Therapeutic cancer vaccines, an exciting development in cancer immunotherapy, share the goal of creating and amplifying tumor-specific T-cell responses, but significant obstacles still remain to their success. Here, we briefly outline the principles underlying cancer vaccine therapy with a focus on novel vaccine platforms and antigens, underscoring the renewed optimism. Numerous strategies have been investigated to overcome immunosuppressive mechanisms of the tumor microenvironment (TME) and counteract tumor escape, including improving antigen selection, refining delivery platforms, and use of combination therapies. Several new cancer vaccine platforms and antigen targets are under development. In an effort to amplify tumor-specific T-cell responses, a heterologous prime-boost antigen delivery strategy is increasingly used for virus-based vaccines. Viruses have also been engineered to express targeted antigens and immunomodulatory molecules simultaneously, to favorably modify the TME. Nanoparticle systems have shown promise as delivery vectors for cancer vaccines in preclinical research. T-win is another platform targeting both tumor cells and the TME, using peptide-based vaccines that engage and activate T cells to target immunoregulatory molecules expressed on immunosuppressive and malignant cells. With the availability of next-generation sequencing, algorithms for neoantigen selection are emerging, and several bioinformatic platforms are available to select therapeutically relevant neoantigen targets for developing personalized therapies. However, more research is needed before the use of neoepitope prediction and personalized immunotherapy becomes commonplace. Taken together, the field of therapeutic cancer vaccines is fast evolving, with the promise of potential synergy with existing immunotherapies for long-term cancer treatment.

Cancer immunotherapy is defined as the manipulation of the immune system to recognize and destroy cancer cells. Among approved immunotherapeutic agents, therapeutic cancer vaccines have the advantage of eliciting specific immune responses to tumor antigens. Accordingly, choice of target antigen is of utmost importance when considering vaccine design (1). Tumor-associated antigens (TAA) are self-antigens abnormally expressed by tumor cells. As a result of central and peripheral tolerance mechanisms, the bank of high-affinity T cells for TAAs may be insufficient to elicit an immune response. Cancer vaccines using TAAs must, therefore, be potent enough to “break” these tolerance mechanisms (2). In contrast, tumor-specific antigens (TSA), some of which are neoantigens, are tumor and often patient specific, arising from nonsynonymous mutations, genetic alterations, or virally introduced genetic information in cancer cells. TSAs recognized by high-affinity T cells are, therefore, less likely to be subject to central tolerance and induce autoimmunity (1, 3). Figure 1 provides a summary of TAAs and TSAs in terms of specificity, central tolerance, and prevalence.

Figure 1.

Therapeutic cancer vaccine target types. Shared antigens are neoantigens encoded by oncogenic driver mutations prevalent across both patients and tumor types; private neoantigens are unique to individual patients' tumors. Adapted from ref. 1: Figure 1 in Hollingsworth, R.E., Jansen, K. Turning the corner on therapeutic cancer vaccines. NPJ Vaccines 2019; 4:7 doi: 10.1038/s41541-019-0103-y; © Springer Nature Limited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Figure 1.

Therapeutic cancer vaccine target types. Shared antigens are neoantigens encoded by oncogenic driver mutations prevalent across both patients and tumor types; private neoantigens are unique to individual patients' tumors. Adapted from ref. 1: Figure 1 in Hollingsworth, R.E., Jansen, K. Turning the corner on therapeutic cancer vaccines. NPJ Vaccines 2019; 4:7 doi: 10.1038/s41541-019-0103-y; © Springer Nature Limited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Close modal

Platforms for cancer vaccines are categorized as cellular, viral vector, or molecular (peptide, DNA, or RNA; ref. 1). Cellular vaccines are developed using autologous patient-derived tumor cells or allogeneic tumor cell line–derived cells (4). Dendritic cells (DC) are used to develop cellular cancer vaccines due to their role as consumers, processors, and presenters of tumor antigens. Genetically modified oncolytic viral vaccines are designed to replicate within and eradicate tumor cells (5). Beyond their oncolytic mechanisms, viral vector vaccines also promote tumor-directed immune responses by delivering tumor antigens via more conventional T-cell priming mechanisms (3). MHC proteins present peptides on the cell surface for recognition by T cells (6). Peptide-based cancer vaccines are designed through understanding of peptide–MHC and T-cell receptor/peptide–MHC interactions. Short peptides (typically nine amino acid residues in length) bind directly to MHC molecules, potentially inducing tolerance, and are subject to degradation (7). Longer (typically 30-mer) peptides may be more immunogenic as they are internalized by antigen-presenting cells (APC) and processed for MHC presentation, inducing memory CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell immune responses (7). DNA vaccines are closed circular DNA plasmids (naked DNA) encoding TAAs and immunomodulatory molecules, aimed at inducing tumor-specific responses (8). Advantages include simplicity, ease of manufacture, and safety; however, naked DNA vaccines have limited efficacy as a result of low transfection rates into target tumor cells. Similarly, mRNA vaccines are synthesized in vitro to encode antigen(s) and express proteins following internalization that stimulate an immune response. mRNA vaccines can deliver a high number of antigens and costimulatory signals, with no risk of infection or insertional mutagenesis, and manufacturing is rapid and inexpensive; however, they are limited by instability and inefficient delivery (8).

Two major advances in the field of therapeutic vaccines, therefore, have been novel platforms and characterization of TSAs. This review focuses on these two essential elements for successful immunotherapy.

