Trial Watch-Oncolytic viruses and cancer therapy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pol J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4801444 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Trial Watch-Oncolytic viruses and cancer therapy.
Pol Jonathan J Buqué Aitziber A Aranda Fernando F Bloy Norma N Cremer Isabelle I Eggermont Alexander A Erbs Philippe P Fucikova Jitka J Galon Jérôme J Limacher Jean-Marc JM Preville Xavier X Sautès-Fridman Catherine C Spisek Radek R Zitvogel Laurence L Kroemer Guido G Galluzzi Lorenzo L
Oncoimmunology 20151208 2
Oncolytic virotherapy relies on the administration of non-pathogenic viral strains that selectively infect and kill malignant cells while favoring the elicitation of a therapeutically relevant tumor-targeting immune response. During the past few years, great efforts have been dedicated to the development of oncolytic viruses with improved specificity and potency. Such an intense wave of investigation has culminated this year in the regulatory approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Oncolytic virotherapy is emerging as a promising approach for the treatment of several neoplasms. The term "oncolytic viruses" is generally employed to indicate naturally occurring or genetically engineered attenuated viral particles that cause the demise of malignant cells while sparing their non-transformed counterparts. From a conceptual standpoint, oncolytic viruses differ from so-called "oncotropic viruses" in that only the former are able to kill cancer cells, even though both display a preferential tropism for malignant tissues. Of note, such a specificity can originate at several different steps of the viral cycle, including the entry of virions (transductional specificity) as well as their intracellular survival and replication (post-transcriptional and transcriptional specificity). During the past two decades, a large array of replication-competent and replication-incompetent oncolytic viruses has been developed and engineered to express gene products that would specifically promote the death of infected (cancer) cells. However, contrarily to long-standing beliefs, the antineoplastic activity of oncolytic viruses is not a mere consequence of the cytopathic effect, i.e., the lethal outcome of an intense, productive viral infection, but rather involves the elicitation of an antitumor immune response. In line with this notion, oncolytic viruses genetically modified to drive the local production of immunostimulatory cytokines exert more robust therapeutic effects than their non-engineered counterparts. Moreover, the efficacy of oncolytic virotherapy is significantly improved by some extent of initial immunosuppression (facilitating viral replication and spread) followed by the administration of immunostimulatory molecules (boosting antitumor immune responses). In this Trial Watch, we will discuss the results of recent clinical trials that have evaluated/are evaluating the safety and antineoplastic potential of oncolytic virotherapy.
| S-EPMC3716755 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oncolytic viruses are natural or genetically modified viral species that selectively infect and kill neoplastic cells. Such an innate or exogenously conferred specificity has generated considerable interest around the possibility to employ oncolytic viruses as highly targeted agents that would mediate cancer cell-autonomous anticancer effects. Accumulating evidence, however, suggests that the therapeutic potential of oncolytic virotherapy is not a simple consequence of the cytopathic effect, but strongly relies on the induction of an endogenous immune response against transformed cells. In line with this notion, superior anticancer effects are being observed when oncolytic viruses are engineered to express (or co-administered with) immunostimulatory molecules. Although multiple studies have shown that oncolytic viruses are well tolerated by cancer patients, the full-blown therapeutic potential of oncolytic virotherapy, especially when implemented in the absence of immunostimulatory interventions, remains unclear. Here, we cover the latest advances in this active area of translational investigation, summarizing high-impact studies that have been published during the last 12 months and discussing clinical trials that have been initiated in the same period to assess the therapeutic potential of oncolytic virotherapy in oncological indications.
| S-EPMC4091053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the past 20 years, dozens-if not hundreds-of monoclonal antibodies have been developed and characterized for their capacity to mediate antineoplastic effects, either as they activate/enhance tumor-specific immune responses, either as they interrupt cancer cell-intrinsic signal transduction cascades, either as they specifically delivery toxins to malignant cells or as they block the tumor-stroma interaction. Such an intense research effort has lead to the approval by FDA of no less than 14 distinct molecules for use in humans affected by hematological or solid malignancies. In the inaugural issue of OncoImmunology, we briefly described the scientific rationale behind the use of monoclonal antibodies in cancer therapy and discussed recent, ongoing clinical studies investigating the safety and efficacy of this approach in patients. Here, we summarize the latest developments in this exciting area of clinical research, focusing on high impact studies that have been published during the last 15 months and clinical trials launched in the same period to investigate the therapeutic profile of promising, yet hitherto investigational, monoclonal antibodies.
