High-throughput screening to enhance oncolytic virus immunotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
KJ Allan,1,2 David F Stojdl,1–3 SL Swift1 1Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) Research Institute, 2Department of Biology, Microbiology and Immunology, 3Department of Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada Abstract: High-throughput screens can rapidly scan and capture large amounts of information across multiple biological parameters. Although many screens have been designed to uncover potential new therapeutic targets capable of crippling viruses that cause disease, there have been relatively few directed at improving the efficacy of viruses that are used to treat disease. Oncolytic viruses (OVs) are biotherapeutic agents with an inherent specificity for treating malignant disease. Certain OV platforms – including those based on herpes simplex virus, reovirus, and vaccinia virus – have shown success against solid tumors in advanced clinical trials. Yet, many of these OVs have only undergone minimal engineering to solidify tumor specificity, with few extra modifications to manipulate additional factors. Several aspects of the interaction between an OV and a tumor-bearing host have clear value as targets to improve therapeutic outcomes. At the virus level, these include delivery to the tumor, infectivity, productivity, oncolysis, bystander killing, spread, and persistence. At the host level, these include engaging the immune system and manipulating the tumor microenvironment. Here, we review the chemical- and genome-based high-throughput screens that have been performed to manipulate such parameters during OV infection and analyze their impact on therapeutic efficacy. We further explore emerging themes that represent key areas of focus for future research. Keywords: oncolytic, virus, screen, high-throughput, cancer, chemical, genomic, immunotherapy
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".