Challenges facing T-cell–based cancer immunotherapy include low immunogenicity, as a result of aging or immune cell exhaustion (9, 10) after multiple previous treatment lines; high disease burden; and the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME), whereby potent immunosuppressive mechanisms evolve throughout cancer progression, enabling cancer cells to escape immune attack (11). Objective responses can be limited to specific subsets of patients with particular genetic mutations, molecular profiles, or recruitment of tumor-infiltrative T cells (12).

Tumor immunogenicity depends on antigenicity and the TME (13). Antigenicity is determined by immune cell infiltration (inflammation) and high mutational burden (genomic instability). High mutational burden in the absence of inflammation can lead to increased antigens with mechanisms for preventing immune cells from infiltrating the TME, as seen in small-cell lung cancers (14). Inflammation without high mutational burden is present in cancers such as renal cell carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, triple-negative breast cancer, gastric cancer, and, to an extent, head and neck cancers (14).

Mechanisms of primary escape (nonresponse to cancer immunotherapy) are thought to depend on underlying drivers of the associated tumor (14). Tumors in sites such as the lymph nodes, lungs, and skin, with a relatively high presence of immune cells, exogenous DNA-damaging insults, or oncolytic viral infections, may be promising sites for anticancer immunity. Conversely, sites such as the bone, intraperitoneal cavity, or blood–brain barrier may be more challenging targets as a result of the high concentration of cytokines, myeloid-derived suppressor cells, and unique stromal interactions indicative of immune-excluded tumors (where CD8+ T cells accumulate, but cannot infiltrate; ref. 14). Mechanisms of secondary escape (cancer progression despite previous clinical response), or acquired resistance, can develop from genetic changes in antigen presentation machinery or target antigen loss. Acquired resistance to anti-programmed death (PD)-1 agents in patients with melanoma is associated with loss-of-function mutations in genes encoding IFN receptor–associated JAK1 or JAK2 (15). Immune pressure shapes intratumor genetic heterogeneity, favoring clonal restriction and dominance, and can have important implications for designing therapeutic strategies (16). Loss of antigenicity leads to weak immune response, allowing tumor cells to develop immune evasion mechanisms (13, 17). Thus, different approaches to cancer immunotherapy may be required in these varying TMEs.

Several strategies have been investigated to overcome immunosuppressive mechanisms of the TME and counteract tumor escape, including improving antigen selection, refining immunotherapy delivery platforms, and combination therapies (1). Chemotherapeutic agents, immunomodulatory molecules, checkpoint inhibitors (CPI), and radiation, together with cancer vaccines, may induce neoantigens and work synergistically to target the TME (18–20).

Cell-based vaccines

Table 1 presents an overview of current cell-based vaccine strategies under investigation. Examples of cancer vaccines using whole-tumor cells include GVAX (4), which has shown promising activity in several pancreatic cancer trials (21–24) and in hormone-refractory prostate cancer (25, 26). Vigil, an autologous tumor cell vaccine, is also currently being evaluated in phase I and II studies of patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer, with prolonged relapse-free survival compared with placebo observed in a recent interim analysis of the phase II study (27, 28). Other cell-based vaccine studies have been discontinued as a result of futility (29–31).

Table 1.

Cell-based vaccines.

