Efficacy and safety of oncolytic viruses in advanced or metastatic cancer: a network meta-analysis

Abstract

Background Oncolytic viruses (OVs) have shown prospects in advanced and metastatic cancer, and many clinical trials have been carried out. To compare OV therapies comprehensively and provide a categorized profile and ranking of efficacy and safety, a network meta-analysis was conducted. Methods A total of 5948 studies were screened and 13 randomized controlled trials with 1939 patients, of whom 1106 patients received OV therapies, comparing four OVs (NTX-010, pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec), talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), and pelareorep) were included in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Eligible studies reported at least one of the following clinical outcome measures: objective response rate (ORR) and grade\u2009≥\u20093 adverse events. Results Compared to systemic treatments alone, talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) (OR 7.00, 95% CI 1.90–26.00) and T-VEC plus systemic treatment (2.90, 0.80–11.00) showed better objective response rates (ORRs), whereas Pexa-Vec 1\u2009*\u200910 9 pfu plus systemic treatment (0.91, 0.26–3.00) and pelareorep plus systemic treatment (1.10, 0.61–2.00) were found to be comparable. The grade\u2009≥\u20093 adverse event ranking of the treatments from worst to best was as follows: T-VEC (ranking probability 24%), Pexa-Vec 1\u2009*\u200910 9 pfu plus systemic treatment (21%), Pexa-Vec 1\u2009*\u200910 9 pfu (17%), T-VEC plus systemic treatment (13%), pelareorep plus systemic treatment (13%), systemic treatments (18%), Pexa-Vec 1\u2009*\u200910 8 pfu (12%), and NTX-010 (20%). Conclusions Compared with other oncolytic virus therapies for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer, T-VEC and T-VEC plus systemic treatment appear to provide the best ORR therapy in terms of monotherapy and combination respectively, but should be given with caution to grade\u2009≥\u20093 adverse events. Conversely, combining OVs with chemotherapy or target agents was demonstrated not to improve efficacy compared with chemotherapy or target agents alone. Combining OV therapies with immune-checkpoint inhibitors, instead of chemotherapy or target agents, tended to provide better ORRs without causing severe adverse events. This study will guide treatment choice and optimize future trial designs for investigations of advanced or metastatic cancer.