Talimogene Laherparepvec Research Articles

A comparison of isolated limb infusion/perfusion, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and intralesional therapy as first-line treatment for patients with melanoma in-transit metastases.

Isolated limb infusion and perfusion (ILI/ILP) has been a mainstay treatment for unresectable melanoma in-transit metastases (ITM), but increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and intralesional therapy (talimogene laherparepvec [TVEC]) introduced several different management options. This study compares first-line ILI/ILP, ICI, and TVEC. Retrospective review from 12 international institutions included patients treated from 1990 to 2022 with first-line ILI/ILP, ICI, or TVEC for unresectable melanoma ITM. A total of 551 patients were treated, with ILI/ILP (n=356), ICI (n=125), and TVEC (n=70) with median follow-up of 5.5 years. Tumor burden was highest with ILI/ILP and lowest with TVEC (p =.002). Breslow thickness was lowest with TVEC (p =.007). TVEC was mostly used in stage IIIB disease versus IIIC for ILI/ILP and ICI (p =.01). Using ICI as the reference category, TVEC had the highest odds of a complete response (CR) (odds ratio, 1.96; p =.029) and a longer local progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; p =.003). ILI/ILP had shorter local PFS (HR, 1.72; p =.012), PFS (HR, 1.79; p <.001), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (HR, 1.75; p =.014), overall survival (HR, 1.82; p =.009), and melanoma-specific survival (HR, 2.29; p =.004). Stage IIIB disease had longer DMFS (HR, 0.24; p <.001) compared to IIIC/D. TVEC as first-line therapy for unresectable melanoma ITM was associated with superior CR rates and local PFS. Notably, TVEC was used in patients with a lower Breslow thickness, disease stage, and tumor burden. Therefore, when compared to ILI/ILP and ICI, TVEC should be considered as first-line therapy for unresectable stage IIIB melanoma ITM with minimal tumor burden and lower Breslow thickness.

A phase II randomized trial of talimogene laherparepvec oncolytic immunotherapy with or without radiotherapy for patients with cutaneous metastases from solid tumors

BackgroundCutaneous metastases (CMs) are a manifestation of advanced cancer and can be treated with oncolytic immunotherapy. Laboratory studies suggest radiotherapy (RT) may facilitate response to immunotherapy. We hypothesized that oncolytic immunotherapy with talimogene lapherparepvec (T-VEC, an oncolytic immunotherapy that expresses granulocyte–macrophage colony stimulating factor) and RT would produce response in non-targeted metastases. MethodsA randomized phase 2 trial of T-VEC+/-RT was conducted. Eligible patients had ≥1 CM from a solid tumor amenable to T-VEC and RT and another measurable metastasis. Tumor and overall response was assessed using modified World Health Organization (mWHO) criteria. Adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QOL) were characterized using CTCAE v4.0 and Skindex-16, respectively. Correlative analyses of tumor genomics and the immune system were performed. Results19 patients were randomized to receive T-VEC (n = 9) or T-VEC+RT (n = 10). One patient in each arm demonstrated complete response in the largest non-targeted metastasis. The trial was closed after the first stage of enrollment because of no overall mWHO responses, slow accrual and the COVID-19 pandemic. AEs were consistent with prior reports of T-VEC. Skin related QOL was poor before and after treatment. Median progression free survival was 1.2 and 2.5 months in the T-VEC and T-VEC+RT arms; median overall survival was 4.9 and 17.3 months in the T-VEC and T-VEC+RT arms. Analyses of peripheral blood cells and cytokines demonstrated responders exhibited several outlying lymphocyte and cytokine parameters. ConclusionsLow overall response rate, slow accrual, and the COVID-19 pandemic led to closure of this trial. Responses in non-injected and non-irradiated metastases were infrequent.

Where Are We Now with Oncolytic Viruses in Melanoma and Nonmelanoma Skin Malignancies?