VaccineDesignClinical trial and intervention (key results, where available)Publication/status
GVAX Whole-tumor cell vaccine in which cancer cells are genetically modified to express GM-CSF to attract and activate DCs. Pilot study of GVAX + cyclophosphamide vs. GVAX alone in patients with PDAC (n = 50) n/a (completed; ref. 21) 
  Median OS: GVAX alone, SD 16.7%; median OS, 2.3 months  
  GVAX + cyclophosphamide, SD 40.0%; median OS, 4.3 months  
  Phase Ib study of GVAX + ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab alone in patients with PDAC (n = 30) NCT00836407 (completed; refs. 22, 23) 
  Median OS: GVAX + ipilimumab, 5.7 months; ipilimumab, 3.6 months (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.23–1.08; P = 0.072)  
  Phase I/II study of GVAX ± nivolumab and urelumab in patients with PDAC (n = 62) NCT02451982 (recruiting) 
  Phase II study of GVAX + adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with PDAC (n = 60) NCT00084383 (completed; ref. 24) 
  1-year survival, 86%  
  2-year survival, 61%  
  Median DFS, 17.3 months  
  Median OS, 24.8 months  
  Phase II study of GVAX (+ cyclophosphamide) and CRS-207 ± nivolumab in patients with PDAC (n = 32) NCT02243371 (completed; ref. 23) 
  Phase II study of GVAX + pembrolizumab + SBRT + cyclophosphamide in patients with PDAC (n = 54) NCT02648282 (recruiting) 
  Phase I/II study of GVAX in patients with HRPC (n = 80) NCT00140348 (completed; ref. 25) 
  Median OS: high dose, 35.0 months; mid dose, 20.0 months; low dose, 23.1 months  
  Phase II study of GVAX, prime dose followed by low or high dose boost, in patients with HRPC (n = 55) NCT00140400 (completed; ref. 26) 
  Median OS: overall, 26.2 months; high dose, 34.9 months; low dose, 24.0 months  
  Phase III study of GVAX + docetaxel vs. docetaxel + prednisone in patients with CRPC (n = 600 planned; n = 408 accrued) NCT00133224 (terminated early because of lack of effect; ref. 29) 
  Median OS: GVAX + docetaxel, 12.2 months; docetaxel + prednisone, 14.1 months (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.15–2.53; P = 0.0076)  
Vigil Autologous tumor cells transfected with a DNA plasmid encoding GM-CSF and bi-shRNA-furin, creating transforming growth factor β expression control and enhancing immune activation. Phase II study of Vigil (n = 46) vs. placebo (n = 45) in advanced-stage ovarian cancer (interim results) NCT02346747 (active, not recruiting; ref. 27) 
  Median RFS: HR, 0.69; P = 0.088 in favor of Vigil  
  Median RFS in BRCA1/2 wt patients: Vigil, 19.4 months; placebo, 8 months (HR 0.51; P = 0.050 since randomization and HR, 0.49; P = 0.038 since surgery)  
  Phase I 3-part cross-over study of Vigil + atezolizumab in recurrent advanced-stage ovarian cancer NCT03073525 (active, not recruiting; ref. 28) 
  Preliminary part 2 results (Vigil first, n = 11; atezolizumab first, n = 10)  
  Median OS: Vigil first, not reached; atezolizumab first, 10.8 months (HR, 0.33; P = 0.097)  
  Median OS in BRCA1/2 wt patients: Vigil first (n = 7), not reached; atezolizumab first (n = 7), 5.2 months (HR, 0.12; P = 0.015)  
Canvaxin Allogeneic whole-cell cancer vaccine. Phase III study of Bacillus Calmette–Guerin (BCG) + canvaxin vs. BCG + placebo in patients with: NCT00052156 (stage IV MM) 
  Stage III MM; n = 1,118, NCT00052130 (discontinued because of futility) (discontinued due to futility; ref. 31) 
  Stage IV MM; n = 496, NCT00052156 (stage IV MM, discontinued as a result of futility) NCT00052130 (stage III MM) 
  Stage IV MM results: (discontinued because of futility; ref. 30) 
  Median OS on termination of trial: BCG + placebo, 38.6 months; BCG + canvaxin, 31.4 months (HR, 1.18; P = 0.250)  
Sipuleucel-T Ex vivo–generated DC, whereby peripheral blood mononuclear cells and APCs are harvested and exposed to a unique recombinant antigen, combining PAP, expressed in 95% of prostate cancers, and GM-CSF. Administered by infusion. Phase III (D9901 and D9902A) studies of Sipuleucel-T vs. placebo in patients with CRPC (n = 127) D9901 study: NCT00005947 (completed) 
  Integrated analysis D9902A study: NCT01133704 (completed; ref. 98) 
  Median OS: sipuleucel-T, 23.2 months; placebo, 18.9 months (HR, 1.50; 95% CI 1.10–2.05; P = 0.011) NCT00065442 (completed; ref. 99) 
  Median TTP: sipuleucel-T, 11.1 weeks; placebo, 9.7 weeks (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.95–1.68; P = 0.111)  
  Phase III IMPACT study of sipuleucel-T vs. placebo in patients with CRPC (n = 512)  
  Median OS: sipuleucel-T, 25.8 months; placebo, 21.7 months (HR, 0.78; 95% CI 0.61–0.99; P = 0.032)  
MART-1 vaccine Multiepitope vaccine composed of tyrosinase, gp100, and MART-1 peptides. Phase III study of GM-CSF vs. peptide vaccination vs. GM-CSF + peptide vaccination vs. placebo in patients with MM (n = 815) NCT01989572 (completed; ref. 33) 
  Median OS: GM-CSF, 69.6 months; placebo, 59.3 months (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77–1.15; P = 0.53)  
  Median RFS: GM-CSF, 11.4 months; placebo, 8.8 months (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74–1.04; P = 0.13)  
OC-DC Autologous DC vaccine loaded in vitro with lysate from autologous oxidized whole-tumor cells. Phase I study of OC-DC alone or + intravenous bevacizumab and cyclophosphamide or + intravenous bevacizumab and cyclophosphamide and aspirin in patients with ovarian cancer (n = 25) NCT01132014 (completed; ref. 34) 
  PFS was significantly longer in patients whose on-treatment peripheral blood mononuclear cells recognized autologous tumor cells (tumor responders; P = 0.0005) or ex vivo autologous tumor lysate–pulsed DCs (vaccine responders; P = 0.05) relative to patients showing no such responses.  
  2-year OS: 100% in responders; 25% in nonresponders  
TLPLDC vaccine Uses YCWP to load autologous TL into autologous DCs. Phase I/IIa study of autologous TL + YCWP + DCs vaccine + SoC CPIs in MM (n = 50, to date) NCT02678741 (active, not recruiting; ref. 35) 
  Evaluable patients, n = 28  
  PD: n = 13 (median 3-month follow-up)  
  SD: n = 12 (median 7.5-month follow-up)  
  PR: n = 2 (7- and 13-month follow-up)  
  CR: n = 1 (18-month follow-up)  
  ORR: 11%  
  Phase IIb study of TLPLDC vaccine (n = 103) vs. unloaded YCWP (n = 41, control) in resected stage III/IV high-risk melanoma patients NCT02301611 (active, not recruiting; refs. 36, 37) 
  24-month DFS  
  Recurrent (disease-free interval of >3 months) group (n = 48): vaccine 52.6%; control 23.5% (P = 0.214)  
  Primary group (n = 96): vaccine, 32.9%; control, 31.8% (P = 0.451)  
  OS  
  Recurrent group: vaccine, 94.4%; control, 50.5% (P = 0.011)  
  Primary group: vaccine, 83.4%; control, 90.2% (P = 0.779)  
  24-month DFS in stage IV patients, subgroup analysis  
  Intention-to-treat population (n = 144): vaccine, 44%; control, 0% (P = 0.41)  
  Per-treatment population (n = 98): vaccine, 73.3%; control, 0% (HR, 0.14; P = 0.002)  
  Phase I/IIa study of autologous TLPLDC vaccine + SoC in solid tumors (n = 44) n/a 
  Of 31 late-stage patients with residual/measurable disease, 12 demonstrated clinical benefit: ISRCTN81339386 (completed; ref. 38) 
  CR: n = 2  
  PR: n = 4  
  SD: n = 6  
  46% remain disease free at a median of 22.5 months  
Ilixadencel Allogeneic off-the-shelf product aimed to prime anticancer immune response when injected intratumorally. Phase II study of ilixadencel + pre- and post-nephrectomy sunitinib (COMBO, n = 58) vs. sunitinib monotherapy post-nephrectomy (SUN, n = 30) as first-line systemic therapy in mRCC. NCT02432846 (active, not recruiting; ref. 39) 
  For COMBO treatment vs. SUN:  
  CR: COMBO, 11%; SUN, 4%  
  ORR: COMBO, 42.2%; SUN, 24.0%  
  Median duration of response: COMBO, 7.1 months; SUN, 2.9 months  
  Median PFS: COMBO, 11.8 months; SUN, 11.0 months  
  OS was not reached in either treatment arm.  
