No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 16, 2026.
Targeting oncogenic Myc as a strategy for cancer treatment
Hui Chen, Hudan Liu, Guoliang Qing
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy · 2018 · Review · CC BY
Abstract
The MYC family oncogene is deregulated in >50% of human cancers, and this deregulation is frequently associated with poor prognosis and unfavorable patient survival. Myc has a central role in almost every aspect of the oncogenic process, orchestrating proliferation, apoptosis, differentiation, and metabolism. Although Myc inhibition would be a powerful approach for the treatment of many types of cancers, direct targeting of Myc has been a challenge for decades owing to its “undruggable” protein structure. Hence, alternatives to Myc blockade have been widely explored to achieve desirable anti-tumor effects, including Myc/Max complex disruption, MYC transcription and/or translation inhibition, and Myc destabilization as well as the synthetic lethality associated with Myc overexpression. In this review, we summarize the latest advances in targeting oncogenic Myc, particularly for cancer therapeutic purposes.
Full text
From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 16, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.
Introduction
The MYC oncogene family consists of three members, C-MYC, MYCN, and MYCL, which encode c-Myc, N-Myc, and L-Myc, respectively.– The Myc oncoproteins belong to a family of so-called “super-transcription factors” that potentially regulate the transcription of at least 15% of the entire genome. The major downstream effectors of Myc include those involved in ribosome biogenesis, protein translation, cell-cycle progression and metabolism, orchestrating a broad range of biological functions, such as cell proliferation, differentiation, survival, and immune surveillance (Fig. 1).,
Myc family members exhibit high-structural homology, including the basic-region /helix-loop-helix/leucine-zipper (BR/HLH/LZ) motif at the C terminus and three highly conserved elements, known as Myc boxes 1–3 at the N terminus (Fig. 2a).,, As a master transcription factor, Myc binds to Max through the common BR/HLH/LZ motif, which is required for DNA–protein interactions.,, The Myc/Max heterodimer recruits a chromatin-modifying complex (TRRAP, GCN5, TIP60, and TIP48) and activates transcription by binding to the conserved E-box DNA sequence (CACGTG) located in the transcriptional regulatory region of target genes (Fig. 2b).,, Recent studies have shown that, in addition to recognizing specific E-box sequences, c-Myc also accumulates in the promoter regions of active genes, leading to transcriptional amplification (Fig. 2c).,
The expression of Myc family members is tightly controlled under normal circumstances., Yet, Myc is frequently deregulated in human cancers. Excess Myc expression can be induced upon retroviral promoter insertion, chromosomal translocation/amplification, activation of super-enhancers within the MYC gene, and/or mutation of upstream signaling pathways that enhance Myc stability. Studies in transgenic mouse models have demonstrated that even transient inactivation of Myc elicits tumor regression, suggesting that regulation of oncogenic Myc could be harnessed to treat cancer patients.– Yet, drug development aimed at directly targeting Myc has proved challenging. First, as a transcription factor, Myc lacks a specific active site for small molecules, making it difficult to functionally inhibit its activities using strategies similar to those used for kinases. Second, Myc is predominantly located in the nucleus, thus, targeting nuclear Myc with specific monoclonal antibodies is technically impractical. To overcome these obstacles, alternative approaches to indirectly abrogate Myc oncogenic functions have been extensively investigated.
Indirect targeting of Myc
Because strategies to directly target Myc have not been achieved thus far, essential targets involved in Myc deregulation have been exploited as new approaches to treat Myc-driven cancers. Targeting MYC transcription by interfering with chromatin-dependent signal transduction to RNA polymerase, a process in which BRD4 has been implicated, has shown great promise., Myc stability is tightly controlled by the ubiquitin-proteasome system, thus, a potential strategy to target Myc is to selectively inhibit the kinases and/or deubiquitinases that stabilize Myc., Myc strictly depends on its partner Max to regulate gene transcription, so interrupting the Myc–Max complex is therefore an additional approach to inhibit Myc signaling. Here, we provide a concise overview of the key factors involved in the transcription, translation, stability, and activation of Myc, which could be targeted for the treatment of Myc-addicted cancers (Fig. 3).