Skin cancer prognosis has greatly improved recently due to the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, many patients with advanced skin cancer still experience immunotherapy resistance and disease progression during ICI treatment, thus calling for novel therapeutics which address this treatment gap. Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) has gained popularity in recent years as a viable treatment option for patients with skin cancer. In preclinical studies, T-VEC demonstrated both a direct anti-tumor effect in injected lesions as well as a systemic immune-mediated effect in non-injected lesions, which could pose additional benefits when combined with ICI therapy. Following promising results from the OPTiM trial, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the usage of T-VEC as a single agent in advanced melanoma. However, the MASTERKEY-265 trial demonstrated that adding T-VEC to pembrolizumab did not offer additional clinical benefit in patients with melanoma. Nevertheless, the promising efficacy of T-VEC and its approval by the FDA helped oncolytic viruses (OVs) gain wide attention in cancer therapy, and extensive research has been undertaken to evaluate the usage of OVs in other tumors such as sarcomas and breast cancers. Here, we provide a review of clinical results from 2022 to 2024 that investigate the efficacy and safety of OVs as a monotherapy or in combination with other therapies in skin malignancies. Furthermore, we delineate the current limitations in OV utilization and outline future directions to enhance clinical outcomes for patients with skin malignancies receiving OV-based therapies.

Factors associated with response to talimogene laherparepvec in the treatment of advanced melanoma

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is currently the only United States Food and Drug Administration-approved intralesional therapy for advanced melanoma. Recent studies have assessed the integration of T-VEC with systemic immunotherapy, though the response remains variable. Therefore, we sought to identify factors associated with the response to T-VEC by conducting a retrospective, single-center analysis involving melanoma patients treated with T-VEC. In the present study, we recorded demographic and clinicopathological data, details of T-VEC treatments, prior and concurrent treatments, and clinical outcomes. The primary endpoint was the in-field overall response rate (ORR: complete + partial). Secondary endpoints included complete in-field response, defined as complete resolution of disease or a negative biopsy; disease failure-free survival (DFFS), defined from the initiation of treatment as the time to progression in patients who did not experience a disease-free interval and time to recurrence in those who did; and overall survival (OS). We used two-sample t-tests for continuous variables and Fisher&amp;rsquo;s exact test for categorical variables. DFFS and OS were further analyzed using the Kaplan&amp;ndash;Meier method and log-rank tests for selected variables. Among the 18 patients who met the inclusion criteria, an in-field response was observed in 14 (78%) patients. Low disease burden (&lt;5 lesions or a total diameter &lt;5 cm) was associated with a higher in-field ORR compared to high-burden disease (100% vs. 43%, P = 0.01). There was a trend toward decreased in-field ORR for patients with &gt;2 prior lines of systemic therapy (P = 0.18). With a median follow-up of 386 days, DFFS was associated with BRAF wild-type melanoma (P = 0.04), an in-field ORR (P = 0.007), and a measurable bystander response (P = 0.01). Two or more prior lines of immunotherapy were associated with poorer survival (P = 0.006) and worse DFFS (P = 0.02). In conclusion, despite a low sample size, we identified covariates associated with in-field ORR, DFFS, and OS, warranting further study.

Phase I trial of talimogene laherparepvec for the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies (TEMPO).

2668 Background: Peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) constitute a group of difficult-to-treat metastatic diseases that respond poorly to standard chemotherapy. Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC), the first FDA-approved oncolytic virus (OV), demonstrates potential in treating various malignancies by effectively initiating crucial immune responses. Yet, the utility of intraperitoneal (ip) T-VEC for unresectable PSM is still unexplored. Methods: TEMPO (NCT03663712) was a nonrandomized, open-label, multicenter phase I trial involving 18 patients with unresectable PSM originating from the appendix (n=14), ovary (n=3), or small bowel (n=1). The trial aimed to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ip T-VEC, as well as to evaluate its safety and tolerability. An exploratory endpoint was the Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST), the estimated non-parametric mean survival time up until the longest patient follow-up time (i.e. maximum of the longest follow-up, and generally an underestimate of the actual mean survival time especially in small samples). Patients received an initial dose of 4x106 plaque-forming units (pfu) of ip T-VEC, followed by their assigned dose every two weeks for up to four additional doses, using a standard ‘3+3’ dose escalation scheme. The doses tested were 4x106, 4x107, and 4x108 pfu of ip T-VEC. Safety assessments were conducted regularly. Results: The RP2D is 4x108 pfu of T-VEC. The trial reported no dose-limiting toxicities, thus the MTD was not reached. Treatment-Related Adverse Events (TRAEs) were recorded and categorized by the maximum dose received (Table).One patient treated with 4x106 pfu had grade 3 abdominal pain and another grade 3 fatigue. No severe TRAEs occurred with 4x107pfu. One patient showed a grade 3 neutrophil count decrease at 4x108 pfu. The RMST, calculated with a truncation time of 5.5 months, varied across the doses. Patients receiving 4x106 pfu had an RMST of 3.1 (95% CI= 1.550-4.733) months, while those treated with 4x107 and 4x108 pfu had RMSTs of 4.2 (95% CI= 2.492-5.884) and 4.6 (95% CI= 3.551-5.722) months, respectively. Conclusions: We conclude that ip T-VEC is safe in patients with unresectable PSM. TEMPO successfully identified 4x108 pfu as the RP2D for TVEC. Notably, the RMST increased with increasing doses of TL. These results are promising, considering the limited benefit of conventional chemotherapy in treating PSM. This study positions T-VEC as a promising candidate for combination immunotherapies for PSM that amplifies the bystander immune response induced by OVs. Clinical trial information: NCT03663712 . [Table: see text]

