Systemic Therapy of Malignant Human Melanoma Tumors by a Common Cold-Producing Enterovirus, Coxsackievirus A21

Cancer therapy with the viral and bacterial pathogens: The past enemies can be considered the present allies

Cancer continues to be one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide despite significant advancements in cancer treatment. Many difficulties have arisen as a result of the detrimental consequences of chemotherapy and radiotherapy as a common cancer therapy, such as drug inability to penetrate deep tumor tissue, and also the drug resistance in tumor cells continues to be a major concern. These obstacles have increased the need for the development of new techniques that are more selective and effective against cancer cells. Bacterial-based therapies and the use of oncolytic viruses can suppress cancer in comparison to other cancer medications. The tumor microenvironment is susceptible to bacterial accumulation and proliferation, which can trigger immune responses against the tumor. Oncolytic viruses (OVs) have also gained considerable attention in recent years because of their potential capability to selectively target and induce apoptosis in cancer cells. This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of the latest literature on the role of bacteria and viruses in cancer treatment, discusses the limitations and challenges, outlines various strategies, summarizes recent preclinical and clinical trials, and emphasizes the importance of optimizing current strategies for better clinical outcomes.

Oncolytic virus V937 in combination with PD-1 blockade therapy to target immunologically quiescent liver and colorectal cancer

V937 is an investigational, genetically unmodified Kuykendall strain of coxsackievirus A21, which has been evaluated in the clinic for advanced solid tumor malignancies. V937 specifically infects and lyses tumor cells that overexpress intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1). Intratumoral V937 as a monotherapy and in combination with anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab has shown clinical response in patients with metastatic melanoma, which overexpresses ICAM-1. Here, we investigate in preclinical studies the potential bidirectional cross-talk between hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) or colorectal carcinomas (CRC) and immune cells when treated with V937 alone or in combination with pembrolizumab. We show that while V937 treatment of tumor cell lines or organoids or peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) alone induced a minimal immunological response, V937 treatment of non-contact co-cultures of tumor cell lines or CRC organoids with PBMCs led to robust production of proinflammatory cytokines and immune cell activation. In addition, both recombinant interferon-gamma and pembrolizumab increased ICAM-1 on tumor cell lines or organoids and, in turn, amplified V937-mediated oncolysis and immunogenicity. These findings provide critical mechanistic insights on the cross-talk between V937-mediated oncolysis and immune responses, demonstrating the therapeutic potential of V937 in combination with PD-1 blockade to treat immunologically quiescent cancers.

A comprehensive review on targeting cluster of differentiation: An attractive strategy for inhibiting viruses through host proteins

Viral infections continue to pose a significant global public health threat. Targeting host proteins, such as cluster of differentiation (CD) macromolecules, may offer a promising alternative approach to developing antiviral treatments. CDs are cell-surface biological macromolecules mainly expressed on leukocytes that viruses can use to enter cells, thereby evading immune detection and promoting their replication. The manipulation of CDs by viruses may represent an effective and clever means of survival through the prolonged co-evolution of hosts and viruses. Targeting of CDs is anticipated to hinder the invasion of related viruses, modulate the body's immune system, and diminish the incidence of subsequent inflammation. They have become crucial for biomedical diagnosis, and some have been used as valuable tools for resisting viral infections. However, a summary of the structures and functions of CDs involved in viral infection is currently lacking. The development of drugs targeting these biological macromolecules is restricted both in terms of their availability and the number of compounds currently identified. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the critical role of CD proteins in virus invasion and a list of relevant targeted antiviral agents, which will serve as a valuable reference for future research in this field.

The Effects of Mesenchymal Stem Cells Loaded with Oncolytic Coxsackievirus A21 on Mouse Models of Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cancer is a major cause of death worldwide. Colorectal cancer is the second most common type. Additional treatments like chemotherapy and radiation therapy may be recommended. Developing new techniques is vital due to drug resistance and a lack of targeted therapies.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the effects of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) loaded with oncolytic Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) on a mouse model of CRC were investigated.

METHODS

The therapeutic potency of MSCs loaded with oncolytic CVA21 were evaluated in an experimental mouse model of colorectal cancer which received an injection CT26 cells per mouse subcutaneously. Splenocyte proliferation index, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) assay, nitric oxide (NO) production assessment, and cytokine assay (IFN-γ, IL-4, IL-10, and TGF-β) in the splenocyte supernatant were all used to evaluate the impact of MSCs loaded with CVA21.

RESULTS

The results of this study showed that the treatment of a mouse model of colorectal cancer with MSCs loaded with oncolytic CVA21 could significantly suppress the tumor growth, which was accompanied by stimulation of splenocytes proliferation index, an increase of NO and LDH. Also, MSCs loaded with oncolytic CVA21 increased the secretion of IFN-γ and decreased the secretion of IL-4, IL-10, and TGF-β.

CONCLUSION

The results of the current study suggest that MSCs loaded with oncolytic CVA21 therapy for the CRC mouse model may have some potential advantages. On the other hand, the results of the study showed that, in addition to activating the acquired immune system, the use of MSCs loaded with oncolytic CVA21 also stimulates the innate immune system by increasing level of nitric oxide.

Non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) oncolysis using coxsackievirus B5 and synergistic DNA-damage response inhibitors

With the continuous in-depth study of the interaction mechanism between viruses and hosts, the virus has become a promising tool in cancer treatment. In fact, many oncolytic viruses with selectivity and effectiveness have been used in cancer therapy. Human enterovirus is one of the most convenient sources to generate oncolytic viruses, however, the high seroprevalence of some enteroviruses limits its application which urges to exploit more oncolytic enteroviruses. In this study, coxsackievirus B5/Faulkner (CV-B5/F) was screened for its potential oncolytic effect against non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) through inducing apoptosis and autophagy. For refractory NSCLCs, DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK) or ataxia telangiectasia mutated protein (ATM) inhibitors can synergize with CV-B5/F to promote refractory cell death. Here, we showed that viral infection triggered endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress-related pro-apoptosis and autophagy signals, whereas repair for double-stranded DNA breaks (DSBs) contributed to cell survival which can be antagonized by inhibitor-induced cell death, manifesting exacerbated DSBs, apoptosis, and autophagy. Mechanistically, PERK pathway was activated by the combination of CV-B5/F and inhibitor, and the irreversible ER stress-induced exacerbated cell death. Furthermore, the degradation of activated STING by ERphagy promoted viral replication. Meanwhile, no treatment-related deaths due to CV-B5/F and/or inhibitors occurred. Conclusively, our study identifies an oncolytic CV-B5/F and the synergistic effects of inhibitors of DNA-PK or ATM, which is a potential therapy for NSCLCs.

A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for V937 oncolytic virus in mice

Introduction: Oncolytic viruses (OVs) represent a novel therapeutic strategy in oncology due to their capability to selectively infect and replicate in cancer cells, triggering a direct and/or immune-induced tumor lysis. However, the mechanisms governing OV pharmacokinetics are still poorly understood. This work aims to develop a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of the novel OV, V937, in non-tumor-bearing mice to get a quantitative understanding of its elimination and tissue uptake processes. Materials and methods: Model development was performed using data obtained from 60 mice. Viral levels were quantified from eight tissues after a single intravenous V937 dose. An external dataset was used for model validation. This test set included multiple-dose experiments with different routes of administration. V937 distribution in each organ was described using a physiological structure based on mouse-specific organ blood flows and volumes. Analyses were performed using the non-linear mixed-effects approach with NONMEM 7.4. Results: Viral levels showed a drop from 108 to 105 copies/µg RNA at day 1 in blood, reflected in a high estimate of total clearance (18.2 mL/h). A well-stirred model provided an adequate description for all organs except the muscle and heart, where a saturable uptake process improved data description. The highest numbers of viral copies were observed in the brain, lymph node, kidney, liver, lung, and spleen on the first day after injection. On the other hand, the maximum amount of viral copies in the heart, muscle, and pancreas occurred 3 days after administration. Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first physiologically based pharmacokinetic model developed to characterize OV biodistribution, representing a relevant source of quantitative knowledge regarding the in vivo behavior of OVs. This model can be further expanded by adding a tumor compartment, where OVs could replicate.

