Explore the vast range of titles available.

Key Points Oncolytic viruses mediate anti-tumour responses through a dual mechanism involving viral oncolysis of cancer cells and induction of host anti-tumour immunity. The molecular and cellular mechanisms of action are not fully elucidated but are likely to depend on viral replication within transformed cells, induction of primary cell death, interaction with tumour cell antiviral elements, release of danger signals and initiation of innate and adaptive anti-tumour immunity. A variety of native and genetically modified viruses have been utilized as oncolytic vectors in preclinical studies, which have demonstrated therapeutic activity against several types of cancer. Oncolytic viruses can be genetically modified to decrease pathogenicity, increase lytic potential and enhance immunogenicity, improving the risk–benefit ratio for clinical development. The approval of a modified adenovirus, H101, in China and the pending approval of a modified herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) encoding granulocyte–macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), termed talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States is likely to promote further drug development within this new class of cancer therapeutics. Oncolytic viruses face unique challenges in drug development, including the need for optimal clinical trial designs and response assessment that capture therapeutic responses, different regulatory and commercialization pathways, the need for live culture scale-up procedures, and novel biosafety concerns related to viral persistence in patients and transmission to household contacts and health-care providers. Oncolytic viruses can kill tumour cells through a dual mechanism of action; the direct lysis of cells, and the induction of an immune response. The first oncolytic virus has been approved in China, and another has been recommended for approval in the United States. This Review discusses the biology of oncolytic viruses as well as key oncolytic viruses in clinical development, and investigates the challenges associated with developing oncolytic viruses as a new therapeutic modality for cancer. Oncolytic viruses represent a new class of therapeutic agents that promote anti-tumour responses through a dual mechanism of action that is dependent on selective tumour cell killing and the induction of systemic anti-tumour immunity. The molecular and cellular mechanisms of action are not fully elucidated but are likely to depend on viral replication within transformed cells, induction of primary cell death, interaction with tumour cell antiviral elements and initiation of innate and adaptive anti-tumour immunity. A variety of native and genetically modified viruses have been developed as oncolytic agents, and the approval of the first oncolytic virus by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is anticipated in the near future. This Review provides a comprehensive overview of the basic biology supporting oncolytic viruses as cancer therapeutic agents, describes oncolytic viruses in advanced clinical trials and discusses the unique challenges in the development of oncolytic viruses as a new class of drugs for the treatment of cancer.

As infections and cancer are two of the most common maladies affecting human beings, a concerted effort is needed to better understand their potential interactions and to further explore their use in microbial-based cancer treatments. Studies focusing on the interaction between pathogens and cancer began over 4000 years ago, but therapeutic application of pathogens has often been bypassed as other cancer therapies have gained wider interest. To many, the field of microbial-based cancer treatment may feel antiquated and already sufficiently explored. However, closer examination reveals that our current knowledge is but a series of dim reflections amongst many yet-unexplored shadows. Particularly, with our increased understanding of pathogen entry, replication, and senescence, coupled with our quickly increasing knowledge regarding cancer initiation, growth, and metastasis, and capped by our realization of the complexity and plasticity of the immune response, we are just now beginning to realize the vastness of the undiscovered area encompassing this field. At the same time, we are now uniquely poised with gained knowledge and discovered tools to join together across disciplines, uncover new positive and negative interactions between pathogens and cancer, and make important progress toward saving cancer patient lives.

Prior studies suggest that the impaired healing seen in diabetic wounds derives from a state of persistent hyper-inflammation characterized by harmful increases in inflammatory leukocytes including macrophages. However, such studies have focused on wounds at later time points (day 10 or older), and very little attention has been given to the dynamics of macrophage responses in diabetic wounds early after injury. Given the importance of macrophages for the process of healing, we studied the dynamics of macrophage response during early and late phases of healing in diabetic wounds. Here, we report that early after injury, the diabetic wound exhibits a significant delay in macrophage infiltration. The delay in the macrophage response in diabetic wounds results from reduced Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2) expression. Importantly, one-time treatment with chemoattractant CCL2 significantly stimulated healing in diabetic wounds by restoring the macrophage response. Our data demonstrate that, rather than a hyper-inflammatory state; the early diabetic wound exhibits a paradoxical and damaging decrease in essential macrophage response. Our studies suggest that the restoration of the proper kinetics of macrophage response may be able to jumpstart subsequent healing stages. CCL2 chemokine-based therapy may be an attractive strategy to promote healing in diabetic wounds.