An update on SOC-1882: A phase 2 study using talimogene laherparepvec, nivolumab, and trabectedin for advanced leiomyosarcoma.

e23570 Background: Intratumoral injection of Talimogene Laherparepvec (TVEC) has a local oncolytic effect and evokes a cytotoxic immune response. The combination of Trabectedin (T) and Nivolumab (N) is a safe and effective therapy in soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Here, we report an update on an ongoing Phase 2 study that aims to determine the efficacy and safety of adding TVEC to the combination of T and N in advanced leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Objectives: Primary: To assess progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary: (1) To evaluate the best overall response, (2) PFS rate at 6 and 9 months, (3) Overall survival (OS) rate at 6, 9, and 12 months, (4) Incidence of conversion from unresectable to the resectable tumor, and (5) Incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Patients and Methods: Eligible patients included patients ≥ 18 years of age with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic LMS, measurable disease by RECIST v1.1, and at least one accessible tumor for TVEC intratumoral injection. N (3 mg/kg q2 weeks), T (1.2 mg/m2 q3 weeks), and TVEC (1x108 PFU/ml q 2 weeks depending on tumor size) were administered. A starting dose of TVEC (1x106 PFU/ml) was initially given, followed by a total dose of 1x108 PFU/ml q 2 weeks depending on tumor size) three weeks later. Results: Efficacy: Per protocol, there were 17 evaluable subjects (Modified Intention to Treat [mITT] patients who had completed at least one treatment cycle and had a follow-up CT scan). The median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1-9). The disease control rate (PR+SD) was 94% with 1 PR, and 15 SD. The median PFS was 8.0 months (95% CI:4.8-11.28) with a 6-month PFS rate of 71%; median OS 19.2 months (95% CI:12.7- 25.7); 6-month OS rate, 82%. Safety: 22 patients (Intention to treat [ITT] who had received at least one-time drug administration) were evaluated for safety analysis. The &gt; Grade 3 TRAEs include anemia (n = 3), thrombocytopenia (n = 3), neutropenia (n = 1), increased ALT (n = 1), increased GGT (n = 1), decreased LVEF (n = 1), dehydration (n = 1), hyponatremia (n = 1). There were no new safety signals noted in this study. Conclusions: Taken together, the data confirms our previous report that (1) the combination regimen using Talimogene laherparepvec, Nivolumab &amp; Trabectedin may be more effective and treatment for previously treated patients with advanced leiomyosarcoma with manageable toxicity, and (2) The best responders are patients with HR+ uterine LMS. Clinical trial information: NCT03886311 .