VaccineDesignClinical trial and intervention (key results, where available)Publication/status
GVAX Whole-tumor cell vaccine in which cancer cells are genetically modified to express GM-CSF to attract and activate DCs. Pilot study of GVAX + cyclophosphamide vs. GVAX alone in patients with PDAC (n = 50) n/a (completed; ref. 21) 
  Median OS: GVAX alone, SD 16.7%; median OS, 2.3 months  
  GVAX + cyclophosphamide, SD 40.0%; median OS, 4.3 months  
  Phase Ib study of GVAX + ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab alone in patients with PDAC (n = 30) NCT00836407 (completed; refs. 22, 23) 
  Median OS: GVAX + ipilimumab, 5.7 months; ipilimumab, 3.6 months (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.23–1.08; P = 0.072)  
  Phase I/II study of GVAX ± nivolumab and urelumab in patients with PDAC (n = 62) NCT02451982 (recruiting) 
  Phase II study of GVAX + adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with PDAC (n = 60) NCT00084383 (completed; ref. 24) 
  1-year survival, 86%  
  2-year survival, 61%  
  Median DFS, 17.3 months  
  Median OS, 24.8 months  
  Phase II study of GVAX (+ cyclophosphamide) and CRS-207 ± nivolumab in patients with PDAC (n = 32) NCT02243371 (completed; ref. 23) 
  Phase II study of GVAX + pembrolizumab + SBRT + cyclophosphamide in patients with PDAC (n = 54) NCT02648282 (recruiting) 
  Phase I/II study of GVAX in patients with HRPC (n = 80) NCT00140348 (completed; ref. 25) 
  Median OS: high dose, 35.0 months; mid dose, 20.0 months; low dose, 23.1 months  
  Phase II study of GVAX, prime dose followed by low or high dose boost, in patients with HRPC (n = 55) NCT00140400 (completed; ref. 26) 
  Median OS: overall, 26.2 months; high dose, 34.9 months; low dose, 24.0 months  
  Phase III study of GVAX + docetaxel vs. docetaxel + prednisone in patients with CRPC (n = 600 planned; n = 408 accrued) NCT00133224 (terminated early because of lack of effect; ref. 29) 
  Median OS: GVAX + docetaxel, 12.2 months; docetaxel + prednisone, 14.1 months (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.15–2.53; P = 0.0076)  
Vigil Autologous tumor cells transfected with a DNA plasmid encoding GM-CSF and bi-shRNA-furin, creating transforming growth factor β expression control and enhancing immune activation. Phase II study of Vigil (n = 46) vs. placebo (n = 45) in advanced-stage ovarian cancer (interim results) NCT02346747 (active, not recruiting; ref. 27) 
  Median RFS: HR, 0.69; P = 0.088 in favor of Vigil  
  Median RFS in BRCA1/2 wt patients: Vigil, 19.4 months; placebo, 8 months (HR 0.51; P = 0.050 since randomization and HR, 0.49; P = 0.038 since surgery)  
  Phase I 3-part cross-over study of Vigil + atezolizumab in recurrent advanced-stage ovarian cancer NCT03073525 (active, not recruiting; ref. 28) 
  Preliminary part 2 results (Vigil first, n = 11; atezolizumab first, n = 10)  
  Median OS: Vigil first, not reached; atezolizumab first, 10.8 months (HR, 0.33; P = 0.097)  
  Median OS in BRCA1/2 wt patients: Vigil first (n = 7), not reached; atezolizumab first (n = 7), 5.2 months (HR, 0.12; P = 0.015)  
Canvaxin Allogeneic whole-cell cancer vaccine. Phase III study of Bacillus Calmette–Guerin (BCG) + canvaxin vs. BCG + placebo in patients with: NCT00052156 (stage IV MM) 
  Stage III MM; n = 1,118, NCT00052130 (discontinued because of futility) (discontinued due to futility; ref. 31) 
  Stage IV MM; n = 496, NCT00052156 (stage IV MM, discontinued as a result of futility) NCT00052130 (stage III MM) 
  Stage IV MM results: (discontinued because of futility; ref. 30) 
  Median OS on termination of trial: BCG + placebo, 38.6 months; BCG + canvaxin, 31.4 months (HR, 1.18; P = 0.250)  
Sipuleucel-T Ex vivo–generated DC, whereby peripheral blood mononuclear cells and APCs are harvested and exposed to a unique recombinant antigen, combining PAP, expressed in 95% of prostate cancers, and GM-CSF. Administered by infusion. Phase III (D9901 and D9902A) studies of Sipuleucel-T vs. placebo in patients with CRPC (n = 127) D9901 study: NCT00005947 (completed) 
  Integrated analysis D9902A study: NCT01133704 (completed; ref. 98) 
  Median OS: sipuleucel-T, 23.2 months; placebo, 18.9 months (HR, 1.50; 95% CI 1.10–2.05; P = 0.011) NCT00065442 (completed; ref. 99) 
  Median TTP: sipuleucel-T, 11.1 weeks; placebo, 9.7 weeks (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.95–1.68; P = 0.111)  
  Phase III IMPACT study of sipuleucel-T vs. placebo in patients with CRPC (n = 512)  
  Median OS: sipuleucel-T, 25.8 months; placebo, 21.7 months (HR, 0.78; 95% CI 0.61–0.99; P = 0.032)  
MART-1 vaccine Multiepitope vaccine composed of tyrosinase, gp100, and MART-1 peptides. Phase III study of GM-CSF vs. peptide vaccination vs. GM-CSF + peptide vaccination vs. placebo in patients with MM (n = 815) NCT01989572 (completed; ref. 33) 
  Median OS: GM-CSF, 69.6 months; placebo, 59.3 months (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77–1.15; P = 0.53)  
  Median RFS: GM-CSF, 11.4 months; placebo, 8.8 months (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74–1.04; P = 0.13)  
OC-DC Autologous DC vaccine loaded in vitro with lysate from autologous oxidized whole-tumor cells. Phase I study of OC-DC alone or + intravenous bevacizumab and cyclophosphamide or + intravenous bevacizumab and cyclophosphamide and aspirin in patients with ovarian cancer (n = 25) NCT01132014 (completed; ref. 34) 
  PFS was significantly longer in patients whose on-treatment peripheral blood mononuclear cells recognized autologous tumor cells (tumor responders; P = 0.0005) or ex vivo autologous tumor lysate–pulsed DCs (vaccine responders; P = 0.05) relative to patients showing no such responses.  
  2-year OS: 100% in responders; 25% in nonresponders  
TLPLDC vaccine Uses YCWP to load autologous TL into autologous DCs. Phase I/IIa study of autologous TL + YCWP + DCs vaccine + SoC CPIs in MM (n = 50, to date) NCT02678741 (active, not recruiting; ref. 35) 
  Evaluable patients, n = 28  
  PD: n = 13 (median 3-month follow-up)  
  SD: n = 12 (median 7.5-month follow-up)  
  PR: n = 2 (7- and 13-month follow-up)  
  CR: n = 1 (18-month follow-up)  
  ORR: 11%  
  Phase IIb study of TLPLDC vaccine (n = 103) vs. unloaded YCWP (n = 41, control) in resected stage III/IV high-risk melanoma patients NCT02301611 (active, not recruiting; refs. 36, 37) 
  24-month DFS  
  Recurrent (disease-free interval of >3 months) group (n = 48): vaccine 52.6%; control 23.5% (P = 0.214)  
  Primary group (n = 96): vaccine, 32.9%; control, 31.8% (P = 0.451)  
  OS  
  Recurrent group: vaccine, 94.4%; control, 50.5% (P = 0.011)  
  Primary group: vaccine, 83.4%; control, 90.2% (P = 0.779)  
  24-month DFS in stage IV patients, subgroup analysis  
  Intention-to-treat population (n = 144): vaccine, 44%; control, 0% (P = 0.41)  
  Per-treatment population (n = 98): vaccine, 73.3%; control, 0% (HR, 0.14; P = 0.002)  
  Phase I/IIa study of autologous TLPLDC vaccine + SoC in solid tumors (n = 44) n/a 
  Of 31 late-stage patients with residual/measurable disease, 12 demonstrated clinical benefit: ISRCTN81339386 (completed; ref. 38) 
  CR: n = 2  
  PR: n = 4  
  SD: n = 6  
  46% remain disease free at a median of 22.5 months  
Ilixadencel Allogeneic off-the-shelf product aimed to prime anticancer immune response when injected intratumorally. Phase II study of ilixadencel + pre- and post-nephrectomy sunitinib (COMBO, n = 58) vs. sunitinib monotherapy post-nephrectomy (SUN, n = 30) as first-line systemic therapy in mRCC. NCT02432846 (active, not recruiting; ref. 39) 
  For COMBO treatment vs. SUN:  
  CR: COMBO, 11%; SUN, 4%  
  ORR: COMBO, 42.2%; SUN, 24.0%  
  Median duration of response: COMBO, 7.1 months; SUN, 2.9 months  
  Median PFS: COMBO, 11.8 months; SUN, 11.0 months  
  OS was not reached in either treatment arm.  

