathrin-mediated endocytosis is the predominant route for internalization of receptor–ligand complexes in most mammalian cells. In CME, receptor complexes accumulate in clathrin-coated pits (~100–150 nm in diameter), where adaptor proteins (., AP-2) recruit clathrin triskelia to form a coated vesicle. Dynamin then pinches off the vesicle, which uncoats and fuses with early endosomes22. Vesicles of this size (~100 nm) are well-suited for the bulk uptake of peptide–drug conjugates. Typically, acidification within late endosomes and lysosomes promotes cargo release, but also risks enzymatic degradation; thus, TTP designs often incorporate endosomal escape motifs to ensure payload release into the cytosol before lysosomal degradation23. Moreover, caveolin-mediated endocytosis occurs via flask-shaped caveolae (~60–80 nm in diameter) enriched in caveolin-1 and Cavin proteins. Ligand–receptor binding induces caveolar budding in a dynamin-dependent manner, forming caveolar carriers that bypass early endosomes and lysosomes, often trafficking to caveosomes or the Golgi and endoplasmic reticulum24. The smaller vesicle size and nonacidic routing protect sensitive cargo (., peptides, proteins, nucleic acids) from degradation, but may slow release kinetics, necessitating specialized release triggers in TTP designs25.

Implications for TTP Design and Drug Release

For CME-internalized cargos, engineering pH-sensitive or membrane-disruptive elements (., histidine-rich sequences) can accelerate endosomal escape, thus maximizing cytosolic delivery before lysosomal degradation26. CvME avoids lysosomes, thereby protecting delicate agents like siRNA and proteins from degradation. However, because it operates more slowly, special linkers responsive to specific signals (., redox-sensitive disulfides) may be required to release cargos at the optimal time27. Targeted trafficking and differential routing can be leveraged to direct payloads to specific intracellular organelles; for example, CvME-mediated trafficking to the ER favors the delivery of unfolded protein therapeutics28.

This process ensures that the cytotoxic effect remains confined to cancer cells, thereby reducing systemic side effects29. Some common receptors targeted by tumor-targeting peptides are integrins, which are involved in tumor angiogenesis and metastasis, thus making them highly effective targets for TTPs. For example, RGD peptides (arginine-glycine-aspartic acid) specifically target these integrins to deliver therapeutic agents and imaging compounds30. EGFR, which is overexpressed in various cancer types, is targeted by peptides to inhibit growth signals and deliver cytotoxic agents. Peptides that bind EGFR can deliver chemotherapeutic drugs specifically to EGFR-expressing tumor cells31. Similarly, HER2 is commonly overexpressed in breast cancer and other tumor types, facilitating the effective delivery of therapeutic agents by HER2-targeting peptides32. Folate receptors are overexpressed in certain cancers, making folate-conjugated peptides useful for targeted drug delivery. Moreover, folate-linked peptides facilitate the delivery of chemotherapy drugs to folate receptor-positive tumors33. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is highly expressed in prostate cancer cells, making it an ideal target for peptide-based delivery systems34. Peptides targeting PSMA can deliver radiolabeled compounds for imaging or therapeutic agents, enabling targeted treatment35. Carbonic anhydrase IX (CA-IX) is overexpressed in hypoxic tumors and can be targeted by peptides to deliver therapeutic agents or imaging probes36.

Targeting the Tumor Microenvironment

The tumor microenvironment (TME) is a highly complex, adaptive system comprising malignant cells, immune cells, stromal elements, blood vessels, and extracellular matrix (ECM) components. It not only drives tumor growth but also significantly contributes to therapeutic resistance, immune evasion, and metastasis37. Acknowledging the TME's active role in tumor biology has led to the development of therapeutic strategies aiming to disrupt its supportive functions, including vascular normalization, immune response reprogramming, and ECM remodeling, ultimately enhancing the efficacy of conventional therapies38. A key factor underlying the complexity of the TME is the genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity within tumor cell populations. This diversity enables cancer cells to interact with surrounding stromal components via distinct paracrine signaling pathways, which shape their behavior and further promote treatment resistance. The influence of this heterogeneity extends to various stromal cells, including cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), which respond to tumor-derived signals and contribute to ECM remodeling, immune modulation, and therapy resistance39. Although CAFs represent a substantial stromal population, they are part of a broader cellular network that includes endothelial cells, pericytes, and immune infiltrates. Endothelial cells form blood vessels that sustain tumor growth and enable metastatic dissemination. Working in concert, TME components ensure that the tumor remains protected and fully functional40. A more detailed discussion of CAF biology and its therapeutic implications appears in Section 3.3. Here, the focus remains on emphasizing the TME as a whole, underscoring the need for integrated therapeutic approaches that target both tumor cells and their supportive ecosystem to overcome resistance and improve clinical outcomes41.

Strategies for Targeting the Tumor Microenvironment

Inhibiting Angiogenesis

Inhibiting angiogenesis is a crucial strategy in cancer therapy that aims to starve the tumor of the blood supply essential for its growth and metastasis42. Tumor-targeting peptides can be designed to specifically bind to angiogenic markers on endothelial cells, thereby delivering therapeutic agents that inhibit the formation of new blood vessels43. This targeted approach ensures that anti-angiogenic treatments are delivered precisely where they are needed, helping reduce systemic toxicity and optimizing therapeutic efficiency44. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptor (VEGFR) are key regulators of angiogenesis45. TTPs can be designed to bind to VEGF or VEGFR, blocking their interaction and inhibiting the angiogenic signaling pathway. For example, Bevacizumab (Avastin) is a monoclonal antibody against VEGF46.

Modulating Immune Response

An immunosuppressive environment persists in most tumors, leading to a diminished immune response and allowing cancer cells to remain undetected due to myeloid-derived suppressor cells, regulatory T cells, tumor-associated macrophages, and inhibitory cytokines47. Patients experiencing these immunosuppressive effects can be treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, which remove inhibitory signals on T cells and allow them to fight the tumor again. When PD-L1 or PD-L2 bind to the PD-1 receptor on activated T cells, the cells become exhausted, and robust immune responses are halted. Pembrolizumab (Keytruda) is a humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody that binds the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) receptor on activated T cells and prevents its interaction with PD-L1 and PD-L2, restoring T-cell proliferation and cytotoxicity against tumor cells48. Nivolumab likewise targets PD-1 to release the PD-1–mediated brake on T cells, and has demonstrated clinical efficacy across multiple advanced malignancies by enhancing T-cell–mediated tumor cell killing49.

Therapeutic cancer vaccines represent another modality to stimulate antitumor immunity by presenting tumor antigens to a patient’s antigen-presenting cells. Sipuleucel-T (Provenge) is an FDA-approved autologous cellular vaccine for metastatic prostate cancer in which a patient’s dendritic cells are harvested, incubated with a fusion protein of prostatic acid phosphatase and granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor, and then reinfused to elicit a sustained, antigen-specific T-cell response and prolong overall survival50. Finally, reprogramming of tumor-associated macrophages from a pro-tumorigenic M2-like state to an antitumorigenic M1-like phenotype can be achieved by targeting the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor (CSF-1R). Small-molecule inhibitors or peptides against CSF-1R deplete or re-educate M2 macrophages, enhancing antigen presentation and fostering a pro-inflammatory microenvironment conducive to tumor rejection51.

Targeting Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts (CAFs)

Beyond directly targeting cancer cells, tumor-targeting peptides are designed to disrupt the tumor-supportive functions of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), which are essential to tumor progression. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are a major stromal component of the tumor microenvironment (TME) and play a critical role in supporting tumor progression, invasion, angiogenesis, and immune evasion52. With growth factors, cytokines, chemokines, and enzymes, CAFs modify cancer cells’ responses by remodeling components of the ECM. This remodeling helps tumor cells migrate more easily to other parts of the body and can also force some of the drug’s dose to remain in the intestines, thus reducing its effectiveness. In addition to shaping the stroma, CAFs secrete TGF-β, VEGF, and FGFs, thereby promoting faster growth of cancer cells and fostering new blood vessel development. Moreover, cells in the CAF system release cytokines and chemokines that inhibit the immune response against cancer within the body53.

Recent research finds that CAF populations have many different functions. Distinct subtypes such as myofibroblastic CAFs (myCAFs) and inflammatory CAFs (iCAFs) differ in their phenotypic markers and roles. While myCAFs contribute to ECM stiffening through expression of α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) and collagen crosslinking enzymes, iCAFs are characterized by the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines like IL-6 and CXCL12, which enhance immune evasion and drive tumor growth54. Targeting CAFs therapeutically has become an area of intense investigation. One promising approach involves the use of tumor-targeting peptides (TTPs) that bind selectively to fibroblast activation protein (FAP), a surface protein highly expressed on CAFs. These peptides can serve as carriers for cytotoxic agents or imaging probes, enabling precise delivery to the CAF-rich regions of tumors55. Peptides designed to inhibit key signaling pathways, such as Hedgehog signaling, have also shown potential in reducing CAF activation and tumor-supportive functions. Additionally, efforts are underway to develop peptide-based inhibitors against matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and other ECM-modifying enzymes secreted by CAFs, aiming to limit their remodeling activity and improve drug penetration56.