Phase 1b study of intravenous coxsackievirus A21 (V937) and ipilimumab for patients with metastatic uveal melanoma

PURPOSE

No standard of care therapy exists for patients with metastatic uveal melanoma who are not HLA-A2:01 positive. The phase 1b, open-label CLEVER study (NCT03408587) evaluated V937 in combination with ipilimumab in patients with uveal melanoma.

METHODS

Adults with advanced uveal melanoma and liver metastases received up to 8 cycles of intravenous V937 (1 × 109 TCID50 per infusion; infusions on days 1, 3, 5, and 8 [cycle 1], then every 3 weeks [Q3W] thereafter [cycles 2-8]) and 4 cycles of intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W (beginning at cycle 1 day 8). The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRECIST).

RESULTS

Eleven patients were enrolled (median age, 65.0 years) and received a median of 6 injections of V937 and 3.5 infusions of ipilimumab. The best overall response was stable disease in 3 patients and progressive disease in 8 patients. All patients exhibited progression per irRECIST, with a 9% irPFS rate at week 26. Ten patients had treatment-related AEs, the most frequent of which were diarrhea (55%), fatigue (45%), and myalgia (36%). Two grade 3 AEs (diarrhea, n = 2) were considered related to ipilimumab; neither was related to V937.

CONCLUSION

Although the combination of V937 with ipilimumab had a manageable safety profile, meaningful clinical benefit was not observed in patients with uveal melanoma and liver metastases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03408587 (January 24, 2018).

Viral vectors engineered for gene therapy

Gene therapy has seen major progress in recent years. Viral vectors have made a significant contribution through efficient engineering for improved delivery and safety. A large variety of indications such as cancer, cardiovascular, metabolic, hematological, neurological, muscular, ophthalmological, infectious diseases, and immunodeficiency have been targeted. Viral vectors based on adenoviruses, adeno-associated viruses, herpes simplex viruses, retroviruses including lentiviruses, alphaviruses, flaviviruses, measles viruses, rhabdoviruses, Newcastle disease virus, poxviruses, picornaviruses, reoviruses, and polyomaviruses have been used. Proof-of-concept has been demonstrated for different indications in animal models. Therapeutic efficacy has also been achieved in clinical trials. Several viral vector-based drugs have been approved for the treatment of cancer, and hematological, metabolic, and neurological diseases. Moreover, viral vector-based vaccines have been approved against COVID-19 and Ebola virus disease.

Current advances in microbial-based cancer therapies

Microbes have an immense metabolic capability and can adapt to a wide variety of environments; as a result, they share complicated relationships with cancer. The goal of microbial-based cancer therapy is to treat patients with cancers that are not easily treatable, by using tumor-specific infectious microorganisms. Nevertheless, a number of difficulties have been encountered as a result of the harmful effects of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and alternative cancer therapies, such as the toxicity to non-cancerous cells, the inability of medicines to penetrate deep tumor tissue, and the ongoing problem of rising drug resistance in tumor cells. Due to these difficulties, there is now a larger need for designing alternative strategies that are more effective and selective when targeting tumor cells. The fight against cancer has advanced significantly owing to cancer immunotherapy. The researchers have greatly benefited from their understanding of tumor-invading immune cells as well as the immune responses that are specifically targeted against cancer. Application of bacterial and viral cancer therapeutics offers promising potential to be employed as cancer treatments among immunotherapies. As a novel therapeutic strategy, microbial targeting of tumors has been created to address the persisting hurdles of cancer treatment. This review outlines the mechanisms by which both bacteria and viruses target and inhibit the proliferation of tumor cells. Their ongoing clinical trials and possible modifications that can be made in the future have also been addressed in the following sections. These microbial-based cancer medicines have the ability to suppress cancer that builds up and multiplies in the tumor microenvironment and triggers antitumor immune responses, in contrast to other cancer medications.

Development and application of oncolytic viruses as the nemesis of tumor cells

Viruses and tumors are two pathologies that negatively impact human health, but what occurs when a virus encounters a tumor? A global consensus among cancer patients suggests that surgical resection, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and other methods are the primary means to combat cancer. However, with the innovation and development of biomedical technology, tumor biotherapy (immunotherapy, molecular targeted therapy, gene therapy, oncolytic virus therapy, etc.) has emerged as an alternative treatment for malignant tumors. Oncolytic viruses possess numerous anti-tumor properties, such as directly lysing tumor cells, activating anti-tumor immune responses, and improving the tumor microenvironment. Compared to traditional immunotherapy, oncolytic virus therapy offers advantages including high killing efficiency, precise targeting, and minimal side effects. Although oncolytic virus (OV) therapy was introduced as a novel approach to tumor treatment in the 19th century, its efficacy was suboptimal, limiting its widespread application. However, since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first OV therapy drug, T-VEC, in 2015, interest in OV has grown significantly. In recent years, oncolytic virus therapy has shown increasingly promising application prospects and has become a major research focus in the field of cancer treatment. This article reviews the development, classification, and research progress of oncolytic viruses, as well as their mechanisms of action, therapeutic methods, and routes of administration.

Oncolytic Virus-Driven Biotherapies from Bench to Bedside

With advances in cancer biology and an ever-deepening understanding of molecular virology, oncolytic virus (OV)-driven therapies have developed rapidly and become a promising alternative to traditional cancer therapies. In recent years, satisfactory results for oncolytic virus therapy (OVT) are achieved at both the cellular and organismal levels, and efforts are being increasingly directed toward clinical trials. Unfortunately, OVT remains ineffective in these trials, especially when performed using only a single OV reagent. In contrast, integrated approaches, such as using immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy, alongside OVT have demonstrated considerable efficacy. The challenges of OVT in clinical efficacy include the restricted scope of intratumoral injections and poor targeting of intravenous administration. Further optimization of OVT delivery is needed before OVs become a viable therapy for tumor treatment. In this review, the development process and antitumor mechanisms of OVs are introduced. The advances in OVT delivery routes to provide perspectives and directions for the improvement of OVT delivery are highlighted. This review also discusses the advantages and limitations of OVT monotherapy and combination therapy through the lens of recent clinical trials and aims to chart a course toward safer and more effective OVT strategies.

Oncolytic virotherapy: basic principles, recent advances and future directions

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) have attracted growing awareness in the twenty-first century, as they are generally considered to have direct oncolysis and cancer immune effects. With the progress in genetic engineering technology, OVs have been adopted as versatile platforms for developing novel antitumor strategies, used alone or in combination with other therapies. Recent studies have yielded eye-catching results that delineate the promising clinical outcomes that OVs would bring about in the future. In this review, we summarized the basic principles of OVs in terms of their classifications, as well as the recent advances in OV-modification strategies based on their characteristics, biofunctions, and cancer hallmarks. Candidate OVs are expected to be designed as "qualified soldiers" first by improving target fidelity and safety, and then equipped with "cold weapons" for a proper cytocidal effect, "hot weapons" capable of activating cancer immunotherapy, or "auxiliary weapons" by harnessing tactics such as anti-angiogenesis, reversed metabolic reprogramming and decomposing extracellular matrix around tumors. Combinations with other cancer therapeutic agents have also been elaborated to show encouraging antitumor effects. Robust results from clinical trials using OV as a treatment congruously suggested its significance in future application directions and challenges in developing OVs as novel weapons for tactical decisions in cancer treatment.