| S-EPMC3583934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cardiac glycosides (CGs) are natural compounds sharing the ability to operate as potent inhibitors of the plasma membrane Na+/K+-ATPase, hence promoting-via an indirect mechanism-the intracellular accumulation of Ca2+ ions. In cardiomyocytes, increased intracellular Ca2+ concentrations exert prominent positive inotropic effects, that is, they increase myocardial contractility. Owing to this feature, two CGs, namely digoxin and digitoxin, have extensively been used in the past for the treatment of several cardiac conditions, including distinct types of arrhythmia as well as contractility disorders. Nowadays, digoxin is approved by the FDA and indicated for the treatment of congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter with rapid ventricular response, whereas the use of digitoxin has been discontinued in several Western countries. Recently, CGs have been suggested to exert potent antineoplastic effects, notably as they appear to increase the immunogenicity of dying cancer cells. In this Trial Watch, we summarize the mechanisms that underpin the unsuspected anticancer potential of CGs and discuss the progress of clinical studies that have evaluated/are evaluating the safety and efficacy of CGs for oncological indications.
| S-EPMC3601180 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Indoleamine 2,3-dioxigenase 1 (IDO1) is the main enzyme that catalyzes the first, rate-limiting step of the so-called "kynurenine pathway", i.e., the metabolic cascade that converts the essential amino acid L-tryptophan (Trp) into L-kynurenine (Kyn). IDO1, which is expressed constitutively by some tissues and in an inducible manner by specific subsets of antigen-presenting cells, has been shown to play a role in the establishment and maintenance of peripheral tolerance. At least in part, this reflects the capacity of IDO1 to restrict the microenvironmental availability of Trp and to favor the accumulation of Kyn and some of its derivatives. Also, several neoplastic lesions express IDO1, providing them with a means to evade anticancer immunosurveillance. This consideration has driven the development of several IDO1 inhibitors, some of which (including 1-methyltryptophan) have nowadays entered clinical evaluation. In animal tumor models, the inhibition of IDO1 by chemical or genetic interventions is indeed associated with the (re)activation of therapeutically relevant anticancer immune responses. This said, several immunotherapeutic regimens exert robust clinical activity in spite of their ability to promote the expression of IDO1. Moreover, 1-methyltryptophan has recently been shown to exert IDO1-independent immunostimulatory effects. Here, we summarize the preclinical and clinical studies testing the antineoplastic activity of IDO1-targeting interventions.
| S-EPMC4292223 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the advent of hybridoma technology, dating back to 1975, monoclonal antibodies have become an irreplaceable diagnostic and therapeutic tool for a wide array of human diseases. During the last 15 years, several monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been approved by FDA for cancer therapy. These mAbs are designed to (1) activate the immune system against tumor cells, (2) inhibit cancer cell-intrinsic signaling pathways, (3) bring toxins in the close proximity of cancer cells, or (4) interfere with the tumor-stroma interaction. More recently, major efforts have been made for the development of immunostimulatory mAbs that either enhance cancer-directed immune responses or limit tumor- (or therapy-) driven immunosuppression. Some of these antibodies, which are thought to facilitate tumor eradication by initiating or sustaining a tumor-specific immune response, have already entered clinical trials. In this Trial Watch, we will review and discuss the clinical progress of the most important mAbs that are have entered clinical trials after January 2008.
| S-EPMC3376976 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tumor-targeting immune responses provide a significant contribution to (when they do not entirely account for) the clinical activity of diverse antineoplastic regimens, encompassing not only a large panel of immunotherapeutic strategies but also conventional cytotoxic molecules, targeted anticancer agents and irradiation. In line with this notion, several approaches have been devised to elicit novel or boost existing anticancer immune responses, including the administration of immunomodulatory cytokines. Such a relatively unspecific intervention suffices to mediate clinical effects in (at least a subset of) patients bearing particularly immunogenic tumors, like melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. More often, however, immunostimulatory cytokines are administered to boost the immunogenic potential of other agents, including (but not limited to) immune checkpoint-blocking antibodies, anticancer vaccines, oncolytic viruses and immunogenic chemotherapeutics. Here, we summarize the latest advances in the clinical development of recombinant cytokines as an immunomodulatory intervention for cancer therapy.