By specifically disrupting CAF functions, these strategies aim to break down the protective stromal barrier that surrounds tumors, reduce resistance to chemotherapy, and enhance overall treatment efficacy. As understanding of CAF heterogeneity continues to evolve, tailored interventions may offer more precise and effective ways to neutralize their tumor-promoting roles57.

Disrupting Extracellular Matrix

Disrupting the extracellular matrix (ECM) within the tumor microenvironment (TME) is a critical strategy in cancer therapy58. Using tumor-targeting peptides (TTPs) against the extracellular matrix can reduce tumor growth and make other treatment methods more effective59. Targeting the ECM with TTPs can inhibit these processes and enhance the effectiveness of other therapies60. Attaching peptides to specific ECM components, such as fibronectin or collagen, can modify tumor development61. Peptides can inhibit matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), which degrade ECM components and facilitate tumor invasion. For example, peptides mimicking MMP inhibitors, such as marimastat, can help prevent ECM degradation62. Peptides designed to bind specific ECM components can alter a tumor’s structural integrity. For example, peptides targeting fibronectin or collagen in the ECM are notable examples63. Disruption of the extracellular matrix with tumor-targeting peptides offers a multifaceted approach to cancer therapy by interfering with the structural and signaling functions of the ECM that support tumor growth and invasion64.

Exploiting Hypoxia and Acidity

Tumors often develop regions with low oxygen levels due to abnormal blood vessel formation and rapid tumor growth that consumes oxygen more quickly than it can be adequately supplied. Hypoxia triggers the expression of hypoxia-inducible factors (HIFs), which help tumors survive, promote new blood vessel formation, and spread. To capitalize on this feature, TTPs and prodrugs can be tailored to activate specifically in hypoxic areas while remaining inactive under normal oxygen levels, thus reducing damage to healthy tissues. For example, hypoxia-responsive linkers such as 2-nitroimidazole are commonly used. Under low oxygen, nitro-reductase enzymes convert the nitro group into an amino group, triggering drug release65. Azobenzene-based linkers have also been incorporated into antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) for selective drug delivery in hypoxic tumor tissue66.

Prodrugs are inactive compounds that only become active in hypoxic conditions, targeting low-oxygen tumor cells specifically. Hypoxia-responsive peptides are engineered to release their drugs when exposed to low oxygen levels. These peptides are often combined with drugs that are triggered by HIFs or enzymes overexpressed in hypoxia, like nitroimidazole derivatives67. To further extend TTP applications beyond simple ligand–receptor binding, recent designs incorporate stimuli‑responsive linkers and motifs that react specifically to TME cues, most prominently pH and hypoxia. Among pH‑sensitive linkers, hydrazone bonds are the most widely used. They remain stable in blood (pH 7.2–7.4) but hydrolyze rapidly in the mildly acidic TME (pH 6.5–6.9) or endosomal compartments (pH ≤ 5.5)68. For example, one study conjugated an 18-4 tumor-homing peptide to doxorubicin via a hydrazone linker. In a triple-negative breast cancer model, this peptide–drug conjugate (PDC) exhibited a 1.4-fold increase in intratumoral doxorubicin accumulation and a 1.3–2.2-fold reduction in off-target organ exposure, resulting in superior antitumor efficacy with minimal systemic toxicity, directly attributable to pH-triggered cleavage in the acidic tumor microenvironment69.

Acetal linkers offer an alternative pH‑sensitive strategy with tunable hydrolysis kinetics; one study examined multiple acetal‑based linkers and showed that each unit decrease in pH increased the acetal hydrolysis rate by an order of magnitude. At pH 5.0, half‑lives ranged from seconds to days, whereas stability at pH 7.4 was maintained70. In addition, hypoxia‑responsive motifs (., 2‑Nitroimidazole) are among the most common hypoxia‑sensing groups. Under low‑oxygen conditions (pO < 10 mmHg), intracellular nitro-reductases reduce the nitro group to an aminoimidazole, converting a hydrophobic motif to a hydrophilic one. This chemical change destabilizes peptide drug assemblies or nanoparticle prodrugs, triggering payload release selectively in hypoxic tumor regions71.

Quinone and azobenzene linkers exploit similar bioreductive mechanisms. Quinone moieties undergo enzymatic reduction to hydro-quinones, disrupting π–π stacking in prodrug dimers and releasing chemotherapeutics under hypoxia72. Another study revealed an azobenzene-based PDC where the azo bond is cleaved in hypoxic tumor cells. This cleavage not only liberates the drug but also alters its subcellular localization, enhancing cytotoxicity specifically in oxygen‑deprived regions73.

Applications of Tumor-Targeting Peptides

Drug Delivery

Peptides are conjugated with cytotoxic drugs to form peptide-drug conjugates, ensuring selective delivery to tumor cells while minimizing systemic toxicity74. Peptides targeting integrins or other specific receptors overexpressed on tumor cells, such as the RGD peptide for αvβ3 integrin, belong to this category75, 76. TTPs are used to functionalize nanoparticles, improving stability, enhancing bioavailability, and enabling controlled release of encapsulated drugs. Liposomes or polymeric nanoparticles are coated with TTPs targeting HER2 and EGFR for selective delivery to breast cancer cells. For example, the peptide-drug conjugate EGF-Pseudomonas exotoxin selectively targets EGFR-expressing tumors77.

Imaging and Diagnostics

TTPs play a crucial role in advancing imaging and diagnostic applications in cancer management. These peptides are designed to specifically bind to receptors or antigens overexpressed on tumor cells, allowing precise visualization and detection of tumors and their microenvironments. TTPs are conjugated with fluorescent dyes, allowing for the visualization of tumors using fluorescence microscopy or imaging systems78. Peptides targeting integrins are conjugated with near-infrared fluorescent dyes for imaging tumor vasculature and metastatic sites. TTPs are labeled with positron-emitting radionuclides (such as F or Cu), enabling the detection of tumors through PET scans79. Peptides targeting somatostatin receptors, which are overexpressed in neuroendocrine tumors, are labeled with Ga for PET imaging80. TTPs are labeled with gamma-emitting radionuclides, such as mTc, allowing for SPECT imaging of tumors81. TTPs can detect specific biomarkers associated with cancer, facilitating early diagnosis and monitoring of disease progression. Peptides targeting EGFR are used in assays to detect elevated levels of EGFR in blood samples of patients with certain cancers82. TTPs can capture circulating tumor cells (CTCs) or extracellular vesicles (EVs) from blood samples, aiding in non-invasive cancer diagnostics83. Peptides targeting EpCAM (epithelial cell adhesion molecule) are used to isolate CTCs from blood samples for molecular analysis84. TTPs conjugated with fluorescent dyes are administered before surgery to highlight tumor margins, helping surgeons achieve complete tumor resection85. Similarly, TTPs conjugated with agents suitable for multiple imaging modalities, such as PET/MRI or SPECT/CT, provide comprehensive diagnostic information. Peptides targeting integrins are labeled with both a PET radionuclide and an MRI contrast for simultaneous PET/MRI imaging of tumors86.

Therapeutic Vaccines

Tumor-associated antigens (TAAs) or neoantigens (mutated antigens unique to tumor cells) are identified and used to develop peptide-based vaccines. These peptides derived from these antigens are presented by major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules on the surface of antigen-presenting cells (APCs), such as dendritic cells. This presentation leads to activation of T cells, particularly cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), which can recognize and kill tumor cells expressing these antigens87. Furthermore, the immune system forms a memory of the tumor antigens, ensuring long-term protection against cancer recurrence. Peptide-based vaccines are composed of short or long peptides derived from TAAs or neoantigens. As common examples, vaccines targeting melanoma-associated antigen (MAGE), NY-ESO-1, or human papillomavirus (HPV) E6/E7 peptides are well-studied. Dendritic cell (DC) vaccines are also increasingly recognized; they are loaded with tumor antigens and then reintroduced into the patient to stimulate a robust immune response88. For instance, DCs pulsed with peptides from prostate-specific antigen (PSA) have been evaluated in prostate cancer, demonstrating safety and immunogenicity in early trials86. Meanwhile, DNA/RNA vaccines encode peptides or proteins from TAAs or neoantigens that are expressed in the patient’s cells, leading to strong antigen presentation and immune activation. A notable example is DNA vaccines encoding HER2/neu peptides for breast cancer, which have elicited antigen-specific T cell responses in phase I studies89.

Recent mRNA-based neoantigen vaccine trials

Recent advancements in therapeutic cancer vaccines have increasingly focused on combining precision-targeting strategies, including tumor-targeting peptides, with mRNA-based technologies. One pivotal development is the use of personalized mRNA-based neoantigen vaccines, which encode patient-specific tumor antigens to stimulate robust immune responses90. An important example is Autogene cevumeran (BNT122), an mRNA-lipoplex vaccine that encodes up to 20 tumor-specific neoantigens identified from individual patients. In a phase I trial in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), this vaccine induced durable and robust neoantigen-specific CD8⁺ T cell responses in 8 of 16 patients. Notably, patients who responded had significantly improved recurrence-free survival upon combination of the vaccine with atezolizumab and chemotherapy91.

From the perspective of tumor-targeting peptides (TTPs), these peptide-based ligands can further enhance mRNA-based vaccine systems by enabling tumor-selective delivery and targeted immune activation. Essentially, mRNA vaccines that encode neoantigens can be co-formulated with tumor-targeting peptides, such as in peptide-modified nanoparticles or lipoplexes, to further enhance accumulation at tumor sites and reduce off-target effects92. mRNA–lipoplex vaccines in PDAC have been shown to prime long-lived CD8⁺ T cells that target somatic mutation-derived neoantigens. In a preclinical and early-phase human study, an mRNA–lipoplex formulation elicited sustained neoantigen-specific T cell immunity, addressing the challenge of T cell durability in pancreatic cancer93.

iNeo-Vac-R01, another personalized mRNA neoantigen vaccine, is under evaluation in phase I trials (NCT06019702, NCT06026774) for advanced solid tumors including melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer. Early results demonstrate a favorable safety profile and the induction of neoantigen-specific T cells in most patients by week 6 of vaccination94. In renal cell carcinoma, a phase I trial (NCT02950766) of a peptide-based neoantigen vaccine in high-risk, fully resected clear cell renal cell carcinoma showed no recurrences at a median follow-up of 40.2 months and excellent safety, supporting further development of personalized neoantigen approaches and demonstrating the potential of peptides as both immunogenic agents and targeting tools95.

These studies collectively demonstrate that mRNA-based neoantigen vaccines can be manufactured rapidly for individual patients, are well tolerated, and effectively prime neoantigen-specific CTLs, with early evidence of improved clinical outcomes in pancreatic, renal, and other solid tumors. Continued enrollment in these and larger phase II/III trials will further clarify their impact on long-term survival and recurrence rates93. These results underscore that tumor-targeting peptides are important building blocks in the domain of therapeutic vaccination and effective in drug delivery systems. As the demand for targeted, tumor-specific immunotherapies continues to grow, incorporating them into mRNA vaccination systems presents a promising hybrid strategy.

Photodynamic Therapy

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a minimally invasive treatment modality that uses light-activated compounds known as photosensitizers (PSs) to induce cytotoxic effects in targeted cells. Tumor-targeting peptides (TTPs) enhance tumor specificity by delivering PSs to tumor cells96. While PSs remain inactive in the dark, they become cytotoxic upon exposure to visible or near-infrared light; this transference of energy to ground-state oxygen produces reactive oxygen species (ROS) that mediate cell death97.

Reactive Oxygen Species Mechanisms

PDT relies on two main photochemical pathways. In Type I, electrons or hydrogen atoms are transferred from the excited PS to substrates (., water, biomolecules), producing radical ions that subsequently react with oxygen to form superoxide anion (O•⁻), hydrogen peroxide (HO), and hydroxyl radicals (•OH)98. In Type II, energy is directly transferred from the excited PS to molecular oxygen (³O), generating singlet oxygen (¹O), which causes oxidative damage to lipids, proteins, and DNA—triggering apoptosis, necrosis, and disruption of tumor vasculature. Recent findings highlight the PS-induced ROS/RNS interplay: singlet oxygen can react with nitric oxide to form peroxynitrite (ONOO), thereby amplifying cell death signals99.

Hypoxia in the Tumor Microenvironment

Hypoxia (O < 2%) in solid tumors reduces Type II PDT efficacy by limiting oxygen availability for singlet-oxygen generation. These hypoxic niches also upregulate HIF-1α, promoting angiogenesis and therapy resistance100.

Hypoxia-Activated Photosensitizers

To overcome hypoxia, several hypoxia-activated PSs (HAPs) have been developed:

By directing hypoxia-activated photosensitizers (HAPs) precisely to hypoxic tumor microenvironments, TTPs significantly improve the selectivity and therapeutic efficacy of HAPs. Researchers have found that conjugating HAPs with TTPs not only improves tumor accumulation but also enhances tissue penetration and strengthens photodynamic effects in low-oxygen environments, making this combination a potent tactic for targeted cancer phototherapy105.

Clinical Case Studies & Emerging Trials

While most HAP systems remain in preclinical stages, early clinical data are emerging. A Phase I trial (NCT04560722) of a nitroimidazole-conjugated PS in head and neck carcinoma reported a 50% objective response rate and manageable mucositis, with pronounced PS accumulation in hypoxic tumor cores (unpublished, investigator’s report). Furthermore, topical TTP-PS formulations for non-melanoma skin cancers showed complete remission in 85% of lesions at 6-month follow-up, with minimal off-target phototoxicity106.

Immunomodulatory Effects

Beyond direct cytotoxicity, PDT-generated ROS can promote immunogenic cell death, releasing tumor antigens and danger signals (., HMGB1, calreticulin), which activate dendritic cells and tumor-specific T cells107. Notably, HTPS_Niclo treatment increased the infiltration of CD8⁺ T cells by 2.5-fold, suggesting synergy between ROS-mediated cytotoxicity and anti-tumor immunity108.

Immunotherapy and Radiotherapy

TTPs can deliver radionuclides to tumor cells for targeted radiotherapy, minimizing radiation exposure to healthy tissues. When cancer cells are exposed to radiation, radiosensitizers intensify DNA damage, increasing the therapy’s efficacy. For instance, alpha-emitting radionuclides conjugated with TTPs are used in targeted alpha therapy (TAT) to destroy tumor cells locally and effectively. To increase the effectiveness of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), TTPs can be conjugated with radiosensitizers109. Radiosensitizers enhance DNA damage in cancer cells upon radiation exposure, improving the outcomes of EBRT110. Similarly, TAT utilizes alpha-emitting radionuclides conjugated with TTPs for potent tumor cell destruction111.

Figure 3

Applications of TTPs in oncology: Peptide-drug conjugate targeting HER2+ tumors, Fluorescent TTPs for surgical margin delineation, Radiolabeled TTPs for PET imaging.

Table 1

FDA-approved Tumor-Targeting peptides

Peptide Name

Target Receptor

Approved Indication

Clinical Use

Reference

Lutetium Lu 177 vipivotide tetraxetan (Pluvicto™)

PSMA

PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

Used after androgen receptor inhibitors ± taxane chemotherapy; prolongs OS (15.3 vs. 11.3 months); also effective pre-taxane (PSMA fore trial)

109, 110

Belantamab mafodotin-blmf (Blenrep®)

BCMA

Relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (≥4 prior lines)

Initially accelerated approval based on 31% ORR (DREAMM-2); later withdrawn in US due to DREAMM-3; DREAMM-7 supports ongoing use in combinations

111, 112

Loncastuximab tesirine-lpyl (Zynlonta™)

CD19

Relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma

Approved after ≥2 prior systemic therapies; ORR 48.3%, CR 24.1% (LOTIS-2); durable response of 10.3 months

113, 114

Piflufolastat F 18 (Pylarify®)

PSMA

Imaging agent for prostate cancer

Detects PSMA+ lesions in suspected metastasis or recurrence; changes management in ~45–74% of cases

115, 116

Nirogacestat (Ogsiveo™)

Gamma secretase

Progressive desmoid tumors needing systemic therapy

Reduced risk of progression by 71% (DeFi trial); ORR 41%, improved pain/function; 20% serious AEs

117, 118

Sacituzumab govitecan-hziy (Trodelvy®)

Trop-2

mTNBC, HR+/HER2 metastatic breast cancer

Improves OS vs chemotherapy in both TNBC (ASCENT) and HR+/HER2 (TROPiCS-02); serious AEs: neutropenia, diarrhea

119, 120

Recent advancements in tumor-targeting peptides

Recent breakthroughs in tumor-targeting peptides (TTPs) have significantly transformed the field of cancer therapy and diagnostics (Table 1). These peptides, which can specifically bind to tumor cells and their microenvironment, provide a powerful strategy for more precise and effective cancer treatments121, 122, 123, 124.

Methodological Advancements and Peptide Engineering

Phage display and computational modeling have expanded peptide libraries, while advanced computational tools have facilitated the identification of high-affinity peptides. High-throughput screening of peptide libraries has enabled the discovery of novel TTPs with improved affinity and specificity for tumor markers125. In addition, chemical modifications have led to the incorporation of D-amino acids, cyclization, and PEGylation into peptides, enhancing their stability, half-life, and binding affinity. Conjugation strategies have enabled the development of dual-function peptides that can target multiple receptors or carry multiple therapeutic payloads. Similarly, coupling peptides with nanoparticles has enhanced targeted drug delivery126, 127. The advantages and disadvantages of different production methods for cancer-targeting peptides are highlighted in Table 2.

Table 2

Pros and Cons of different production methods of Anti-cancer peptides.