Viral Vectors in Gene Therapy: Where Do We Stand in 2023?

Viral vectors have been used for a broad spectrum of gene therapy for both acute and chronic diseases. In the context of cancer gene therapy, viral vectors expressing anti-tumor, toxic, suicide and immunostimulatory genes, such as cytokines and chemokines, have been applied. Oncolytic viruses, which specifically replicate in and kill tumor cells, have provided tumor eradication, and even cure of cancers in animal models. In a broader meaning, vaccine development against infectious diseases and various cancers has been considered as a type of gene therapy. Especially in the case of COVID-19 vaccines, adenovirus-based vaccines such as ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and Ad26.COV2.S have demonstrated excellent safety and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials, leading to Emergency Use Authorization in many countries. Viral vectors have shown great promise in the treatment of chronic diseases such as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), muscular dystrophy, hemophilia, β-thalassemia, and sickle cell disease (SCD). Proof-of-concept has been established in preclinical studies in various animal models. Clinical gene therapy trials have confirmed good safety, tolerability, and therapeutic efficacy. Viral-based drugs have been approved for cancer, hematological, metabolic, neurological, and ophthalmological diseases as well as for vaccines. For example, the adenovirus-based drug Gendicine® for non-small-cell lung cancer, the reovirus-based drug Reolysin® for ovarian cancer, the oncolytic HSV T-VEC for melanoma, lentivirus-based treatment of ADA-SCID disease, and the rhabdovirus-based vaccine Ervebo against Ebola virus disease have been approved for human use.

Gene Therapy Cargoes Based on Viral Vector Delivery

Viral vectors have been proven useful in a broad spectrum of gene therapy applications due to their possibility to accommodate foreign genetic material for both local and systemic delivery. The wide range of viral vectors has enabled gene therapy applications for both acute and chronic diseases. Cancer gene therapy has been addressed by the delivery of viral vectors expressing anti-tumor, toxic, and suicide genes for the destruction of tumors. Delivery of immunostimulatory genes such as cytokines and chemokines has also been applied for cancer therapy. Moreover, oncolytic viruses specifically replicating in and killing tumor cells have been used as such for tumor eradication or in combination with tumor killing or immunostimulatory genes. In a broad meaning, vaccines against infectious diseases and various cancers can be considered gene therapy, which has been highly successful, not the least for the development of effective COVID-19 vaccines. Viral vector-based gene therapy has also demonstrated encouraging and promising results for chronic diseases such as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), muscular dystrophy, and hemophilia. Preclinical gene therapy studies in animal models have demonstrated proof-of-concept for a wide range of disease indications. Clinical evaluation of drugs and vaccines in humans has showed high safety levels, good tolerance, and therapeutic efficacy. Several gene therapy drugs such as the adenovirus-based drug Gendicine® for non-small-cell lung cancer, the reovirus-based drug Reolysin® for ovarian cancer, lentivirus-based treatment of SCID-X1 disease, and the rhabdovirus-based vaccine Ervebo against Ebola virus disease, and adenovirus-based vaccines against COVID-19 have been developed.

Emerging Nano-/Biotechnology Drives Oncolytic Virus-Activated and Combined Cancer Immunotherapy

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) as one promising antitumor methods have made important contributions to tumor immunotherapy, which arouse increasing attention. They provide the dual mechanisms including direct killing effect toward tumor cells and immune activation for elevating antitumor responses, which have been proved in many preclinical studies. Especially, natural or genetically modified viruses as clinical immune preparations have emerged as a new promising approach objective to oncology treatment. The approval of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the therapy of advanced melanoma could be considered as a milestone achievement in the clinical translation of OV. In this review, we first discussed the antitumor mechanisms of OVs with an emphasis on targeting, replication, and propagation. We further outlined the state of the art of current OVs in tumor and underlined the activated biological effects especially including immunity. More significantly, the enhanced immune responses based on OVs were systematically discussed from different perspectives such as combination with immunotherapy, genetic engineering of OVs, integration with nanobiotechnology or nanoparticles, and antiviral response counteraction, where their principles were shed light on. The development of OVs in the clinics was also highlighted to analyze the actuality and concerns of different OV applications in clinical trials. At last, the future perspectives and challenges of OVs as an already widely accepted treatment means were discussed. This review will provide a systematic review and deep insight into OV development and also offer new opportunities and guidance pathways to drive the further clinical translation.

Intratumoral oncolytic virus V937 plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: the phase 1b MITCI study

BACKGROUND

Intratumoral administration of V937, a bioselected, genetically unmodified coxsackievirus A21, has previously demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced melanoma as monotherapy and in combination with the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) antibody pembrolizumab. We report results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 1b study (NCT02307149) evaluating V937 plus the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitor ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

METHODS

Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed metastatic or unresectable stage IIIB/C or IV melanoma received intratumoral V937 on days 1, 3, 5, 8, and 22 and every 3 weeks (Q3W) thereafter for up to 19 sets of injections plus intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W administered for four doses starting on day 22. Imaging was performed at screening, on days 43 and 106 and every 6 weeks thereafter; response was assessed by immune-related response criteria per investigator assessment. Primary endpoints were safety in all treated patients and objective response rate (ORR) in all treated patients and in patients with disease that progressed on prior anti-PD-1 therapy.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were enrolled and treated. ORR was 30% (95% CI 18% to 45%) among all treated patients, 47% (95% CI 23% to 72%) among patients who had not received prior anti-PD-1 therapy, and 21% (95% CI 9% to 39%) among patients who had experienced disease progression on prior anti-PD-1 therapy. Tumor regression occurred in injected and non-injected lesions. Median immune-related progression-free survival was 6.2 months (95% CI 3.5 to 9.0 months), and median overall survival was 45.1 months (95% CI 28.3 months to not reached). The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were pruritus (n=25, 50%), fatigue (n=22, 44%), and diarrhea (n=16, 32%). There were no V937-related dose-limiting toxicities and no treatment-related grade 5 AEs. Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 AEs, all of which were considered related to ipilimumab, occurred in 14% of patients (most commonly dehydration, diarrhea, and hepatotoxicity in 4% each).

CONCLUSIONS

Responses associated with intratumoral V937 plus ipilimumab were robust, including in the subgroup of patients who had experienced disease progression on prior anti-PD-1 therapy. Toxicities were manageable and consistent with those of the individual monotherapies.

A phase 1b single-arm trial of intratumoral oncolytic virus V937 in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma: results from the CAPRA study

Background

CAPRA (NCT02565992) evaluated Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) + pembrolizumab for metastatic/unresectable stage IIIB–IV melanoma.

Methods

Patients received intratumoral V937 on days 1, 3, 5, and 8 (then every 3 weeks [Q3W]) and intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg Q3W from day 8. Primary endpoint was safety.

Results

Median time from first dose to data cutoff was 32.0 months. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred; 14% (5/36) of patients experienced grade 3‒5 treatment-related adverse events. Objective response rate was 47% (complete response, 22%). Among 17 responders, 14 (82%) had responses ≥ 6 months. Among 8 patients previously treated with immunotherapy, 3 responded (1 complete, 2 partial). Responses were associated with increased serum CXCL10 and CCL22, suggesting viral replication contributes to antitumor immunity. For responders versus nonresponders, there was no difference in baseline tumor PD-L1 expression, ICAM1 expression, or CD3+ infiltrates. Surprisingly, the baseline cell density of CD3+CD8− T cells in the tumor microenvironment was significantly lower in responders compared with nonresponders (P = 0.0179).

Conclusions

These findings suggest responses to this combination may be seen even in patients without a typical “immune-active” microenvironment.

Trial registration number

NCT02565992.

