Biosafety and biohazard considerations of HSV-1–based oncolytic viral immunotherapy

Oncolytic viral immunotherapies are agents which can directly kill tumor cells and activate an immune response. Oncolytic viruses (OVs) range from native/unmodified viruses to genetically modified, attenuated viruses with the capacity to preferentially replicate in and kill tumors, leaving normal tissue unharmed. Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is the only OV approved for patient use in the United States; however, during the last 20 years, there have been a substantial number of clinical trials using OV immunotherapies across a broad range of cancers. Like T-VEC, many OV immunotherapies in clinical development are based on the herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), with genetic modifications for tumor selectivity, safety, and immunogenicity. Despite these modifications, HSV-1 OV immunotherapies are often treated with the same biosafety guidelines as the wild-type virus, potentially leading to reduced patient access and logistical hurdles for treatment centers, including community treatment centers and small group or private practices, and healthcare workers. Despite the lack of real-world evidence documenting possible transmission to close contacts, and in the setting of shedding and biodistribution analyses for T-VEC demonstrating limited infectivity and low risk of spread to healthcare workers, barriers to treatment with OV immunotherapies remain. With comprehensive information and educational programs, our hope is that updated biosafety guidance on OV immunotherapies will reduce logistical hurdles to ensure that patients have access to these innovative and potentially life-saving medicines across treatment settings. This work reviews a comprehensive collection of data in conjunction with the opinions of the authors based on their clinical experience to provide the suggested framework and key considerations for implementing biosafety protocols for OV immunotherapies, namely T-VEC, the only approved agent to date

Biosafety and biohazard considerations of HSV-1-based oncolytic viral immunotherapy.

Oncolytic viral immunotherapies are agents which can directly kill tumor cells and activate an immune response. Oncolytic viruses (OVs) range from native/unmodified viruses to genetically modified, attenuated viruses with the capacity to preferentially replicate in and kill tumors, leaving normal tissue unharmed. Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is the only OV approved for patient use in the United States; however, during the last 20 years, there have been a substantial number of clinical trials using OV immunotherapies across a broad range of cancers. Like T-VEC, many OV immunotherapies in clinical development are based on the herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), with genetic modifications for tumor selectivity, safety, and immunogenicity. Despite these modifications, HSV-1 OV immunotherapies are often treated with the same biosafety guidelines as the wild-type virus, potentially leading to reduced patient access and logistical hurdles for treatment centers, including community treatment centers and small group or private practices, and healthcare workers. Despite the lack of real-world evidence documenting possible transmission to close contacts, and in the setting of shedding and biodistribution analyses for T-VEC demonstrating limited infectivity and low risk of spread to healthcare workers, barriers to treatment with OV immunotherapies remain. With comprehensive information and educational programs, our hope is that updated biosafety guidance on OV immunotherapies will reduce logistical hurdles to ensure that patients have access to these innovative and potentially life-saving medicines across treatment settings. This work reviews a comprehensive collection of data in conjunction with the opinions of the authors based on their clinical experience to provide the suggested framework and key considerations for implementing biosafety protocols for OV immunotherapies, namely T-VEC, the only approved agent to date

Coinfections in Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) Study

Background: The frequency of coinfections and their association with outcomes have not been adequately studied among patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a high-risk group for coinfection. Methods: We included adult (≥18 years) patients with active or prior hematologic or invasive solid malignancies and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection, using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19, NCT04354701). We captured coinfections within ±2 weeks from diagnosis of COVID-19, identified factors cross-sectionally associated with risk of coinfection, and quantified the association of coinfections with 30-day mortality. Results: Among 8765 patients (hospitalized or not; median age, 65 years; 47.4% male), 16.6% developed coinfections: 12.1% bacterial, 2.1% viral, 0.9% fungal. An additional 6.4% only had clinical diagnosis of a coinfection. The adjusted risk of any coinfection was positively associated with age \u3e50 years, male sex, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities, diabetes, hematologic malignancy, multiple malignancies, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, progressing cancer, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and baseline corticosteroids; the adjusted risk of superinfection was positively associated with tocilizumab administration. Among hospitalized patients, high neutrophil count and C-reactive protein were positively associated with bacterial coinfection risk, and high or low neutrophil count with fungal coinfection risk. Adjusted mortality rates were significantly higher among patients with bacterial (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% CI, 1.33-1.95) and fungal (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.28-3.76) coinfections. Conclusions: Viral and fungal coinfections are infrequent among patients with cancer and COVID-19, with the latter associated with very high mortality rates. Clinical and laboratory parameters can be used to guide early empiric antimicrobial therapy, which may improve clinical outcomes

