Oncolytic viruses (OVs) comprise a diverse group of biologic agents with potential as cancer therapeutics. Numerous clinical trials are under way or have been completed using this approach. In 2015, in a milestone for the field, talimogene laherparepvec became the first OV to gain US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in the United States.¹ However, the use of viruses for cancer treatment is not new. Throughout the 20th century, case studies and small trials of various viruses in cancer therapy were reported.² These investigations conducted with small numbers of patients used wild-type and often crudely prepared viral isolates, and it was not until the 1990s that the era of genetic engineering of viruses to enhance their oncolytic potential began. The first reported³ genetically engineered OV was based on herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV1). This development was rapidly followed by many studies² illustrating the effectiveness of this approach using a diverse range of viruses and tumor models. The main focus of the field during the early development of OVs was to identify viruses or their engineered variants with tumor-selective replication. However, it has always been appreciated that an immune component is important and may be critical for the therapeutic efficacy of this approach. Indeed, OVs are now broadly considered as immunotherapy agents for which effectiveness in patients depends on activation of host antitumor immune responses.^4-6

Binding of programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) to programmed cell death protein-1 (PD1) leads to cancer immune evasion via inhibition of T cell function. One of the defining characteristics of glioblastoma, a universally fatal brain cancer, is its profound local and systemic immunosuppression. Glioblastoma has also been shown to generate extracellular vesicles (EVs), which may play an important role in tumor progression. We thus hypothesized that glioblastoma EVs may be important mediators of immunosuppression and that PD-L1 could play a role. We show that glioblastoma EVs block T cell activation and proliferation in response to T cell receptor stimulation. PD-L1 was expressed on the surface of some, but not of all, glioblastoma-derived EVs, with the potential to directly bind to PD1. An anti-PD1 receptor blocking antibody significantly reversed the EV-mediated blockade of T cell activation but only when PD-L1 was present on EVs. When glioblastoma PD-L1 was up-regulated by IFN-γ, EVs also showed some PD-L1–dependent inhibition of T cell activation. PD-L1 expression correlated with the mesenchymal transcriptome profile and was anatomically localized in the perinecrotic and pseudopalisading niche of human glioblastoma specimens. PD-L1 DNA was present in circulating EVs from glioblastoma patients where it correlated with tumor volumes of up to 60 cm³. These results suggest that PD-L1 on EVs may be another mechanism for glioblastoma to suppress antitumor immunity and support the potential of EVs as biomarkers in tumor patients.

Oncolytic viruses (OV) selectively replicate and kill cancer cells and spread within the tumor, while not harming normal tissue. In addition to this direct oncolytic activity, OVs are also very effective at inducing immune responses to themselves and to the infected tumor cells. OVs encompass a broad diversity of DNA and RNA viruses that are naturally cancer selective or can be genetically engineered. OVs provide a diverse platform for immunotherapy; they act as in situ vaccines and can be armed with immunomodulatory transgenes or combined with other immunotherapies. However, the interactions of OVs with the immune system may affect therapeutic outcomes in opposing fashions: negatively by limiting virus replication and/or spread, or positively by inducing antitumor immune responses. Many aspects of the OV–tumor/host interaction are important in delineating the effectiveness of therapy: (i) innate immune responses and the degree of inflammation induced; (ii) types of virus-induced cell death; (iii) inherent tumor physiology, such as infiltrating and resident immune cells, vascularity/hypoxia, lymphatics, and stromal architecture; and (iv) tumor cell phenotype, including alterations in IFN signaling, oncogenic pathways, cell surface immune markers [MHC, costimulatory, and natural killer (NK) receptors], and the expression of immunosuppressive factors. Recent clinical trials with a variety of OVs, especially those expressing granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), have demonstrated efficacy and induction of antitumor immune responses in the absence of significant toxicity. Manipulating the balance between antivirus and antitumor responses, often involving overlapping immune pathways, will be critical to the clinical success of OVs. Cancer Immunol Res; 2(4); 295–300. ©2014 AACR.

Immunotherapy failures can result from the highly suppressive tumour microenvironment that characterizes aggressive forms of cancer such as recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM)^1,2. Here we report the results of a first-in-human phase I trial in 41 patients with rGBM who were injected with CAN-3110—an oncolytic herpes virus (oHSV)³. In contrast to other clinical oHSVs, CAN-3110 retains the viral neurovirulence ICP34.5 gene transcribed by a nestin promoter; nestin is overexpressed in GBM and other invasive tumours, but not in the adult brain or healthy differentiated tissue⁴. These modifications confer CAN-3110 with preferential tumour replication. No dose-limiting toxicities were encountered. Positive HSV1 serology was significantly associated with both improved survival and clearance of CAN-3110 from injected tumours. Survival after treatment, particularly in individuals seropositive for HSV1, was significantly associated with (1) changes in tumour/PBMC T cell counts and clonal diversity, (2) peripheral expansion/contraction of specific T cell clonotypes; and (3) tumour transcriptomic signatures of immune activation. These results provide human validation that intralesional oHSV treatment enhances anticancer immune responses even in immunosuppressive tumour microenvironments, particularly in individuals with cognate serology to the injected virus. This provides a biological rationale for use of this oncolytic modality in cancers that are otherwise unresponsive to immunotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03152318).

An oral small molecule turns on the transcription of human interleukin-12, with biological effects in patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas.

Extracellular vesicles have emerged as important mediators of intercellular communication in cancer, including by conveying tumor-promoting microRNAs between cells, but their regulation is poorly understood. In this study, we report the findings of a comparative microRNA profiling and functional analysis in human glioblastoma that identifies miR-1 as an orchestrator of extracellular vesicle function and glioblastoma growth and invasion. Ectopic expression of miR-1 in glioblastoma cells blocked in vivo growth, neovascularization, and invasiveness. These effects were associated with a role for miR-1 in intercellular communication in the microenvironment mediated by extracellular vesicles released by cancer stem–like glioblastoma cells. An extracellular vesicle–dependent phenotype defined by glioblastoma invasion, neurosphere growth, and endothelial tube formation was mitigated by loading miR-1 into glioblastoma-derived extracellular vesicles. Protein cargo in extracellular vesicles was characterized to learn how miR-1 directed extracellular vesicle function. The mRNA encoding Annexin A2 (ANXA2), one of the most abundant proteins in glioblastoma-derived extracellular vesicles, was found to be a direct target of miR-1 control. In addition, extracellular vesicle–derived miR-1 along with other ANXA2 extracellular vesicle networking partners targeted multiple pro-oncogenic signals in cells within the glioblastoma microenvironment. Together, our results showed how extracellular vesicle signaling promotes the malignant character of glioblastoma and how ectopic expression of miR-1 can mitigate this character, with possible implications for how to develop a unique miRNA-based therapy for glioblastoma management. Cancer Res; 74(3); 738–50. ©2013 AACR.