Beyond Immunotherapy: Seizing the Momentum of Oncolytic Viruses in the Ideal Platform of Skin Cancers

Simple Summary

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) are the most innovative and promising class of intratumoral immunotherapies. The broad immunogenic landscape of skin cancer, accessible to intralesional infusion and available for direct response assessment, seems to be an ideal platform to expand the role of OVs. The established efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in this field and their hypothetical synergy with OVs have generated expectations for their combined use beyond the current immunotherapy achievements. Despite the recent negative phase III results of the MASTERKEY-265 trial for the combination of T-VEC plus pembrolizumab, such projects, including different ICIs and various natural or genetically modified OVs, continue to attract considerable interest, with numerous clinical trials underway for all the subtypes of skin cancer. To date, the majority of studies confirm the safety of tested OVs in patients with advanced skin cancers but cannot clearly prove whether these viral agents add any therapeutic benefit in the standard ICI-based approach. The aim of this overview is to present the main findings related to the examined OV-containing regimens at pre-clinical and clinical levels, and to discuss the previous failures as well as the future perspectives of oncolytic virotherapy.

Abstract

Despite the durable remissions induced by ICIs and targeted therapies in advanced melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers, both subtypes usually relapse. Many systematic therapies have been tested to increase efficacy and delay relapse in ICIs, but their success has been limited. Due the feasibility of this approach, skin cancers have become the ideal platform for intralesional infusions of many novel agents, including oncolytic viruses (OVs). Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) was the first FDA-approved OV for the treatment of unresectable melanoma and this virus opened up further potential for the use of this class of agents, especially in combination with ICIs, in order to achieve deeper and longer immune-mediated responses. However, the recently announced phase III MASTERKEY-265 trial was not able to confirm that the addition of T-VEC to pembrolizumab treatment improves progression-free or overall survival over the use of pembrolizumab alone. Despite these results, numerous studies are currently active, evaluating T-VEC and several other OVs as monotherapies or in regimens with ICIs in different subtypes of skin cancer. This overview provides a comprehensive update on the evolution status of all available OVs in melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers and summarizes the more interesting preclinical findings, the latest clinical evidence, and the future insights in relation to the expected selective incorporation of some of these OVs into oncological practice.

Bispecific Antibody Expressed by an Oncolytic Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 Can Transform Heterologous T Cells Into Uniform Tumor Killer Cells

BsAb (bispecific antibody)-armed oncolytic viruses (OVs) are effective in regulating tumor microenvironment. However, oHSV2 (oncolytic herpes simplex virus type 2) expressing immune checkpoints targeting BsAb molecules are not reported. Here, we generated oHSV2-armed PD-L1/CD3 BsAb and established pharmacodynamic evaluation models, which suggested that our oHSV2-BsAb molecules have an improved oncolytic potency in vitro and in vivo. The oHSV2 viruses armed with BsAb molecules targeting programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1)/CD3 or CD19/CD3 (oHSV2-PD-L1/CD3-BsAb or oHSV2-CD19/mCD3-BsAb) were constructed; besides inducing oncolysis in virus-infected tumor cells, the modified oncolytic virus oHSV2-PD-L1/CD3-BsAb can also activate peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) by releasing PD-L1/CD3 BsAb and thereby induce PBMC-mediated killing of PD-L1-positive tumor cells, regardless of PD-L1 expression level. The expressed PD-L1/CD3 BsAb can upregulate the activation markers of T cells in PBMCs and induce different cytokine secretion. The activation of T cells and the enrichment of related immune regulatory pathways are further confirmed by proteomics. It also demonstrated that the OVs or PBMCs could upregulate PD-L1 expression on the surface of tumor cells through transforming "cold tumors" with low PD-L1 expression into "hot tumors" with high PD-L1 expression, which can facilitate the targeting of BsAb molecules and enhance the effect of oncolysis. oHSV2-PD-L1/CD3-BsAb or oHSV2-CD19/mCD3-BsAb showed an enhanced oncolytic effect in vitro and in vivo compared to backbone virus oHSV2-GFP. Our results showed that the newly designed oHSV2-BsAb had enhanced therapeutic effects against solid tumors and provided a new option of immunotherapy.

Cytolytic Properties and Genome Analysis of Rigvir® Oncolytic Virotherapy Virus and Other Echovirus 7 Isolates

Rigvir® is a cell-adapted, oncolytic virotherapy enterovirus, which derives from an echovirus 7 (E7) isolate. While it is claimed that Rigvir® causes cytolytic infection in several cancer cell lines, there is little molecular evidence for its oncolytic and oncotropic potential. Previously, we genome-sequenced Rigvir® and five echovirus 7 isolates, and those sequences are further analyzed in this paper. A phylogenetic analysis of the full-length data suggested that Rigvir® was most distant from the other E7 isolates used in this study, placing Rigvir® in its own clade at the root of the phylogeny. Rigvir® contained nine unique mutations in the viral capsid proteins VP1-VP4 across the whole data set, with a structural analysis showing six of the mutations concerning residues with surface exposure on the cytoplasmic side of the viral capsid. One of these mutations, E/Q/N162G, was located in the region that forms the contact interface between decay-accelerating factor (DAF) and E7. Rigvir® and five other isolates were also subjected to cell infectivity assays performed on eight different cell lines. The used cell lines contained both cancer and non-cancer cell lines for observing Rigvir®'s claimed properties of being both oncolytic and oncotropic. Infectivity assays showed that Rigvir® had no discernable difference in the viruses' oncolytic effect when compared to the Wallace prototype or the four other E7 isolates. Rigvir® was also seen infecting non-cancer cell lines, bringing its claimed effect of being oncotropic into question. Thus, we conclude that Rigvir®'s claim of being an effective treatment against multiple different cancers is not warranted under the evidence presented here. Bioinformatic analyses do not reveal a clear mechanism that could elucidate Rigvir®'s function at a molecular level, and cell infectivity tests do not show a discernable difference in either the oncolytic or oncotropic effect between Rigvir® and other clinical E7 isolates used in the study.

Oncolytic ImmunoViroTherapy: A long history of crosstalk between viruses and immune system for cancer treatment

Cancer Immunotherapy relies on harnessing a patient's immune system to fine-tune specific anti-tumor responses and ultimately eradicate cancer. Among diverse therapeutic approaches, oncolytic viruses (OVs) have emerged as a novel form of cancer immunotherapy. OVs are a naturally occurring or genetically modified class of viruses able to selectively kill cancer cells, leaving healthy cells unharmed; in the last two decades, the role of OVs has been redefined to act beyond their oncolytic activity. Indeed, the immunogenic cancer cell death mediated by OVs induces the release of tumor antigens that in turn induces anti-tumor immunity, allowing OVs to act as in situ therapeutic cancer vaccines. Additionally, OVs can be engineered for intratumoral delivery of immunostimulatory molecules such as tumor antigens or cytokines to further enhance anti-tumor response. Moreover, OVs can be used in combination with other cancer immunotherapeutic approaches such as Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and CAR-T cells. The current review first defines the three main mechanisms of action (MOA) of OVs currently used in cancer therapy that are: i) Oncolysis, ii) OV-induced cancer-specific immune activation, and iii) Exploiting pre-existing anti-viral immunity to enhance cancer therapy. Secondly, we focus on how OVs can induce and/or improve anti-cancer immunity in a specific or unspecific fashion, highlighting the importance of these approaches. Finally, the last part of the review analyses OVs combined with other cancer immunotherapies, revising present and future clinical applications.

