MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Initial results from a first in human trial incorporating accelerated dose titration of a novel immune stimulating oncolytic virus - VG161.

2021· article· en· W3170530345 on OpenAlexaff
Ronghua Zhao, Rasha Cosman, Neha Aggarwal, Aaron O'Grady, Eugene Hsu, Luke Ardolino, Huiqun Xia, Yiting Chi, Shi Qui, Yanal Murad, Erica Lee, William Jia, Anthony M. Joshua

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Biotech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncolytic virusMedicineImmune systemCohortTolerabilityAdverse effectVirusImmunologyInternal medicineOncologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e14574 Background: Oncolytic virus (OV) can specifically replicate in cancer cells causing cell lysis. Together with the expression of immune stimulating payloads, OV can induce an anti-tumor immune response. The aim of this study is to assess the safety, tolerability, and PK profile of VG161, a novel HSV-1 OV armed with IL12, IL15 with its receptor α unit, and PD-L1 antagonist (Fc-fused 14 amino acid peptide), after single intra-tumoral injection (IT) in patients with advanced refractory solid tumors. Methods: This is an open label, single-arm, accelerated titration design pilot trial. Based on preclinical NOAEL, the first cohort dose level was calculated as 5×10 7 /subject, followed with 2 cohorts (1×10 8 and 2×10 8 PFU), 1-3 patients per cohort. One patient was treated in each cohort and the subsequent cohorts were initiated only after the safety observation of the current cohort was completed (21 days) with no DLT and no > 2 moderate toxicity events deemed possibly, probably, or definitely related to VG161, otherwise, it would be expanded per the 3+3 design. DNA copy number of VG161 was measured with qPCR in the tumor biopsy and blood, in urine for virus shedding, as well as swabs of injection site and mouth. Immune cytokines were measured with MSD assay (electrochemiluminescence detection) in blood. Peripheral lymphocyte subsets were analyzed with flowcytometry. Results: Three patients (1 per cohort) were treated and completed safety observation. No DLT, and 10 AEs (fever, low neutrophils and lymphocytes, etc.) were possibly, probably, or definitely related. Grade 3 fever was the only related SAE, which recovered in 3 days. Dose dependent increase of VG161 DNA copy was detected in the tumor 2-3 days after treatment (C-max: 10, 1000, and 1000000 times increase from low to high dose), in contrast, it remained undetectable in blood, oral swab, and urine. Virus DNA was detected in injection site swab for the patient at the highest dose level but not for those treated at lower dose levels. After dosing, increases of IL-12 (C-max: 2.0, 2.4, and 21 times of baseline), IL-15 (C-max: 1.6, 3.2, and 2.5 times of baseline), IFN-γ (C-max: 49, 638, and 236 times of baseline) and TNF-α (C-max: 2.3, 3.7, and 2.2 times of baseline) from low to high dose were seen. Peripheral lymphocyte subset analysis and immune profiling of injected tumor are ongoing. Interestingly, partial regression of multiple visible non-injected lesions was observed in 1 patient shortly after dosing, however no durable direct or abscopal responses were seen to date. Conclusions: Single IT injection of VG161 up to 2×10 8 PFU/subject is safe and well tolerated, with no unexpected viral spread or shedding. The post-dose increase in cytokines and the transit regression of non-injected lesions imply the activation of anti-cancer immunity induced by VG161. This holds potential for further dose optimization to assess the safety and efficacy. Clinical trial information: ACTRN12620000244909.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.245
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicVirus-based gene therapy research→French-language works237,207→