Monitoring the Efficacy of Oncolytic Viruses via Gene Expression

Oncolytic virotherapy in cancer treatment: challenges and optimization prospects

Oncolytic viruses (OVs) are emerging cancer therapeutics that offer a multifaceted therapeutic platform for the benefits of replicating and lysing tumor cells, being engineered to express transgenes, modulating the tumor microenvironment (TME), and having a tolerable safety profile that does not overlap with other cancer therapeutics. The mechanism of OVs combined with other antitumor agents is based on immune-mediated attack resistance and might benefit patients who fail to achieve durable responses after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment. In this Review, we summarize data on the OV mechanism and limitations of monotherapy, which are currently in the process of combination partner development, especially with ICIs. We discuss some of the hurdles that have limited the preclinical and clinical development of OVs. We also describe the available data and provide guidance for optimizing OVs in clinical practice, as well as a summary of approved and promising novel OVs with clinical indications.

Evolving Role of Oncolytic Virotherapy: Challenges and Prospects in Clinical Practice

Selective oncotropism and cytolytic activity against tumors have made certain viruses subject to investigation as novel treatment modalities. However, monotherapy with oncolytic viruses (OVs) has shown limited success and modest clinical benefit. The capacity to genetically engineer OVs makes them a desirable platform to design complementary treatment modalities to overcome the existing treatment options' shortcomings. In recent years, our knowledge of interactions of the tumors with the immune system has expanded profoundly. There is a growing body of literature supporting immunomodulatory roles for OVs. The concept of bioengineering these platforms to induce the desired immune response and complement the current immunotherapeutic modalities to make immune-resistant tumors responsive to immunotherapy is under investigation in preclinical and early clinical trials. This review provides an overview of attempts to optimize oncolytic virotherapy as essential components of the multimodality anticancer therapeutic approach and discusses the challenges in translation to clinical practice.

Optimizing oncolytic virotherapy in cancer treatment

In the wake of the success of modern immunotherapy, oncolytic viruses (OVs) are currently seen as a potential therapeutic option for patients with cancer who do not respond or fail to achieve durable responses following treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. OVs offer a multifaceted therapeutic platform because they preferentially replicate in tumour cells, can be engineered to express transgenes that augment their cytotoxic and immunostimulatory activities, and modulate the tumour microenvironment to optimize immune-mediated tumour eradication, both at locoregional and systemic sites of disease. Lysis of tumour cells releases tumour-specific antigens that trigger both the innate and adaptive immune systems. OVs also represent attractive combination partners with other systemically delivered agents by virtue of their highly favourable safety profiles. Rational combinations of OVs with different immune modifiers and/or antitumour agents, based on mechanisms of tumour resistance to immune-mediated attack, may benefit the large, currently underserved, population of patients who respond poorly to immune checkpoint inhibition.

Preclinical safety evaluation of hepatic arterial infusion of oncolytic poxvirus

Purpose

Oncolytic poxvirus has shown promise in treating various solid tumors, such as liver cancer, and administration of oncolytic poxvirus via the hepatic artery may provide more survival benefits than other routes of administration. However, there is a lack of safety information to guide the application of hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of oncolytic poxvirus in human studies. To investigate the acute and chronic toxicity of HAI administration of oncolytic poxvirus in animals and provide safety information for future human studies.

Methods

VV^tk-, a vaccinia poxvirus with inactivated thymidine kinase gene, was administered via HAI to rabbits with normal liver function under angiography (1×10⁸ or 1×10⁹ pfu), and rats with N-nitrosomorpholine-induced precancerous liver cirrhosis under open surgery (1×10⁸ pfu). Body weights and survival were monitored and blood samples were collected for hematological and biochemical tests. Distribution of A56 (a specific marker for poxvirus infection) in rabbit organs was evaluated using immunofluorescence assays.

Results

HAI of high doses of VV^tk- did not cause any acute or chronic changes in body weight, survival or in biochemical, hematological tests in the 2 animal models, and none of the changes showed dose dependency (in rabbit study), or were influenced by liver cirrhosis (in rat study). A56 was not detected in any of the major rabbit organs.

Conclusion

HAI may provide a safe alternative route of oncolytic poxvirus administration for human studies.