Oncolytic virotherapy as promising immunotherapy against cancer: mechanisms of resistance to oncolytic viruses

Oncolytic virotherapy has currently emerged as a powerful therapeutic approach in cancer treatment. Although the history of using viruses goes back to the early 20th century, the approval of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) in 2015 increased interest in oncolytic viruses (OVs). OVs are multifaceted biotherapeutic agents because they replicate in and kill tumor cells and augment immune responses by releasing immunostimulatory molecules from lysed cells. Despite promising results, some limitations hinder the efficacy of oncolytic virotherapy. The delivery challenges and the upregulation of checkpoints following oncolytic virotherapy also mediate resistance to OVs by diminishing immune responses. Furthermore, the localization of receptors of viruses in the tight junctions, interferon responses, and the aberrant expression of genes involved in the cell cycle of the virus, including their infection and replication, reduce the efficacy of OVs. In this review, we present different mechanisms of resistance to OVs and strategies to overcome them.

Oncolytic virus therapy in cancer: A current review

In view of the advancement in the understanding about the most diverse types of cancer and consequently a relentless search for a cure and increased survival rates of cancer patients, finding a therapy that is able to combat the mechanism of aggression of this disease is extremely important. Thus, oncolytic viruses (OVs) have demonstrated great benefits in the treatment of cancer because it mediates antitumor effects in several ways. Viruses can be used to infect cancer cells, especially over normal cells, to present tumor-associated antigens, to activate "danger signals" that generate a less immune-tolerant tumor microenvironment, and to serve transduction vehicles for expression of inflammatory and immunomodulatory cytokines. The success of therapies using OVs was initially demonstrated by the use of the genetically modified herpes virus, talimogene laherparepvec, for the treatment of melanoma. At this time, several OVs are being studied as a potential treatment for cancer in clinical trials. However, it is necessary to be aware of the safety and possible adverse effects of this therapy; after all, an effective treatment for cancer should promote regression, attack the tumor, and in the meantime induce minimal systemic repercussions. In this manuscript, we will present a current review of the mechanism of action of OVs, main clinical uses, updates, and future perspectives on this treatment.

Oncolytic viruses for triple negative breast cancer and beyond

Biological therapy is considered an alternative treatment capable of eliciting the same effects on tumors as surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. As a major player in biological therapy, oncolytic viruses (OVs) have attracted great attention and achieved good results. Specifically, the successful application of OVs in head and neck cancer, as well as melanoma, promoted its research in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). TNBC is a high-risk molecular type of breast cancer, characterized by strong invasion, easy recurrence, and metastasis. Due to the absence of estrogen and progesterone receptors, as well as the absence of overexpression or gene amplification of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), endocrine therapy and anti HER-2 targeted therapy have proven ineffective. Although chemotherapy has shown substantial efficacy in some TNBC patients, the occurrence of drug resistance and poor prognosis have prompted the exploration of new and effective treatment methods. The emerging concept of OVs provides a new platform to treat TNBC. Indeed, several studies have confirmed the therapeutic effects of OVs in TNBC. Numerous studies have also investigated the efficacy of OVs in other malignances, including solid tumor clinical trials, thus further demonstrating the promising application of oncolytic virotherapy for TNBC. The primary focus of the current review is the examination of OV mechanisms underlying their antitumor properties, while also summarizing the ongoing progress in OV research regarding TNBC treatment, as well as the various combinatorial strategies comprising OVs and other therapies. We also briefly introduce specific relevant clinical trials and discuss some of the progress in the research of novel OVs for the treatment of other malignancies, thereby affirming the significant therapeutic potential of OVs for the treatment of TNBC, as well as other cancers.

Prior Exposure to Coxsackievirus A21 Does Not Mitigate Oncolytic Therapeutic Efficacy

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) are being developed as a type of immunotherapy and have demonstrated durable tumor responses and clinical efficacy. One such OV, Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21), exhibited therapeutic efficacy in early phase clinical trials, demonstrating the ability to infect and kill cancer cells and stimulate anti-tumor immune responses. However, one of the major concerns in using this common cold virus as a therapeutic is the potential for innate and adaptive immune responses to mitigate the benefits of viral infection, particularly in individuals that have been exposed to coxsackievirus prior to treatment. In this study, we assess melanoma responses to CVA21 in the absence or presence of prior exposure to the virus. Melanomas were transplanted into naïve or CVA21-immunized C57BL6 mice and the mice were treated with intratumoral (IT) CVA21. We find that prior exposure to CVA21 does not dramatically affect tumor responses, nor does it alter overall survival. Our results suggest that prior exposure to coxsackievirus is not a critical determinant of patient selection for IT CVA21 interventions.

Mechanistic Modeling of a Novel Oncolytic Virus, V937, to Describe Viral Kinetic and Dynamic Processes Following Intratumoral and Intravenous Administration

V937 is an investigational novel oncolytic non-genetically modified Kuykendall strain of Coxsackievirus A21 which is in clinical development for the treatment of advanced solid tumor malignancies. V937 infects and lyses tumor cells expressing the intercellular adhesion molecule I (ICAM-I) receptor. We integrated in vitro and in vivo data from six different preclinical studies to build a mechanistic model that allowed a quantitative analysis of the biological processes of V937 viral kinetics and dynamics, viral distribution to tumor, and anti-tumor response elicited by V937 in human xenograft models in immunodeficient mice following intratumoral and intravenous administration. Estimates of viral infection and replication which were calculated from in vitro experiments were successfully used to describe the tumor response in vivo under various experimental conditions. Despite the predicted high clearance rate of V937 in systemic circulation (t_1/2 = 4.3 min), high viral replication was observed in immunodeficient mice which resulted in tumor shrinkage with both intratumoral and intravenous administration. The described framework represents a step towards the quantitative characterization of viral distribution, replication, and oncolytic effect of a novel oncolytic virus following intratumoral and intravenous administrations in the absence of an immune response. This model may further be expanded to integrate the role of the immune system on viral and tumor dynamics to support the clinical development of oncolytic viruses.

Oncolytic virotherapy reverses the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and its potential in combination with immunotherapy

It has been intensively reported that the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) results in tumor resistance to immunotherapy, especially immune checkpoint blockade and chimeric T cell antigen therapy. As an emerging therapeutic agent, oncolytic viruses (OVs) can specifically kill malignant cells and modify immune and non-immune TME components through their intrinsic properties or genetically incorporated with TME regulators. Strategies of manipulating OVs against the immunosuppressive TME include serving as a cancer vaccine, expressing proinflammatory factors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, and regulating nonimmune stromal constituents. In this review, we summarized the mechanisms and applications of OVs against the immunosuppressive TME, and strategies of OVs in combination with immunotherapy. We also introduced future directions to achieve efficient clinical translation including optimization of preclinical models that simulate the human TME and achieving systemic delivery of OVs.

Coxsackievirus B3-Its Potential as an Oncolytic Virus

Oncolytic virotherapy represents one of the most advanced strategies to treat otherwise untreatable types of cancer. Despite encouraging developments in recent years, the limited fraction of patients responding to therapy has demonstrated the need to search for new suitable viruses. Coxsackievirus B3 (CVB3) is a promising novel candidate with particularly valuable features. Its entry receptor, the coxsackievirus and adenovirus receptor (CAR), and heparan sulfate, which is used for cellular entry by some CVB3 variants, are highly expressed on various cancer types. Consequently, CVB3 has broad anti-tumor activity, as shown in various xenograft and syngeneic mouse tumor models. In addition to direct tumor cell killing the virus induces a strong immune response against the tumor, which contributes to a substantial increase in the efficiency of the treatment. The toxicity of oncolytic CVB3 in healthy tissues is variable and depends on the virus strain. It can be abrogated by genetic engineering the virus with target sites of microRNAs. In this review, we present an overview of the current status of the development of CVB3 as an oncolytic virus and outline which steps still need to be accomplished to develop CVB3 as a therapeutic agent for clinical use in cancer treatment.

