Preliminary efficacy and safety of YSCH-01 in patients with advanced solid tumors: an investigator-initiated trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of YSCH-01 (Recombinant L-IFN adenovirus) in subjects with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: In this single-center, open-label, investigator-initiated trial of YSCH-01, 14 patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled. The study consisted of two distinct phases: (1) the dose escalation phase and (2) the dose expansion phase; with three dose groups in the dose escalation phase based on dose levels (5.0×109 viral particles (VP)/subject, 5.0×1010 VP/subject, and 5.0×1011 VP/subject). Subjects were administered YSCH-01 injection via intratumoral injections. The safety was assessed using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0, and the efficacy evaluation was performed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor V.1.1. RESULTS: 14 subjects were enrolled in the study, including 9 subjects in the dose escalation phase and 5 subjects in the dose expansion phase. Of the 13 subjects included in the full analysis set, 4 (30.8%) were men and 9 (69.2%) were women. The most common tumor type was lung cancer (38.5%, 5 subjects), followed by breast cancer (23.1%, 3 subjects) and melanoma (23.1%, 3 subjects). During the dose escalation phase, no subject experienced dose-limiting toxicities. The content of recombinant L-IFN adenovirus genome and recombinant L-IFN protein in blood showed no trend of significant intergroup changes. No significant change was observed in interleukin-6 and interferon-gamma. For 11 subjects evaluated for efficacy, the overall response rate with its 95% CI was 27.3% (6.02% to 60.97%) and the disease control rate with its 95% CI was 81.8% (48.22% to 97.72%). The median progression-free survival was 4.97 months, and the median overall survival was 8.62 months. In addition, a tendency of decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions was observed. For 13 subjects evaluated for safety, the overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 92.3%, the overall incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was 84.6%, and the overall incidence of >Grade 3 AEs was 7.7%, while no AEs/ADRs leading to death occurred. The most common AEs were fever (69.2%), nausea (30.8%), vomiting (30.8%), and hypophagia (23.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that YSCH-01 injections were safe and well tolerated and exhibited preliminary efficacy in patients with advanced solid tumors, supporting further investigation to evaluate its efficacy and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05180851.

New hopes for the breast cancer treatment: perspectives on the oncolytic virus therapy.

Oncolytic virus (OV) therapy has emerged as a promising frontier in cancer treatment, especially for solid tumours. While immunotherapies like immune checkpoint inhibitors and CAR-T cells have demonstrated impressive results, their limitations in inducing complete tumour regression have spurred researchers to explore new approaches targeting tumours resistant to current immunotherapies. OVs, both natural and genetically engineered, selectively replicate within cancer cells, inducing their lysis while sparing normal tissues. Recent advancements in clinical research and genetic engineering have enabled the development of targeted viruses that modify the tumour microenvironment, triggering anti-tumour immune responses and exhibiting synergistic effects with other cancer therapies. Several OVs have been studied for breast cancer treatment, including adenovirus, protoparvovirus, vaccinia virus, reovirus, and herpes simplex virus type I (HSV-1). These viruses have been modified or engineered to enhance their tumour-selective replication, reduce toxicity, and improve oncolytic properties.Newer generations of OVs, such as Oncoviron and Delta-24-RGD adenovirus, exhibit heightened replication selectivity and enhanced anticancer effects, particularly in breast cancer models. Clinical trials have explored the efficacy and safety of various OVs in treating different cancers, including melanoma, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, head and neck cancer, and gynecologic malignancies. Notably, Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and Oncorine have. been approved for advanced melanoma and nasopharyngeal carcinoma, respectively. However, adverse effects have been reported in some cases, including flu-like symptoms and rare instances of severe complications such as fistula formation. Although no OV has been approved specifically for breast cancer treatment, ongoing preclinical clinical trials focus on four groups of viruses. While mild adverse effects like low-grade fever and nausea have been observed, the effectiveness of OV monotherapy in breast cancer remains insufficient. Combination strategies integrating OVs with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or immunotherapy, show promise in improving therapeutic outcomes. Oncolytic virus therapy holds substantial potential in breast cancer treatment, demonstrating safety in trials. Multi-approach strategies combining OVs with conventional therapies exhibit more promising therapeutic effects than monotherapy, signalling a hopeful future for OV-based breast cancer treatments.

