Baker, Alexander

Background: Morreton virus (MORV) is an oncolytic Vesiculovirus , genetically distinct from vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV). Aim: To report that MORV induced potent cytopathic effects (CPEs) in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in vitro models. Approach and Results: In preliminary safety analyses, high intranasal doses (up to 10 10 50% tissue culture infectious dose [TCID 50 ]) of MORV were not associated with significant adverse effects in immune competent, non–tumor‐bearing mice. MORV was shown to be efficacious in a Hep3B hepatocellular cancer xenograft model but not in a CCA xenograft HuCCT1 model. In an immune competent, syngeneic murine CCA model, single intratumoral treatments with MORV (1 × 10 7 TCID 50 ) triggered a robust antitumor immune response leading to substantial tumor regression and disease control at a dose 10‐fold lower than VSV (1 × 10 8 TCID 50 ). MORV led to increased CD8 + cytotoxic T cells without compensatory increases in tumor‐associated macrophages and granulocytic or monocytic myeloid‐derived suppressor cells. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that wild‐type MORV is safe and can induce potent tumor regression via immune‐mediated and immune‐independent mechanisms in HCC and CCA animal models without dose limiting adverse events. These data warrant further development and clinical translation of MORV as an oncolytic virotherapy platform.

PURPOSE This investigation sought to evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in metastatic biliary tract cancers (BTCs) treated with platinum-based first-line chemotherapy treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of 67 patients who underwent ctDNA testing before platinum-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment for metastatic BTC. For analysis, we considered the detected gene with highest variant allele frequency as the dominant clone allele frequency (DCAF). Results of ctDNA analysis were correlated with patients' demographics, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS The median age of patients was 67 (27-90) years. Fifty-four (80.6%) of 67 patients evaluated had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; seven had extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and six gallbladder cancers. Forty-six (68.6%) of the patients were treated with cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and 16.4% of patients received gemcitabine and other platinum (carboplatin or oxaliplatin) combinations, whereas 15% of patients were treated on a clinical trial with gemcitabine and cisplatin plus additional agents (CX4945, PEGPH20, or nab-paclitaxel). TP53, KRAS, FGFR2, ARID1A, STK11, and IDH1 were the genes with highest frequency as DCAF. The median DCAF was 3% (0%-97%). DCAF > 3% was associated with worse OS (median OS: 10.8 v 18.8 months, P = .032). Stratifying DCAF in quartiles, DCAF > 10% was significantly related to worse PFS (median PFS: 3 months, P = .014) and worse OS (median OS: 7.0 months, P = .001). Each 1% increase in ctDNA was associated with a hazard ratio of 13.1 in OS when adjusting for subtypes, metastatic sites, size of largest tumor, age, sex, and CA19-9. CONCLUSION DCAF at diagnosis of advanced BTC can stratify patients who have worse outcomes when treated with upfront platinum-based chemotherapy. Each increase in %ctDNA decreases survival probabilities.

Single particle analysis cryo-electron microscopy (EM) and molecular dynamics (MD) have been complimentary methods since cryo-EM was first applied to the field of structural biology. The relationship started by biasing structural models to fit low-resolution cryo-EM maps of large macromolecular complexes not amenable to crystallization. The connection between cryo-EM and MD evolved as cryo-EM maps improved in resolution, allowing advanced sampling algorithms to simultaneously refine backbone and sidechains. Moving beyond a single static snapshot, modern inferencing approaches integrate cryo-EM and MD to generate structural ensembles from cryo-EM map data or directly from the particle images themselves. We summarize the recent history of MD innovations in the area of cryo-EM modeling. The merits for the myriad of MD based cryo-EM modeling methods are discussed, as well as, the discoveries that were made possible by the integration of molecular modeling with cryo-EM. Lastly, current challenges and potential opportunities are reviewed.

We observe previously unknown interactions between clinically important adenovirus vector capsids, platelet factor 4, and CAR.

Abstract Background and aims Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are uncommon, but highly lethal, gastrointestinal malignancies. Gemcitabine/cisplatin is a standard‐of‐care systemic therapy, but has a modest impact on survival and harbors toxicities, including myelosuppression, nephropathy, neuropathy, and ototoxicity. Whereas BTCs are characterized by aberrations activating the cyclinD1/cyclin‐dependent kinase (CDK)4/6/CDK inhibitor 2a/retinoblastoma pathway, clinical use of CDK4/6 inhibitors as monotherapy is limited by lack of validated biomarkers, diffident preclinical efficacy, and development of acquired drug resistance. Emerging studies have explored therapeutic strategies to enhance the antitumor efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitors by the combination with chemotherapy regimens, but their mechanism of action remains elusive. Approach and results Here, we report in vitro and in vivo synergy in BTC models, showing enhanced efficacy, reduced toxicity, and better survival with a combination comprising gemcitabine/cisplatin and CDK4/6 inhibitors. Furthermore, we demonstrated that abemaciclib monotherapy had only modest efficacy attributable to autophagy‐induced resistance. Notably, triplet therapy was able to potentiate efficacy through elimination of the autophagic flux. Correspondingly, abemaciclib potentiated ribonucleotide reductase catalytic subunit M1 reduction, resulting in sensitization to gemcitabine. Conclusions As such, these data provide robust preclinical mechanistic evidence of synergy between gemcitabine/cisplatin and CDK4/6 inhibitors and delineate a path forward for translation of these findings to preliminary clinical studies in advanced BTC patients.

Abstract Purpose: Virotherapies are maturing in the clinical setting. Adenoviruses (Ad) are excellent vectors for the manipulability and tolerance of transgenes. Poor tumor selectivity, off-target sequestration, and immune inactivation hamper clinical efficacy. We sought to completely redesign Ad5 into a refined, tumor-selective virotherapy targeted to αvβ6 integrin, which is expressed in a range of aggressively transformed epithelial cancers but nondetectable in healthy tissues. Experimental Design: Ad5NULL-A20 harbors mutations in each major capsid protein to preclude uptake via all native pathways. Tumor-tropism via αvβ6 targeting was achieved by genetic insertion of A20 peptide (NAVPNLRGDLQVLAQKVART) within the fiber knob protein. The vector's selectivity in vitro and in vivo was assessed. Results: The tropism-ablating triple mutation completely blocked all native cell entry pathways of Ad5NULL-A20 via coxsackie and adenovirus receptor (CAR), αvβ3/5 integrins, and coagulation factor 10 (FX). Ad5NULL-A20 efficiently and selectively transduced αvβ6+ cell lines and primary clinical ascites-derived EOC ex vivo, including in the presence of preexisting anti-Ad5 immunity. In vivo biodistribution of Ad5NULL-A20 following systemic delivery in non–tumor-bearing mice was significantly reduced in all off-target organs, including a remarkable 107-fold reduced genome accumulation in the liver compared with Ad5. Tumor uptake, transgene expression, and efficacy were confirmed in a peritoneal SKOV3 xenograft model of human EOC, where oncolytic Ad5NULL-A20–treated animals demonstrated significantly improved survival compared with those treated with oncolytic Ad5. Conclusions: Oncolytic Ad5NULL-A20 virotherapies represent an excellent vector for local and systemic targeting of αvβ6-overexpressing cancers and exciting platforms for tumor-selective overexpression of therapeutic anticancer modalities, including immune checkpoint inhibitors. Clin Cancer Res; 24(17); 4215–24. ©2018 AACR.