Abbreviations: APC, antigen-presenting cell; CI, confidence interval; CR, complete response; CRPC, castration-resistant prostate cancer; DC, dendritic cell; DFS, disease-free survival; GVAX, GM-CSF secreting tumor immunotherapy; HR, hazard ratio; HRPC, hormone-refractory prostate cancer; MM, malignant melanoma; mRCC, metastatic renal cell carcinoma; n/a, not applicable (study does not have an NCT number); mRCC, metastatic renal cell carcinoma; OC-DC, oxidized autologous whole-tumor cell lysate; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PAP, prostatic acid phosphatase; PD, progressive disease; PDAC, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; PFS, progression-free survival; PR: partial response; RFS, relapse-free survival; SBRT, stereotactic body radiotherapy; SD, stable disease; SoC, standard of care; TL, tumor lysate; TTP, time to progression; wt, wild-type; YCWP, yeast cell wall particles.

Sipuleucel-T (PROVENGE), targeting prostatic acid phosphatase, is approved for the treatment of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, despite positive efficacy and safety data, since its approval, barriers to administration of sipuleucel-T and approval of competing cancer therapies have hampered its widespread adoption (32). Several other vaccines derived from ex vivo DCs are being investigated, for example, against melanoma antigen, MART-1 (33). In a phase I trial, a vaccine using autologous monocyte-derived DCs pulsed with oxidized autologous whole-tumor lysate significantly prolonged survival in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (34). In addition, a vaccine using yeast cell wall particles (YCWP) to load autologous tumor lysate into autologous DCs is being studied for melanoma and for solid tumors (35–38); in a phase II trial, the YCWP vaccine resulted in prolonged disease-free survival in patients with resected melanoma, with a disease-free interval of >3 months, compared with those who received unloaded YCWP (36, 37). A further phase II study of ilixadencel, an off-the-shelf, cell-based immune primer, in combination with sunitinib, pre- and post-nephrectomy, showed greater rates of complete and objective response, but similar progression-free survival, compared with sunitinib monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic renal cell carcinoma (39).