Reshaping the tumor microenvironment of cold soft-tissue sarcomas with oncolytic viral therapy: a phase 2 trial of intratumoral JX-594 combined with avelumab and low-dose cyclophosphamide.

Most soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) exhibit an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME), leading to resistance against immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and limited therapeutic response. Preclinical data suggest that oncolytic viral therapy can remodel the TME, facilitating T cell accumulation and enhancing the immunogenicity of these tumors.We conducted the METROMAJX, a phase II clinical trial, to investigate the combination of JX-594, an oncolytic vaccinia virus engineered for selective tumor cell replication, with metronomic cyclophosphamide and the PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab in patients with advanced, 'cold' STS, characterized by an absence of tertiary lymphoid structures. The trial employed a two-stage Simon design. JX-594 was administered intratumorally at a dose of 1.109 pfu every 2 weeks for up to 4 intra-tumoral administrations. Cyclophosphamide was given orally at 50 mg twice daily in a week-on, week-off schedule, and avelumab was administered at 10 mg/kg biweekly. The primary endpoint was the 6-month non-progression rate.Fifteen patients were enrolled, with the most frequent toxicities being grade 1 fatigue and fever. Fourteen patients were assessable for efficacy analysis. At 6 months, only one patient remained progression-free, indicating that the trial did not meet the first stage endpoint of Simon's design. Analysis of sequential tissue biopsies and plasma samples revealed an increase in CD8 density and upregulation of immune-related protein biomarkers, including CXCL10.Intra-tumoral administration of JX-594 in combination with cyclophosphamide and avelumab is safe and capable of modulating the TME in cold STS. However, the limited efficacy observed warrants further research to define the therapeutic potential of oncolytic viruses, particularly in relation to specific histological subtypes of STS.

The need for paradigm shift: prognostic significance and implications of standard therapy-related systemic immunosuppression in glioblastoma for immunotherapy and oncolytic virotherapy.

Despite significant advances in our knowledge regarding the genetics and molecular biology of gliomas over the past two decades and hundreds of clinical trials, no effective therapeutic approach has been identified for adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma, and overall survival remains dismal. Great hopes are now placed on combination immunotherapy. In clinical trials, immunotherapeutics are generally tested after standard therapy (radiation, temozolomide, and steroid dexamethasone) or concurrently with temozolomide and/or steroids. Only a minor subset of patients with progressive/recurrent glioblastoma have benefited from immunotherapies. In this review, we comprehensively discuss standard therapy-related systemic immunosuppression and lymphopenia, their prognostic significance, and the implications for immunotherapy/oncolytic virotherapy. The effectiveness of immunotherapy and oncolytic virotherapy (viro-immunotherapy) critically depends on the activity of the host immune cells. The absolute counts, ratios, and functional states of different circulating and tumor-infiltrating immune cell subsets determine the net immune fitness of patients with cancer and may have various effects on tumor progression, therapeutic response, and survival outcomes. Although different immunosuppressive mechanisms operate in patients with glioblastoma/gliomas at presentation, the immunological competence of patients may be significantly compromised by standard therapy, exacerbating tumor-related systemic immunosuppression. Standard therapy affects diverse immune cell subsets, including dendritic, CD4+, CD8+, natural killer (NK), NKT, macrophage, neutrophil, and myeloid-derived suppressor cell (MDSC). Systemic immunosuppression and lymphopenia limit the immune system's ability to target glioblastoma. Changes in the standard therapy are required to increase the success of immunotherapies. Steroid use, high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and low post-treatment total lymphocyte count (TLC) are significant prognostic factors for shorter survival in patients with glioblastoma in retrospective studies; however, these clinically relevant variables are rarely reported and correlated with response and survival in immunotherapy studies (e.g., immune checkpoint inhibitors, vaccines, and oncolytic viruses). Our analysis should help in the development of a more rational clinical trial design and decision-making regarding the treatment to potentially improve the efficacy of immunotherapy or oncolytic virotherapy.