Real-time PCR assay as a simple and efficient tool for viral stability study

Aim: For oncolytic virus trials, regulatory agencies often require pharmaceutical industry to evaluate risks of released viruses from patients to environment. This study was to establish a real-time PCR method to assess viral shedding and viral stability in human urine. Results/methodology: Herein, we describe an incubation of viral drug product in human urine and use of real-time PCR as a simple, efficient and high throughput assay to assess the level and stability of a nonenveloped and single stranded RNA virus. The viral stability issue is critical to the collection, transport, storage and testing of clinical samples. Discussion/conclusion: In summary, this simple method provides useful viral stability information at various temperatures and detergents. A similar approach may apply to other RNA viruses (including SARS-CoV-2).

Oncolytic virotherapy: new weapon for breast cancer treatment

The recent introduction of viruses as a weapon against cancer can be regarded as one of the most intriguing approaches in the context of precision medicine. The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors has been extensively studied in early and advanced cancer stages, with extraordinary results. Although there is a good tolerability profile, especially when compared with conventional chemotherapy, severe immune-related adverse events have emerged as a potential limitation. Moreover, there are still treatment-resistant cases and thus further treatment options need to be implemented. Several in vitro and in vivo studies have been conducted and are ongoing to develop oncolytic viruses (OVs) as a tool to modulate the immune system response. OVs are attenuated viruses that can kill cancer cells after having infected them, producing microenvironment remodelling and antitumour immune response. The potential of oncolytic virotherapy is to contrast the absence of T cell infiltrates, converting ‘cold’ tumours into ‘hot’ ones, thus improving the performance of the immune system. Breast cancer, the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths among women, is considered a ‘cold’ tumour. In this context, oncolytic virotherapy might well be considered as a promising strategy. This review summarises the current status, clinical applications and future development of OVs, focusing on breast cancer treatment.

Application of Viral Vectors for Vaccine Development with a Special Emphasis on COVID-19

Viral vectors can generate high levels of recombinant protein expression providing the basis for modern vaccine development. A large number of different viral vector expression systems have been utilized for targeting viral surface proteins and tumor-associated antigens. Immunization studies in preclinical animal models have evaluated the elicited humoral and cellular responses and the possible protection against challenges with lethal doses of infectious pathogens or tumor cells. Several vaccine candidates for both infectious diseases and various cancers have been subjected to a number of clinical trials. Human immunization trials have confirmed safe application of viral vectors, generation of neutralizing antibodies and protection against challenges with lethal doses. A special emphasis is placed on COVID-19 vaccines based on viral vectors. Likewise, the flexibility and advantages of applying viral particles, RNA replicons and DNA replicon vectors of self-replicating RNA viruses for vaccine development are presented.

Oncolytic Viruses and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Preclinical Developments to Clinical Trials

Immuno-oncology (IO) has been an active area of oncology research. Following US FDA approval of the first immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI), ipilimumab (human IgG1 k anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody), in 2011, and of the first oncolytic virus, Imlygic (talimogene laherparepvec), in 2015, there has been renewed interest in IO. In the past decade, ICIs have changed the treatment paradigm for many cancers by enabling better therapeutic control, resuming immune surveillance, suppressing tumor immunosuppression, and restoring antitumor immune function. However, ICI therapies are effective only in a small subset of patients and show limited therapeutic potential due to their inability to demonstrate efficacy in 'cold' or unresponsive tumor microenvironments (TMEs). Relatedly, oncolytic viruses (OVs) have been shown to induce antitumor immune responses, augment the efficacy of existing cancer treatments, and reform unresponsive TME to turn 'cold' tumors 'hot,' increasing their susceptibility to checkpoint blockade immunotherapies. For this reason, OVs serve as ideal complements to ICIs, and multiple preclinical studies and clinical trials are demonstrating their combined therapeutic efficacy. This review will discuss the merits and limitations of OVs and ICIs as monotherapy then progress onto the preclinical rationale and the results of clinical trials of key combination therapies.

The Oncolytic Virus in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Cancer has always been an enormous threat to human health and survival. Surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy could improve the survival of cancer patients, but most patients with advanced cancer usually have a poor survival or could not afford the high cost of chemotherapy. The emergence of oncolytic viruses provided a new strategy for us to alleviate or even cure malignant tumors. An oncolytic virus can be described as a genetically engineered or naturally existing virus that can selectively replicate in cancer cells and then kill them without damaging the healthy cells. There have been many kinds of oncolytic viruses, such as herpes simplex virus, adenovirus, and Coxsackievirus. Moreover, they have different clinical applications in cancer treatment. This review focused on the clinical application of oncolytic virus and predicted the prospect by analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of oncolytic virotherapy.

Oncolytic Virotherapy for Malignant Tumor: Current Clinical Status

Oncolytic viruses, as novel biological anti-tumor agents, provide anti-tumor therapeutic effects by different mechanisms including directly selective tumor cell lysis and secondary systemic anti-tumor immune responses. Some wide-type and genetically engineered oncolytic viruses have been applied in clinical trials. Among them, T-Vec has a significant therapeutic effect on melanoma patients and received the approval of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as the first oncolytic virus to treat cancer in the US. However, the mechanisms of virus interaction with tumor and immune systems have not been clearly elucidated and there are still no "gold standards" for instructions of virotherapy in clinical trials. This Review collected the recent clinical trials data from 2005 to summarize the basic oncolytic viruses biology, describe the application in recent clinical trials, and discuss the challenges in the application of oncolytic viruses in clinical trials.

Viral Vector-Based Melanoma Gene Therapy

Gene therapy applications of oncolytic viruses represent an attractive alternative for cancer treatment. A broad range of oncolytic viruses, including adenoviruses, adeno-associated viruses, alphaviruses, herpes simplex viruses, retroviruses, lentiviruses, rhabdoviruses, reoviruses, measles virus, Newcastle disease virus, picornaviruses and poxviruses, have been used in diverse preclinical and clinical studies for the treatment of various diseases, including colon, head-and-neck, prostate and breast cancer as well as squamous cell carcinoma and glioma. The majority of studies have focused on immunotherapy and several drugs based on viral vectors have been approved. However, gene therapy for malignant melanoma based on viral vectors has not been utilized to its full potential yet. This review represents a summary of the achievements of preclinical and clinical studies using viral vectors, with the focus on malignant melanoma.

Intratumoural immunotherapies in oncology

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the standard of care for many tumours, the majority of patients fail to achieve sustained benefit, often owing to the lack of a T-cell inflamed tumour microenvironment (TME). Directly injected intratumoural therapies present a potential strategy to induce T-cell inflammation and convert a 'cold' immune-inert TME into a 'hot' immune-inflamed TME. Various approaches including chemoablation, oncolytic viral therapy, cytokines and agents targeting innate immunity such as Toll-like receptor agonists and stimulator of interferon genes agonists are in clinical development. Thus far, melanoma has led the way in intratumoural drug development owing to its relative immunogenicity and propensity for cutaneous metastasis easily amenable to injections. However, intratumoural therapies are moving to other tumour types and advances in endoscopic and interventional radiological techniques are allowing these agents to be injected into visceral lesions. This review provides an overview of the current status of intratumoural therapies in oncology, as well as future directions regarding therapeutic niches and appropriate trial design for intratumoural agents.