Virus-based vaccines

Table 2 provides an overview of current virus-based vaccine strategies. The first FDA-approved oncolytic virus for cancer treatment was talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC; ref. 40). T-VEC relies on direct intratumoral injection, which overcomes dilution and neutralization in blood, to induce cell lysis and promote antitumor immune responses in distant lesions (40–43). A phase II trial of T-VEC in combination with ipilimumab, first or second line, demonstrated a significantly higher objective response rate (ORR) compared with ipilimumab alone in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, with no additional safety concerns (42). The phase III OPTiM study also demonstrated improved progression-free survival, ORR, and overall survival (OS) with T-VEC compared with GM-CSF, particularly in previously untreated patients (41, 43).

Table 2.

Virus-based vaccines.

VaccineDesignAdministrationClinical trial and intervention (key results, where available)Publication/status
Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) First FDA-approved oncolytic virus for cancer treatment. Cutaneous, s.c., and/or intranodal Phase III OPTiM study of T-VEC vs. GM-CSF in patients with MM (n = 436) NCT00769704 (completed; refs. 41, 43) 
 Genetically engineered vector utilizes an attenuated HSV coding for GM-CSF production and relies on direct intratumoral injection to induce cell lysis as a form of in situ vaccination that promotes antitumor immune responses in uninjected adjacent and distant lesions.  DRR: T-VEC, 16.3%; GM-CSF, 2.1% (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 2.7–29.2; P < 0.001)  
   ORR: T-VEC, 26.4%; GM-CSF, 5.7%  
   Median OS: T-VEC, 23.3 months; GM-CSF, 18.9 months (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62–1.00; P = 0.051)  
   PFS: significantly improved with T-VEC vs. GM-CSF (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54–0.85; P < 0.001)  
   12-month PFS: T-VEC, 14.4%; GM-CSF, 4.6%  
   Phase II study of T-VEC + ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab in patients with MM (n = 198) NCT01740297 (active, not recruiting; ref. 42) 
   ORR: T-VEC + ipilimumab, 39%; ipilimumab, 18% (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5–5.5; P = 0.002)  
Heterologous prime-boost strategy 
PROSTVAC-VF/TRICOM PROSTVAC-VF/TRICOM uses a vaccinia virus encoding PSA for priming, followed by subsequent booster doses of a fowlpox virus encoding PSA, demonstrated OS benefit in prostate cancer (44). s.c. Phase II study of PROSTVAC + GM-CSF vs. control (empty vector) in patients with mCRPC (n = 125) n/a (completed; ref. 44) 
   Median OS: PROSTVAC + GM-CSF, 26.2 months; control, 16.3 months (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32–0.78; P = 0.0019)  
   Phase I/II study of PROSTVAC + nivolumab in patients with prostate cancer (n = 29) NCT02933255 (recruiting) 
   Phase II study of PROSTVAC + ipilimumab in patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy (n = 15) NCT02506114 (active, not recruiting) 
   Phase III study of PROSTVAC vs. PROSTVAC + GM-CSF vs. placebo in patients with mCRPC (planned n = 1,297) NCT01322490 (terminated early because of futility; ref. 45) 
   Median OS: PROSTVAC, 34.4 months (HR vs. placebo, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84–1.20; P = 0.47)  
   PROSTVAC + GM-CSF, 33.2 months (HR vs. placebo, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.86–1.22; P = 0.59)  
   Placebo, 34.3 months  
Viruses expressing both targeted antigens and immunomodulatory molecules 
TG4010 TG4010 contains the MVA-expressing tumor antigen MUC-1 and immunostimulatory cytokine IL2. s.c. Phase II study of TG4010 (weekly for 6 weeks, then every 3 weeks until progression), then TG4010 + IFNα2a + IL2 in patients with MUC1-positive RCC (n = 37) n/a (completed; ref. 46) 
   Induction of an immunologic response against MUC-1 observed and safety established, but no objective clinical responses occurred  
   SD for >6 months: TG4010 alone, 18%; TG4010 + cytokines, 30%  
   Median TTF: TG4010 alone, 4.1 months; TG4010 + cytokines, 3.6 months  
   Median OS: TG4010 + cytokines, 22.4 months  
   Phase IIb/III TIME study of TG4010 + chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC (n = 222) NCT01383148 (terminated; ref. 47) 
   Median OS: MUC-1 responders, 32.1 months; MUC-1 nonresponders, 12.7 months (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20–0.93; P = 0.03)  
TroVax TroVax is an MVA-expressing oncofetal antigen 5T4 (MVA-5T4). i.m. Phase III study of TroVax + 1L SoC in patients with RCC (n = 700) NCT00397345 (completed; ref. 48) 
   Median OS: MVA-5T4, 20.1 months; SoC, 19.2 months (P = 0.55)  
MG1 Maraba/MAGE-A3 (MG1MA3) MG1 is a version of the oncolytic Maraba virus engineered with added transgene capacity for targeted expression of the MAGE-A3 antigen. i.m. Phase I/II study of MG1MA3 ± AdMA3 in patients with MAGE-A3–expressing solid tumors (n = 56) NCT02285816 (active, not recruiting; ref. 50) 
   Phase I/II study of MG1MA3+ AdMA3 + pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC (n = 75) NCT02879760 (active, not recruiting; ref. 50) 
MG1-E6E7 MG1 Maraba virus engineered to express E6 and E7, found in HPV+ cells. i.v., i.m., i.t. Phase Ib study in patients with HPV-associated cancers (n = 75)
  • Arm 1: i.v. MG1-E6E7 following i.m. Ad-E6E7 priming and subsequent i.v. atezolizumab