A Phase 2 Study of In Situ Oncolytic Virus Therapy and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Followed by Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: A phase 2 study of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and in situ oncolytic virus therapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) followed by pembrolizumab (STOMP) was designed to explore the dual approach in enhancing single pembrolizumab with ADV/HSV-tk plus valacyclovir gene therapy and SBRT in mNSCLC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: STOMP is a single-arm, open-label phase 2 study. Patients with mNSCLC received intratumoral injections of ADV/HSV-tk (5 × 1011 vp) and SBRT (30 Gy in 5 fractions) followed by pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) (complete response [CR] and partial response [PR]). Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit rate (CBR) (CR, PR and stable disease [SD]), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: 28 patients were enrolled, of whom 27 were evaluated for response. The ORR was 33.3%, including 2 CR (7.4%) and 7 PR (25.9%). CBR was 70.4%. Six of eight (75.0%) patients who were immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) refractory derived clinical benefits. Responders had durable responses with median PFS, and OS not reached. The entire cohort had a median PFS of 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.1-9.6 months), and median OS of 18.1 months (95% CI, 15.4-20.9 months). The combination was well tolerated, with grade 3 or higher toxicity in 6 (21.4%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The dual approach of in situ ADV/HSV-tk plus valacyclovir gene therapy and SBRT as a chemotherapy-sparing strategy to enhance the antitumor effect of pembrolizumab is a well-tolerated encouraging treatment in patients with mNSCLC.

A phase I oncolytic virus trial with vesicular stomatitis virus expressing human interferon beta and tyrosinase related protein 1 administered intratumorally and intravenously in uveal melanoma: safety, efficacy, and T cell responses.

Introduction: Metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM) has a poor prognosis and treatment options are limited. These patients do not typically experience durable responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Oncolytic viruses (OV) represent a novel approach to immunotherapy for patients with MUM. Methods: We developed an OV with a Vesicular Stomatitis Virus (VSV) vector modified to express interferon-beta (IFN-ß) and Tyrosinase Related Protein 1 (TYRP1) (VSV-IFNß-TYRP1), and conducted a Phase 1 clinical trial with a 3 + 3 design in patients with MUM. VSV-IFNß-TYRP1 was injected into a liver metastasis, then administered on the same day as a single intravenous (IV) infusion. The primary objective was safety. Efficacy was a secondary objective. Results: 12 patients with previously treated MUM were enrolled. Median follow up was 19.1 months. 4 dose levels (DLs) were evaluated. One patient at DL4 experienced dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), including decreased platelet count (grade 3), increased aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and cytokine release syndrome (CRS). 4 patients had stable disease (SD) and 8 patients had progressive disease (PD). Interferon gamma (IFNγ) ELIspot data showed that more patients developed a T cell response to virus encoded TYRP1 at higher DLs, and a subset of patients also had a response to other melanoma antigens, including gp100, suggesting epitope spreading. 3 of the patients who responded to additional melanoma antigens were next treated with ICIs, and 2 of these patients experienced durable responses. Discussion: Our study found that VSV-IFNß -TYRP1 can be safely administered via intratumoral (IT) and IV routes in a previously treated population of patients with MUM. Although there were no clear objective radiographic responses to VSV-IFNß-TYRP1, dose-dependent immunogenicity to TYRP1 and other melanoma antigens was seen.

[Oncolytic viruses: Actors and deliverers of therapeutic proteins against tumors]. / Les virus oncolytiques : acteurs et vecteurs de protéines thérapeutiques contre les tumeurs.

