Perspective on Advanced Cancer Research

William Tandey^*
*Correspondence: William Tandey, Department of Anatomical and Cellular Pathology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China, Email:

Perspective

These are exciting times in cancer research; significant advances in cancer biology are now being effectively translated into the clinic. The promising results of STI-571 (Gleevec) in chronic myeloid leukemia and c-kit activated gastrointestinal stromal tumors and the encouraging results of EGF receptor blockers in solid tumors offer a glimpse of a new era of mechanism-based approaches to cancer therapeutics. In addition, technological advances such as gene expression profiling are allowing the characterization of cancerous lesions at the molecular level and the identification of markers of prognostic value. In this context, we are proud to introduce Cancer Cell, a new forum for cutting-edge findings in cancer research. The main goal of Cancer Cell is to publish highly significant work in all areas of cancer research. Cancer Cell will also feature review material, including Commentaries, Primers, Previews, and Reviews, appealing to basic scientists and clinical oncologists alike. During its first year, Cancer Cell will publish a Focus on a different tumor every month; this concise piece is meant to provide, at a glance, the current status of each disease in terms of epidemiology, diagnosis, conventional treatment and experimental therapeutics, relevant molecular targets involved in cancer pathogenesis, prevention, and future challenges.

The inaugural issue of Cancer Cell reflects the scope of the journal, by including studies that provide a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in cancer development (such as the amplification of the MET oncogene in human gastric carcinoma, the identification of novel oncogenic pathways in T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemias and the regulation of angiogenic signaling) and reports on the development of sophisticated mouse models for ovarian carcinoma and acute myeloid leukemia, which may contribute to the identification of diagnostic markers and the development of preclinical testing of novel therapeutic approaches. Richard Klausner comments on the enormous gap that exists between our appreciation of the molecular basis of tumorigenesis and our ability to translate these concepts into efficient prevention and genuine cures, and how this gap might be overcome. Emerging technologies, such as the ones used in cancer genomics are described by Barbara Weber in a Primer accessible to clinicians. The identification of molecular predictors of clinical outcome, by gene expression profiling, and its implications for the treatment of breast cancer patients are discussed by Robert Weinberg.

As part of our efforts to bridge the gap between basic scientists and clinical oncologists, Brian Druker summarizes the lessons drawn from the clinical success of Gleevec in CML that may contribute to the clinical development of other molecularly targeted therapies and Charles Sawyers discusses novel findings in the autoregulation of c-Abl and their implications for cancer therapeutics. I come to Cancer Cell after 15 years of experience in cancer research. I obtained my Ph.D. from the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina, for my work on human breast cancer biology. After postdoctoral training in France in AIDS research and in the development of mouse models for human malignancies, I joined the faculty at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia. My research there focused on the role of the IGF-I receptor in proliferation, tumorigenesis, and apoptosis, leading to the preclinical development of different approaches for IGF-I receptor targeting in tumors. From my collaborations with scientists at biotech companies and with clinicians, I came to recognize the need for a dynamic forum that fosters the exchange of ideas across the entire cancer community. We now have an opportunity to make Cancer Cell just such a journal, and this is an exciting challenge. Assisting me in this new venture is Katharine Winkler, as an Associate Editor, and Judith Glaven as a Consulting Editor [1-5].

Kate has a background in cell cycle and checkpoint regulation. Judyâ??s research focused on small GT Pases and second messenger signaling, and she currently works as a Senior Editor on Cell, Molecular Cell, and Developmental Cell. For Cancer Cell to become an exciting forum for cancer research, we need you to contribute your most innovative and significant work in the cancer field. In exchange, Cancer Cell will strive to provide a fast, fair, and constructive review process; the highest quality production values; and a dedicated team of professional scientific editors, who are willing to discuss your research, respond to your pre submission inquiries, and ensure that all manuscripts are reviewed on the basis of scientific merit and held to the highest standards of excellence and editorial consistency. Cancer Cell will also provide press releases, enabling Cancer Cell articles to be covered by the popular press and other high-profile research journals. As part of our launch, the first three issues of Cancer Cell will be available free online (http://www.cancercell.org) and they will be widely distributed at the forthcoming AACR and ASCO conferences. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge our Editorial Board for their commitment to the journal and to express my most sincere gratitude to the entire staff of Cell Press for their valuable advice and support in launching this journal. I also want to acknowledge the important role played by Kevin Davies, who was Editor-in-Chief of Cell Press in 2001. Kevin appointed the editorial team and was instrumental during the early stages of the launch. I invite you to work together with us to develop this new forum for cancer research, and I look forward to meeting you at conferences throughout the year.

REFERENCES

1. Warren, Jared, Kavin Sundaram, Hiba Anis, Atul F. Kamath and Michael A. Mont, et al. "Spinal anesthesia is associated with decreased complications after total knee and hip arthroplasty."JAm Acad Orthop Surg28 (2020): 213-221.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Neuman, Mark, Rui Feng, Jeffrey Carson and Lakisha Gaskins, et al. "Spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia for hip surgery in older adults."New Eng J Med 385 (2021): 2025-2035.

Indexed at

3. Paziuk, Taylor M., Andrew J. Luzzi, Andrew N. Fleischman and Karan Goswami, et al. "General vs spinal anesthesia for total joint arthroplasty: a single-institution observational review." J Arthroplasty35 (2020): 955-959.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Khan, Zahid Hussain, Negar Eftekhar, and Rafah Sabah Barrak. "General versus spinal anesthesia during caesarean section: a narrative review."Arch Anesthesiol Crit Care5 (2019): 18-21.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Teixeira, F, C Peixoto de Sousa, D Gonçalves and AP Pereira, et al. "70 Abdominal surgery in high-risk cardiovascular patient–anesthetic option." Reg Anesth Pain Med 3 (2021): 37-38.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at