  • Arm 2: i.t. and i.v. MG1-E6E7 following i.m. Ad-E6E7 priming and subsequent i.v. atezolizumab

 
NCT03618953 (active, not recruiting; ref. 51) 
Oncolytic virus directly targeting tumor 
RP1 HSV-1–based virus expressing GALV-GP-R and GM-CSF. Fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy based on HSV-1 engineered to express GALV envelope proteins. i.t. Phase I/II study of RP1 ± nivolumab in patients with solid tumors (n = 168) NCT03767348 (recruiting; ref. 52) 
MEDI5395 NDV-based virus expressing GM-CSF. MEDI5395 has the intrinsic ability to infect and kill tumor cells and has been inserted with a GM-CSF transgene to potentiate a stronger adaptive immune response. i.v. Phase I study of MEDI5395 + durvalumab in patients with selected advanced solid tumors (n = 164) NCT03889275 (active, not recruiting) 
BVAC-C B cell/monocyte-based vaccine (BVAC-C) transfected with recombinant HPV 16/18 E6/E7 and loaded with alpha-galactosyl ceramide, a natural killer T-cell ligand. i.v. Phase I study of BVAC-C in patients with cervical cancer (n = 11) NCT02866006 (phase I and II, recruiting; ref. 54) 
   Overall response rate, 11%  
   Duration of response, 10 months  
   Median PFS, 6.8 months  
   OS, 89% at 6 months; 65% at 12 months  
   Phase II study of BVAC-C in patients with cervical cancer (n = 30)  
BVAC-B Autologous B cell- and monocyte-based vaccine transfected with recombinant HER2/neu antigen, and loaded with alpha-galactosyl ceramide, a natural killer T-cell ligand. i.v. Phase I study of BVAC-B in patients with HER2/Neu-positive gastric cancer (n = 8) NCT03425773 (completed; ref. 55) 
VaccineDesignAdministrationClinical trial and intervention (key results, where available)Publication/status
Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) First FDA-approved oncolytic virus for cancer treatment. Cutaneous, s.c., and/or intranodal Phase III OPTiM study of T-VEC vs. GM-CSF in patients with MM (n = 436) NCT00769704 (completed; refs. 41, 43) 
 Genetically engineered vector utilizes an attenuated HSV coding for GM-CSF production and relies on direct intratumoral injection to induce cell lysis as a form of in situ vaccination that promotes antitumor immune responses in uninjected adjacent and distant lesions.  DRR: T-VEC, 16.3%; GM-CSF, 2.1% (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 2.7–29.2; P < 0.001)  
   ORR: T-VEC, 26.4%; GM-CSF, 5.7%  
   Median OS: T-VEC, 23.3 months; GM-CSF, 18.9 months (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62–1.00; P = 0.051)  
   PFS: significantly improved with T-VEC vs. GM-CSF (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54–0.85; P < 0.001)  
   12-month PFS: T-VEC, 14.4%; GM-CSF, 4.6%  
   Phase II study of T-VEC + ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab in patients with MM (n = 198) NCT01740297 (active, not recruiting; ref. 42) 
   ORR: T-VEC + ipilimumab, 39%; ipilimumab, 18% (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5–5.5; P = 0.002)  
Heterologous prime-boost strategy 
PROSTVAC-VF/TRICOM PROSTVAC-VF/TRICOM uses a vaccinia virus encoding PSA for priming, followed by subsequent booster doses of a fowlpox virus encoding PSA, demonstrated OS benefit in prostate cancer (44). s.c. Phase II study of PROSTVAC + GM-CSF vs. control (empty vector) in patients with mCRPC (n = 125) n/a (completed; ref. 44) 
   Median OS: PROSTVAC + GM-CSF, 26.2 months; control, 16.3 months (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32–0.78; P = 0.0019)  
   Phase I/II study of PROSTVAC + nivolumab in patients with prostate cancer (n = 29) NCT02933255 (recruiting) 
   Phase II study of PROSTVAC + ipilimumab in patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy (n = 15) NCT02506114 (active, not recruiting) 
   Phase III study of PROSTVAC vs. PROSTVAC + GM-CSF vs. placebo in patients with mCRPC (planned n = 1,297) NCT01322490 (terminated early because of futility; ref. 45) 
   Median OS: PROSTVAC, 34.4 months (HR vs. placebo, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84–1.20; P = 0.47)  
   PROSTVAC + GM-CSF, 33.2 months (HR vs. placebo, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.86–1.22; P = 0.59)  
   Placebo, 34.3 months  
Viruses expressing both targeted antigens and immunomodulatory molecules 
TG4010 TG4010 contains the MVA-expressing tumor antigen MUC-1 and immunostimulatory cytokine IL2. s.c. Phase II study of TG4010 (weekly for 6 weeks, then every 3 weeks until progression), then TG4010 + IFNα2a + IL2 in patients with MUC1-positive RCC (n = 37) n/a (completed; ref. 46) 
   Induction of an immunologic response against MUC-1 observed and safety established, but no objective clinical responses occurred  
   SD for >6 months: TG4010 alone, 18%; TG4010 + cytokines, 30%  
   Median TTF: TG4010 alone, 4.1 months; TG4010 + cytokines, 3.6 months  
   Median OS: TG4010 + cytokines, 22.4 months  
   Phase IIb/III TIME study of TG4010 + chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC (n = 222) NCT01383148 (terminated; ref. 47) 
   Median OS: MUC-1 responders, 32.1 months; MUC-1 nonresponders, 12.7 months (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20–0.93; P = 0.03)  
TroVax TroVax is an MVA-expressing oncofetal antigen 5T4 (MVA-5T4). i.m. Phase III study of TroVax + 1L SoC in patients with RCC (n = 700) NCT00397345 (completed; ref. 48) 
   Median OS: MVA-5T4, 20.1 months; SoC, 19.2 months (P = 0.55)  
MG1 Maraba/MAGE-A3 (MG1MA3) MG1 is a version of the oncolytic Maraba virus engineered with added transgene capacity for targeted expression of the MAGE-A3 antigen. i.m. Phase I/II study of MG1MA3 ± AdMA3 in patients with MAGE-A3–expressing solid tumors (n = 56) NCT02285816 (active, not recruiting; ref. 50) 
   Phase I/II study of MG1MA3+ AdMA3 + pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC (n = 75) NCT02879760 (active, not recruiting; ref. 50) 
MG1-E6E7 MG1 Maraba virus engineered to express E6 and E7, found in HPV+ cells. i.v., i.m., i.t. Phase Ib study in patients with HPV-associated cancers (n = 75)
  • Arm 1: i.v. MG1-E6E7 following i.m. Ad-E6E7 priming and subsequent i.v. atezolizumab

