4.6 Article

Biodistribution of an oncolytic adenovirus after intracranial injection in permissive animals: a comparative study of Syrian hamsters and cotton rats

Journal

CANCER GENE THERAPY
Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages 362-372

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/cgt.2008.80

Keywords

oncolytic adenovirus; Syrian hamster; cotton rat; biodistribution; replication; glioma

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [R01-CA122930]
  2. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [K08-NS046430]
  3. The Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy Young Investigator Award
  4. American Cancer Society [RSG-07-276-01-MGO]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Conditionally replicative adenoviruses (CRAds) are often evaluated in mice; however, normal and cancerous mouse tissues are poorly permissive for human CRAds. As the cotton rat (CR) is a semipermissive animal and the Syrian hamster (SH) is a fully permissive model for adenoviral replication, we compared them in a single study following intracranial (i.c.) injection of a novel glioma-targeting CRAd. Viral genomic copies were quantified by real-time PCR in brain, blood, liver and lung. The studies were corroborated by immunohistochemical, serological and immunological assays. CR had a multiple log higher susceptibility for adenoviral infection than SH. A similar amount of genomic copies of CRAd-Survivin-pk7 and human adenovirus serotype 5 (AdWT) was found in the brain of CR and in all organs from SH. In blood and lung of CR, AdWT had more genomic copies than CRAd-Survivin-pk7 in some of the time points studied. Viral antigens were confirmed in brain slices, an elevation of serum transaminases was observed in both models, and an increase in anti-adenoviral antibodies was detected in SH sera. In conclusion, CR represents a sensitive model for studying biodistribution of CRAds after i.c. delivery, allowing for the detection of differences in the replication of CRAd-Survivin-pk7 and AdWT that were not evident in SH.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available