Bromodomain-containing 4 (BRD4)
BRD4 is a member of the mammalian bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) family. BRD4 regulates transcription through recruitment of the positive transcription elongation factor b (P-TEFb), which phosphorylates the carboxy-terminal domain of RNA polymerase II (pol II), to the site of hyperacetylated chromatin. These changes lead to the release of RNA pol II from pausing in the promoter-proximal region, ultimately resulting in transcriptional elongation., MYC transcription is under BRD4 regulation. JQ1, a powerful inhibitor of BRD4, competes with BRD4 for binding to acetylated lysines and displaces BRD4 from the super-enhancers within the MYC oncogene., As such, inhibition of the BET bromodomain with JQ1 showed potent anti-cancer effects both in vitro and in vivo in multiple hematopoietic cancers and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) exhibiting C-MYC overexpression.– Neuroblastomas and other MYCN-driven cancers are also sensitive to BET inhibitors. GSK525762, a specific BET inhibitor, is currently in early-phase clinical trials for treating these hematopoietic malignancies and solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01943851, NCT03266159).
Cyclin-dependent kinase 7 and 9 (CDK7 and CDK9)
In contrast to the classical cell-cycle CDKs which are largely responsible for cell-cycle transition, CDK7 and CDK9 are CDKs that have critical roles in transcription initiation and elongation., CDK7 is a catalytic subunit of the transcription factor IIH complex (TFIIH), and CDK9 is a kinase subunit of P-TEFb., These two transcriptional kinases phosphorylate specific serine residues within the carboxy-terminal domain of Pol II, facilitating efficient transcriptional initiation, pause release and elongation. Numerous studies demonstrate that inhibition of transcriptional CDKs primarily affects the accumulation of transcripts critical for the control of cell identity, growth, and proliferation.–
A general feature of MYC deregulation is its transcriptional regulation by Super-Enhancers (SEs), clusters of enhancers that are densely occupied by transcription factors and chromatin regulators, including CDK7 and CDK9, rendering this group of kinases ideal candidates for blocking Myc-dependent transcriptional amplification., Indeed, inhibition of CDK7 and/or CDK9 substantially reduces MYC expression, attendant to widespread transcriptional downregulation of Myc target genes.,, Administration of specific inhibitors against CDK7 (THZ1) and/or CDK9 (PC585) induced potent anti-tumor effects in MYC-overexpressing T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, mixed-lineage leukemia, neuroblastomas, and small cell lung cancers, validating these newly developed transcriptional CDK inhibitors as a potential treatment strategy that targets global transcriptional amplification in Myc-driven cancers.,,
Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)
The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mTOR pathway is frequently altered in various cancers. mTOR is a serine/threonine kinase that functions as the catalytic subunit of two distinct complexes called mTOR complexes 1 and 2 (mTORC1 and mTORC2). The central role of mTOR in protein synthesis is largely attributed to mTORC1., mTORC1-dependent phosphorylation of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) binding protein 1 (4EBP1) blocks its ability to negatively regulate the translation initiation factor eIF4E, thus promoting the translation of mRNAs containing long 5′-untranslated regions (5′-UTRs) with complex RNA secondary structures, such as MYC., As such, pharmacological inhibition of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway markedly decreased Myc level and exhibited remarkable therapeutic efficacy in Myc-driven cancers, including neuroblastoma, small-cell lung carcinoma, breast cancer, and multiple hematopoietic cancers., –
Cytoplasmic polyadenylation element-binding protein (CPEB)
The CPEB-family proteins are sequence-specific RNA-binding proteins which control the elongation of the poly(A) tail and polyadenylation-induced translation. CPEB binds the cytoplasmic polyadenylation element (CPE) containing the conserved UUUUAU or UUUUAAU sequence within the 3′-UTRs of responding mRNAs. A recent study revealed that the C-MYC mRNA contains CPEs that can be recognized by CPEB. Mechanistically, CPEB recruits Caf1 deadenylase through an interaction with Tob, an antiproliferative protein, and inhibits c-Myc expression by accelerating the deadenylation and decay of its mRNA. Expression of CPEB-family proteins are frequently downregulated in human cancers. Therefore, pharmacological approaches aimed at reactivating CPEB expression would lead to Myc inhibition in Myc-driven cancers.
