4.7 Article

Safety and Efficacy of VCN-01, an Oncolytic Adenovirus Combining Fiber HSG-Binding Domain Replacement with RGD and Hyaluronidase Expression

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 1406-1418

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2213

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III
  2. Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia of the Government of Spain [BIO2011-30299-C02-01]
  3. Generalitat de Catalunya [VALTEC 09-02-105, ACCIO10, 2009SGR283]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Tumor targeting upon intravenous administration and subsequent intratumoral virus dissemination are key features to improve oncolytic adenovirus therapy. VCN-01 is a novel oncolytic adenovirus that combines selective replication conditional to pRB pathway deregulation, replacement of the heparan sulfate glycosaminoglycan putative-binding site KKTK of the fiber shaft with an integrin-binding motif RGDK for tumor targeting, and expression of hyaluronidase to degrade the extracellular matrix. In this study, we evaluate the safety and efficacy profile of this novel oncolytic adenovirus. Experimental Design: VCN-01 replication and potency were assessed in a panel of tumor cell lines. VCN-01 tumor-selective replication was evaluated in human fibroblasts and pancreatic islets. Preclinical toxicity, biodistribution, and efficacy studies were conducted in mice and Syrian hamsters. Results: Toxicity and biodistribution preclinical studies support the selectivity and safety of VCN-01. Antitumor activity after intravenous or intratumoral administration of the virus was observed in all tumor models tested, including melanoma and pancreatic adenocarcinoma, both in immunodeficient mice and immunocompetent hamsters. Conclusions: Oncolytic adenovirus VCN-01 characterized by the expression of hyaluronidase and the RGD shaft retargeting ligand shows an efficacy-toxicity prolife in mice and hamsters by intravenous and intratumoral administration that warrants clinical testing. (C) 2014 AACR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据