Local intralesional talimogene laherparepvec therapy with complete local response in oral palatine mucosal melanoma: a case report

BackgroundMucosal melanoma, an aggressive type of malignancy different from the cutaneous melanomas commonly seen in the head and neck region, represents < 1% of all malignant melanomas. The pathogenesis of mucosal melanoma is unknown. Targetable mutations commonly seen in cutaneous melanoma, such as in the BRAF and NRAS genes, have a lower incidence in mucosal melanoma. Mucosal melanoma carries a distinct mutational pattern from cutaneous melanoma. Surgery with negative margins is the first-line treatment for mucosal melanoma, and systemic therapy is not well defined. Talimogene laherparepvec, an oncolytic viral immunotherapy, is United States Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of advanced malignant cutaneous melanoma, with local therapeutic benefits. Mucosal melanoma was initially excluded from talimogene laherparepvec’s initial phase III clinical trial.Case presentationWe present the case of a white female patient in her 40s with past medical history of systemic lupus erythematous, scleroderma, and estrogen-receptor-positive invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Following a bilateral mastectomy, the patient was found to have BRAF-negative mucosal melanoma of her hard palate with a soft palate skip lesion. Owing to the presence of a skip mucosal lesion as well as the anticipated defect and need for free-flap reconstructive surgery, nonsurgical management was considered. The patient was referred to medical oncology, where—based on the patient’s complicated medical history and the risk of immunotherapy possibly worsening her prior autoimmune diseases—local talimogene laherparepvec injections were chosen as the primary therapy for her mucosal lesions. Though talimogene laherparepvec is approved for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma, there are limited data available on the use of talimogene laherparepvec in mucosal melanomas.ConclusionThe patient had a complete local tumor response at both the primary lesion as well as the skip lesion with the local injections. She had no side effects and maintained a high quality of life during treatment.

Intralesional and Infusional Updates for Metastatic Melanoma.

Locoregionally advanced and metastatic melanoma represent a challenging clinical problem, but in the era of immune checkpoint blockade and intralesional and infusional therapies, more options are available for use. Isolated limb infusion (ILI) was first introduced in the 1990s for the management of advanced melanoma, followed by the utilization of isolated extremity perfusion (ILP). Following this, intralesional oncolytic viruses, xanthene dyes, and cytokines were introduced for the management of in-transit metastases as well as unresectable, advanced melanoma. In 2015, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first oncolytic intralesional therapy, talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), for the treatment of advanced melanoma. Additionally, immune checkpoint inhibition has demonstrated efficacy in the management of advanced melanomas, and this improvement in outcomes has been extrapolated to aid in the management of in-transit metastatic disease. Finally, percutaneous hepatic perfusion (PHP), also approved by the FDA, has been reported to have a significant impact on the treatment of hepatic disease in uveal melanoma. While some of these treatments have less utility due to inferior outcomes as well as higher toxicity profiles, there are selective patient profiles for which these therapies carry a role. This review highlights intralesional and infusional therapies for the management of metastatic melanoma.

Combined Regional Approach of Talimogene laherparepvec and Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Advanced Melanoma.

Talimogene laherparepvec (TVEC) is a genetically modified oncolytic herpes simplex virus (HSV-1) that is used for the intralesional treatment of advanced or metastatic melanoma. Given that TVEC produces the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), recent reports have suggested that radiation treatment (RT) given in conjunction with TVEC may provide synergistic immune activation at the site, and possibly systemically. However, studies on combining RT with TVEC remain limited. We conducted a retrospective review of melanoma patients from a single cancer center who received TVEC and RT in the same region of the body and compared them to patients who received TVEC with RT at another site (other than the site of TVEC injection). Between January 2015 and September 2022, we identified twenty patients who were treated with TVEC and RT; fourteen patients received TVEC and RT in the same region, and six had treatments in separate regions. Regions were determined at the time of analysis and were based on anatomic sites (such as arm, leg, torso, etc.). Kaplan-Meier analysis of progression-free survival (PFS), analyses of time to distant metastasis (DM), overall survival (OS), and locoregional control (LRC), and the corresponding log-rank test were performed. With a median follow-up of 10.5 months [mos] (range 1.0-58.7 mos), we found an improvement in PFS with TVEC and RT in the same region compared to different regions, which were 6.4 mos (95% CI, 2.4-NR mos) and 2.8 mos (95% CI, 0.7-4.4 mos), respectively; p = 0.005. There was also a significant improvement in DM when TVEC and RT were used in the same region compared to different regions: 13.8 mos (95% CI, 4.6-NR mos) and 2.8 mos (95% CI, 0.7-4.4 mos), respectively (p = 0.001). However, we found no difference in overall survival (OS) between patients who had TVEC and RT in the same region (19.0 mos, 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1-not reached [NR] mos) and those who received treatments in different regions (18.5 mos, 95% CI, 1.0-NR mos); p = 0.366. There was no statistically significant improvement in locoregional control (LRC) in patients who had TVEC and RT in the same region was 26.0 mos (95% CI, 6.4-26.0 mos) compared to patients who received TVEC and RT in different regions (4.4 mos) (95% CI, 0.7-NR mos) (p = 0.115). No grade 3 or higher toxicities were documented in either group. Overall, there were improvements in PFS and DM when TVEC and RT were delivered to the same region of the body compared to when they were used in different regions. However, we did not find a significant difference in locoregional recurrence or OS. Future studies are needed to assess the sequence and timing of combining RT and TVEC to potentially enhance the immune response both locally and distantly.

