| Literature DB >> 35574359 |
Jing Zhang1, Qiying Zhang1, Zi Liu1, Juan Wang1, Fan Shi1, Jin Su1, Tao Wang1, Fei Wang1.
Abstract
Background: To assess the efficacy and safety of recombinant human adenovirus type 5 (H101) in patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic gynecologic malignancies.Entities:
Keywords: H101; efficacy; gynecologic malignancies; oncolytic virus; recombinant human adenovirus type 5; safety
Year: 2022 PMID: 35574359 PMCID: PMC9095970 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.877155
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Flow chart of patients entered into the study.
Baseline characteristics.
| Patient Characteristics | N (%) |
|---|---|
| Total enrollment | 29 (100) |
| Age (years) | 51 (20-75) |
| ECOG performance-status score | |
| 0 | 0 (0) |
| 1 | 22 (76) |
| 2 | 4 (14) |
| 3 | 3 (10) |
| Disease diagnosis | |
| Cervical cancer | 22 (76) |
| Vaginal cancer | 2 (7) |
| Vulvar cancer | 3 (10) |
| Ovarian cancer | 2 (7) |
| Pathological type | |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 18 (62) |
| Adenocarcinoma | 9 (31) |
| malignant melanoma | 2 (7) |
| Morbid state at enrollment | |
| Persistence | 16 (55) |
| Recurrence or Metastasis | 13 (45) |
| Cycle number of using H101 | |
| 1 | 16 (55) |
| ≥2 | 13 (45) |
| Combination therapy | |
| Only H101 | 7 (24) |
| Combination radiation | 7 (24) |
| Combination other medications | 8 (28) |
| Combination radiation plus other medications | 7 (24) |
| Number of therapy lines | |
| 2 | 17 (59) |
| ≥3 | 12 (41) |
| Injection site | |
| Cervix | 14 (48) |
| Vagina | 10 (34) |
| Vulva | 3 (10) |
| Others | 2 (7) |
| Cycle number of previous systemic chemotherapies | |
| <4 | 11 (38) |
| 4-6 | 10 (34) |
| >6 | 8 (28) |
Data are No. (%) unless otherwise indicated.
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status scores on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability.
Including external beam radiation therapy, brachytherapy, or coalition of these two.
Including chemotherapeutic agents, molecularly targeted agents, immune checkpoint inhibitors, or combinations of the above.
One is in the umbilical region, and another is in the abdominal wall.
Treatment Responses.
| Response | No. (%) |
|---|---|
| Best overall response | |
| CR | 13 (44.8) |
| PR | 8 (27.6) |
| SD | 3 (10.3) |
| PD | 5 (17.2) |
| ORR, No. (%; 95CI)# | 21 (72.4; 55.1-89.7.) |
| DCR, No. (%; 95CI)# | 24 (82.8; 68.1-97.4) |
| Median TTR (days) | 4(3-15) |
| Median DOR (months) | NR (0.6-18.1) |
Data are No. (%) unless otherwise indicated.
#based on the Clopper and Pearson method.
CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, disease progression; ORR, objective responses rate; DCR, disease control rate; NR, not reached; TTR, time to response; DOR, duration of response.
Figure 2Characteristics of treatment response in different cancer types. Maximum change from baseline in the sum of target lesion diameters. Tumor reduction (bars) corresponds to maximum change from baseline in target lesions and not to the best overall response.
Figure 3A patient with stage IB3 at the initial diagnosis of mucinous adenocarcinoma of the cervix developed into a huge residual mass of 57*76*66mm (MRI) (A) because of the treatment was terminated by grade 4 myelosuppression due to one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which also made the patient refuse concurrent chemotherapy. After external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) 30Gy plus 1 cycle local injection of H101 (1.0×1012 virus particles daily for 5 days), the mass was significantly reduced to 46*51*48mm (MRI) (B). The mass was further reduced by 32*46*45mm (MRI) (C) after 50Gy of EBRT. After the following brachytherapy (6Gy for 1 time of intraluminal brachytherapy and 7Gy for 3 times of interstitial brachytherapy), the residual lesion was 29*39*30mm (MRI) after 1 month of radiation (D). Since refusal of chemotherapy, she accepted 1 cycle treatment of H101 (5.0×1011 virus particles daily for 5 days) again. Gynecological examination indicated that the lesion had further shrunk, while there were still some suspicious and hard masses. Therefore, surgical resection of the residual lesion was suggested. Postoperative pathology indicated that no cancer cells were found in the surgically excised lesions. One-month postoperative Computed tomography (CT) scan showed no signs of tumor (E). The red arrow stands for the tumor mass.
Figure 4Swimmer plot representing critical points and duration of response (DOR) during treatment and follow-up, in patients who achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR), based on RECIST v1.1. Length of bars represents duration from initial H101 treatment to final follow-up.
Figure 5One patient with mucinous ovarian adenocarcinoma who had received five different chemotherapy regimens and 2 times of surgeries had huge metastatic carcinoma of vaginal cuff (A). After one injection, the mass shrunk and showed necrosis (B). The mass was partially exfoliated (E) and significantly reduced (C) after 2 injections. After completion of a course of injections (5.0 × 1011 virus particles daily for 5 days), vaginal cuff was only minimal residual (D).
Figure 6One patient with recurrent vulvar cancer had a lesion at left labia majora presented as an ulcer with foul pus on the surface (A). With 5 days of continuous injection, the local state of the lesion gradually improved, and the ulcerated surface of the lesion was shallower and cleaner. (B–D) showed the changes of lesions after the first, third and fifth injection in the injection cycle, respectively. (E) showed the lesion in outpatient review after 1 week of this cycle of treatment.
Figure 7Kaplan-Meier curves of response duration among 21 patients who responded to treatment (A) and progression-free survival in 29 patients (B).
Treatment-related Adverse Event.
| Event | Grades No. (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1-2 | G3 | G4 | Any Grade | |
| Fever | 18 (62.1) | 2 (6.8) | 0 (0) | 20 (70.0) |
| Flu-like symptoms | 6 (20.7) | 1 (3.4) | 0 (0) | 7 (24.1) |
| Nausea/vomiting | 7 (24.1) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 7 (24.1) |
| Fatigue | 11 (37.9) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 11 (37.9) |
| Injection site bleeding | 1 (3.4) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (3.4) |
| Injection site pain | 8 (27.6) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 8 (27.6) |
| Intestinal fistula | 0 (0) | 1 (3.4) | 0 (0) | 1 (3.4) |
| Myelosuppression | 6 (20.1) | 1 (3.4) | 1 (3.4) | 8 (27.6) |