The discovery of the unique ability of certain viruses to specifically target cancer cells has led to significant advancements in cancer immunotherapy research. In addition to inducing specific lysis of cancer cells, oncolytic viruses (OV) have been genetically modified to express molecules of interest within the tumor bed. The use of OV as vectors for therapeutic molecules has allowed to enhance antitumor responses while limiting the adverse effects associated with systemic administration of the molecule. Other studies are currently focused on delaying the neutralization and clearance of the virus by the host's immune system and improving its delivery insight tumors.

Title: Les virus oncolytiques : acteurs et vecteurs de protéines thérapeutiques contre les tumeurs. Abstract: La mise en évidence de la capacité unique de certains virus à cibler spécifiquement les cellules cancéreuses a ouvert de nouvelles perspectives pour la recherche en immunothérapie des cancers. Outre leur capacité à induire la destruction spécifique des cellules cancéreuses, les virus oncolytiques (OV) ont été modifiés génétiquement pour exprimer des molécules thérapeutiques directement au sein de la tumeur. L'utilisation des OV comme vecteurs de molécules thérapeutiques a permis d'augmenter les réponses anti-tumorales, tout en limitant les effets indésirables liés à une administration par voie générale de ces molécules. D'autres recherches visent aujourd'hui à limiter la neutralisation et l'élimination du virus par le système immunitaire de l'hôte et à améliorer son accès aux tumeurs.

The efficacy and safety assessment of oncolytic virotherapies in the treatment of advanced melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of oncolytic virotherapies in the treatment of advanced melanoma still remains controversal. It is necessary to conduct quantitative evaluation on the basis of preclinical trial reports. METHODS: Publicly available databases (PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane Library.) and register (Clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to collect treatment outcomes of oncolytic virotherapies (including herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV), coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21), adenovirus, poxvirus and reovirus) for advanced/unresectable melanoma. Comparisons of treatment response, adverse events (AEs) and survival analyses for different virotherapies were performed by R software based on the extracted data from eligible studies. RESULTS: Finally, thirty-four eligible studies were analysed and HSV virotherapy had the highest average complete response (CR, 24.8%) and HSV had a slightly higher average overall response rate (ORR) than CVA21 (43.8% vs 42.6%). In the pooled results of comparing talimogene laherparepve (T-VEC) with or without GM-CSF/ICIs (immune checkpoint inhibitors) to GM-CSF/ICIs monotherapy suggested virotherapy was more efficient in subgroups CR (RR = 1.80, 95% CI [1.30; 2.51], P < 0.01), ORR (RR = 1.17, 95% CI [1.02; 1.34], P < 0.05), and DCR (RR = 1.27, 95% CI [1.15; 1.40], P < 0.01). In patients treated with T-VEC+ICIs, 2-year overall survival (12.1 ± 6.9 months) and progression-free survival (9.9 ± 6.9) were significantly longer than those treated with T-VEC alone. Furthermore, we found that AEs occurred frequently in virotherapy but decreased in a large cohort of enrolled patients, some of which, such as abdominal distension/pain, injection site pain and pruritus, were found to be positively associated with disease progression in patients treated with T-VEC monotherapy. CONCLUSION: Given the relative safety and tolerability of oncolytic viruses, and the lack of reports of dose-limiting-dependent toxicities, more patients treated with T-VEC with or without ICIs should be added to future assessment analyses. There is still a long way to go before it can be used as a first-line therapy for patients with advanced or unresectable melanoma.

Clinical trial links oncolytic immunoactivation to survival in glioblastoma.

