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 Â 10 10 TCID 50 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 Â 10 8 for 1 day up to 3 Â 10 10 TCID 50 for 5 days, repeated every four weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity was not seen. Common grade 1to 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 Â 10 10 TCID 50 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.

No abstract

Purpose Reovirus type 3 Dearing (RT3D) replicates preferentially in Ras-activated cancers. RT3D shows synergistic in vitro cytotoxicity in combination with platins and taxanes. The purpose of this phase I/II study was to assess RT3D combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with advanced cancers. Experimental Design Patients were initially treated in a dose-escalating, phase I trial with intravenous RT3D days 1 to 5, carboplatin [area under curve (AUC) 5, day 1] and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2, day 1) 3-weekly. RT3D was escalated through three dose levels: 3 × 109, 1 × 1010, and 3 × 1010 TCID50 in cohorts of three. Primary endpoints were to define the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicity and to recommend a dose for phase II studies. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics, immune response, and antitumor activity. A subsequent phase II study using the 3 × 1010 TCID50 dose characterized the response rate in patients with head and neck cancer. Results Thirty-one heavily pretreated patients received study therapy. There were no dose-limiting toxicities during dose-escalation and most toxicities were grade I/II. Overall effectiveness rates were as follows: one patient had a complete response (3.8%), six patients (23.1%) had partial response, two patients (7.6%) had major clinical responses clinically evaluated in radiation pretreated lesions which are not evaluable by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), nine patients (34.6%) had stable disease, and eight patients (30.8%) had disease progression. Viral shedding was minimal and antiviral immune responses were attenuated compared with previous single-agent data for RT3D. Conclusions The combination of RT3D plus carboplatin/paclitaxel is well tolerated with evidence of activity in cancer of the head and neck. A randomized phase III study is currently open for recruitment.

Purpose REOLYSIN (Oncolytics Biotech) consists of a wild-type oncolytic reovirus, which has selective cytotoxicity for tumor cells while sparing normal cells. In a phase I study as a single agent, repeated infusions of reovirus were safe with evidence of antitumor activity. Preclinical studies indicate potential for synergy between reovirus and chemotherapeutic agents. A multicenter, phase I dose escalation study was designed to assess the safety of combining reovirus with docetaxel chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer. Experimental Design Patients received 75 mg/m2 docetaxel (day 1) and escalating doses of reovirus up to 3 × 1010 TCID50 (days 1-5) every 3 weeks. Results Twenty-five patients were enrolled, and 24 patients were exposed to treatment, with 23 completing at least one cycle and 16 suitable for response assessment. Dose-limiting toxicity of grade 4 neutropenia was seen in one patient, but the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Antitumor activity was seen with one complete response and three partial responses. A disease control rate (combined complete response, partial response, and stable disease) of 88% was observed. Immunohistochemical analysis of reovirus protein expression was observed in posttreatment tumor biopsies from three patients. Conclusion The combination of reovirus and docetaxel is safe, with evidence of objective disease response, and warrants further evaluation in a phase II study at a recommended schedule of docetaxel (75 mg/m2, three times weekly) and reovirus (3 × 1010 TCID50, days 1-5, every 3 weeks).

Reovirus is a promising unmodified double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) anti-cancer oncolytic virus, which is thought to specifically target cells with activated Ras. Although reovirus has been tested in a wide range of preclinical models and has entered early clinical trials, it has not previously been tested for the treatment of human melanoma. Here, we show that reovirus effectively kills and replicates in both human melanoma cell lines and freshly resected tumour; intratumoural injection also causes regression of melanoma in a xenograft in vivo model. Reovirus-induced melanoma death is blocked by caspase inhibition and is dependent on constituents of the Ras/RalGEF/p38 pathway. Reovirus melanoma killing is more potent than, and distinct from, chemotherapy or radiotherapy-induced cell death; a range of inflammatory cytokines and chemokines are released by infected tumour cells, while IL-10 secretion is abrogated. Furthermore, the inflammatory response generated by reovirus-infected tumour cells causes bystander toxicity against reovirus-resistant tumour cells and activates human myeloid dendritic cells (DC) in vitro. Hence, reovirus is suitable for clinical testing in melanoma, and may provide a useful danger signal to reverse the immunologically suppressive environment characteristic of this tumour.

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 0.001and 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.

Purpose: This study combined systemic administration of the oncolytic reovirus type 3 Dearing (reovirus) with chemotherapy in human subjects. We aimed to determine the safety and feasibility of combining reovirus administration with gemcitabine and to describe the effects of gemcitabine on the antireoviral immune response.Experimental Design: Patients received reovirus in various doses, initially we dosed for five consecutive days but this was poorly tolerated. We amended the protocol to administer a single dose and administered up to 3 Â 10 10 TCID 50 . Toxicity was assessed by monitoring of clinical and laboratory measurements. We assessed antibody response by cytotoxicity neutralization assay.Results: Sixteen patients received 47 cycles of reovirus. The two initial patients and one patient in the final cohort experienced dose limiting toxicity (DLT). The DLTs consisted of two asymptomatic grade 3 liver enzyme rises and one asymptomatic grade 3 troponin I rise. Common toxicities consisted of known reovirus and gemcitabine associated side effects. Further analysis showed a potential interaction between reovirus and gemcitabine in causing liver enzyme rises. Grade 3 rises in liver enzymes were associated with concomitant aminocetophen use. Importantly, the duration of the liver enzyme rise was short and reversible. Neutralizing antibody responses to reovirus were attenuated both in time-to-occurrence and peak height of the response.Conclusions: Reovirus at the dose of 1 Â 10 10 TCID 50 can be safely combined with full dose gemcitabine.Combination of reovirus with gemcitabine affects the neutralizing antibody response and this could impact both safety and efficacy of this treatment schedule.

Purpose To determine the safety and feasibility of combining intratumoral reovirus and radiotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and to assess viral biodistribution, reoviral replication in tumors, and antiviral immune responses. Experimental Design Patients with measurable disease amenable to palliative radiotherapy were enrolled. In the first stage, patients received radiotherapy (20 Gy in five fractions) plus two intratumoral injections of RT3D at doses between 1 × 108 and 1 × 1010 TCID50. In the second stage, the radiotherapy dose was increased (36 Gy in 12 fractions) and patients received two, four, or six doses of RT3D at 1 × 1010 TCID50. End points were safety, viral replication, immunogenicity, and antitumoral activity. Results Twenty-three patients with various solid tumors were treated. Dose-limiting toxicity was not seen. The most common toxicities were grade 2 (or lower) pyrexia, influenza-like symptoms, vomiting, asymptomatic lymphopenia, and neutropenia. There was no exacerbation of the acute radiation reaction. Reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) studies of blood, urine, stool, and sputum were negative for viral shedding. In the low-dose (20 Gy in five fractions) radiation group, two of seven evaluable patients had a partial response and five had stable disease. In the high-dose (36 Gy in 12 fractions) radiation group, five of seven evaluable patients had partial response and two stable disease. Conclusions The combination of intratumoral RT3D and radiotherapy was well tolerated. The favorable toxicity profile and lack of vector shedding means that this combination should be evaluated in newly diagnosed patients receiving radiotherapy with curative intent.