Open-label, phase II study of talimogene laherparepvec plus pembrolizumab for the treatment of advanced melanoma that progressed on prior anti–PD-1 therapy: MASTERKEY-115,

BackgroundTreatment options for immunotherapy-refractory melanoma are an unmet need. The MASTERKEY-115 phase II, open-label, multicenter trial evaluated talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) plus pembrolizumab in advanced melanoma that progressed on prior programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors. MethodsCohorts 1 and 2 comprised patients (unresectable/metastatic melanoma) who had primary or acquired resistance, respectively, and disease progression within 12 weeks of their last anti–PD-1 dose. Cohorts 3 and 4 comprised patients (resectable disease) who underwent complete surgery, received adjuvant anti–PD-1, and experienced recurrence. Cohort 3 were disease-free for < 6 months and cohort 4 for ≥ 6 months after starting the adjuvant anti–PD-1 therapy and before confirmed recurrence. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included complete response rate (CRR), disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1 and irRC-RECIST, and safety. ResultsOf the 72 enrolled patients, 71 were treated. The ORR (95% CI) was 0%, 6.7% (0.2–32.0), 40.0% (16.3–67.7), and 46.7% (21.3–73.4) in cohorts 1–4, respectively; iORR was 3.8% (0.1–19.6), 6.7% (0.2–32.0), 53.3% (26.6–78.7), and 46.7% (21.3–73.4). iCRR was 0%, 0%, 13.3%, and 13.3%. Median iPFS (months) was 5.5, 8.2, not estimable [NE], and NE for cohorts 1–4, respectively; iDCR was 50.0%, 40.0%, 73.3%, and 86.7%. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), grade ≥ 3 TRAEs, serious AEs, and fatal AEs occurred in 54 (76.1%), 9 (12.7%), 24 (33.8%), and 10 (14.1%) patients, respectively. ConclusionT-VEC-pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and tolerability in PD-1−refractory melanoma, specifically in patients with disease recurrence on or after adjuvant anti–PD-1. Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier - NCT04068181

Multimodal Therapy Approaches for NUT Carcinoma by Dual Combination of Oncolytic Virus Talimogene Laherparepvec with Small Molecule Inhibitors

NUT (nuclear-protein-in-testis) carcinoma (NC) is a highly aggressive tumor disease. Given that current treatment regimens offer a median survival of six months only, it is likely that this type of tumor requires an extended multimodal treatment approach to improve prognosis. In an earlier case report, we could show that an oncolytic herpes simplex virus (T-VEC) is functional in NC patients. To identify further combination partners for T-VEC, we have investigated the anti-tumoral effects of T-VEC and five different small molecule inhibitors (SMIs) alone and in combination in human NC cell lines. Dual combinations were found to result in higher rates of tumor cell reductions when compared to the respective monotherapy as demonstrated by viability assays and real-time tumor cell growth monitoring. Interestingly, we found that the combination of T-VEC with SMIs resulted in both stronger and earlier reductions in the expression of c-Myc, a main driver of NC cell proliferation, when compared to T-VEC monotherapy. These results indicate the great potential of combinatorial therapies using oncolytic viruses and SMIs to control the highly aggressive behavior of NC cancers and probably will pave the way for innovative multimodal clinical studies in the near future.