Production Method

Pros

Cons

Affinity

Cost

Scalability

Typical Yield

References

Solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS)

High purity, high throughput, automation possible

Expensive reagents, less suitable for very long peptides

High (nM–pM)

High

Moderate

~100 mg per batch

125, 126

Solution-phase peptide synthesis (SuPPS)

Greater flexibility in modifying peptides

More complex purification, lower efficiency than SPPS

Moderate–High

High

Low

2–70 mg per batch

104

Enzymatic hydrolysis

Eco-friendly, fewer toxic reagents

Low specificity, yields mixed peptides

Variable (depends on source)

Low

Moderate

17.21 mg/mL

127

Recombinant DNA technology

Enables large-scale production, cost-effective in long-term

Endotoxin risk, needs purification, limited post-translational modifications

Moderate–High

Low–Medium

High

60–80 mg/L

128

Extraction from natural sources

Naturally occurring peptides, low immunogenicity

Labor-intensive, inconsistent batch quality

Variable

High

Low

9–15 mg/g of tissue

129

Phage Display

Rapid screening of high-affinity ligands, suitable for cancer targeting

Requires post-selection synthesis, bias in library diversity

Very High (pM–nM)

Low

High

Screening yields clones; synthesis needed

130

Multifunctional Peptides

Peptides are engineered to target multiple receptors or pathways simultaneously, which enhances their efficacy and reduces the likelihood of resistance. Peptides that combine both therapeutic and diagnostic functions pave the way for theragnostic (simultaneous therapy and diagnostics)131, 132, 133, 134.

Delivery Systems

Incorporation of TTPs into nanoparticles, liposomes, or micelles significantly improves their stability, bioavailability, and targeted delivery. Moreover, intracellular delivery of therapeutic agents can be enhanced by coupling them with cell-penetrating peptides135. Liposomes, which are spherical vesicles composed of lipid bilayers, can encapsulate TTPs, thereby protecting them from degradation and enabling targeted delivery through surface modification with tumor-specific ligands136. Biodegradable polymers such as PLGA (poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid)) can be used to create nanoparticles that encapsulate TTPs, providing controlled release and improved stability137. Dendrimers, featuring a highly branched, tree-like structure, can carry multiple peptide molecules, enhancing their solubility and stability138. Gold nanoparticles, silica nanoparticles, and other inorganic materials can be functionalized with TTPs for targeted delivery and imaging applications139.

Translational Status of Nanoparticle-Based Tumor-Targeting Peptide Strategies

Recent advancements in nanoparticle-based TTP strategies have demonstrated promising results in both preclinical and clinical settings. Understanding the translational status of these approaches remains crucial for assessing their immediate and future clinical potential140.

Preclinical Developments

In thyroid cancer, a combined chemotherapy and photothermal therapy approach was administered using polydopamine nanoparticles loaded with doxorubicin. This strategy demonstrated more potent anti-cancer activity than comparable materials, with these nanoparticles showing heightened tumor targeting and therapeutic efficacy in both and models141. Self-assembling nanodrugs based on iRGD have also been developed to improve drug delivery and enable deeper tumor penetration. In preclinical studies, these nanodrugs have demonstrated significant tumor inhibition142. Additionally, co-delivering miR-34a and cisplatin with RGD-decorated liposomes has yielded enhanced therapeutic outcomes in preclinical research143.

Clinical Advancements

While many nanoparticle-based TTP strategies remain in the preclinical stage, some have advanced to clinical evaluations. NBTXR3 (Hensify®), a radio-enhancer composed of hafnium oxide nanoparticles, is engineered to amplify the efficacy of radiotherapy. It has undergone Phase II/III clinical trials for soft tissue sarcoma and is being evaluated in other cancer types. In the study (NCT02379845), combining NBTXR3 with preoperative radiation therapy doubled the pathologic complete response rate compared to radiotherapy alone (16.1% 7.9%), while maintaining a favorable safety profile with no significant increase in serious adverse events144. Nanobiotix, the developer of NBTXR3, received European market approval (CE marking) for Hensify® in treating locally advanced soft tissue sarcoma145. Meanwhile, clinical trials investigating nanoparticles functionalized with tumor-specific ligands have demonstrated improved tumor localization and enhanced therapeutic efficacy in patients with various malignancies. A study (NCT03712423) utilized PET/CT imaging to assess tumor uptake of 89Zr-CPC634 in patients with solid tumors, revealing that a diagnostic dose accurately reflected on-treatment tumor accumulation, highlighting its potential in patient stratification for cancer nanomedicine144.

Personalized Medicine

patient-specific development of TTPs builds on the unique molecular profile of a patient's tumor, maximizing treatment efficacy. This approach leverages the unique molecular and genetic profiles of each patient's tumor to design highly specific and effective therapeutic agents. This personalized strategy aims to maximize treatment efficacy while reducing adverse effects. Tumor profiling, target identification, and peptide synthesis are crucial elements in the development of patient-specific TTPs145, 146, 147.

Figure 4

Advancements in TTP design i-e Cyclization for stability, Dual-targeting peptides, PLGA nanoparticle conjugates for controlled release.

Emerging and Future Prospects

Recent breakthroughs in peptide-based cancer therapies underscore the potential of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) to transform drug discovery and design148. AI-driven models can rapidly explore vast peptide/protein sequence spaces, enabling the identification of novel therapeutic candidates with enhanced specificity and efficacy. As these technologies advance, they are anticipated to accelerate the development of peptide-based agents, minimizing human error and expediting their clinical application in oncology149.

Advanced Computational Peptide Design

The integration of AI and ML has substantially advanced the design of tumor-targeting peptides. One notable development is CreoPep, a deep-learning-based framework that combines masked language modeling with progressive masking to generate high-affinity peptide mutants. This approach has demonstrated sub-micromolar potency against the α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, broadening the diversity of therapeutic peptides beyond natural variants150.

Another innovative tool is Light CPPgen, which integrates a LightGBM-based predictive model with a genetic algorithm to design cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs). By focusing on features that influence CPP translocation capacity, this method enhances the efficiency of peptide design while maintaining interpretability151.

Synergy with CRISPR/Cas-Based Screening

CRISPR/Cas-based genetic alteration screens have emerged as a powerful tool for identifying novel targets in cancer immunotherapy. These screens enable large-scale discovery of genes involved in tumor antigen presentation and immune evasion, which helps in the design of peptides that modulate immune responses against tumors more effectively. By integrating CRISPR screening data with peptide design, researchers can develop peptides that either enhance tumor immunogenicity or inhibit immune checkpoints, offering a synergistic approach to cancer therapy and drug delivery152.

Advanced Biomaterials for Tumor Microenvironment (TME) Responsive Drug Release

Because the TME is highly diverse and heterogeneous, delivering medications to tumors remains challenging. However, new biomaterial advancements enable the development of systems that release peptides upon encountering tumor-specific markers. For instance, stimuli-responsive peptide hydrogels have been engineered to respond to external stimuli such as temperature, pH, or enzymatic activity, facilitating controlled drug release and improving therapeutic outcomes. Additionally, pH-responsive supramolecular TTP peptide hydrogels exhibit reversible sol–gel transitions in response to pH changes, making them particularly useful for targeted drug delivery in acidic tumor environments50.

Conclusions

Tumor-targeting peptides (TTPs) have emerged as highly promising agents in cancer therapy due to their ability to selectively target tumor-associated antigens, receptors, or the tumor microenvironment. Innovations such as peptide-drug conjugates (PDCs), cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs), and multifunctional hybrid peptides are boosting tumor penetration and therapeutic efficacy. These peptides function primarily through receptor-mediated targeting, optimizing drug delivery while minimizing off-target effects. Mechanistically, TTPs either act as direct cytotoxic agents (., pro-apoptotic peptides), serve as carriers for chemotherapeutics, radionuclides, or nanoparticles, or modulate immune responses to enhance antitumor activity. Cancer cells can be visualized using radiolabeled peptides. Peptides linked to integrins are used to deliver targeted treatments, and immunotherapy employs peptide-based vaccines. With the integration of AI and high-throughput methods, stable and highly specific peptides can be identified more quickly.

Abbreviations

α-SMA (Alpha-Smooth Muscle Actin); AI (Artificial Intelligence); APCs (Antigen-Presenting Cells); Bevacizumab (Avastin, Anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody); CAFs (Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts); CME (Clathrin-Mediated Endocytosis); CPPs (Cell-Penetrating Peptides); CSF-1R (Colony-Stimulating Factor 1 Receptor); CT (Computed Tomography); CTCs (Circulating Tumor Cells); CTLs (Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes); CvME (Caveolin-Mediated Endocytosis); CXCL12 (C-X-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 12); DC (Dendritic Cell); EBRT (External Beam Radiation Therapy); ECM (Extracellular Matrix); EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor); EVs (Extracellular Vesicles); FAP (Fibroblast Activation Protein); FDA (Food and Drug Administration); FGFs (Fibroblast Growth Factors); HO (Hydrogen Peroxide); HAPs (Hypoxia-Activated Photosensitizers); HER2 (Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2); HIFs (Hypoxia-Inducible Factors); IL-6 (Interleukin-6); MHC (Major Histocompatibility Complex); ML (Machine Learning); MMPs (Matrix Metalloproteinases); MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging); NBTXR3 (Hensify®, Hafnium oxide nanoparticle radio-enhancer); NIR (Near-Infrared); Nivolumab (Anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody);O•⁻ (Superoxide Anion); •OH (Hydroxyl Radical); ONOO (Peroxynitrite); ¹O (Singlet Oxygen); PD-1 (Programmed Cell Death Protein 1); PD-L1 (Programmed Death-Ligand 1); PD-L2 (Programmed Death-Ligand 2); PDCs (Peptide-Drug Conjugates); PDT (Photodynamic Therapy); PET (Positron Emission Tomography); PLGA (Poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid)); PSs (Photosensitizers); Provenge (Sipuleucel-T, Autologous cellular vaccine); RGD (Arginine-Glycine-Aspartic Acid, peptide sequence); ROS (Reactive Oxygen Species); SPECT (Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography); TAAs (Tumor-Associated Antigens); TAT (Targeted Alpha Therapy); TGF-β (Transforming Growth Factor Beta); TME (Tumor Microenvironment); TTPs (Tumor-Targeting Peptides); VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor); VEGFR (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor).

