BACKGROUND: To determine the MTD of Seneca Valley Virus (NTX-010) in children with relapsed/refractory solid tumors. Patients (≥ 3-≤ 21 years) with neuroblastoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, or rare tumors with neuroendocrine features were eligible. PROCEDURE: Part A (single dose of NTX-010) enrolled 13 patients at three dose levels (1 × 10(9) viral particles (vp)/kg [n = 6], 1 × 10(10) vp/kg [n = 3], 1 × 10(11) vp/kg [n = 4]). Diagnoses included neuroblastoma (n = 9), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 2), carcinoid tumor (n = 1), and adrenocorticocarcinoma (n = 1). Part B added cyclophosphamide (CTX) (oral CTX (25 mg/m(2) /day) days 1-14 and IV CTX (750 mg/m(2) ) days 8 and 29) to two doses of NTX-010 (1 × 10(11) vp/kg, days 8 and 29). Nine patients enrolled to Part B. Diagnoses included neuroblastoma (n = 3), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 1), Wilms tumor (n = 3), and adrenocorticocarcinoma (n = 2). RESULTS: Twelve patients on Part A were evaluable for toxicity. There was a single DLT (grade 3 pain) at dose level 1. Additional grade ≥ 3 related adverse events (AEs) included leukopenia (n = 1), neutropenia (n = 3), lymphopenia (n = 3), and tumor pain (n = 1). No DLTs occurred on part B. Other grade ≥ 3 related AEs on Part B included: Leukopenia (n = 3), nausea (n = 1), emesis (n = 1), anemia (n = 1), neutropenia (n = 4), platelets (n = 1), alanine aminotransferase (n = 1), and lymphopenia (n = 2). All patients cleared NTX-010 from blood and stool by 3 weeks with 17/18 patients developing neutralizing antibodies. CONCLUSION: NTX-010 is feasible and tolerable at the dose levels tested in pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory solid tumors either alone or in combination with cyclophosphamide. However, despite the addition of cyclophosphamide, neutralizing antibodies appeared to limit applicability.
BACKGROUND: To determine the MTD of Seneca Valley Virus (NTX-010) in children with relapsed/refractory solid tumors. Patients (≥ 3-≤ 21 years) with neuroblastoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, or rare tumors with neuroendocrine features were eligible. PROCEDURE: Part A (single dose of NTX-010) enrolled 13 patients at three dose levels (1 × 10(9) viral particles (vp)/kg [n = 6], 1 × 10(10) vp/kg [n = 3], 1 × 10(11) vp/kg [n = 4]). Diagnoses included neuroblastoma (n = 9), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 2), carcinoid tumor (n = 1), and adrenocorticocarcinoma (n = 1). Part B added cyclophosphamide (CTX) (oral CTX (25 mg/m(2) /day) days 1-14 and IV CTX (750 mg/m(2) ) days 8 and 29) to two doses of NTX-010 (1 × 10(11) vp/kg, days 8 and 29). Nine patients enrolled to Part B. Diagnoses included neuroblastoma (n = 3), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 1), Wilms tumor (n = 3), and adrenocorticocarcinoma (n = 2). RESULTS: Twelve patients on Part A were evaluable for toxicity. There was a single DLT (grade 3 pain) at dose level 1. Additional grade ≥ 3 related adverse events (AEs) included leukopenia (n = 1), neutropenia (n = 3), lymphopenia (n = 3), and tumor pain (n = 1). No DLTs occurred on part B. Other grade ≥ 3 related AEs on Part B included: Leukopenia (n = 3), nausea (n = 1), emesis (n = 1), anemia (n = 1), neutropenia (n = 4), platelets (n = 1), alanine aminotransferase (n = 1), and lymphopenia (n = 2). All patients cleared NTX-010 from blood and stool by 3 weeks with 17/18 patients developing neutralizing antibodies. CONCLUSION:NTX-010 is feasible and tolerable at the dose levels tested in pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory solid tumors either alone or in combination with cyclophosphamide. However, despite the addition of cyclophosphamide, neutralizing antibodies appeared to limit applicability.
Authors: Scott A Laurie; John C Bell; Harold L Atkins; Joanne Roach; Michael K Bamat; James D O'Neil; M Scot Roberts; William S Groene; Robert M Lorence Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Svend O Freytag; Benjamin Movsas; Ibrahim Aref; Hans Stricker; James Peabody; Jan Pegg; Yingshu Zhang; Kenneth N Barton; Stephen L Brown; Mei Lu; Adnan Savera; Jae Ho Kim Journal: Mol Ther Date: 2007-03-20 Impact factor: 11.454
Authors: Samuel T Workenhe; Graydon Simmons; Jonathan G Pol; Brian D Lichty; William P Halford; Karen L Mossman Journal: Mol Ther Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 11.454
Authors: Robert M Lorence; M Scot Roberts; James D O'Neil; William S Groene; Jeffrey A Miller; Stephen N Mueller; Michael K Bamat Journal: Curr Cancer Drug Targets Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.428
Authors: P Seshidhar Reddy; Kevin D Burroughs; Laura M Hales; Shanthi Ganesh; Brian H Jones; Neeraja Idamakanti; Carl Hay; Shawn S Li; Kristine L Skele; Ann-Jeanette Vasko; Jingping Yang; D Neil Watkins; Charles M Rudin; Paul L Hallenbeck Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-10-30 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Pascal R A Buijs; Judith H E Verhagen; Casper H J van Eijck; Bernadette G van den Hoogen Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2015 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: David Ruano; José A López-Martín; Lucas Moreno; Álvaro Lassaletta; Francisco Bautista; Maitane Andión; Carmen Hernández; África González-Murillo; Gustavo Melen; Ramón Alemany; Luis Madero; Javier García-Castro; Manuel Ramírez Journal: Mol Ther Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 11.454
Authors: Linde A Miles; Laura N Burga; Eric E Gardner; Mihnea Bostina; John T Poirier; Charles M Rudin Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2017-06-26 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Mike Strauss; Nadishka Jayawardena; Eileen Sun; Richard A Easingwood; Laura N Burga; Mihnea Bostina Journal: J Virol Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Nadishka Jayawardena; Linde A Miles; Laura N Burga; Charles Rudin; Matthias Wolf; John T Poirier; Mihnea Bostina Journal: Viruses Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 5.048