Currently approximately 10 million people die each year due to cancer, and cancer is the cause of every sixth death worldwide. Tremendous efforts and progress have been made towards finding a cure for cancer. However, numerous challenges have been faced due to adverse effects of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and alternative cancer therapies, including toxicity to non-cancerous cells, the inability of drugs to reach deep tumor tissue, and the persistent problem of increasing drug resistance in tumor cells. These challenges have increased the demand for the development of alternative approaches with greater selectivity and effectiveness against tumor cells. Cancer immunotherapy has made significant advancements towards eliminating cancer. Our understanding of cancer-directed immune responses and the mechanisms through which immune cells invade tumors have extensively helped us in the development of new therapies. Among immunotherapies, the application of bacteria and bacterial-based products has promising potential to be used as treatments that combat cancer. Bacterial targeting of tumors has been developed as a unique therapeutic option that meets the ongoing challenges of cancer treatment. In comparison with other cancer therapeutics, bacterial-based therapies have capabilities for suppressing cancer. Bacteria are known to accumulate and proliferate in the tumor microenvironment and initiate antitumor immune responses. We are currently well-informed regarding various methods by which bacteria can be manipulated by simple genetic engineering or synthetic bioengineering to induce the production of anti-cancer drugs. Further, bacterial-based cancer therapy (BBCT) can be either used as a monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer therapies for better clinical outcomes. Here, we review recent advances, current challenges, and prospects of bacteria and bacterial products in the development of BBCTs.

Infection is a major co-morbidity that contributes to impaired healing in diabetic wounds. Although impairments in diabetic neutrophils have been blamed for this co-morbidity, what causes these impairments and whether they can be overcome, remain largely unclear. Diabetic neutrophils, isolated from diabetic individuals, exhibit chemotaxis impairment but this peculiar functional impairment has been largely ignored because it appears to contradict the clinical findings which blame excessive neutrophil influx as a major impediment to healing in chronic diabetic ulcers. Here, we report that exposure to glucose in diabetic range results in impaired chemotaxis signaling through the formyl peptide receptor (FPR) in neutrophils, culminating in reduced chemotaxis and delayed neutrophil trafficking in the wound of Lepr db (db/db) type two diabetic mice, rendering diabetic wound vulnerable to infection. We further show that at least some auxiliary receptors remain functional under diabetic conditions and their engagement by the pro-inflammatory cytokine CCL3, overrides the requirement for FPR signaling and substantially improves infection control by jumpstarting the neutrophil trafficking toward infection, and stimulates healing in diabetic wound. We posit that CCL3 may have therapeutic potential for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers if it is applied topically after the surgical debridement process which is intended to reset chronic ulcers into acute fresh wounds.

Background Viral therapies developed for cancer treatment have classically prioritized direct oncolytic effects over their immune activating properties. However, recent clinical insights have challenged this longstanding prioritization and have shifted the focus to more immune-based mechanisms. Through the potential utilization of novel, inherently immune-stimulating, oncotropic viruses there is a therapeutic opportunity to improve anti-tumor outcomes through virus-mediated immune activation. PV001-DV is an attenuated strain of Dengue virus (DEN-1 #45AZ5) with a favorable clinical safety profile that also maintains the potent immune stimulatory properties characterstic of Dengue virus infection. Methods In this study, we utilized in vitro tumor killing and immune multiplex assays to examine the anti-tumor effects of PV001-DV as a potential novel cancer immunotherapy. Results In vitro assays demonstrated that PV001-DV possesses the ability to directly kill human melanoma cells lines as well as patient melanoma tissue ex vivo. Importantly, further work demonstrated that, when patient peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were exposed to PV001-DV, a substantial induction in the production of apoptotic factors and immunostimulatory cytokines was detected. When tumor cells were cultured with the resulting soluble mediators from these PBMCs, rapid cell death of melanoma and breast cancer cell lines was observed. These soluble mediators also increased dengue virus binding ligands and immune checkpoint receptor, PD-L1 expression. Conclusions The direct in vitro tumor-killing and immune-mediated tumor cytotoxicity facilitated by PV001-DV contributes support of its upcoming clinical evaluation in patients with advanced melanoma who have failed prior therapy.

IFN-λ is the newly established type III IFN with unique immunomodulatory functions. In contrast to the IFN-α/β family and to some extent IFN-γ, IFN-λ is apparently acting in specific areas of the body to activate resident immune cells and induces a local immunity, instrumental in preventing particular infections and also keeping transformed cells under control. Mucosal areas of lung and gastrointestinal tracts are now under scrutiny to elucidate the immune mechanisms triggered by IFN-λ and leading to viral protection. New evidence also indicates the crucial role of IFN-λ in promoting innate immunity in solid cancer models. Based on its unique biological activities among the IFN system, new immunotherapeutic approaches are now emerging for the treatment of cancer, infection, and autoimmune diseases. In the present review, we highlight the recent advances of IFN-λ immunomodulatory functions. We also discuss the perspectives of IFN-λ as a therapeutic agent.