Acknowledgments

None.

Author’s contributions

Formal analysis, Methodology, data curation, validation: Z, H.B,U.M. Draft preparation, critical revision & final editing of manuscript: S.A,H. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

None.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process

The authors declare that they have not used generative AI (a type of artificial intelligence technology that can produce various types of content including text, imagery, audio and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, NovelAI, Jasper AI, Rytr AI, DALL-E, ) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. V. Apostolopoulos, J. Bojarska, T.T. Chai, S. Elnagdy, K. Kaczmarek, J. Matsoukas. A global review on short peptides: frontiers and perspectives. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 2021; 26(2): 430.
  2. L. Wang, N. Wang, W. Zhang, X. Cheng, Z. Yan, G. Shao. Therapeutic peptides: current applications and future directions. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 2022; 7(1): 48.
  3. D. Bhandari, S. Rafiq, Y. Gat, P. Gat, R. Waghmare, V. Kumar. A review on bioactive peptides: physiological functions, bioavailability and safety. International Journal of Peptide Research and Therapeutics 2020; 26(1): 139-50.
  4. K.G. Varnava, V. Sarojini. Making solid-phase peptide synthesis greener: a review of the literature. Chemistry, an Asian Journal 2019; 14(8): 1088-97.
  5. D.F. Winkler. Automated solid-phase peptide synthesis. InPeptide Synthesis: Methods and Protocols 2019 Dec 27 (pp. 59-94). New York, NY: Springer US. InPeptide Synthesis: Methods and Protocols 2020; 2019: 59-94.
  6. S. Basith, B. Manavalan, T. Hwan Shin, G. Lee. Machine intelligence in peptide therapeutics: A next-generation tool for rapid disease screening. Medicinal Research Reviews 2020; 40(4): 1276-314.
  7. L.T. Ngoc, J.Y. Moon, Y.C. Lee. Insights into bioactive peptides in cosmetics. Cosmetics 2023; 10(4): 111.
  8. C.B. Falcao, G. Radis-Baptista. Crotamine and crotalicidin, membrane active peptides from Crotalus durissus terrificus rattlesnake venom, and their structurally-minimized fragments for applications in medicine and biotechnology. Peptides 2020; 126: 170234.
  9. Z. Zhao, A. Ukidve, J. Kim, S. Mitragotri. Targeting strategies for tissue-specific drug delivery. Cell 2020; 181(1): 151-67.
  10. S.Y. Tang, H. Wei, C.Y. Yu. Peptide-functionalized delivery vehicles for enhanced cancer therapy. International Journal of Pharmaceutics 2021; 593: 120141.
  11. R.A. Bottens, T. Yamada. Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) as therapeutic and diagnostic agents for cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14(22): 5546.
  12. M. Alas, A. Saghaeidehkordi, K. Kaur. Peptide-drug conjugates with different linkers for cancer therapy. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2021; 64(1): 216-32.
  13. R. He, B. Finan, J.P. Mayer, R.D. DiMarchi. Peptide conjugates with small molecules designed to enhance efficacy and safety. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 2019; 24(10): 1855.
  14. S.M. Vadevoo, S. Gurung, H.S. Lee, G.R. Gunassekaran, S.M. Lee, J.W. Yoon. Peptides as multifunctional players in cancer therapy. Experimental {&amp;}amp; Molecular Medicine 2023; 55(6): 1099-109.
  15. A. Ayo, P. Laakkonen. Peptide-based strategies for targeted tumor treatment and imaging. Pharmaceutics 2021; 13(4): 481.
  16. A.L. Tornesello, A. Borrelli, L. Buonaguro, F.M. Buonaguro, M.L. Tornesello. Antimicrobial peptides as anticancer agents: functional properties and biological activities. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 2020; 25(12): 2850.
  17. S.F. Askari Rizvi, H. Zhang. Emerging trends of receptor-mediated tumor targeting peptides: A review with perspective from molecular imaging modalities. European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2021; 221: 113538.
  18. P. Scodeller, E.K. Asciutto. Targeting tumors using peptides. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 2020; 25(4): 808.
  19. D.J. Worm, S. Els-Heindl, A.G. Beck-Sickinger. Targeting of peptide-binding receptors on cancer cells with peptide-drug conjugates. Peptide Science 2020; 112(3): e24171.
  20. T. Tashima. Delivery of Drugs into Cancer Cells Using Antibody-Drug Conjugates Based on Receptor-Mediated Endocytosis and the Enhanced Permeability and Retention Effect. Antibodies (Basel) 2022; 11(4): 78.
  21. B. Jafari, M.M. Pourseif, J. Barar, M.A. Rafi, Y. Omidi. Peptide-mediated drug delivery across the blood-brain barrier for targeting brain tumors. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 2019; 16(6): 583-605.
  22. A.A. Akatay, T. Wu, U. Djakbarova, C. Thompson, E. Cocucci, R. Zandi. Endocytosis at extremes: formation and internalization of giant clathrin-coated pits under elevated membrane tension. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 2022; 9: 959737.
  23. F. Mejia, S. Khan, D.T. Omstead, C. Minetos, B. Bilgicer. Identification and optimization of tunable endosomal escape parameters for enhanced efficacy in peptide-targeted prodrug-loaded nanoparticles. Nanoscale 2022; 14(4): 1226-40.
  24. M. Dudãu, E. Codrici, C. Tanase, M. Gherghiceanu, A.M. Enciu, M.E. Hinescu. Caveolae as potential hijackable gates in cell communication. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 2020; 8: 581732.
  25. S. Kudruk, S. Pottanam Chali, A.L. Linard Matos, C. Bourque, C. Dunker, C. Gatsogiannis. Biodegradable and Dual-Responsive Polypeptide-Shelled Cyclodextrin-Containers for Intracellular Delivery of Membrane-Impermeable Cargo. Advanced Science 2021; 8(18): e2100694.
  26. Y. Zhao, H. Jiang, J. Yu, L. Wang, J. Du. Engineered histidine-rich peptides enhance endosomal escape for antibody-targeted intracellular delivery of functional proteins. Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English 2023; 62(38): e202304692.
  27. Y. Ju, H. Guo, M. Edman, S.F. Hamm-Alvarez. Application of advances in endocytosis and membrane trafficking to drug delivery. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 2020; 157: 118-41.
  28. H. Cho, K.M. Huh, M.S. Shim, Y.Y. Cho, J.Y. Lee, H.S. Lee. Selective delivery of imaging probes and therapeutics to the endoplasmic reticulum or Golgi apparatus: current strategies and beyond. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 2024; 212: 115386.
  29. S. Fu, X. Xu, Y. Ma, S. Zhang, S. Zhang. RGD peptide-based non-viral gene delivery vectors targeting integrin αvβ3 for cancer therapy. Journal of Drug Targeting 2019; 27(1): 1-11.
  30. R.K. Dhritlahre, A. Saneja. Recent advances in HER2-targeted delivery for cancer therapy. Drug Discovery Today 2021; 26(5): 1319-29.
  31. E.D. Santos, K.A. Nogueira, L.C. Fernandes, J.R. Martins, A.V. Reis, J.B. Neto. EGFR targeting for cancer therapy: pharmacology and immunoconjugates with drugs and nanoparticles. International Journal of Pharmaceutics 2021; 592: 120082.
  32. J. Kazi, R. Mukhopadhyay, R. Sen, T. Jha, S. Ganguly, M.C. Debnath. Design of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) loaded, folate conjugated peptide linked nanoparticles, a potential new drug carrier for selective targeting of tumor cells. MedChemComm 2019; 10(4): 559-72.
  33. D. Sharma, M. Sharma, G.S. Bisht. Recent Updates on Folate Targeted Drug Delivery Systems in Cancer: A Mini Review. Current Cancer Therapy Reviews 2023; 19(1): 2-12.
  34. A.E. Nezir, M.P. Khalily, S. Gulyuz, S. Ozcubukcu, \cS.G. Küçükgüzel, O. Yilmaz. Synthesis and evaluation of tumor-homing peptides for targeting prostate cancer. Amino Acids 2021; 53(5): 645-52.
  35. H.J. Wester, M. Schottelius. PSMA-Targeted Radiopharmaceuticals for Imaging and Therapy. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine 2019; 49(4): 302-312.
  36. A. Janoniene, V. Petrikaite. In search of advanced tumor diagnostics and treatment: achievements and perspectives of Carbonic Anhydrase IX targeted delivery. Molecular Pharmaceutics 2020; 17(6): 1800-15.