USP28, USP36, and USP7
Myc stability is tightly controlled by the ubiquitin-proteasome system. Upon phosphorylation at Thr58, Myc is polyubiquitinated by the E3 ligase FBW7 and degraded by the proteasome. The human FBW7 locus encodes three protein isoforms, FBW7α, FBW7β, and FBW7ɣ, that differ in their N-terminal sequences and in their subcellular localization. Both FBW7α and FBW7ɣ are responsible for the selective degradation of endogenous Myc in human cells. Several deubiquitinating enzymes are involved in Myc stabilization. USP28 was shown to bind c-Myc through an interaction with FBW7α and antagonize its E3 ligase activities in the nucleus, leading to Myc stabilization and tumor cell proliferation. USP36 deubiquitinates and stabilizes c-Myc through interactions with FBW7ɣ in the nucleolus. USP7 directly binds to and stabilizes N-Myc through deubiquitination in neuroblastomas cells, and a small-molecule inhibitor of USP7, P22077, markedly suppressed growth of MYCN-amplified neuroblastoma in a xenograft model. In principle, targeting these deubiquitinases could cause Myc destabilization and tumor suppression.
AURKA
The Aurora family includes AURKA, AURKB, and AURKC, which are key regulators of mitosis. AURKA contributes to tumorigenesis through interactions with P53 and Myc.– Recently, Otto et al. showed that Aurora A and N-Myc acted as oncogenic partners in neuroblastomas. AURKA forms a complex with N-Myc, which protects N-Myc from FBW7-mediated proteasomal degradation. Two AURKA inhibitors, MLN8054 and MLN8237, disrupt the Myc–AURKA complex, resulting in N-Myc degradation and tumor regression in MYCN-amplified neuroblastomas., MLN8237 also induced c-Myc degradation in P53-mutant human hepatocellular carcinoma cells. These data suggest that AURKA inhibitors may be potential therapeutics for the treatment of Myc-dependent cancers.
Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1)
The Polo-like kinases (PLKs) comprise a family of five serine/threonine protein kinases that control many crucial biological processes. The best characterized PLK family member is PLK1. Using MYCN-amplified neuroblastomas and small cell lung carcinomas as model systems, we recently demonstrated that PLK1 and Myc created a positive, feedforward activation loop that was essential for sustaining mutual high expression, leading to Myc-dependent transcriptional amplification and aggressive tumor progression. Inhibitors of PLK1, such as BI 6727 or BI2356, preferentially induce potent apoptosis of Myc-overexpressing tumor cells and synergistically potentiate the therapeutic efficacies of BCL-2 antagonists. These findings reveal a PLK1-FBW7-Myc signaling circuit that underlies tumorigenesis and validate PLK1 inhibitors, alone or with BCL-2 antagonists, as potential effective therapeutics for Myc-overexpressing cancers.
Targeting the MYC–MAX complex
The Myc–Max complex is required for the binding of Myc to DNA and its subsequent activation of target gene transcription. The Myc–Max dimer interface is a parallel, left-handed, four-helix bundle, with each monomer comprising two R-helices separated by a loop. Although studies have shown that this structure has no apparent sites for positioning a small-molecule inhibitor, several labs have screened small molecules that block this interaction. The peptide mimetic IIA6B17 was first reported as a small-molecule inhibitor of Myc–Max dimerization. A compound called 10058-F4 was capable of disrupting the Myc–Max complex in HL60 cells. Another widely known inhibitor, Omomyc, a mutant basic helix-loop-helix peptide that sequesters Myc in a transcriptionally incompetent complex, prevents Myc-induced tumorigenesis in multiple mouse tumor models.–
Synthetic lethal interaction with MYC
Two genes (“A” and “B”) are said to be “synthetic lethal” if mutation of either gene alone is compatible with viability but simultaneous mutation of both genes causes death. Synthetic lethal interactions are most commonly described for loss-of-function alleles but can also involve gain-of-function alleles. For example, gene A might become essential for survival when a particular gene B is overexpressed. This situation describes Myc-mediated synthetic lethality. MYC overexpression is found in many cancers, and MYC overexpression sensitizes cells to apoptosis, enabling targeting a gene that is synthetic lethal to a cancer-relevant MYC overexpression should kill only cancer cells but spare normal counterparts. Here, we describe key factors that exhibit synthetic lethal interactions with Myc deregulation (Fig. 4).
Cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (CDK1)
CDK1 is a catalytic subunit of the highly conserved protein kinase complex known as the M-phase-promoting factor, which is essential for the G1/S and G2/M-phase transitions of the eukaryotic cell cycle. RNAi screens for synthetic lethality in MYC overexpressing cells highlight the promise of targeting this cell-cycle kinase for Myc-dependent cancers. Indeed, inhibiting CDK1 function using the small molecule purvalanol A selectively induced apoptosis in cells with MYC overexpression and significantly decreased tumor growth in Myc-dependent lymphoma and hepatoblastoma mouse models. It appears that the selective induction of apoptosis upon CDK1 inhibition is associated with upregulation of the pro-apoptotic molecule BIM and/or downregulation of the anti-apoptotic molecule survivin., It should be noted that CDK1 inhibition could also selectively kill transformed cells by targeting E2F-1 and/or enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2)., Most likely, multiple mechanisms contributed to the CDK1 inhibition-induced tumor regression. Nevertheless, these results suggest the potential value of targeting CDK1 in Myc-driven cancers.
Checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1)
CHK1 has a key role in cell-cycle progression and DNA damage checkpoint control., The use of CHK1 inhibitors to treat cancer was derived from observations that tumor cells without DNA damage checkpoints during tumorigenesis or therapy are highly sensitive to additional genomic instability. Myc deregulation is sufficient to induce genome instability. Myc induces replication stresses and DNA damages through excessive replication-fork firing, making Myc-overexpressing tumors substantially more sensitive to CHK1 inhibition. As such, CHK1 inhibition leads to massive cell death in Myc-overexpressing lymphomas, neuroblastomas, breast and lung cancers.–
Glutaminase (GLS)
Many tumor cells rely on glutamine metabolism to fuel their unabated growth and proliferation., Oncogenic Myc increases the surface expression of glutamine transporters and alters mitochondrial metabolism, making the cell dependent on exogenous glutamine for survival.– Glutamine is converted to glutamate by GLS, an enzyme that is highly expressed in tumor cells. Accordingly, inhibition of glutamine metabolism by GLS inhibitors selectively induces apoptosis in Myc-overexpressing tumor cells.– Of note, CB-839, a potent and selective GLS inhibitor, is currently in phase I clinical studies for treating leukemias and other hematological tumors with Myc deregulation.
Conclusion and perspectives
Here, we have described multiple pharmacological approaches to indirectly target Myc at different levels (Table 1). These approaches should be translated as a strategy to move forward in future patient care, as patients with Myc deregulation are likely to respond. Although direct targeting of Myc has not yet been achieved, promise remains in developing innovative approaches to effectively and specifically target this cancer super-controller. As a matter of fact, BCL-2 was also considered undruggable until a decade of fragment-based nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) screening altered and broadened the view of this potential inhibitory molecule. Whether through direct or indirect targeting of Myc, better therapeutics to target Myc-dependent cancers will be required in the future.
References 97
- 1.
Adhikary S, Eilers M. Transcriptional regulation and transformation by Myc proteins. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2005;6:635-645.
Not in our library10.1038/nrm1703
- 2.
Pelengaris S, Khan M, Evan G. c-MYC: more than just a matter of life and death. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2002;2:764-776.
Not in our library10.1038/nrc904
- 3.
Dang CV. MYC on the path to cancer. Cell. 2012;149:22-35.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2012.03.003
- 4.
Dang CV, et al. The c-Myc target gene network. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2006;16:253-264.
Not in our library10.1016/j.semcancer.2006.07.014
- 5.
Meyer N, Penn LZ. Reflecting on 25 years with MYC. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2008;8:976-990.
Not in our library10.1038/nrc2231
- 6.
Nie Z, et al. c-Myc is a universal amplifier of expressed genes in lymphocytes and embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2012;151:68-79.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2012.08.033
- 7.
Lin CY, et al. Transcriptional amplification in tumor cells with elevated c-Myc. Cell. 2012;151:56-67.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2012.08.026
- 8.
Shachaf CM, Felsher DW. Tumor dormancy and MYC inactivation: pushing cancer to the brink of normalcy. Cancer Res. 2005;65:4471-4474.
Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-05-1172
- 9.
Soucek L, et al. Modelling Myc inhibition as a cancer therapy. Nature. 2008;455:679-683.
Not in our library10.1038/nature07260
- 10.
Arvanitis C, Felsher DW. Conditional transgenic models define how MYC initiates and maintains tumorigenesis. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2006;16:313-317.
Not in our library10.1016/j.semcancer.2006.07.012
- 11.
