English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Whilst improvements in patient survival have been realized for a number of haematological and solid malignancies in the last 30 years, new efficacious systemic anti-cancer treatments are still needed. The current, widely used drug development paradigm is often associated with a poor conversion rate from experimental to licensed drug. This process involves a sig‐ nificant investment of resources from sponsors, investigators and patients and to date has only lead to a limited chance of success. At present there are in excess of 800 anti-cancer agents in development and less than 10 new FDA approvals each year [1]. In order to ad‐ dress this problem there has been considerable debate concerning the best trial methodology to rationalize this process, with discussion of the timing, sequence and design of appropriate trials [2]. At present in many tumour types including breast, lung, renal cell and prostate cancer, the pipeline of new agents is crowded. In order therefore to use the available finan‐ cial and patient resource wisely, it is crucial to identify the key important pathways in onco‐ genesis that in turn may help and prioritize the drugs with the most promise.

Rational Categorization of the Pipeline of New Treatments for Advanced Cancer – Prostate Cancer as an Example