Background Glutamate signaling activates MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways in tumor cells. Treatment with riluzole, a glutamate release inhibitor, has been previously shown to be safe in melanoma patients and produced biologic effects, but did not lead to radiographic responses, possibly due to poor pharmacokinetic properties. Therefore, we conducted a phase Ib trial to determine the safety and tolerability of the combination of the riluzole prodrug troriluzole (BHV-4157, trigriluzole) and the PD-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods Patients with advanced or refractory solid tumors and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1 were treated with increasing doses of troriluzole using a semi-Bayesian modified toxicity probability interval dose escalation procedure. Troriluzole monotherapy was orally self-administered for a 14-day lead-in period followed by continuation of troriluzole in combination with nivolumab 240 mg IV every 2 weeks. Endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy. Results We enrolled 14 patients with advanced solid tumors (melanoma = 3, NSCLC = 3, renal cell carcinoma = 2, bladder/urothelial = 2, ovarian cancer = 1, adenoid cystic carcinoma = 1, pleural mesothelial = 1, head and neck cancer = 1). Eleven patients had cancer progression on prior therapy with PD-1 or PD-L1 agent. Patients received troriluzole total daily doses from 140 to 560 mg (divided). The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) occurring in ≥ 5 patients (> 35%) were transaminitis and increased lipase. DLT (dose-limiting toxicity) occurred in 3 patients: (1) grade 3 anorexia, (2) grade 3 fatigue and, (3) grade 3 atrial fibrillation. Six patients were treated at the MTD (maximum tolerated dose). No subjects discontinued treatment due to AEs. One response occurred (7%), which was a partial response in a subject who had PD-1 refractory disease. The 6-month PFS rate was 21%. PK data showed that the prodrug troriluzole was efficiently cleaved into riluzole by 2-h post-dosing in all dose cohorts tested. Conclusion The combination of troriluzole and nivolumab was safe and well-tolerated. The MTD of troriluzole was determined to be 420 mg total daily dose. The observed antitumor activity, primarily disease stabilization, is of interest in patients with PD-1 resistant tumors. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03229278.

BackgroundImmunotherapies are becoming front-line treatments for many advanced cancers, and combinations of two or more therapies are beginning to be investigated. Based on their individual antitumor capabilities, we sought to determine whether combination oncolytic virus (OV) and radiation therapy (RT) may improve cancer outcomes.MethodsTo investigate the activity of this combination therapy, we used in vitro mouse and human cancer cell lines as well as a mouse model of skin cancer. After initial results, we further included immune checkpoint blockade, whose addition constituted a triple combination immunotherapy.ResultsOur findings demonstrate that OV and RT reduce tumor growth via conversion of immunologically ‘cold’ tumors to ‘hot’, via a CD8+ T cell-dependent and IL-1α-dependent mechanism that is associated with increased PD-1/PD-L1 expression, and the triple combination of OV, RT, and PD-1 checkpoint inhibition impedes tumor growth and prolongs survival. Further, we describe the response of a PD-1-refractory patient with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma who received the triple combination of OV, RT, and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI), and went on to experience unexpected, prolonged control and survival. He remains off-treatment and is without evidence of progression for >44 months since study entry.ConclusionsEffective systemic antitumor immune response is rarely elicited by a single therapy. In a skin cancer mouse model, we demonstrate improved outcomes with combination OV, RT, and ICI treatment, which is associated with mechanisms involving augmented CD8+ T cell infiltration and IL-1α expression. We report tumor reduction and prolonged survival of a patient with skin cancer treated with combination OV, RT, and ICI. Overall, our data provide strong rationale for combining OV, RT, and ICI for treatment of patients with ICI-refractory skin and potentially other cancers.

It was recently reported that acute influenza infection of the lung promoted distal melanoma growth in the dermis of mice. Melanoma-specific CD8+ T cells were shunted to the lung in the presence of the infection, where they expressed high levels of inflammation-induced cell-activation blocker PD-1, and became incapable of migrating back to the tumor site. At the same time, co-infection virus-specific CD8+ T cells remained functional while the infection was cleared. It was also unexpectedly found that PD-1 blockade immunotherapy reversed this effect. Here, we proceed to ground the experimental observations in a mechanistic immunobiochemical model that incorporates T cell pathways that control PD-1 expression. A core component of our model is a kinetic motif, which we call a PD-1 Double Incoherent Feed-Forward Loop (DIFFL), and which reflects known interactions between IRF4, Blimp-1, and Bcl-6. The different activity levels of the PD-1 DIFFL components, as a function of the cognate antigen levels and the given inflammation context, manifest themselves in phenotypically distinct outcomes. Collectively, the model allowed us to put forward a few working hypotheses as follows: (i) the melanoma-specific CD8+ T cells re-circulating with the blood flow enter the lung where they express high levels of inflammation-induced cell-activation blocker PD-1 in the presence of infection; (ii) when PD-1 receptors interact with abundant PD-L1, constitutively expressed in the lung, T cells loose motility; (iii) at the same time, virus-specific cells adapt to strong stimulation by their cognate antigen by lowering the transiently-elevated expression of PD-1, remaining functional and mobile in the inflamed lung, while the infection is cleared. The role that T cell receptor (TCR) activation and feedback loops play in the underlying processes are also highlighted and discussed. We hope that the results reported in our study could potentially contribute to the advancement of immunological approaches to cancer treatment and, as well, to a better understanding of a broader complexity of fundamental interactions between pathogens and tumors.