Delmore JE, et al. BET bromodomain inhibition as a therapeutic strategy to target c-Myc. Cell. 2011;146:904-917.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2011.08.017
- 12.
Filippakopoulos P, et al. Selective inhibition of BET bromodomains. Nature. 2010;468:1067-1073.
Not in our library10.1038/nature09504
- 13.
Tavana O, et al. HAUSP deubiquitinates and stabilizes N-Myc in neuroblastoma. Nat. Med. 2016;22:1180-1186.
Not in our library10.1038/nm.4180
- 14.
Otto T, et al. Stabilization of N-Myc is a critical function of Aurora A in human neuroblastoma. Cancer Cell. 2009;15:67-78.
Not in our library10.1016/j.ccr.2008.12.005
- 15.
Berg T, et al. Small-molecule antagonists of Myc/Max dimerization inhibit Myc-induced transformation of chicken embryo fibroblasts. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2002;99:3830-3835.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.062036999
- 16.
Haynes SR, et al. The bromodomain: a conserved sequence found in human, Drosophila and yeast proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 1992;20:2603.
Not in our library10.1093/nar/20.10.2603
- 17.
Yang Z, et al. Recruitment of P-TEFb for stimulation of transcriptional elongation by the bromodomain protein Brd4. Mol. Cell. 2005;19:535-545.
Not in our library10.1016/j.molcel.2005.06.029
- 18.
Peterlin BM, Price DH. Controlling the elongation phase of transcription with P-TEFb. Mol. Cell. 2006;23:297-305.
Not in our library10.1016/j.molcel.2006.06.014
- 19.
Dawson MA, et al. Inhibition of BET recruitment to chromatin as an effective treatment for MLL-fusion leukaemia. Nature. 2011;478:529-533.
Not in our library10.1038/nature10509
- 20.
Zuber J, et al. RNAi screen identifies Brd4 as a therapeutic target in acute myeloid leukaemia. Nature. 2011;478:524-528.
Not in our library10.1038/nature10334
- 21.
Mertz JA, et al. Targeting MYC dependence in cancer by inhibiting BET bromodomains. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2011;108:16669-16674.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1108190108
- 22.
Mazur PK, et al. Combined inhibition of BET family proteins and histone deacetylases as a potential epigenetics-based therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Nat. Med. 2015;21:1163-1171.
Not in our library10.1038/nm.3952
- 23.
Puissant A, et al. Targeting MYCN in neuroblastoma by BET bromodomain inhibition. Cancer Discov. 2013;3:308-323.
Not in our library10.1158/2159-8290.cd-12-0418
- 24.
Fisher RP. Secrets of a double agent: CDK7 in cell-cycle control and transcription. J. Cell. Sci. 2005;118:5171-5180.
Not in our library10.1242/jcs.02718
- 25.
Shiekhattar R, et al. CDK-activating kinase complex is a component of human transcription factor TFIIH. Nature. 1995;374:283-287.
Not in our library10.1038/374283a0
- 26.
Peng J, Marshall NF, Price DH. Identification of a cyclin subunit required for the function of Drosophila P-TEFb. J. Biol. Chem. 1998;273:13855-13860.
Not in our library10.1074/jbc.273.22.13855
- 27.
Heidemann M, Hintermair C, Voß K, Eick D. Dynamic phosphorylation patterns of RNA polymerase II CTD during transcription. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 2013;1829:55-62.
Not in our library10.1016/j.bbagrm.2012.08.013
- 28.
Chen R, Keating MJ, Gandhi V, Plunkett W. Transcription inhibition by flavopiridol: mechanism of chronic lymphocytic leukemia cell death. Blood. 2005;106:2513-2519.
Not in our library10.1182/blood-2005-04-1678
- 29.
Rahl PB, et al. c-Myc regulates transcriptional pause release. Cell. 2010;141:432-445.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2010.03.030
- 30.
Chipumuro E, et al. CDK7 inhibition suppresses super-enhancer-linked oncogenic transcription in MYCN-driven cancer. Cell. 2014;159:1126-1139.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2014.10.024
- 31.
Chapuy B, et al. Discovery and characterization of super-enhancer-associated dependencies in diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Cancer Cell. 2013;24:777-790.
Not in our library10.1016/j.ccr.2013.11.003
- 32.
