ArticleImmunology2024
Comparison of the oncolytic activity of a replication-competent and a replication-deficient herpes simplex virus 1.
Article in Immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatiotemporal control of immunogenic cell death: rewiring tumor-immune dialogues for next-generation immunotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- HMGB1 as Double-Edged Regulator of Cancer Therapy: Mechanistic Roles in Chemotherapy Resistance and Immunotherapy Response.OncoTargets and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In 2015, the oncolytic herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) T-VEC (talimogene laherparepvec) was approved for intratumoral injection in non-resectable malignant melanoma. To determine whether viral replication is required for oncolytic activity, we compared replication-deficient HSV-1 d106S with replication-competent T-VEC. High infectious doses of HSV-1 d106S killed melanoma (n = 10), head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (n = 11), and chondrosarcoma cell lines (n = 2) significantly faster than T-VEC as measured by MTT metabolic activity, while low doses of T-VEC were more effective over time. HSV-1 d106S and, to a lesser extent T-VEC, triggered caspase-dependent early apoptosis as shown by pan-caspase inhibition and specific induction of caspases 3/7, 8, and 9. HSV-1 d106S induced a higher ratio of apoptosis-inducing infected cell protein (ICP) 0 to apoptosis-blocking ICP6 than T-VEC. T-VEC was oncolytic for an extended period of time as viral replication continued, which could be partially blocked by the antiviral drug aciclovir. High doses of T-VEC, but not HSV-1 d106S, increased interferon-β mRNA as part of the intrinsic immune response. When markers of immunogenic cell death were assessed, ATP was released more efficiently in the context of T-VEC than HSV-1 d106S infection, whereas HMGB1 was induced comparatively well. Overall, the early oncolytic effect on three different tumour entities was stronger with the non-replicative strain, while the replication-competent virus elicited a stronger innate immune response and more pronounced immunogenic cell death.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.