An Optimized Clinical Regimen for the Oncolytic Virus PV701

Abstract

Purpose: Previous phase 1 trials of i.v.-administered PV701 have shown this virus to be welltolerated with toxicity primarily associated with the first dose. Our hypothesis, based on preclinical evidence, was that patient tolerability could be improved by slowing the i.v. infusion rate, and that this approach would allow for the safe administration of higher doses. Additionally, this phase 1trial was the first to measure PV701clearance. Experimental Design: For the first dose, a 3-h infusion was used compared with the 10-and 30-min infusions administered in the two previous trials. Subsequent doses were infused over 1h. Six doses were given per 3-week cycle. Escalation of the first dose was done separately from the escalation of doses 2 to 6. Viral clearance was determined using whole blood reverse transcription-PCR. Results: Eighteen patients with advanced chemorefractory cancer were enrolled. The first dose was safely escalated to 24 Â 10 9 plaque-forming units/m 2 and doses 2 to 6 were safely escalated to 120 Â 10 9 plaque-forming units/m 2 . Tolerability was improved compared with the rapid bolus dosing used previously with the elimination of severe flu-like symptoms. Furthermore, infusion reactions were markedly decreased in this trial compared with previous PV701trials.The presence of neutralizing antibodies did not significantly affect PV701clearance. Four major and two minor tumor responses were observed. Conclusions: Using slow infusion, patient tolerability was improved, while the first dose was safely escalated relative to two previous PV701 trials. Based on improved tolerability and encouraging signs of activity, this slow infusion regimen was selected for further PV701 clinical development.

PD-L1 in tumor microenvironment mediates resistance to oncolytic immunotherapy

“…The major limitations of OVs are their poor delivery to metastatic cancer sites with systemic administration and rapid development of neutralizing antibodies. Nevertheless, in the few patients who responded to OVs, the observed clinical benefit was often durable, even after completion of therapy (1). These studies implicate the role of the antitumor immune response in the observed therapeutic effect of OVs and warrant further exploration of OVs as immunotherapeutic, rather than simply lytic, agents.…”

Rac1 is required for oncolytic NDV replication in human cancer cells and establishes a link between tumorigenesis and sensitivity to oncolytic virus

“…NDV preferentially replicates in a variety of human tumor cells but not in normal cells (Reichard et al, 1992). As NDV is nonpathogenic in humans and is associated with only a few minor symptoms, several NDV strains are under clinical evalulation for anticancer treatment (Sinkovics and Horvath, 2000;Pecora et al, 2002;Hotte et al, 2007). The tumor-selective replication of oncolytic RNA viruses such as NDV or vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) has been proposed to be related to tumor-specific defects in the cellular antiviral defense.…”

Oncolytic Specificity of Newcastle Disease Virus Is Mediated by Selectivity for Apoptosis-Resistant Cells

“…NDV has been shown to possess oncolytic properties (27,32) and has been used as a cancer vaccine and also as an oncolytic agent in several clinical trials in different human cancers (14,16,21,34). The selectivity of NDV and other oncolytic viruses to cancer cells has been proposed to be due to defects in the type I interferon (IFN) response of cancer cells (13,38).…”