COVID-19 Severity and Cardiovascular Outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients With Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND: Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. OBJECTIVES: To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD RESULTS: Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all CONCLUSIONS: Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701)

Transmission of Clostridioides Difficile Infection (CDI) from Patients Less than 3 Years of Age in a Pediatric Oncology Setting

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is prevalent in pediatric oncology patients, but the transmission risk to peers is unknown. In 224 children with CDI, multilocus sequence typing (MLST) identified only 7 alleged transmission events (18%) originating from childrenWGS

Building antimicrobial stewardship through massive open online courses : A pilot study in Macedonia

Background: The global struggle against antibiotic resistance requires antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). Massive open online courses (MOOCs) offer health professionals unprecedented access to high-quality instructional material on AMS; the question is how apprehensible it is to non-native English speakers. Furthermore, to better understand how education interventions promote change towards rational antibiotic prescribing, leading institutions call for studies integrating behavioural science. Research from lower- A nd middle-income countries is particularly needed. Objectives: To measure the knowledge improvement from an AMS MOOC, the influence of language, course satisfaction and subsequent effect on intention to change antibiotic prescribing behaviour. Methods: Fifty-five physicians from Macedonia completed the MOOC. Pre- A nd post-course knowledge test scores were compared using a one-sample t-test. The effect of a language barrier was assessed using self-reported English level. Scores were compared with participants' intention to change behaviour in clinical practice. Results: Scores significantly improved from 77.8% to 82.2%. Participants with a higher English level improved most, while the low-level group showed no significant improvement. Physicians reported a high or very high intention to change behaviour. This was independent of knowledge improvements. Conclusions: First, lower self-reported English proficiency hindered knowledge acquisition from a MOOC platform. AMS programmes should commit to bridge this barrier so as to enable a global spread of education in AMS. Second, factors underlying the physicians' intentions to engage in AMS appear to be more complex than simple knowledge improvements. This suggests that less time-consuming interventions could be as effective

Effectiveness of Ultraviolet Disinfection in Reducing Hospital-Acquired Clostridium difficile and Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus on a Bone Marrow Transplant Unit

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of ultraviolet (UV) environmental disinfection system on rates of hospital-acquired vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) and Clostridium difficile. DESIGN: Using active surveillance and an interrupted time-series design, hospital-acquired acquisition of VRE and C. difficile on a bone marrow transplant (BMT) unit were examined before and after implementation of terminal disinfection with UV on all rooms regardless of isolation status of patients. The main outcomes were hospital-based acquisition measured through (1) active surveillance: admission, weekly, and discharge screening for VRE and toxigenic C. difficile (TCD) and (2) clinical surveillance: incidence of VRE and CDI on the unit. SETTING: Bone marrow transplant unit at a tertiary-care cancer center.ParticipantsStem cell transplant (SCT) recipients.InterventionTerminal disinfection of all rooms with UV regardless of isolation status of patients. RESULTS: During the 20-month study period, 579 patients had 704 admissions to the BMT unit, and 2,160 surveillance tests were performed. No change in level or trend in the incidence of VRE (trend incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.14; level IRR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.37-1.18) or C. difficile (trend IRR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.89-1.31; level IRR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.13-2.11) was observed after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of UV disinfection to supplement routine terminal cleaning of rooms was not effective in reducing hospital-acquired VRE and C. difficile among SCT recipients