Oncolytic Immunotherapy for Bladder Cancer Using Coxsackie A21 Virus: Using a Bladder Tumor Precision-Cut Slice Model System to Assess Viral Efficacy

Oncolytic viruses are anticancer agents that selectively target and kill cancer cells by direct lysis, while at the same time stimulating a tumor antigen-specific adaptive immune response. These promising therapeutic agents target multiple cancers and have already proven to be an effective treatment option for solid malignancies. One such agent, T-Vec (Talimogene laherparepvec) has been licensed and is in routine clinical use for treatment of malignant melanoma.Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is an ideal potential target for oncolytic immunotherapy as locally instilled live biological therapy using Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) is already well established in the clinical setting. Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) is a novel intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1)-targeted immunotherapeutic virus. We have investigated CVA21-induced cytotoxicity in a panel of human bladder cancer cell lines, revealing a range of sensitivities largely correlating with expression of the viral receptor ICAM-1. CVA21 in combination with low doses of mitomycin-C enhanced CVA21 viral replication and oncolysis by increasing surface expression levels of ICAM-1. In addition to cell lines and an animal model a key component of our studies into oncolytic immunotherapy for bladder cancer was the use of a bladder tumor precision slice preclinical model system which represents tumor architecture, heterogeneity, and the complexity of a tumor in vitro. Results seen in cell lines were reflected in the tumor slice model whereby levels of virus protein expression and induction of apoptosis were enhanced with prior exposure to mitomycin-C. In this chapter we demonstrate the utility of the precision cut tumor slice model as a unique organotypic model to test oncolytic viruses. We will describe how to prepare and slice the tumor using a vibrating microtome together with the optimum culture and conditions for treatment.

Local and Recurrent Regional Metastases of Melanoma

Up to 10% of patients with cutaneous melanoma will develop recurrent locoregional disease. While surgical resection remains the mainstay of treatment for isolated recurrences, locoregional melanoma can often present as bulky, unresectable disease and can pose a significant therapeutic challenge. This chapter focuses on the natural history of local and regionally recurrent metastases and the multiple treatment modalities which exist for advanced locoregional melanoma, including regional perfusion procedures such as hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion and isolated limb infusion, intralesional therapies, and neo-adjuvant systemic therapy strategies for borderline resectable regional disease. Hyperthermic limb perfusion (HILP) and isolated limb infusion (ILI) are generally well-tolerated and have shown overall response rates between 44% and 90%. Intralesional therapies also appear to be well-tolerated as adverse events are usually limited to the site of injection and minor transient flu-like symptoms. Systemic targeted therapies have shown to have response rates up to 85% when used as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with borderline resectable disease. While combination immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting has also shown promising results, this data has not yet matured.

Intratumoral Immunotherapy-Update 2019

Intratumoral immunotherapies aim to trigger local and systemic immunologic responses via direct injection of immunostimulatory agents with the goal of tumor cell lysis, followed by release of tumor‐derived antigens and subsequent activation of tumor‐specific effector T cells. In 2019, a multitude of intratumoral immunotherapies with varied mechanisms of action, including nononcolytic viral therapies such as PV‐10 and toll‐like receptor 9 agonists and oncolytic viral therapies such as CAVATAK, Pexa‐Vec, and HF10, have been extensively evaluated in clinical trials and demonstrated promising antitumor activity with tolerable toxicities in melanoma and other solid tumor types. Talimogene laherparepvec (T‐VEC), a genetically modified herpes simplex virus type 1–based oncolytic immunotherapy, is the first oncolytic virus approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of unresectable melanoma recurrent after initial surgery. In patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma, T‐VEC demonstrated a superior durable response rate (continuous complete response or partial response lasting ≥6 months) over subcutaneous GM‐CSF (16.3% vs. 2.1%; p < .001). Responses were seen in both injected and uninjected lesions including visceral lesions, suggesting a systemic antitumor response. When combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors, T‐VEC significantly improved response rates compared with single agent; similar results were seen with combinations of checkpoint inhibitors and other intratumoral therapies such as CAVATAK, HF10, and TLR9 agonists. In this review, we highlight recent results from clinical trials of key intratumoral immunotherapies that are being evaluated in the clinic, with a focus on T‐VEC in the treatment of advanced melanoma as a model for future solid tumor indications.

Implications for Practice

This review provides oncologists with the latest information on the development of key intratumoral immunotherapies, particularly oncolytic viruses. Currently, T‐VEC is the only U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)‐approved oncolytic immunotherapy. This article highlights the efficacy and safety data from clinical trials of T‐VEC both as monotherapy and in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors. This review summarizes current knowledge on intratumoral therapies, a novel modality with increased utility in cancer treatment, and T‐VEC, the only U.S. FDA‐approved oncolytic viral therapy, for medical oncologists. This review evaluates approaches to incorporate T‐VEC into daily practice to offer the possibility of response in selected melanoma patients with manageable adverse events as compared with other available immunotherapies.

This review highlights recent results from clinical trials of key intratumoral immunotherapies that are being evaluated in the clinic, with a focus on talimogene laherparepvec in the treatment of advanced melanoma as a model for future solid tumor indications.

Phase I Trial of an ICAM-1-Targeted Immunotherapeutic-Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) as an Oncolytic Agent Against Non Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

PURPOSE

The CANON [CAVATAK in NON-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC)] study evaluated a novel ICAM-1-targeted immunotherapeutic-coxsackievirus A21 as a novel oncolytic agent against bladder cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifteen patients enrolled in this "window of opportunity" phase I study, exposing primary bladder cancers to CAVATAK prior to surgery. The first 9 patients received intravesical administration of monotherapy CAVATAK; in the second stage, 6 patients received CAVATAK with a subtherapeutic dose of mitomycin C, known to enhance expression of ICAM-1 on bladder cancer cells. The primary endpoint was to determine patient safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary endpoints were evidence of viral replication, induction of inflammatory cytokines, antitumor activity, and viral-induced changes in resected tissue.

RESULTS

Clinical activity of CAVATAK was demonstrated by induction of tumor inflammation and hemorrhage following either single or multiple administrations of CAVATAK in multiple patients, and a complete resolution of tumor in 1 patient. Whether used alone or in combination with mitomycin C, CAVATAK caused marked inflammatory changes within NMIBC tissue biopsies by upregulating IFN-inducible genes, including both immune checkpoint inhibitory genes (PD-L1 and LAG3) and Th1-associated chemokines, as well as the induction of the innate activator RIG-I, compared with bladder cancer tissue from untreated patients. No significant toxicities were reported in any patient, from either virus or combination therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The acceptable safety profile of CAVATAK, proof of viral targeting, replication, and tumor cell death together with the virus-mediated increases in "immunological heat" within the tumor microenvironment all indicate that CAVATAK may be potentially considered as a novel therapeutic for NMIBC.

Directed evolution as a tool for the selection of oncolytic RNA viruses with desired phenotypes

Viruses have some characteristics in common with cell-based life. They can evolve and adapt to environmental conditions. Directed evolution can be used by researchers to produce viral strains with desirable phenotypes. Through bioselection, improved strains of oncolytic viruses can be obtained that have better safety profiles, increased specificity for malignant cells, and more efficient spread among tumor cells. It is also possible to select strains capable of killing a broader spectrum of cancer cell variants, so as to achieve a higher frequency of therapeutic responses. This review describes and analyses virus adaptation studies performed with members of four RNA virus families that are used for viral oncolysis: reoviruses, paramyxoviruses, enteroviruses, and rhabdoviruses.

Developing Picornaviruses for Cancer Therapy

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) form a group of novel anticancer therapeutic agents which selectively infect and lyse cancer cells. Members of several viral families, including Picornaviridae, have been shown to have anticancer activity. Picornaviruses are small icosahedral non-enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses infecting a wide range of hosts. They possess several advantages for development for cancer therapy: Their genomes do not integrate into host chromosomes, do not encode oncogenes, and are easily manipulated as cDNA. This review focuses on the picornaviruses investigated for anticancer potential and the mechanisms that underpin this specificity.