Primary prophylaxis with mTOR inhibitor enhances T cell effector function and prevents heart transplant rejection during talimogene laherparepvec therapy of squamous cell carcinoma

The application of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition (mTORi) as primary prophylactic therapy to optimize T cell effector function while preserving allograft tolerance remains challenging. Here, we present a comprehensive two-step therapeutic approach in a male patient with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and heart transplantation followed with concomitant longitudinal analysis of systemic immunologic changes. In the first step, calcineurin inhibitor/ mycophenolic acid is replaced by the mTORi everolimus to achieve an improved effector T cell status with increased cytotoxic activity (perforin, granzyme), enhanced proliferation (Ki67) and upregulated activation markers (CD38, CD69). In the second step, talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) injection further enhances effector function by switching CD4 and CD8 cells from central memory to effector memory profiles, enhancing Th1 responses, and boosting cytotoxic and proliferative activities. In addition, cytokine release (IL-6, IL-18, sCD25, CCL-2, CCL-4) is enhanced and the frequency of circulating regulatory T cells is increased. Notably, no histologic signs of allograft rejection are observed in consecutive end-myocardial biopsies. These findings provide valuable insights into the dynamics of T cell activation and differentiation and suggest that timely initiation of mTORi-based primary prophylaxis may provide a dual benefit of revitalizing T cell function while maintaining allograft tolerance.

Abstract CT004: A single arm phase 2 study of TVEC in patients with invasive cutaneous SCC: A novel therapeutic approach for low risk tumors

Abstract Background: Immune recognition and cytotoxic responses play an important role in the pathogenesis and progression of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). Talimogene laherparepvec (TVEC) is an HSV-1 oncolytic immunological agent FDA approved for the local treatment of unresectable recurrent melanoma. It is proposed that T-VEC directly destroys cancer cells, and induces production of GM-CSF to enhance systemic antitumor immune priming. This proposed mechanism of action supports the novel approach to implement TVEC in the management of cSCC, particularly, in patients with increased burden of primary tumors. Methods: Study subjects were Immunocompetent, ≥ 18 years of age, and diagnosed with at least one histologically confirmed primary low-risk cSCC according to the Brigham and Women staging system. Unresectable lesions or patients unable/unwilling to undergo standard of care treatment were eligible to participate. Study lesions included target lesions injected (TLIs) and target non-injected lesions (TNILs). TNILs were selected to evaluate for abscopal effect when feasible. The TLIs were treated according to TVEC FDA approved protocol and followed for 1yr after the 1st injection. The primary study endpoint was to evaluate the overall response rate, defined as the proportion of subjects who achieved complete response and partial response in the TLIs. Safety and adverse effect profile (AEs), duration of response, time to response, durable response rate, and time to progression, were the secondary endpoints. A Simon 2 stage design was used. Total sample size was calculated to be 20 subjects. A total of 11 subjects were recruited, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and 100% CR observed in the interim analysis. NCT 03714828. Results: The analysis was conducted after all 11 participants completed Visit 8 (230-271 days from study initiation). Conclusions: TVEC showed extremely impressive ORR for patients with cSCC with a 95.8% CR for TLIs. AE profile of TVEC was mild and was well tolerated. Further studies evaluating the role of intralesional immunotherapy should be considered in patients with increased burden of cSCC. Table 1. summarizes the study results. For the primary endpoint 100% of participants achieved an overall response. Primary outcomes for patients (n = 11) Secondary outcomes for TLIs (n = 24) Time to response - days Mean ± standard deviation Median/Range (min, max) 41.6 ± 24.9 Time to response - days Mean ± standard deviation Median/Range (min, max) 48.7 ± 29.2 35/(18 - 112) 35/(18 - 112) Final response to TVEC - % Overall response rate (ORR) Partial response (PR) Complete response (CR) 100% (11/11) 9.1% (1/11) Response to TVEC - Overall response rate (ORR) Partial response (PR) Complete response (CR) 100% (24/24) 90.9% (10/11) 4.2% (1/24) 95.8% (23/24) Duration of response - days Mean ± standard deviation Median - Range (min, max) 206.0 ± 26.0 Duration of response - days Mean ± standard deviation Median - Range (min, max) 201.4 ± 29.6 212 (140 - 236) 209 (136 - 250) Durable response rate - % 90.9% (10/11) Durable response rate - % 83.3% (20/24) Secondary outcomes for TNILs (n = 2) Final response to TVEC - % 100% (2/2) Adverse Events NCI CTCAE (v. 4.0) Event n (%) 95% CI Severity Mild (Grade 1) Moderate (Grade 2) Fatigue 5 (45.5%) (16.7%, 76.6%) 4 (80%) 1 (20%) Flu-like symptoms 4 (36.4%) (10.9%, 69.2%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) Headache 2 (18.2%) (2.3%, 51.7% 2 (100%) Citation Format: Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski, Delaney B. Stratton, Anngela C. Adams, Haiyan Cui, Denise Roe, Srinath Sundararajan. A single arm phase 2 study of TVEC in patients with invasive cutaneous SCC: A novel therapeutic approach for low risk tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT004.

