Oncolytic Virotherapy最新文献

Background: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is an aggressive form of brain cancer which is associated with poor prognosis. A variety of oncolytic viruses have previously shown positive efficacy against GBM, potentially offering new treatment options for patients. One such oncolytic virus is Myxoma virus (MYXV), a rabbit-specific poxvirus that has been shown to be efficacious against a variety of tumor models including GBM.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of MYXV combined with current treatment regimens for GBM in both established cell lines as well as patient biopsy samples.

Materials and methods: U118 gliobastoma cell lines were treated under various standard of care combinations (untreated, radiation and chemotherapeutic) prior to infection with MYXV. Infection was then monitored for differences in rate of infection, titer and rate of spread. Cellular death was measured by MTT assay and Caspase-3 colorimetric assay. Patient biopsies were harvested and treated under similar treatment conditions.

Results: The addition of GBM standard of care to MYXV infection resulted in an increased rate of spread compared to single treatment with either radiation or chemotherapeutic alone. SOC did not alter viral replication or infection rates. Similar effects were seen in ex vivo patient biopsies. Cellular viability was significantly decreased with the combination therapy of SOC and MYXV infection compared to any other treatment outcome. Caspase-3 activity was also significantly increased in samples treated with combination therapy when compared to any other treatment combination.

Conclusion: Our results show that the combination of MYXV with current SOC results in both increased killing of GBM cells compared to either treatment regime alone as well as increased spread of MYXV infection. These findings lay the foundation for future in vivo studies on combining MYXV with GBM SOC.

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common causes of cancer death throughout the world. Replication-competent viruses, which are naturally able to infect and lyse tumor cells, seem to be promising in this field. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) on human CRC cells and elucidate the mechanism of apoptosis induction.

Materials and methods: Protein and gene expression of poliovirus (PV) receptor (CD155) on four human CRC cell lines including HCT116, SW480, HT-29, and Caco-2 and normal fetal human colon (FHC) cell line as a control were examined by flow cytometry and SYBR Green Real-Time PCR, respectively. Cytotoxicity of OPV on indicated cell lines was tested using MTT assay. The ability of OPV on apoptosis induction for both intrinsic and extrinsic pathways was examined using caspase-8 and caspase-9 colorimetric assay kits. The PV propagation in mentioned cell lines was investigated, and the quantity of viral yields (cells associated and extracellular) was determined using TaqMan PCR.

Results: CD155 mRNA and protein were expressed significantly higher in studied CRC cell lines rather than the normal cell line (P=0). OPV induced cell death in a time- and dose-dependent manner in human CRC cells. Apoptosis through both extrinsic and intrinsic pathways was detected in CRC cells with the minimum level found in FHC. PV viral load was significantly correlated with apoptosis via extrinsic (R=0.945, P=0.0001) and intrinsic (R=0.756, P=0.001) pathways.

Conclusion: This study suggests that OPV has potential for clinical treatment of CRC. However further studies in animal models (tumor xenografts) are needed to be certain that it is qualified enough for treatment of CRC.

Oncolytic virotherapy constitutes an upcoming alternative treatment option for a broad spectrum of cancer entities. However, despite great research efforts, there is still only a single US Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency-approved oncolytic virus available for clinical use. One reason for that is the gap between promising preclinical data and limited clinical success. Since oncolytic viruses are biological agents, they might require more realistic in vitro tumor models than common monolayer tumor cell cultures to provide meaningful predictive preclinical evaluation results. For more realistic invitro tumor models, three-dimensional tumor cell-culture systems can be employed in preclinical virotherapy research. This review provides an overview of spheroid and hydrogel tumor cell cultures, organotypic tumor-tissue slices, organotypic raft cultures, and tumor organoids utilized in the context of oncolytic virotherapy. Furthermore, we also discuss advantages, disadvantages, techniques, and difficulties of these three-dimensional tumor cell-culture systems when applied specifically in virotherapy research.

Oncolytic viruses are lytic for many types of cancers but are attenuated or replication-defective in normal tissues. Aside from tumor lysis, oncolytic viruses can induce host immune responses against cancer cells and may thus be viewed as a form of immunotherapy. Although recent successes with checkpoint inhibitors have shown that enhancing antitumor immunity can be effective, the dynamic nature of the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment presents significant hurdles to the broader application of these therapies. Targeting one immune-suppressive pathway may not be sufficient to eliminate tumors. Here we focus on the development of the combination of oncolytic virotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors designed to target the programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 signaling axis. We also discuss future directions for the clinical application of this novel combination therapy.

Mammalian orthoreovirus (reovirus) is under development as a cancer virotherapy. Clinical trials demonstrate that reovirus-based therapies are safe and tolerated in patients with a wide variety of cancers. Although reovirus monotherapy has proven largely ineffective, reovirus sensitizes cancer cells to existing chemotherapeutic agents and radiation. Clinical trials are underway to test the efficacy of reovirus in combination with chemotherapeutic and radiation regimens and to evaluate the effectiveness of reovirus in conjunction with immunotherapies. Central to the use of reovirus to treat cancer is its capacity to directly kill cancer cells and alter the cellular environment to augment other therapies. Apoptotic cell death is a prominent mechanism of reovirus cancer cell killing. However, reoviruses can also kill cancer cells through nonapoptotic mechanisms. Here, we describe mechanisms of reovirus cancer cell killing, highlight how reovirus is used in combination with existing cancer treatments, and discuss what is known as to how reovirus modulates cancer immunotherapy.