Kwiatkowski N, et al. Targeting transcription regulation in cancer with a covalent CDK7 inhibitor. Nature. 2014;511:616-620.
Not in our library10.1038/nature13393
- 33.
Garcia-Cuellar MP, et al. Efficacy of cyclin-dependent-kinase 9 inhibitors in a murine model of mixed-lineage leukemia. Leukemia. 2014;28:1427-1435.
Not in our library10.1038/leu.2014.40
- 34.
Bjornsti MA, Houghton PJ. The TOR pathway: a target for cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2004;4:335-348.
Not in our library10.1038/nrc1362
- 35.
Wullschleger S, Loewith R, Hall MN. TOR signaling in growth and metabolism. Cell. 2006;124:471-484.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2006.01.016
- 36.
Kim DH, et al. mTOR interacts with raptor to form a nutrient-sensitive complex that signals to the cell growth machinery. Cell. 2002;110:163-175.
Not in our library10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00808-5
- 37.
Frost P, et al. In vivo antitumor effects of the mTOR inhibitor CCI-779 against human multiple myeloma cells in a xenograft model. Blood. 2004;104:4181-4187.
Not in our library10.1182/blood-2004-03-1153
- 38.
Chapuis N, et al. Dual inhibition of PI3K and mTORC1/2 signaling by NVP-BEZ235 as a new therapeutic strategy for acute myeloid leukemia. Clin. Cancer Res. 2010;16:5424-5435.
Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-10-1102
- 39.
Yu K, et al. mTOR, a novel target in breast cancer: the effect of CCI-779, an mTOR inhibitor, in preclinical models of breast cancer. Endocr. Relat. Cancer. 2001;8:249-258.
Not in our library10.1677/erc.0.0080249
- 40.
Fernández-Miranda G, Méndez R. The CPEB-family of proteins, translational control in senescence and cancer. Ageing Res. Rev. 2012;11:460-472.
Not in our library10.1016/j.arr.2012.03.004
Cited by papers we hold 19
- Anti-glioma effect of ginseng-derived exosomes-like nanoparticles by active blood–brain-barrier penetration and tumor microenvironment modulation · 2023No notice
- Recent advances in targeting the “undruggable” proteins: from drug discovery to clinical trials · 2023No notice
- Intrinsically Disordered Proteins: An Overview · 2022No notice
- Immune Landscape of CMV Infection in Cancer Patients: From “Canonical” Diseases Toward Virus-Elicited Oncomodulation · 2021Not checked
- Repositioning of a novel GABA-B receptor agonist, AZD3355 (Lesogaberan), for the treatment of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis · 2021Not checked
- Roles of XBP1s in Transcriptional Regulation of Target Genes · 2021No notice
- MYC: a multipurpose oncogene with prognostic and therapeutic implications in blood malignancies · 2021Corrected
- Taking the Myc out of cancer: toward therapeutic strategies to directly inhibit c-Myc · 2021No notice
- FOXO transcription factor family in cancer and metastasis · 2020No notice
- Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Comparison With Canine Mammary Tumors From Light Microscopy to Molecular Pathology · 2020Not checked
- Regulation of cancer cell metabolism: oncogenic MYC in the driver’s seat · 2020No notice
- Transcription Factors in Cancer Development and Therapy · 2020No notice
- Bromodomain and Extra-Terminal Motif Inhibitors: a Review of Preclinical and Clinical Advances in Cancer Therapy · 2019No notice
- The Multifaceted p21 (Cip1/Waf1/CDKN1A) in Cell Differentiation, Migration and Cancer Therapy · 2019No notice
- Emerging Roles of C-Myc in Cancer Stem Cell-Related Signaling and Resistance to Cancer Chemotherapy: A Potential Therapeutic Target Against Colorectal Cancer · 2019No notice
- Regulation of TEAD Transcription Factors in Cancer Biology · 2019No notice
- Therapeutic Inhibition of Myc in Cancer. Structural Bases and Computer-Aided Drug Discovery Approaches · 2018No notice
- ANXA2 promotes esophageal cancer progression by activating MYC-HIF1A-VEGF axis · 2018No notice
- Emerging roles of Myc in stem cell biology and novel tumor therapies · 2018Corrected
Reads
Read by people on this page
None yet.
Checked or read by AI through naulon
None yet.
A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.
Are you an author?
Is this your paper?
Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.