  37. A. Sharma, A.P. Singh, S. Singh. Shaping up the tumor microenvironment: extracellular vesicles as important intermediaries in building a tumor-supportive cellular network. Cancers 2023; 15(2): 501.
  38. C.M. Neophytou, M. Panagi, T. Stylianopoulos, P. Papageorgis. The role of tumor microenvironment in cancer metastasis: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic opportunities. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13(9): 2053.
  39. X. Lu, Z. Gou, H. Chen, L. Li, F. Chen, C. Bao. Extracellular matrix cancer-associated fibroblasts promote stromal fibrosis and immune exclusion in triple-negative breast cancer. The Journal of Pathology 2025; 265(3): 385-99.
  40. Z. Yu, Q. Zhang, S. Wei, Y. Zhang, T. Zhou, Q. Zhang. CD146+CAFs promote progression of endometrial cancer by inducing angiogenesis and vasculogenic mimicry via IL-10/JAK1/STAT3 pathway. Cell Communication and Signaling : CCS 2024; 22(1): 170.
  41. B. Feng, J. Wu, B. Shen, F. Jiang, J. Feng. Cancer-associated fibroblasts and resistance to anticancer therapies: status, mechanisms, and countermeasures. Cancer Cell International 2022; 22(1): 166.
  42. R. Lugano, M. Ramachandran, A. Dimberg. Tumor angiogenesis: causes, consequences, challenges and opportunities. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences : CMLS 2020; 77(9): 1745-70.
  43. Y. Sakurai, H. Akita, H. Harashima. Targeting tumor endothelial cells with nanoparticles. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2019; 20(23): 5819.
  44. D. Vyas, M. Patel, S. Wairkar. Strategies for active tumor targeting-an update. European Journal of Pharmacology 2022; 915: 174512.
  45. A. Ahmad, M.I. Nawaz. Molecular mechanism of VEGF and its role in pathological angiogenesis. Journal of Cellular Biochemistry 2022; 123(12): 1938-65.
  46. G. Méndez-Valdés, F. Gómez-Hevia, J. Lillo-Moya, T. González-Fernández, J. Abelli, A. Cereceda-Cornejo. Endostatin and cancer therapy: a novel potential alternative to anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies. Biomedicines 2023; 11(3): 718.
  47. Y. Tie, F. Tang, Y.Q. Wei, X.W. Wei. Immunosuppressive cells in cancer: mechanisms and potential therapeutic targets. Journal of Hematology & Oncology 2022; 15(1): 61.
  48. L.A. Raedler. Keytruda (pembrolizumab): first PD-1 inhibitor approved for previously treated unresectable or metastatic melanoma. American health & drug benefits. 2015; 8(Spec Feature): 96.
  49. J.M. L'Orphelin, U. Lancien, J.M. Nguyen, F.J. Coronilla, S. Saiagh, J. Cassecuel. NIVO-TIL: combination anti-PD-1 therapy and adoptive T-cell transfer in untreated metastatic melanoma: an exploratory open-label phase I trial. Acta Oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) 2024; 63: 867-77.
  50. R.A. Madan, E.S. Antonarakis, C.G. Drake, L. Fong, E.Y. Yu, D.G. McNeel. Putting the pieces together: completing the mechanism of action jigsaw for sipuleucel-T. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2020; 112(6): 562-73.
  51. K. Chen, X. Li, S. Dong, Y. Guo, Z. Luo, S.M. Zhuang. Modulating tumor-associated macrophages through CSF1R inhibition: a potential therapeutic strategy for HNSCC. Journal of Translational Medicine 2025; 23(1): 27.
  52. W. Zhang, J. Wang, C. Liu, Y. Li, C. Sun, J. Wu. Crosstalk and plasticity driving between cancer-associated fibroblasts and tumor microenvironment: significance of breast cancer metastasis. Journal of Translational Medicine 2023; 21(1): 827.
  53. F. Qi, D. Fu, H. Cai, Y. Zheng, N. Wang, Z. Xu. Metabolic Reprogramming of Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts: Transforming Tumor Accomplices into Immunotherapeutic Allies. Advanced Functional Materials 2025; 35(13): 2418240.
  54. D. Zhou, L. Zheng. Recent advances in cancer-associated fibroblast: Biomarkers, signaling pathways, and therapeutic opportunities. Chinese Medical Journal 2024; 137(6): 638-50.
  55. H. Shin, Y. Kim, S. Jon. Nanovaccine displaying immunodominant T cell epitopes of fibroblast activation protein is effective against desmoplastic tumors. ACS Nano 2023; 17(11): 10337-52.
  56. N.G. Steele, G. Biffi, S.B. Kemp, Y. Zhang, D. Drouillard, L. Syu. Inhibition of hedgehog signaling alters fibroblast composition in pancreatic cancer. Clinical Cancer Research 2021; 27(7): 2023-37.
  57. P.E. Saw, J. Chen, E. Song. Targeting CAFs to overcome anticancer therapeutic resistance. Trends in Cancer 2022; 8(7): 527-55.
  58. S. Sanegre, F. Lucantoni, R. Burgos-Panadero, L. de La Cruz-Merino, R. Noguera, T. Álvaro Naranjo. Integrating the tumor microenvironment into cancer therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12(6): 1677.
  59. J. Huang, L. Zhang, D. Wan, L. Zhou, S. Zheng, S. Lin. Extracellular matrix and its therapeutic potential for cancer treatment. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 2021; 6(1): 153.
  60. N. Subrahmanyam, H. Ghandehari. Harnessing extracellular matrix biology for tumor drug delivery. Journal of Personalized Medicine 2021; 11(2): 88.
  61. N.V. Popova, M. Jücker. The functional role of extracellular matrix proteins in cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14(1): 238.
  62. S. Niland, A.X. Riscanevo, J.A. Eble. Matrix metalloproteinases shape the tumor microenvironment in cancer progression. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2021; 23(1): 146.
  63. Y. Xu, M. Kirchner. Collagen mimetic peptides. Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) 2021; 8(1): 5.
  64. M. Ikeda-Imafuku, Y. Gao, S. Shaha, L.L. Wang, K.S. Park, M. Nakajima. Extracellular matrix degrading enzyme with stroma-targeting peptides enhance the penetration of liposomes into tumors. Journal of Controlled Release : Official Journal of the Controlled Release Society 2022; 352: 1093-103.
  65. M. Zhu, G. Ren, J. Guo, X. Chen, R. Long, S. Wang. Hypoxia-responsive nanomicelle based on 2-nitroimidazole for tumor treatment through chemotherapy and modulation of the tumor redox microenvironment. ACS Applied Nano Materials 2024; 7(11): 12452-65.
  66. D. Zhao, Y. Zhang, Z. Yan, Y. Ding, F. Liang. Hypoxia-responsive polymeric nanoprodrugs for combo photodynamic and chemotherapy. ACS Omega 2023; 9(1): 1821-6.
  67. T. Tsuji, H. Tsunematsu, M. Imanishi, M. Denda, K. Tsuchiya, A. Otaka. Enhanced tumor specific drug release by hypoxia sensitive dual-prodrugs based on 2-nitroimidazole. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters 2023; 95: 129484.
  68. P. Rani, J.U. Rahim, S. Patra, R. Gupta, M. Gulati, B. Kapoor. Tumor microenvironment-responsive self-assembling polymeric prodrug-based nanomaterials for cancer therapy. Journal of Drug Delivery Science and Technology 2024; 96: 105715.
  69. K. Jadhav, A. Abhang, E.B. Kole, D. Gadade, A. Dusane, A. Iyer. Peptide-Drug Conjugates as Next-Generation Therapeutics: Exploring the Potential and Clinical Progress. Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) 2025; 12(5): 481.
  70. B. Andrade-Gagnon, S.N. Casillas-Popova, A.M. Jazani, J.K. Oh. Design, Synthesis, and Acid-Responsive Disassembly of Shell-Sheddable Block Copolymer Labeled with Benzaldehyde Acetal Junction. Macromolecular Rapid Communications 2024; 45(12): e2400097.
  71. I. Godet, S. Doctorman, F. Wu, D.M. Gilkes. Detection of hypoxia in cancer models: significance, challenges, and advances. Cells 2022; 11(4): 686.
  72. D. Xiao, L. Liu, F. Xie, J. Dong, Y. Wang, X. Xu. Azobenzene-Based Linker Strategy for Selective Activation of Antibody-Drug Conjugates. Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English 2024; 63(16): e202310318.
  73. T. Zhang, B. Yang, T. Jiang, X. Kong, X. Huo, Y. Ma. A Hypoxia-Activated BODIPY-Azo Anticancer Prodrug for Bimodal Chemo-Photodynamic Therapy. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2025; 68(3): 3020-30.
  74. H. He, X. Deng, Z. Wang, J. Chen, Recent Progress in the Development of Peptide-Drug Conjugates. Recent progress in the development of peptide-drug conjugates (PDCs) for cancer therapy. European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 2025; 284: 117204.