Oncolytic herpes simplex virus expressing IL-2 controls glioblastoma growth and improves survival

BackgroundGlioblastoma (GBM), a highly immunosuppressive and often fatal primary brain tumor, lacks effective treatment options. GBMs contain a subpopulation of GBM stem-like cells (GSCs) that play a central role in...

New hopes for the breast cancer treatment: perspectives on the oncolytic virus therapy.

Oncolytic virus (OV) therapy has emerged as a promising frontier in cancer treatment, especially for solid tumours. While immunotherapies like immune checkpoint inhibitors and CAR-T cells have demonstrated impressive results, their limitations in inducing complete tumour regression have spurred researchers to explore new approaches targeting tumours resistant to current immunotherapies. OVs, both natural and genetically engineered, selectively replicate within cancer cells, inducing their lysis while sparing normal tissues. Recent advancements in clinical research and genetic engineering have enabled the development of targeted viruses that modify the tumour microenvironment, triggering anti-tumour immune responses and exhibiting synergistic effects with other cancer therapies. Several OVs have been studied for breast cancer treatment, including adenovirus, protoparvovirus, vaccinia virus, reovirus, and herpes simplex virus type I (HSV-1). These viruses have been modified or engineered to enhance their tumour-selective replication, reduce toxicity, and improve oncolytic properties.Newer generations of OVs, such as Oncoviron and Delta-24-RGD adenovirus, exhibit heightened replication selectivity and enhanced anticancer effects, particularly in breast cancer models. Clinical trials have explored the efficacy and safety of various OVs in treating different cancers, including melanoma, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, head and neck cancer, and gynecologic malignancies. Notably, Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and Oncorine have. been approved for advanced melanoma and nasopharyngeal carcinoma, respectively. However, adverse effects have been reported in some cases, including flu-like symptoms and rare instances of severe complications such as fistula formation. Although no OV has been approved specifically for breast cancer treatment, ongoing preclinical clinical trials focus on four groups of viruses. While mild adverse effects like low-grade fever and nausea have been observed, the effectiveness of OV monotherapy in breast cancer remains insufficient. Combination strategies integrating OVs with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or immunotherapy, show promise in improving therapeutic outcomes. Oncolytic virus therapy holds substantial potential in breast cancer treatment, demonstrating safety in trials. Multi-approach strategies combining OVs with conventional therapies exhibit more promising therapeutic effects than monotherapy, signalling a hopeful future for OV-based breast cancer treatments.

Clinical and Histological Response to Talimogene Laherparepvec Therapy in Advanced Melanoma: Impact on Overall Survival.

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is an FDA-approved oncolytic herpesvirus therapy used for unresectable stage IIIB through IV metastatic melanoma. However, the correlation between clinical complete response (cCR) and pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients treated with T-VEC is understudied. We conducted a retrospective study from a prospectively maintained IRB-approved melanoma single-center database in patients treated with T-VEC from October 2015 to April 2022. Patients were categorized into 3 groups: cCR with pCR, cCR without pCR, and less than cCR. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We used descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to compare key covariates among exposure groups. We used survival analysis to compare survival curves and reported hazard ratio of death (95% CI) across exposure groups. We included 116 patients with a median overall survival (interquartile range) of 22.7 (14.8-39.3) months. The majority were men (69%) and White (97.4%), with a median age of 74.5 years. More than half of patients (n = 60, 51.6%) achieved cCR. Distribution among the groups was as follows: cCR with pCR (35.3%), cCR without pCR (16.3%), and less than cCR (48.4%). Median overall survival time (interquartile range) was 26.5 (18.6-36.0) months for cCR with pCR, 22.7 (14.4-35.5) months for cCR without pCR, and 17.8 (9.2-47.0) months for less than cCR (log-rank p value = 0.0033). Patients achieving cCR with pCR after T-VEC therapy have the most favorable overall survival outcomes, whereas those achieving cCR without pCR have inferior survival and those achieving less than cCR have the poorest overall survival outcomes. These findings emphasize the importance of histological confirmation and provide insights for optimizing T-VEC therapy in patients with advanced melanoma.

