“…Anticancer peptides (ACPs) have been introduced as alternative candidates to treat cancer with a certain degree of cancer cell selectivity, low tendency to drug resistance, good biocompatibility, and ease of synthesizing and modifying. − Generally, they are relatively small peptides with variable cationic and amphipathic characteristics. They exhibit broad-spectrum antitumor activity through multiple action mechanisms. − One prominent merit of ACPs is that these peptides could selectively disrupt the tumor cell membrane in a receptor-independent manner, which is different from that of conventional antineoplastic agents. , Despite this, the drawbacks of anticancer peptides, such as the toxicity at high concentrations and fast degradation in vivo, are still the main concerns for drug development. , To circumvent these limitations, many different strategies have been used to improve the therapeutic efficiency of ACPs, including amino acid substitution, − fatty acid modification, , glycosylation, , backbone conjugation or cyclization, , and utilization of functionalized carriers. , Histidine modification is a simple and effective approach to develop smart pH-responsive ACPs with better selectivity for cancer therapy based on the tumor acidic environment, as histidine could protonate into a positive charge under the acidic tumor microenvironment from predominantly no charge in tissues with normal physiological conditions, thereby endowing peptides with a pH-activated charge conversion feature. , Hence, this type of histidine-based ACPs is inactivated under physiological conditions, while their antitumor activity can be activated in an acidified tumor microenvironment. Notably, the combination of unique histidine with negatively charged glutamate (Glu) is also a promising approach to obtaining acid-responsive recombinant peptides. , The cationic charge of these peptides can be first shielded by anionic glutamate under normal physiological conditions to alleviate their indiscriminative effect.…”