Clinical trial indicates preexisting HSV-1 immunity improves survival in glioblastoma, suggesting immune evasion mechanisms inform novel therapeutic strategies.
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) remains one of the most aggressive and treatment-resistant cancers due to tumor heterogeneity and the highly immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Our laboratory has been investigating HSV-1 based oncolytic virotherapy for GBM. Findings from our recent clinical trial (NCT03152318) suggest that patients with preexisting immunity to HSV-1 respond more favorably to oncolytic HSV (oHSV) therapy, demonstrating improved survival compared to HSV-1 seronegative patients. Thus, our research aims to understand mechanisms by which HSV-1 pre-existent immunity enhances oHSV therapy. HSV-1 encodes a viral Fc receptor, composed of glycoproteins E and I, which binds to human IgG and promotes degradation of anti-HSV antibodies through the mechanism, antibody bipolar bridge (ABB). In the ABB process, tethered antibodies are internalized into cellular endosomes/lysosomes for degradation, while viral gE-gI is recycled back to the cell surface. However, how this immune evasion mechanism works in HSV-experienced patients during oHSV therapy remains unclear. To investigate this phenomenon, we generated an in vitro model using recombinant anti-HSV1 gD IgG with either human or mouse Fc regions. Immunofluorescence on Vero cells indicates that human Fc antibodies colocalize with lysosomes in HSV-infected cells, suggesting they are targeted for degradation. In contrast, mouse Fc antibodies were not internalized, supporting the idea that HSV-1 mediates species-specific immune evasion to shape tumor immune responses. To test this in vivo, we developed an adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector that expresses anti-gD antibodies with either human or mouse Fc regions. It is expected that this animal model will help in understanding the importance of HSV pre-existing immunity in oHSV therapy and lead to the development of new therapeutic strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Runco et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: