Background Oncolytic reovirus therapy for cancer induces a typical antiviral response to this RNA virus, including neutralizing antibodies. Concomitant treatment with cytotoxic chemotherapies has been hypothesized to improve the therapeutic potential of the virus. Chemotherapy side effects can include immunosuppression, which may slow the rate of the antiviral antibody response, as well as potentially make the patient more vulnerable to viral infection. Method Reovirus neutralizing antibody data were aggregated from separate phase I clinical trials of reovirus administered as a single agent or in combination with gemcitabine, docetaxel, carboplatin and paclitaxel doublet or cyclophosphamide. In addition, the kinetics of individual antibody isotypes were profiled in sera collected in these trials. Results These data demonstrate preserved antiviral antibody responses, with only moderately reduced kinetics with some drugs, most notably gemcitabine. All patients ultimately produced an effective neutralizing antibody response. Conclusion Patients’ responses to infection by reovirus are largely unaffected by the concomitant drug treatments tested, providing confidence that RNA viral treatment or infection is compatible with standard of care treatments.
REO-10: A Phase I Study of Intravenous Reovirus and Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Cancer
Abstract Purpose: To determine the safety and feasibility of daily i.v. administration of wild-type oncolytic reovirus (type 3 Dearing) to patients with advanced cancer, assess viral excretion kinetics and antiviral immune responses, identify tumor localization and replication, and describe antitumor activity. Experimental Design: Patients received escalating doses of reovirus up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 for 5 consecutive days every 4 weeks. Viral excretion was assessed by reverse transcription-PCR and antibody response by cytotoxicity neutralization assay. Pretreatment and post-treatment tumor biopsies were obtained to measure viral uptake and replication. Results: Thirty-three patients received 76 courses of reovirus from 1 × 108 for 1 day up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 for 5 days, repeated every four weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity was not seen. Common grade 1 to 2 toxicities included fever, fatigue, and headache, which were dose and cycle independent. Viral excretion at day 15 was not detected by reverse transcription-PCR at 25 cycles and only in 5 patients at 35 cycles. Neutralizing antibodies were detected in all patients and peaked at 4 weeks. Viral localization and replication in tumor biopsies were confirmed in 3 patients. Antitumor activity was seen by radiologic and tumor marker (carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19.9, and prostate-specific antigen) evaluation. Conclusions: Oncolytic reovirus can be safely and repeatedly administered by i.v. injection at doses up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 for 5 days every 4 weeks without evidence of severe toxicities. Productive reoviral infection of metastatic tumor deposits was confirmed. Reovirus is a safe agent that warrants further evaluation in phase II studies.
Enhanced
In vitro
and
In vivo
Cytotoxicity of Combined Reovirus and Radiotherapy
Abstract Purpose: To test combination treatment schedules of reovirus and radiation in human and murine tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. Experimental Design: In vitro cytotoxicity and cell cycle effects of reovirus given alone and combined with radiotherapy were assessed by colorimetric, tissue culture infectious dose 50, and fluorescence-activated cell sorting–based assays. Interactions between the agents were evaluated using combination index analysis. The effect of different schedules of reovirus and radiotherapy on viral replication and cytotoxicity was tested in vitro and the combination was assessed in three tumor models in vivo. Results: Characterization of reovirus cytotoxicity in a panel of cell lines yielded a range of sensitivities. Combined reovirus and radiotherapy yielded statistically significantly increased cytotoxicity, particularly in cell lines with moderate susceptibility to reovirus alone. The enhanced cytotoxicity of the combination occurred independently of treatment sequence or schedule. Radiation did not affect viral replication and only reduced reoviral cytotoxicity after clinically irrelevant single doses (>50 Gy). Combination index analysis revealed synergy between radiation (3-10 Gy) and reovirus at multiplicities of infection between 0.001 and 1. Combination treatment significantly increased apoptosis in tumor cells relative to either single-agent treatment. In vivo studies using xenograft and syngeneic tumors showed enhanced activity of the combination relative to reovirus or radiation alone (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Combining reovirus and radiotherapy synergistically enhances cytotoxicity in a variety of tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. These results offer strong support for translational clinical trials of reovirus plus radiotherapy that have been initiated in the clinic.
Cyclophosphamide Facilitates Antitumor Efficacy against Subcutaneous Tumors following Intravenous Delivery of Reovirus
Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether it is possible to achieve truly systemic delivery of oncolytic reovirus, in immunocompetent hosts, using cyclophosphamide to overcome some of the barriers to effective intratumoral delivery and replication of i.v. injected virus. Experimental Design: I.v. delivery of reovirus was combined with different regimens of i.p. administered cyclophosphamide in C57Bl/6 mice bearing established s.c. B16 tumors. Intratumoral viral replication, tumor size, and survival were measured along with levels of neutralizing antibody (NAb) in the blood. Finally, differential toxicities of the virus/cyclophosphamide regimens were monitored through viral replication in systemic organs, survival, and cardiac damage. Results: Repeated i.v. injection of reovirus was poorly effective at seeding intratumoral viral replication/oncolysis. However, by combining i.v. virus with cyclophosphamide, viral titers of between 107 and 108 plaque-forming units per milligram were recovered from regressing tumors. Doses of cyclophosphamide that ablated NAb were associated with severe toxicities, characterized by viral replication in systemic organs—toxicities that are mirrored by repeated reovirus injections into B-cell knockout mice. Next, we restructured the dosing of cyclophosphamide and i.v. virus such that a dose of 3 mg cyclophosphamide was administered 24 h before reovirus injection, and this schedule was repeated every 6 days. Using this protocol, high levels of intratumoral viral access and replication (∼107 plaque-forming units per milligram tumor) were maintained along with systemically protective levels of NAb and only very mild, non–life-threatening toxicity. Conclusion: NAb to oncolytic viruses play a dual role in the context of systemic viral delivery; on one hand, they hinder repeated administration of virus but on the other, they provide an important safety mechanism by which virus released from vigorous intratumoral replication is neutralized before it can disseminate and cause toxicity. These data support the use of cyclophosphamide to modulate, but not ablate, patient NAb, in development of carefully controlled clinical trials of the systemic administration of oncolytic viruses.