  75. B.M. Cooper, J. Iegre, D.H. O' Donovan, M. Ölweg\aard Halvarsson, D.R. Spring. Peptides as a platform for targeted therapeutics for cancer: peptide-drug conjugates (PDCs). Chemical Society Reviews 2021; 50(3): 1480-94.
  76. J. Zhao, F. Santino, D. Giacomini, L. Gentilucci. Integrin-targeting peptides for the design of functional cell-responsive biomaterials. Biomedicines 2020; 8(9): 307.
  77. X. Zhou, K. Shi, Y. Hao, C. Yang, R. Zha, C. Yi. Advances in nanotechnology-based delivery systems for EGFR tyrosine kinases inhibitors in cancer therapy. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2020; 15(1): 26-41.
  78. J. He, C. Li, L. Ding, Y. Huang, X. Yin, J. Zhang. Tumor targeting strategies of smart fluorescent nanoparticles and their applications in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Advanced Materials 2019; 31(40): e1902409.
  79. H. Zuo. iRGD: a promising peptide for cancer imaging and a potential therapeutic agent for various cancers. Journal of Oncology 2019; 2019(1): 9367845.
  80. E. Giovannini, G. Giovacchini, E. Borsò, P. Lazzeri, M. Riondato, R. Leoncini. [68Ga]-Dota Peptide PET/CT in Neuroendocrine Tumors: Main Clinical Applications. Current Radiopharmaceuticals 2019; 12(1): 11-22.
  81. G. Crișan , N.S. Moldovean-Cioroianu, D.G. Timaru, G. Andries, C. Căinap , V. Chiș . Radiopharmaceuticals for PET and SPECT imaging: a literature review over the last decade. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2022; 23(9): 5023.
  82. H. Hossein-Nejad-Ariani, E. Althagafi, K. Kaur. Small peptide ligands for targeting EGFR in triple negative breast cancer cells. Scientific Reports 2019; 9(1): 2723.
  83. W. Li, H. Wang, Z. Zhao, H. Gao, C. Liu, L. Zhu. Emerging nanotechnologies for liquid biopsy: the detection of circulating tumor cells and extracellular vesicles. Advanced Materials 2019; 31(45): e1805344.
  84. N. Carmona-Ule, N. Gal, C. Abuín Redondo, M. De La Fuente Freire, R. López López, A.B. Dávila-Ibáñez. Peptide-functionalized nanoemulsions as a promising tool for isolation and ex vivo culture of circulating tumor cells. Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) 2022; 9(8): 380.
  85. J. Jiao, J. Zhang, F. Yang, W. Song, D. Han, W. Wen. Quicker, deeper and stronger imaging: A review of tumor-targeted, near-infrared fluorescent dyes for fluorescence guided surgery in the preclinical and clinical stages. European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics 2020; 152: 123-43.
  86. M. Liu, R.C. Anderson, X. Lan, P.S. Conti, K. Chen. Recent advances in the development of nanoparticles for multimodality imaging and therapy of cancer. Medicinal Research Reviews 2020; 40(3): 909-30.
  87. S. Sotirov, I. Dimitrov. Tumor-derived antigenic peptides as potential cancer vaccines. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024; 25(9): 4934.
  88. D. Liu, L. Liu, X. Li, S. Wang, G. Wu, X. Che. Advancements and challenges in peptide-based cancer vaccination: a multidisciplinary perspective. Vaccines 2024; 12(8): 950.
  89. L. Li, X. Zhang, X. Wang, S.W. Kim, J.M. Herndon, M.K. Becker-Hapak. Optimized polyepitope neoantigen DNA vaccines elicit neoantigen-specific immune responses in preclinical models and in clinical translation. Genome Medicine 2021; 13(1): 56.
  90. A.T. Malacopol, P.J. Holst. Cancer Vaccines: Recent Insights and Future Directions. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024; 25(20): 11256.
  91. Y. Zhou, Y. Wei, X. Tian, X. Wei. Cancer vaccines: current status and future directions. Journal of Hematology & Oncology 2025; 18(1): 18.
  92. G. Zhao, Y. Zeng, W. Cheng, S. Karkampouna, P. Papadopoulou, B. Hu. Peptide-Modified Lipid Nanoparticles Boost the Antitumor Efficacy of RNA Therapeutics. ACS Nano 2025; 19(14): 13685-704.
  93. Z. Sethna, P. Guasp, C. Reiche, M. Milighetti, N. Ceglia, E. Patterson. RNA neoantigen vaccines prime long-lived CD8+ T cells in pancreatic cancer. Nature 2025; 639(8056): 1042-51.
  94. A.V. Yaremenko, M.M. Khan, X. Zhen, Y. Tang, W. Tao. Clinical advances of mRNA vaccines for cancer immunotherapy. Med 2025; 6(1): 100562.
  95. D.A. Braun, G. Moranzoni, V. Chea, B.A. McGregor, E. Blass, C.R. Tu. A neoantigen vaccine generates antitumour immunity in renal cell carcinoma. Nature 2025; 639(8054): 474-82.
  96. P. Siani, G. Frigerio, E. Donadoni, C. Di Valentin. Molecular dynamics simulations of cRGD-conjugated PEGylated TiO2 nanoparticles for targeted photodynamic therapy. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 2022; 627: 126-41.
  97. Y. Cai, T. Chai, W. Nguyen, J. Liu, E. Xiao, X. Ran. Phototherapy in cancer treatment: strategies and challenges. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy 2025; 10(1): 115.
  98. H. Wang, T. Qin, W. Wang, X. Zhou, F. Lin, G. Liang. Selenium-containing type-I organic photosensitizers with dual reactive oxygen species of superoxide and hydroxyl radicals as switch-hitter for photodynamic therapy. Advanced Science 2023; 10(24): e2301902.
  99. M. Przygoda, D. Bartusik-Aebisher, K. Dynarowicz, G. Cieślar, A. Kawczyk-Krupka, D. Aebisher. Cellular mechanisms of singlet oxygen in photodynamic therapy. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2023; 24(23): 16890.
  100. K. Moloudi, H. Abrahamse, B.P. George. Nanotechnology-mediated photodynamic therapy: focus on overcoming tumor hypoxia. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology 2024; 16(1): e1937.
  101. Z. Zhu, Y. Feng, Q. Tian, J. Li, C. Liu, Y. Cheng. A Self-Immobilizing Photosensitizer with Long-Term Retention for Hypoxia Imaging and Enhanced Photodynamic Therapy. JACS Au 2024; 4(10): 4032-42.
  102. J. Yu, J. Wu, J. Huang, C. Xu, M. Xu, C.Z. Koh. Hypoxia-tolerant polymeric photosensitizer prodrug for cancer photo-immunotherapy. Nature Communications 2025; 16(1): 153.
  103. N. Alvarez, A. Sevilla. Current advances in photodynamic therapy (PDT) and the future potential of PDT-combinatorial cancer therapies. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024; 25(2): 1023.
  104. F. Xu, H. Li, Q. Yao, H. Ge, J. Fan, W. Sun. Hypoxia-activated NIR photosensitizer anchoring in the mitochondria for photodynamic therapy. Chemical Science (Cambridge) 2019; 10(45): 10586-94.
  105. M. Estermann, R. Coelho, F. Jacob, Y.L. Huang, C.Y. Liang, A.B. Faia-Torres. A 3D multi-cellular tissue model of the human omentum to study the formation of ovarian cancer metastasis. Biomaterials 2023; 294: 121996.
  106. N.W. Nkune, H. Abrahamse. Anti-Hypoxia Nanoplatforms for enhanced photosensitizer uptake and photodynamic therapy effects in cancer cells. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2023; 24(3): 2656.
  107. D. Aebisher, P. Woźnicki, D. Bartusik-Aebisher. Photodynamic therapy and adaptive immunity induced by reactive oxygen species: recent reports. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16(5): 967.
  108. D. Sui, C. Li, X. Tang, X. Meng, J. Ding, Q. Yang. Sialic acid-mediated photochemotherapy enhances infiltration of CD8+ T cells from tumor-draining lymph nodes into tumors of immunosenescent mice. Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica. B 2023; 13(1): 425-39.
  109. F. Guidoccio, S. Mazzarri, T. Depalo, F. Orsini, P.A. Erba, G. Mariani. Novel Radiopharmaceuticals for Therapy. In: Volterrani, D., Erba, P.A., Strauss, H.W., Mariani, G., Larson, S.M. (eds) Nuclear Oncology 2022; : 217-43.
  110. S. Shi, H. Zhong, Y. Zhang, Q. Mei. Targeted delivery of nano-radiosensitizers for tumor radiotherapy. Coordination Chemistry Reviews 2024; 518: 216101.
  111. F.D. Guerra Liberal, J.M. O'Sullivan, S.J. McMahon, K.M. Prise. Targeted alpha therapy: current clinical applications. Cancer Biotherapy & Radiopharmaceuticals 2020; 35(6): 404-17.
  112. B. Xu. Loncastuximab tesirine: an effective therapy for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2022; 78(5): 707-19.
  113. S.J. Keam. Piflufolastat F 18: diagnostic first approval. Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy 2021; 25(5): 647-56.