| S-EPMC4091551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The foundation of modern vaccinology dates back to the 1790s, when the English physician Edward Jenner uncovered the tremendous medical potential of prophylactic vaccination. Jenner's work ignited a wave of nationwide vaccination campaigns abating the incidence of multiple life-threatening infectious diseases and culminating with the eradication of natural smallpox virus, which was definitively certified by the WHO in 1980. The possibility of using vaccines against cancer was first proposed at the end of the 19th century by Paul Ehrlich and William Coley. However, it was not until the 1990s that such a hypothesis began to be intensively investigated, following the realization that the immune system is not completely unresponsive to tumors and that neoplastic cells express immunogenic tumor-associated antigens (TAAs). Nowadays, anticancer vaccines are rapidly moving from the bench to the bedside, and a few prophylactic and therapeutic preparations have already been approved by FDA for use in humans. In this setting, one interesting approach is constituted by DNA vaccines, i.e., TAA-encoding circularized DNA constructs, often of bacterial origin, that are delivered to patients as such or by means of specific vectors, including (but not limited to) liposomal preparations, nanoparticles, bacteria and viruses. The administration of DNA vaccines is most often performed via the intramuscular or subcutaneous route and is expected to cause (1) the endogenous synthesis of the TAA by myocytes and/or resident antigen-presenting cells; (2) the presentation of TAA-derived peptides on the cell surface, in association with MHC class I molecules; and (3) the activation of potentially therapeutic tumor-specific immune responses. In this Trial Watch, we will summarize the results of recent clinical trials that have evaluated/are evaluating DNA vaccines as therapeutic interventions against cancer.
| S-EPMC3654598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prophylactic vaccination constitutes one of the most prominent medical achievements of history. This concept was first demonstrated by the pioneer work of Edward Jenner, dating back to the late 1790s, after which an array of preparations that confer life-long protective immunity against several infectious agents has been developed. The ensuing implementation of nation-wide vaccination programs has de facto abated the incidence of dreadful diseases including rabies, typhoid, cholera and many others. Among all, the most impressive result of vaccination campaigns is surely represented by the eradication of natural smallpox infection, which was definitively certified by the WHO in 1980. The idea of employing vaccines as anticancer interventions was first theorized in the 1890s by Paul Ehrlich and William Coley. However, it soon became clear that while vaccination could be efficiently employed as a preventive measure against infectious agents, anticancer vaccines would have to (1) operate as therapeutic, rather than preventive, interventions (at least in the vast majority of settings), and (2) circumvent the fact that tumor cells often fail to elicit immune responses. During the past 30 y, along with the recognition that the immune system is not irresponsive to tumors (as it was initially thought) and that malignant cells express tumor-associated antigens whereby they can be discriminated from normal cells, considerable efforts have been dedicated to the development of anticancer vaccines. Some of these approaches, encompassing cell-based, DNA-based and purified component-based preparations, have already been shown to exert conspicuous anticancer effects in cohorts of patients affected by both hematological and solid malignancies. In this Trial Watch, we will summarize the results of recent clinical trials that have evaluated/are evaluating purified peptides or full-length proteins as therapeutic interventions against cancer.
| S-EPMC3525611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the past 2 decades, the possibility that preparations capable of eliciting tumor-specific immune responses would mediate robust therapeutic effects in cancer patients has received renovated interest. In this context, several approaches to vaccinate cancer patients against their own malignancies have been conceived, including the administration of DNA constructs coding for one or more tumor-associated antigens (TAAs). Such DNA-based vaccines conceptually differ from other types of gene therapy in that they are not devised to directly kill cancer cells or sensitize them to the cytotoxic activity of a drug, but rather to elicit a tumor-specific immune response. In spite of an intense wave of preclinical development, the introduction of this immunotherapeutic paradigm into the clinical practice is facing difficulties. Indeed, while most DNA-based anticancer vaccines are well tolerated by cancer patients, they often fail to generate therapeutically relevant clinical responses. In this Trial Watch, we discuss the latest advances on the use of DNA-based vaccines in cancer therapy, discussing the literature that has been produced around this topic during the last 13 months as well as clinical studies that have been launched in the same time frame to assess the actual therapeutic potential of this intervention.
| S-EPMC4008456 | biostudies-literature