ArticlePloS one2024
Oncolytic vaccinia virus immunotherapy antagonizes image-guided radiotherapy in mouse mammary tumor models.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ionizing radiation (IR) and oncolytic viruses are both used to treat cancer, and the effectiveness of both agents depends upon stimulating an immune response against the tumor. In this study we tested whether combining image guided ionizing radiation (IG-IR) with an oncolytic vaccinia virus (VACV) could yield a better therapeutic response than either treatment alone. ΔF4LΔJ2R VACV grew well on irradiated human and mouse breast cancer cells, and the virus can be combined with 4 or 8 Gy of IR to kill cells in an additive or weakly synergistic manner. To test efficacy in vivo we used immune competent mice bearing orthotopic TUBO mammary tumors. IG-IR worked well with 10 Gy producing 80% complete responses, but this was halved when the tumors were treated with VACV starting 2 days after IG-IR. VACV monotherapy was ineffective in this model. The antagonism was time dependent as waiting for 21 days after IG-IR eliminated the inhibitory effect but without yielding any further benefits over IR alone. In irradiated tumors, VACV replication was also lower, suggesting that irradiation created an environment that did not support infection as well in vivo as in vitro. A study of how four different treatment regimens affected the immune composition of the tumor microenvironment showed that treating irradiated tumors with VACV altered the immunological profiles in tumors exposed to IR or VACV alone. We detected more PD-1 and PD-L1 expression in tumors exposed to IR+VACV but adding an αPD-1 antibody to the protocol did not change the way VACV interferes with IG-IR therapy. VACV encodes many immunosuppressive gene products that may interfere with the ability of radiotherapy to induce an effective anti-tumor immune response through the release of danger-associated molecular patterns. These data suggest that infecting irradiated tumors with VACV, too soon after exposure, may interfere in the innate and linked adaptive immune responses that are triggered by radiotherapy to achieve a beneficial impact.
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.