Discussion.

Discussion.

Comparison of the oncolytic activity of a replication-competent and a replication-deficient herpes simplex virus 1.

In 2015, the oncolytic herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) T-VEC (talimogene laherparepvec) was approved for intratumoral injection in non-resectable malignant melanoma. To determine whether viral replication is required for oncolytic activity, we compared replication-deficient HSV-1 d106S with replication-competent T-VEC. High infectious doses of HSV-1 d106S killed melanoma (n = 10), head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (n = 11), and chondrosarcoma cell lines (n = 2) significantly faster than T-VEC as measured by MTT metabolic activity, while low doses of T-VEC were more effective over time. HSV-1 d106S and, to a lesser extent T-VEC, triggered caspase-dependent early apoptosis as shown by pan-caspase inhibition and specific induction of caspases 3/7, 8, and 9. HSV-1 d106S induced a higher ratio of apoptosis-inducing infected cell protein (ICP) 0 to apoptosis-blocking ICP6 than T-VEC. T-VEC was oncolytic for an extended period of time as viral replication continued, which could be partially blocked by the antiviral drug aciclovir. High doses of T-VEC, but not HSV-1 d106S, increased interferon-β mRNA as part of the intrinsic immune response. When markers of immunogenic cell death were assessed, ATP was released more efficiently in the context of T-VEC than HSV-1 d106S infection, whereas HMGB1 was induced comparatively well. Overall, the early oncolytic effect on three different tumour entities was stronger with the non-replicative strain, while the replication-competent virus elicited a stronger innate immune response and more pronounced immunogenic cell death.

Current Role and Status for Intratumoral Injection Therapies in Metastatic Melanoma.

Intratumoral therapies represent a unique avenue for drug development in melanoma as patients often have accessible lesions that are particularly amenable to these approaches. In addition, a majority of intratumoral therapies have focused on stimulating antitumor immune responses, making them a particularly attractive option for use in melanoma. In this review, we describe applications for talimogene laherparepvec, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved intratumoral therapy in melanoma, as well as several classes of intratumoral therapies in development including novel oncolytic viruses, mRNA-based intratumoral injections, and cytokines and other signaling molecules.

Beyond the Scalpel: Advancing Strategic Approaches and Targeted Therapies in Nonexcisable Melanomas.

Melanoma in challenging anatomical locations such as the face, acral surfaces, and mucosal areas presents unique hurdles for surgical excision. This review examines alternative nonsurgical treatment modalities in the context of these complexities, addressing the gaps in current guidelines and the varied efficacy of existing therapies. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The review focuses on peer-reviewed articles discussing nonsurgical treatment options for melanoma in complex anatomical locations. Articles were screened by three independent researchers, ensuring a broad analysis of topical agents, immunotherapies, radiotherapies, and targeted therapies. The review highlights significant advancements in localized treatments such as imiquimod and intralesional therapy with talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), which show promise in managing nonexcisable melanomas. BRAF and MEK inhibitors, as well as checkpoint inhibitors targeting CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 pathways, demonstrate improved survival rates but pose challenges with resistance and systemic side effects. Radiotherapy serves as an adjunctive strategy due to melanoma's inherent radioresistant properties. Despite advancements, there is a notable absence of comprehensive, evidence-based protocols to guide the treatment of melanoma in these critical areas. This paper underscores the need for standardized treatment guidelines that account for the efficacy, side effects, and psychosocial impacts of therapies. Future research should focus on refining existing treatments and exploring innovative modalities to enhance patient outcomes in the management of nonexcisable melanomas. Comprehensive guidelines and long-term efficacy studies are essential to optimize care and improve the quality of life for patients afflicted with melanoma in challenging anatomical locations.