Immunotherapy failures can result from the highly suppressive tumour microenvironment that characterizes aggressive forms of cancer such as recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM)1,2. Here we report the results of a first-in-human phase I trial in 41 patients with rGBM who were injected with CAN-3110-an oncolytic herpes virus (oHSV)3. In contrast to other clinical oHSVs, CAN-3110 retains the viral neurovirulence ICP34.5 gene transcribed by a nestin promoter; nestin is overexpressed in GBM and other invasive tumours, but not in the adult brain or healthy differentiated tissue4. These modifications confer CAN-3110 with preferential tumour replication. No dose-limiting toxicities were encountered. Positive HSV1 serology was significantly associated with both improved survival and clearance of CAN-3110 from injected tumours. Survival after treatment, particularly in individuals seropositive for HSV1, was significantly associated with (1) changes in tumour/PBMC T cell counts and clonal diversity, (2) peripheral expansion/contraction of specific T cell clonotypes; and (3) tumour transcriptomic signatures of immune activation. These results provide human validation that intralesional oHSV treatment enhances anticancer immune responses even in immunosuppressive tumour microenvironments, particularly in individuals with cognate serology to the injected virus. This provides a biological rationale for use of this oncolytic modality in cancers that are otherwise unresponsive to immunotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03152318 ).

Comprehensive Single-Cell Immune Profiling Defines the Patient Multiple Myeloma Microenvironment Following Oncolytic Virus Therapy in a Phase Ib Trial.

PURPOSE: Our preclinical studies showed that the oncolytic reovirus formulation pelareorep (PELA) has significant immunomodulatory anti-myeloma activity. We conducted an investigator-initiated clinical trial to evaluate PELA in combination with dexamethasone (Dex) and bortezomib (BZ) and define the tumor immune microenvironment (TiME) in patients with multiple myeloma treated with this regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (n = 14) were enrolled in a phase Ib clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02514382) of three escalating PELA doses administered on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16. Patients received 40 mg Dex and 1.5 mg/m2 BZ on Days 1, 8, and 15. Cycles were repeated every 28 days. Pre- and posttreatment bone marrow specimens (IHC, n = 9; imaging mass cytometry, n = 6) and peripheral blood samples were collected for analysis (flow cytometry, n = 5; T-cell receptor clonality, n = 7; cytokine assay, n = 7). RESULTS: PELA/BZ/Dex was well-tolerated in all patients. Treatment-emergent toxicities were transient, and no dose-limiting toxicities occurred. Six (55%) of 11 response-evaluable patients showed decreased paraprotein. Treatment increased T and natural killer cell activation, inflammatory cytokine release, and programmed death-ligand 1 expression in bone marrow. Compared with nonresponders, responders had higher reovirus protein levels, increased cytotoxic T-cell infiltration posttreatment, cytotoxic T cells in significantly closer proximity to multiple myeloma cells, and larger populations of a novel immune-primed multiple myeloma phenotype (CD138+ IDO1+HLA-ABCHigh), indicating immunomodulation. CONCLUSIONS: PELA/BZ/Dex is well-tolerated and associated with anti-multiple myeloma activity in a subset of responding patients, characterized by immune reprogramming and TiME changes, warranting further investigation of PELA as an immunomodulator.

Advancements and challenges in oncolytic virus therapy for gastrointestinal tumors.

BACKGROUND: Tumors of the gastrointestinal tract impose a substantial healthcare burden due to their prevalence and challenging prognosis. METHODS: We conducted a review of peer-reviewed scientific literature using reputable databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) with a focus on oncolytic virus therapy within the context of gastrointestinal tumors. Our search covered the period up to the study's completion in June 2023. INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: This study includes articles from peer-reviewed scientific journals, written in English, that specifically address oncolytic virus therapy for gastrointestinal tumors, encompassing genetic engineering advances, combined therapeutic strategies, and safety and efficacy concerns. Excluded are articles not meeting these criteria or focusing on non-primary gastrointestinal metastatic tumors. RESULTS: Our review revealed the remarkable specificity of oncolytic viruses in targeting tumor cells and their potential to enhance anti-tumor immune responses. However, challenges related to safety and efficacy persist, underscoring the need for ongoing research and improvement. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the promising role of oncolytic virus therapy in enhancing gastrointestinal tumor treatments. Continued investigation and innovative combination therapies hold the key to reducing the burden of these tumors on patients and healthcare systems.

A Pilot Study of Neoadjuvant Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, and Intralesional Oncolytic Virotherapy for HER2-negative Breast Cancer.

