Gao Peng, Ding Guanxiong, Wang Lujia
Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Transl Cancer Res. 2021 Oct;10(10):4290-4302. doi: 10.21037/tcr-21-905.
Cancer treatment remains one of the most formidable challenges worldwide. Some novel treatment strategies, including molecularly targeted therapy, gene therapy, and cellular immunotherapy, have also been investigated to improve therapeutic effects for cancer patients and have demonstrated unexpected positive effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of oncolytic virus (OV) monotherapy or combination therapy for intermediate to advanced solid tumors.
We retrieved articles from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP. The quality of the included studies was assessed by Review Manager Software version 5.3. STATA software was used to perform meta-analyses of efficacy, overall survival (OS) and adverse reactions.
A total of 22 studies involving 3,996 patients were included in this analysis, including 13 H101 studies, 5 T-VEC studies, 2 Pexa-Vec studies, 1 HF10 study and 1 Reolysin study. Regarding oncolytic adenovirus H101, meta-analysis showed that patients treated with H101 monotherapy or H101 combined with chemotherapy had a significantly higher objective response rate (ORR) than those treated with chemotherapy. Patients in the H101 and T-VEC groups had significantly longer effect size (ES) than the control group patients. The odds ratio (OR) and ES of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, lung cancer and melanoma treated with OV were analyzed. For the safety profile, the total incidence of adverse reactions was similar in both groups. In terms of the other OVs, according to a systematic review, we found that after Reolysin treatment, the ORR was 26.9% in patients with head and neck cancer. The phase I study of HF10 exhibited some therapeutic potential. The adverse events (AEs) associated with the other OVs mainly included fever, nausea and vomiting, leukopenia, and hypotension.
OVs are effective and well tolerated for the treatment of intermediate to advanced solid cancer and represent a promising therapeutic approach for solid cancers.
癌症治疗仍是全球最严峻的挑战之一。一些新型治疗策略,包括分子靶向治疗、基因治疗和细胞免疫治疗,也已被研究以提高癌症患者的治疗效果,并显示出意想不到的积极效果。本系统评价和荟萃分析评估了溶瘤病毒(OV)单药治疗或联合治疗中晚期实体瘤的疗效和安全性。
我们从PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、CNKI、万方和维普检索文章。采用Review Manager软件5.3版评估纳入研究的质量。使用STATA软件对疗效、总生存期(OS)和不良反应进行荟萃分析。
本分析共纳入22项研究,涉及3996例患者,包括13项H101研究、5项T-VEC研究、2项Pexa-Vec研究、1项HF10研究和1项Reolysin研究。关于溶瘤腺病毒H101,荟萃分析显示,接受H101单药治疗或H101联合化疗的患者客观缓解率(ORR)显著高于接受化疗的患者。H101组和T-VEC组患者的效应大小(ES)显著长于对照组患者。分析了接受OV治疗的肝细胞癌、肺癌和黑色素瘤患者的比值比(OR)和ES。在安全性方面,两组不良反应的总发生率相似。对于其他OV,根据一项系统评价,我们发现Reolysin治疗后,头颈癌患者的ORR为26.9%。HF10的I期研究显示出一定的治疗潜力。与其他OV相关的不良事件(AE)主要包括发热、恶心、呕吐、白细胞减少和低血压。
OV对中晚期实体癌的治疗有效且耐受性良好,是实体癌一种有前景的治疗方法。