RNA Viruses as Tools in Gene Therapy and Vaccine Development

RNA viruses have been subjected to substantial engineering efforts to support gene therapy applications and vaccine development. Typically, retroviruses, lentiviruses, alphaviruses, flaviviruses rhabdoviruses, measles viruses, Newcastle disease viruses, and picornaviruses have been employed as expression vectors for treatment of various diseases including different types of cancers, hemophilia, and infectious diseases. Moreover, vaccination with viral vectors has evaluated immunogenicity against infectious agents and protection against challenges with pathogenic organisms. Several preclinical studies in animal models have confirmed both immune responses and protection against lethal challenges. Similarly, administration of RNA viral vectors in animals implanted with tumor xenografts resulted in tumor regression and prolonged survival, and in some cases complete tumor clearance. Based on preclinical results, clinical trials have been conducted to establish the safety of RNA virus delivery. Moreover, stem cell-based lentiviral therapy provided life-long production of factor VIII potentially generating a cure for hemophilia A. Several clinical trials on cancer patients have generated anti-tumor activity, prolonged survival, and even progression-free survival.

Reprogramming lymphocytes for the treatment of melanoma: From biology to therapy

This decade has introduced drastic changes in melanoma therapy, predominantly due to the materialization of the long promise of immunotherapy. Cytotoxic T cells are the chief component of the immune system, which are targeted by different strategies aimed to increase their capacity against melanoma cells. To this end, reprogramming of T cells occurs by T cell centered manipulation, targeting the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment or altering the whole patient. These are enabled by delivery of small molecules, functional monoclonal antibodies, different subunit vaccines, as well as living lymphocytes, native or genetically engineered. Current FDA-approved therapies are focused on direct T cell manipulation, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors blocking CTLA-4 and/or PD-1, which paves the way for an effective immunotherapy backbone available for combination with other modalities. Here we review the biology and clinical developments that enable melanoma immunotherapy today and in the future.

Intralesional Cancer Immunotherapies

Melanoma and other solid cancers with low or absent T-cell inflammation respond poorly to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Tumor infiltration with T cells that are directed against tumor antigens requires the induction of an innate immune response leading to production of type I interferons and maturation and activation of dendritic cells that can cross-present tumor antigens to T cells. Intralesional therapies, including oncolytic viral therapies, inflammatory cytokines, and agonists of Toll-like receptors and stimulator of interferon genes, can provide the necessary stimuli to trigger such an innate immune response.

Oncolytic viruses and checkpoint inhibitors: combination therapy in clinical trials

Advances in the understanding of cancer immunotherapy and the development of multiple checkpoint inhibitors have dramatically changed the current landscape of cancer treatment. Recent large-scale phase III trials (e.g. PHOCUS, OPTiM) are establishing use of oncolytic viruses as another tool in the cancer therapeutics armamentarium. These viruses do not simply lyse cells to achieve their cancer-killing effects, but also cause dramatic changes in the tumor immune microenvironment. This review will highlight the major vector platforms that are currently in development (including adenoviruses, reoviruses, vaccinia viruses, herpesviruses, and coxsackieviruses) and how they are combined with checkpoint inhibitors. These vectors employ a variety of engineered capsid modifications to enhance infectivity, genome deletions or promoter elements to confer selective replication, and encode a variety of transgenes to enhance anti-tumor or immunogenic effects. Pre-clinical and clinical data have shown that oncolytic vectors can induce anti-tumor immunity and markedly increase immune cell infiltration (including cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells) into the local tumor microenvironment. This "priming" by the viral infection can change a 'cold' tumor microenvironment into a 'hot' one with the influx of a multitude of immune cells and cytokines. This alteration sets the stage for subsequent checkpoint inhibitor delivery, as they are most effective in an environment with a large lymphocytic infiltrate. There are multiple ongoing clinical trials that are currently combining oncolytic viruses with checkpoint inhibitors (e.g. CAPTIVE, CAPRA, and Masterkey-265), and the initial results are encouraging. It is clear that oncolytic viruses and checkpoint inhibitors will continue to evolve together as a combination therapy for multiple types of cancers.

The emerging role of oncolytic virus therapy against cancer

This review discusses current clinical advancements in oncolytic viral therapy, with a focus on the viral platforms approved for clinical use and highlights the benefits each platform provides. Three oncolytic viruses (OVs), an echovirus, an adenovirus, and a herpes simplex-1 virus, have passed governmental regulatory approval in Latvia, China, and the USA and EU. Numerous other recombinant viruses from diverse families are in clinical testing in cancer patients and we highlight the design features of selected examples, including adenovirus, herpes simplex virus, measles virus, retrovirus, reovirus, vaccinia virus, vesicular stomatitis virus. Lastly, we provide thoughts on the path forward for this rapidly expanding field especially in combination with immune modulating drugs.

Combining Tumor Vaccination and Oncolytic Viral Approaches with Checkpoint Inhibitors: Rationale, Pre-Clinical Experience, and Current Clinical Trials in Malignant Melanoma

The field of tumor immunology has faced many complex challenges over the last century, but the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 [CTLA4] and anti-programmed cell death-1 [PD-1]/PD-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) and talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) for the treatment of metastatic melanoma have awakened a new wave of interest in cancer immunotherapy. Additionally, combinations of vaccines and oncolytic viral therapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors and other systemic agents seem to be promising synergistic strategies to further boost the immune response against cancer. These combinations are undergoing clinical investigation, and if successful, will hopefully soon become available to patients. Here, we review key basic concepts of tumor-induced immune suppression in malignant melanoma, the historical perspective around vaccine development in melanoma, and advances in oncolytic viral therapies. We also discuss the emerging role for combination approaches with different immunomodulatory agents as well as new developments in personalized immunization approaches.

The Role of Oncolytic Viruses in the Treatment of Melanoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Oncolytic virotherapy is a new approach to the treatment of cancer and its success in the treatment of melanoma represents a breakthrough in cancer therapeutics. This paper provides a review of the current literature on the use of oncolytic viruses (OVs) in the treatment of melanoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is the first OV approved for the treatment of melanoma and presents new challenges as it enters the clinical setting. Several other OVs are at various stages of clinical and pre-clinical development for the treatment of melanoma. Reports from phase Ib-III clinical trials combining T-VEC with checkpoint blockade are encouraging and demonstrate potential added benefit of combination immunotherapy. OVs have recently emerged as a standard treatment option for patients with advanced melanoma. Several OVs and therapeutic combinations are in development. Immunooncolytic virotherapy combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors is promising for the treatment of advanced melanoma.

Oncolytic Immunotherapy for Bladder Cancer Using Coxsackie A21 Virus

As a clinical setting in which local live biological therapy is already well established, non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) presents intriguing opportunities for oncolytic virotherapy. Coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) is a novel intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1)-targeted immunotherapeutic virus. This study investigated CVA21-induced cytotoxicity in a panel of human bladder cancer cell lines, revealing a range of sensitivities largely correlating with expression of the viral receptor ICAM-1. CVA21 in combination with low doses of mitomycin-C enhanced CVA21 viral replication and oncolysis by increasing surface expression levels of ICAM-1. This was further confirmed using 300-μm precision slices of NMIBC where levels of virus protein expression and induction of apoptosis were enhanced with prior exposure to mitomycin-C. Given the importance of the immunogenicity of dying cancer cells for triggering tumor-specific responses and long-term therapeutic success, the ability of CVA21 to induce immunogenic cell death was investigated. CVA21 induced immunogenic apoptosis in bladder cancer cell lines, as evidenced by expression of the immunogenic cell death (ICD) determinant calreticulin, and HMGB-1 release and the ability to reject MB49 tumors in syngeneic mice after vaccination with MB49 cells undergoing CVA21 induced ICD. Such CVA21 immunotherapy could offer a potentially less toxic, more effective option for the treatment of bladder cancer.