Purpose: Neoadjuvant combination immune checkpoint blockade and intralesional oncolytic virotherapy have the potential to activate antitumor responses in patients with breast cancer. Experimental Design: Eligibility for this pilot phase I trial included patients with localized HER2-negative breast cancer who received systemic nivolumab and ipilimumab and intratumor talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC; NCT04185311). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and adverse event profile of immunotherapy combined with T-VEC in patients with localized, HER2-negative breast cancer. Results: Six patients were enrolled, 4 having relapses after prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 2 who were previously untreated. Toxicities included 1 patient having grade 3 hypotension and type 1 diabetes mellitus, 3 patients with hypothyroidism, and all patients having constitutional symptoms known to be associated with the administration of T-VEC. One patient had a pathologic complete response, 3 patients had pathologic partial responses, 1 showed no significant response, and 1 had disease progression. Biopsies demonstrated increased immune cell infiltration in samples from patients who responded to therapy. Conclusions: This triple immunotherapy regimen provided responses in patients with advanced or relapsed HER2-negative breast cancer, at the expense of long-term toxicities. Significance: Systemic immune checkpoint blockade with a programmed death receptor 1 and a CTL antigen-4 blocking antibody, combined with intralesional oncolytic virotherapy, is a chemotherapy-free combination aimed at inducing an antitumor immune response locally and systemic immunity.

Oncolytic DNX-2401 virotherapy plus pembrolizumab in recurrent glioblastoma: a phase 1/2 trial.

Immune-mediated anti-tumoral responses, elicited by oncolytic viruses and augmented with checkpoint inhibition, may be an effective treatment approach for glioblastoma. Here in this multicenter phase 1/2 study we evaluated the combination of intratumoral delivery of oncolytic virus DNX-2401 followed by intravenous anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab in recurrent glioblastoma, first in a dose-escalation and then in a dose-expansion phase, in 49 patients. The primary endpoints were overall safety and objective response rate. The primary safety endpoint was met, whereas the primary efficacy endpoint was not met. There were no dose-limiting toxicities, and full dose combined treatment was well tolerated. The objective response rate was 10.4% (90% confidence interval (CI) 4.2-20.7%), which was not statistically greater than the prespecified control rate of 5%. The secondary endpoint of overall survival at 12 months was 52.7% (95% CI 40.1-69.2%), which was statistically greater than the prespecified control rate of 20%. Median overall survival was 12.5 months (10.7-13.5 months). Objective responses led to longer survival (hazard ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.05-0.87). A total of 56.2% (95% CI 41.1-70.5%) of patients had a clinical benefit defined as stable disease or better. Three patients completed treatment with durable responses and remain alive at 45, 48 and 60 months. Exploratory mutational, gene-expression and immunophenotypic analyses revealed that the balance between immune cell infiltration and expression of checkpoint inhibitors may potentially inform on response to treatment and mechanisms of resistance. Overall, the combination of intratumoral DNX-2401 followed by pembrolizumab was safe with notable survival benefit in select patients (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02798406).

Safety and dose escalation of the targeted oncolytic adenovirus OBP-301 for refractory advanced liver cancer: Phase I clinical trial.

OBP-301 is an oncolytic adenovirus modified to replicate within cancer cells and lyse them. This open-label, non-comparative, phase I dose-escalation trial aimed to assess its safety and optimal dosage in 20 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Good tolerance was shown with a maximum tolerated dose of 6 × 1012 viral particles. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were influenza-like illness, pyrexia, fatigue, decreased platelet count, abdominal distension, and anemia. Cohorts 4 and 5 had approximately 50% higher levels of CD8+ T cells in the peripheral blood after injection. The best target response occurred in 14 patients, 4 of whom had progressive disease. Multiple intratumoral injections of OBP-301 were well tolerated in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The stable disease rate for the injected tumors was greater than the overall response rate, even with no obvious tumor response. OBP-301 might have a greater impact on local response as histological examination revealed that the presence of OBP-301 was consistent with the necrotic area at the injection site. Increased infiltration of CD8+ T cells and <1% PD-L1 expression were observed in tumors after injection. Improved antitumor efficacy might be achieved in future studies via viral injection with volume adjustment and in combination with other immuno-therapeutics.

