Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Analysis of predictive and prognostic factors in 290 patients treated with oncolytic adenoviruses
  1. Kristian Taipale1,
  2. Ilkka Liikanen1,
  3. Anniina Koski1,
  4. Anna Kanerva1,
  5. Minna Oksanen1 and
  6. Akseli Hemminki2,3
  1. Aff1 grid.7737.40000000404102071Cancer Gene Therapy GroupUniversity of Helsinki Helsinki Finland
  2. Aff2 grid.7737.40000000404102071Cancer Gene Therapy Group, Medicum, Haartman InstituteUniversity of Helsinki Helsinki Finland
  3. Aff3 TILT Biotherapeutics Ltd Helsinki Finland

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Meeting abstracts


After years of development, oncolytic viruses are nearing a breakthrough into clinical use. In order to facilitate the implementation of this new form of immunotherapy, all existing clinical experience must be utilized to optimize treatment strategies, improve patient selection and develop even more effective oncolytic therapeutics.

Here we report clinical factors that affected the prognosis and predicted treatment efficacy in 290 patients treated with oncolytic adenoviruses. In these analyses, survival and efficacy determined by radiological response criteria were used as dependent variables in multi-parameter regression models. In prognostic models measuring hazard ratio (HR) for cancer mortality, tumor type and virus arming were found to affect the prognosis of the patients significantly. Gynecological tumors were notably linked to better prognosis (HR 0.477, p=0,004). Patients treated with viruses coding for GMCSF (HR 0.549, p=0.003) or GMCSF-coding viruses and CD40L-coding viruses (HR 0.439, p=0.023) were more likely to survive longer. In the predictive models the administration of the virus was discovered to independently influence the efficacy of the treatment. Patients who received most of the treatments as intraperitoneal injections were more likely to achieve disease control status (OR 3.878, p=0.016). In a small subset of patients (n=13) who received all treatments intravenously the probability of disease control was even higher (OR 8.995, p=0.032).


These data indicate several options for further development of oncolytic adenovirus therapy. Concentration on sensitive diseases and choosing the right patient subsets for treatment, as well as finding optimal administration schemes, are key steps in improving the therapeutic efficacy of adenoviruses. The results suggest that evaluating the immunological status of the patients before oncolytic virotherapy can offer important prognostic information. In order to be translated to the field of personalized oncology, this concept requires still further investigation.