Background: Human species C adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5) is the archetype oncolytic adenovirus and has been used in the vast majority of preclinical and clinical tests. While Ad5 can be robust, species C Ad6 has lower seroprevalence, side effects, and appears to be more potent as a systemic therapy against a number of tumors than Ad5. Historically, there have only been four species C human adenoviruses: serotypes 1, 2, 5, and 6. More recently a new species C adenovirus, Ad57, was identified. Ad57 is most similar to Ad6 with virtually all variation in their capsid proteins occurring in the hypervariable regions (HVRs) of their hexon proteins. Most adenovirus neutralizing antibodies target the HVRs on adenoviruses. This led us to replace the hexon HVRs in Ad6 with those from Ad57 to create a new virus called Ad657 and explore this novel species C platform's utility as an oncolytic virus.

Methods: The HVR region from Ad57 was synthesized and used to replace the Ad6 HVR region by homologous recombination in bacteria generating a new viral platform that we call Ad657. Replication-competent Ad5, Ad6, and Ad657 were compared in vitro and in vivo for liver damage and oncolytic efficacy against prostate cancers after single intravenous treatment in mice.

Results: Ad5, Ad6, and Ad657 had similar in vitro oncolytic activity against human prostate cancer cells. Ad5 provoked the highest level of liver toxicity after intravenous injection and Ad657 caused the least damage in mice. Previous data demonstrated that Ad6 was superior to Ad5 at killing distant subcutaneous prostate cancer tumors in mouse models after a intravenous injection. Given this, Ad657 was compared to the Ad6 benchmark virus by single intravenous injection into mice bearing subcutaneous human DU145 prostate cancers. Under these conditions, Ad657 first infected the liver and then reached distant tumors. Both Ad6 and Ad657 mediated significant delays in tumor growth and extension of survival with Ad6 mediating higher efficacy.

Conclusions: These data suggest that Ad657 may have utility as a local or systemic oncolytic virotherapy for prostate cancers. These data also lay the foundation for serotype-switching with oncolytic species C Ads.

Background: Attenuated oncolytic measles virus (OMV) is a promising antitumor agent in early-phase clinical trials. However, pre-existing immunity against measles might be a hurdle for OMV therapy.

Methods: OMV was inactivated with short-wavelength ultraviolet light (UV-C). Loss of replication and oncolytic activity of UV-inactivated OMV were confirmed by tissue culture infective dose 50 (TCID₅₀) assay using Vero cells and by flow cytometry using Jurkat cells. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed to verify that UV-inactivated OMV remained antigenic. Different doses of UV-inactivated OMV were pre-cultured in media supplemented with measles immune serum. The mixture was transferred to Jurkat cells and active OMV was added. Active OMV-induced death of Jurkat cells was monitored by flow cytometry.

Results: UV-inactivation abrogates OMV replication while maintaining its antigenicity. UV-inactivated OMV sequesters pre-existing anti-MV antibodies in Jurkat cell culture, thereby protecting active OMV from neutralization and preserving oncolytic activity.

Conclusion: We prove the principle that a non-replicating OMV can serve as a "decoy" for neutralizing anti-MV antibodies, thereby allowing antitumor activity of OMV.

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) are an emergent and unique therapy for cancer patients. Similar to chemo- and radiation therapy, OV can lyse (kill) cancer cell directly. In general, the advantages of OVs over other treatments are primarily: a higher safety profile (as shown by less adverse effects), ability to replicate, transgene(s) delivery, and stimulation of a host's immune system against cancer. The latter has prompted successful use of OVs with other immunotherapeutic strategies in a synergistic manner. In spite of extended testing in pre-clinical and clinical setting, using biologically derived therapeutics like virus always raises potential concerns about safety (replication at non-intended locations) and bio-availability of the product. Recent advent in in vivo imaging techniques dramatically improves the convenience of use, quality of pictures, and amount of information acquired. Easy assessing of safety/localization of the biotherapeutics like OVs became a new potential weapon in the physician's arsenal to improve treatment outcome. Given that OVs are typically replicating, in vivo imaging can also track virus replication and persistence as well as precisely mapping tumor tissues presence. This review discusses the importance of imaging in vivo in evaluating OV efficacy, as well as currently available tools and techniques.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a clonal malignancy of plasma cells that is newly diagnosed in ~30,000 patients in the US each year. While recently developed therapies have improved the prognosis for MM patients, relapse rates remain unacceptably high. To overcome this challenge, researchers have begun to investigate the therapeutic potential of oncolytic viruses as a novel treatment option for MM. Preclinical work with these viruses has demonstrated that their infection can be highly specific for MM cells and results in impressive therapeutic efficacy in a variety of preclinical models. This has led to the recent initiation of several human trials. This review summarizes the current state of oncolytic therapy as a therapeutic option for MM and highlights a variety of areas that need to be addressed as the field moves forward.