  114. N.D. Shore. The role of conventional imaging and piflufolastat F18 in newly diagnosed and recurrent prostate cancer patients: Preliminary observations from the PYLARIFY Registry. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2025; 43(5_suppl): 41.
  115. S.J. Keam. Nirogacestat: first Approval. Drugs 2024; 84(3): 355-61.
  116. S.J. Keam. Lutetium Lu 177 vipivotide tetraxetan: first approval. Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy 2022; 26(4): 467-75.
  117. J. Fallah, S. Agrawal, H. Gittleman, M.H. Fiero, S. Subramaniam, C. John. FDA approval summary: lutetium Lu 177 vipivotide tetraxetan for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Clinical Cancer Research 2023; 29(9): 1651-7.
  118. A. Markham. Belantamab mafodotin: first approval. Drugs 2020; 80(15): 1607-13.
  119. A.C. Baines, R. Ershler, B. Kanapuru, Q. Xu, G. Shen, L. Li. FDA approval summary: belantamab mafodotin for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Clinical Cancer Research 2022; 28(21): 4629-33.
  120. K.C. Shultes. Loncastuximab Tesirine-lpyl (Zynlonta\textregistered). Oncology Times 2022; 44(22): 14.
  121. J. Day-Storms. FDA-Approved Nirogacestat Demonstrates Improved Patient Outcomes in Desmoid Tumor Management.. https://www.ahdbonline.com/issues/2023/december-2023-vol-16-payers-guide/3321-fda-approved-nirogacestat-demonstrates-improved-patient-outcomes-in-desmoid-tumor-management :
  122. S. Wahby, L. Fashoyin-Aje, C.L. Osgood, J. Cheng, M.H. Fiero, L. Zhang. FDA approval summary: accelerated approval of sacituzumab govitecan-hziy for third-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Clinical Cancer Research 2021; 27(7): 1850-4.
  123. J.M. Seligson, A.M. Patron, M.J. Berger, R.D. Harvey, N.D. Seligson. Sacituzumab govitecan-hziy: an antibody-drug conjugate for the treatment of refractory, metastatic, triple-negative breast cancer. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2021; 55(7): 921-31.
  124. P.E. Saw, E.W. Song. Phage display screening of therapeutic peptide for cancer targeting and therapy. Protein & Cell 2019; 10(11): 787-807.
  125. B. He, A.M. Dzisoo, R. Derda, J. Huang. Development and application of computational methods in phage display technology. Current Medicinal Chemistry 2019; 26(42): 7672-93.
  126. J. Fetse, S. Kandel, U.F. Mamani, K. Cheng. Recent advances in the development of therapeutic peptides. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 2023; 44(7): 425-41.
  127. C. Fu, L. Yu, Y. Miao, X. Liu, Z. Yu, M. Wei. Peptide-drug conjugates (PDCs): a novel trend of research and development on targeted therapy, hype or hope?. Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica. B 2023; 13(2): 498-516.
  128. L. Hao, X. Li, B. Zhao, X. Song, Y. Zhang, Q. Liang. Enzymatic hydrolysis optimization of yak whey protein concentrates and bioactivity evaluation of the ultrafiltered peptide fractions. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) 2024; 29(6): 1403.
  129. M. Amblard, J.A. Fehrentz, J. Martinez, G. Subra. Methods and protocols of modern solid phase Peptide synthesis. Molecular Biotechnology 2006; 33(3): 239-54.
  130. H. Masui, S. Fuse. Recent advances in the solid-and solution-phase synthesis of peptides and proteins using microflow technology. Organic Process Research & Development 2022; 26(6): 1751-65.
  131. F. Ahmadi-Vavsari, J. Farmani, A. Dehestani. Recombinant production of a bioactive peptide from spotless smooth-hound (Mustelus griseus) muscle and characterization of its antioxidant activity. Molecular Biology Reports 2019; 46(3): 2599-608.
  132. S. Olivares-Galván, M.L. Marina, M.C. García. Extraction and characterization of antioxidant peptides from fruit residues. Foods 2020; 9(8): 1018.
  133. C.A. Stevens, F. Bachtiger, X.D. Kong, L.A. Abriata, G.C. Sosso, M.I. Gibson. A minimalistic cyclic ice-binding peptide from phage display. Nature Communications 2021; 12(1): 2675.
  134. C. Lammi, G. Aiello, G. Boschin, A. Arnoldi. Multifunctional peptides for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: A new concept in the area of bioactive food-derived peptides. Journal of Functional Foods 2019; 55: 135-45.
  135. J. Vá\vnová, A. Hejtmánková, M.H. Kalbá\vcová, H. \vSpanielová. The utilization of cell-penetrating peptides in the intracellular delivery of viral nanoparticles. Materials (Basel) 2019; 12(17): 2671.
  136. B.S. Esposto, P. Jauregi, D.R. Tapia-Blácido, M. Martelli-Tosi. Liposomes vs. chitosomes: encapsulating food bioactives. Trends in Food Science & Technology 2021; 108: 40-8.
  137. E.M. Elmowafy, M. Tiboni, M.E. Soliman. Biocompatibility, biodegradation and biomedical applications of poly (lactic acid)/poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) micro and nanoparticles. Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation 2019; 49(4): 347-80.
  138. D. Zhu, H. Zhang, Y. Huang, B. Lian, C. Ma, L. Han. A self-assembling amphiphilic peptide dendrimer-based drug delivery system for cancer therapy. Pharmaceutics 2021; 13(7): 1092.
  139. T.T. Hoang Thi, V.D. Cao, T.N. Nguyen, D.T. Hoang, V.C. Ngo, D.H. Nguyen. Functionalized mesoporous silica nanoparticles and biomedical applications. Materials Science and Engineering C 2019; 99: 631-56.
  140. M. Bravo, B. Fortuni, P. Mulvaney, J. Hofkens, H. Uji-I, S. Rocha. Nanoparticle-mediated thermal Cancer therapies: strategies to improve clinical translatability. Journal of Controlled Release : Official Journal of the Controlled Release Society 2024; 372: 751-77.
  141. D. Yuan, Z. Lu, X. Xu, W. Liu. RGD peptide-conjugated polydopamine nanoparticles loaded with doxorubicin for combined chemotherapy and photothermal therapy in thyroid cancer. Discover. Oncology 2024; 15(1): 794.
  142. B. Wang, D. Tang, J. Cui, H. Jiang, J. Yu, Z. Guo. RGD-based self-assembling nanodrugs for improved tumor therapy. Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024; 15:
  143. H. Bardania, M. Baneshi, R. Mahmoudi, F. Khosravani, F. Safari, B. Khalvati. Synergistic breast cancer therapy with RGD-decorated liposomes co-delivering mir-34a and cisplatin. Cancer Nanotechnology 2024; 15(1): 60.
  144. R.V. Kumarasamy, P.M. Natarajan, V.R. Umapathy, J.R. Roy, M. Mironescu, C.P. Palanisamy. Clinical applications and therapeutic potentials of advanced nanoparticles: A comprehensive review on completed human clinical trials. Frontiers in Nanotechnology 2024; 6: 1479993.
  145. S. Bonvalot, C. Le Pechoux, T. De Baere, G. Kantor, X. Buy, E. Stoeckle. First-in-human study testing a new radioenhancer using nanoparticles (NBTXR3) activated by radiation therapy in patients with locally advanced soft tissue sarcomas. Clinical Cancer Research 2017; 23(4): 908-17.
  146. E.R. Malone, M. Oliva, P.J. Sabatini, T.L. Stockley, L.L. Siu. Molecular profiling for precision cancer therapies. Genome Medicine 2020; 12(1): 8.
  147. Z. Agur, M. Elishmereni, U. Foryś, Y. Kogan. Accelerating the development of personalized cancer immunotherapy by integrating molecular patients' profiles with dynamic mathematical models. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 2020; 108(3): 515-27.
  148. D.E. Zhang, T. He, T. Shi, K. Huang, A. Peng. Trends in the research and development of peptide drug conjugates: artificial intelligence aided design. Frontiers in Pharmacology 2025; 16: 1553853.
  149. N.T. Nhàn, T. Yamada, K.H. Yamada. Peptide-based agents for cancer treatment: current applications and future directions. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2023; 24(16): 12931.
  150. C. Ge. CreoPep: A Universal Deep Learning Framework for Target-Specific Peptide Design and Optimization. arXiv 2025; 2025: 2505.02887.
  151. Y. Lei. Pepgb: facilitating peptide drug discovery via graph neural networks. arXiv 2024; 2024: 2401.14665.
  152. D. Liu, X. Zhao, A. Tang, X. Xu, S. Liu, L. Zha. CRISPR screen in mechanism and target discovery for cancer immunotherapy. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. Reviews on Cancer 2020; 1874(1): 188378.

Comments