Phase Ib study of talimogene laherparepvec in combination with atezolizumab in patients with triple negative breast cancer and colorectal cancer with liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), a first-in-class oncolytic viral immunotherapy, enhances tumor-specific immune activation. T-VEC combined with atezolizumab, which blocks inhibitor T-cell checkpoints, could provide greater benefit than either agent alone. Safety/efficacy of the combination was explored in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastases. METHODS: In this phase Ib, multicenter, open-label, parallel cohort study of adults with TNBC or CRC with liver metastases, T-VEC (106 then 108 PFU/ml; ≤4 ml) was administered into hepatic lesions via image-guided injection every 21 (±3) days. Atezolizumab 1200 mg was given on day 1 and every 21 (±3) days thereafter. Treatment continued until patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), had complete response, progressive disease, needed alternative anticancer treatment, or withdrew due to an adverse event (AE). The primary endpoint was DLT incidence, and secondary endpoints included efficacy and AEs. RESULTS: Between 19 March 2018 and 6 November 2020, 11 patients with TNBC were enrolled (safety analysis set: n = 10); between 19 March 2018 and 16 October 2019, 25 patients with CRC were enrolled (safety analysis set: n = 24). For the 5 patients in the TNBC DLT analysis set, no patient had DLT; for the 18 patients in the CRC DLT analysis set, 3 (17%) had DLT, all serious AEs. AEs were reported by 9 (90%) TNBC and 23 (96%) CRC patients, the majority with grade ≥3 [TNBC, 7 (70%); CRC, 13 (54%)], and 1 was fatal [CRC, 1 (4%)]. Evidence of efficacy was limited. Overall response rate was 10% (95% confidence interval 0.3-44.5) for TNBC; one (10%) patient had a partial response. For CRC, no patients had a response; 14 (58%) were unassessable. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile reflected known risks with T-VEC including risks of intrahepatic injection; no unexpected safety findings from addition of atezolizumab to T-VEC were observed. Limited evidence of antitumor activity was observed.

Regulatory Issues: PMDA - Review of Sakigake Designation Products: Oncolytic Virus Therapy with Delytact Injection (Teserpaturev) for Malignant Glioma.

In June 2021, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare approved Delytact Injection as a regenerative medical product for oncolytic virus therapy. The active substance of Delytact Injection is teserpaturev, a genetically engineered herpes simplex virus type 1 (strain F) in which the α47 gene and both copies of the γ34.5 gene have been deleted and the infected cell protein 6 (ICP6) gene has been inactivated by the insertion of the lacZ gene from Escherichia coli. Delytact Injection, when intratumorally administered to patients with malignant glioma, is expected to exert the following effects: (1) the mutant virus selectively replicates in tumor cells and destroys the infected cells through the replication process, exerting a cytocidal effect, and (2) the administration leads to induction of tumor-responsive T cells, which activates antitumor immunity and thus prolongs the survival of patients with malignant glioma. A Japanese phase II study (Study GD01) was conducted in patients with glioblastoma who had residual or recurrent tumors after radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide. In Study GD01, however, stable disease continued for an extended period in some patients with glioblastoma. Hence, Delytact Injection is expected to be effective to a certain level. In line with this, Delytact Injection has been approved as an option for the treatment of malignant glioma, with one of the 3 approval conditions including conducting a use-results comparison survey and resubmission of the marketing authorization application within the granted time period of 7 years, under the conditional and time-limited approval scheme described in Article 23-26 of Act on Securing Quality, Efficacy and Safety of Products Including Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices.

Ultralow-dose binary oncolytic/helper-dependent adenovirus promotes antitumor activity in preclinical and clinical studies.

