Repurposing Sunitinib with Oncolytic Reovirus as a Novel Immunotherapeutic Strategy for Renal Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In addition to their direct cytopathic effects, oncolytic viruses are capable of priming antitumor immune responses. However, strategies to enhance the immunotherapeutic potential of these agents are lacking. Here, we investigated the ability of the multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor and first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) agent, sunitinib, to augment the antitumor immune response generated by oncolytic reovirus. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In vitro, oncolysis and chemokine production were assessed in a panel of human and murine RCC cell lines after exposure to reovirus, sunitinib, or their combination. In vivo, the RENCA syngeneic murine model of RCC was employed to determine therapeutic and tumor-specific immune responses after treatment with reovirus (intratumoral), sunitinib, or their combination. Parallel investigations employing the KLN205 syngeneic murine model of lung squamous cell carcinoma (NSCLC) were conducted for further validation. RESULTS: IFNγ-producing cells. Coadministration of sunitinib with reovirus further reduced tumor burden resulting in improved survival, decreased accumulation of immune suppressor cells, and the establishment of protective immunity upon tumor rechallenge. Similar results were observed for KLN205 tumor-bearing mice, highlighting the potential broad applicability of this approach. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to repurpose sunitinib for augmentation of reovirus' immunotherapeutic efficacy positions this novel combination therapy as an attractive strategy ready for clinical testing against a range of histologies, including RCC and NSCLC. Clin Cancer Res; 22(23); 5839-50. ©2016 AACR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".