We show that a binary oncolytic/helper-dependent adenovirus (CAdVEC) that both lyses tumor cells and locally expresses the proinflammatory cytokine IL-12 and PD-L1 blocking antibody has potent antitumor activity in humanized mouse models. On the basis of these preclinical studies, we treated four patients with a single intratumoral injection of an ultralow dose of CAdVEC (NCT03740256), representing a dose of oncolytic adenovirus more than 100-fold lower than used in previous trials. While CAdVEC caused no significant toxicities, it repolarized the tumor microenvironment with increased infiltration of CD8 T cells. A single administration of CAdVEC was associated with both locoregional and abscopal effects on metastases and, in combination with systemic administration of immune checkpoint antibodies, induced sustained antitumor responses, including one complete and two partial responses. Hence, in both preclinical and clinical studies, CAdVEC is safe and even at extremely low doses is sufficiently potent to induce significant tumor control through oncolysis and immune repolarization.

Increased risk of cutaneous immune-related adverse events in patients treated with talimogene laherparepvec and immune checkpoint inhibitors: A multi-hospital cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that combining immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with talimogene laherparepvec (TVEC) may improve antitumor responses. However, the risk of developing cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) in patients treated with ICI and TVEC has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differences in cirAE development between patients treated with ICI alone and both ICI and TVEC (ICI + TVEC). METHODS: Patients with cutaneous malignancy receiving ICI with or without TVEC therapy at the Massachusetts General Brigham healthcare system were included. CirAE development, time from ICI initiation to cirAE, cirAE grade, cirAE morphology, and survival were analyzed. Pearson's χ2 test or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and t test or Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables were used. To account for immortal time bias, we performed adjusted time-varying Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: The rate of cirAE development was 32.3% and 38.7% for ICI only and ICI + TVEC, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, ICI + TVEC was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of cirAE development (hazard ratio: 2.03, P = .006) compared to patients receiving ICI therapy alone. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective nature and limited sample size from a tertiary-level academic center. CONCLUSION: These findings underscore potential opportunities for dermatologists and oncologists in counseling and monitoring patients.

Therapy with oncolytic viruses: progress and challenges.

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) are an emerging class of cancer therapeutics that offer the benefits of selective replication in tumour cells, delivery of multiple eukaryotic transgene payloads, induction of immunogenic cell death and promotion of antitumour immunity, and a tolerable safety profile that largely does not overlap with that of other cancer therapeutics. To date, four OVs and one non-oncolytic virus have been approved for the treatment of cancer globally although talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) remains the only widely approved therapy. T-VEC is indicated for the treatment of patients with recurrent melanoma after initial surgery and was initially approved in 2015. An expanding body of data on the clinical experience of patients receiving T-VEC is now becoming available as are data from clinical trials of various other OVs in a range of other cancers. Despite increasing research interest, a better understanding of the underlying biology and pharmacology of OVs is needed to enable the full therapeutic potential of these agents in patients with cancer. In this Review, we summarize the available data and provide guidance on optimizing the use of OVs in clinical practice, with a focus on the clinical experience with T-VEC. We describe data on selected novel OVs that are currently in clinical development, either as monotherapies or as part of combination regimens. We also discuss some of the preclinical, clinical and regulatory hurdles that have thus far limited the development of OVs.

Oncolytic virus preclinical toxicology studies.

With the ever-emerging concerns of patient safety during medical care, the search for treatments as safe as possible is a priority, especially when focusing on cancer treatment of which therapies often go hand in hand with severe side effects. Oncolytic virotherapy is an emerging treatment for cancer that is promising in both safety and efficacy. Many currently ongoing clinical trials demonstrate the growing interest in this field. To conduct clinical trials, preclinical studies are mandatory; however, there are not many reviews of toxicology studies on oncolytic virus therapies. This article summarizes the preclinical toxicology studies of the most well studied oncolytic viruses, including Oncorine, Talimogene laherparepvec, Cavatak, ONYX-015, teserpaturev and Rigvir, a non-pathogenic ECHO-7 virus. It is concluded that oncolytic viruses have been shown to have low toxicity and high tolerability in preclinical toxicology studies.