  • Arm 2: i.t. and i.v. MG1-E6E7 following i.m. Ad-E6E7 priming and subsequent i.v. atezolizumab

 
NCT03618953 (active, not recruiting; ref. 51) 
Oncolytic virus directly targeting tumor 
RP1 HSV-1–based virus expressing GALV-GP-R and GM-CSF. Fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy based on HSV-1 engineered to express GALV envelope proteins. i.t. Phase I/II study of RP1 ± nivolumab in patients with solid tumors (n = 168) NCT03767348 (recruiting; ref. 52) 
MEDI5395 NDV-based virus expressing GM-CSF. MEDI5395 has the intrinsic ability to infect and kill tumor cells and has been inserted with a GM-CSF transgene to potentiate a stronger adaptive immune response. i.v. Phase I study of MEDI5395 + durvalumab in patients with selected advanced solid tumors (n = 164) NCT03889275 (active, not recruiting) 
BVAC-C B cell/monocyte-based vaccine (BVAC-C) transfected with recombinant HPV 16/18 E6/E7 and loaded with alpha-galactosyl ceramide, a natural killer T-cell ligand. i.v. Phase I study of BVAC-C in patients with cervical cancer (n = 11) NCT02866006 (phase I and II, recruiting; ref. 54) 
   Overall response rate, 11%  
   Duration of response, 10 months  
   Median PFS, 6.8 months  
   OS, 89% at 6 months; 65% at 12 months  
   Phase II study of BVAC-C in patients with cervical cancer (n = 30)  
BVAC-B Autologous B cell- and monocyte-based vaccine transfected with recombinant HER2/neu antigen, and loaded with alpha-galactosyl ceramide, a natural killer T-cell ligand. i.v. Phase I study of BVAC-B in patients with HER2/Neu-positive gastric cancer (n = 8) NCT03425773 (completed; ref. 55) 

Abbreviations: AdMA3, adenovirus/MAGE-A3; CI, confidence interval; DRR, durable response rate; GALV, gibbon ape leukemia virus; HR, hazard ratio; i.m., intramuscular; i.t., intratumoral; i.v., intravenous; mCRPC, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; MM, malignant melanoma; n/a, not applicable (study does not have an NCT number); PFS, progression-free survival; RCC, renal cell carcinoma; s.c., subcutaneous; SD, stable disease; SoC, standard of care; TTF, time to treatment failure.

A heterologous prime-boost strategy has more recently been used to educate T cells and achieve a robust immune response, where a tumor antigen is delivered with one virus vector first, followed by a boost with the same tumor antigen delivered by a different viral vector or vector type. PROSTVAC-VF/Tricom, using a vaccinia virus encoding prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for priming, followed by subsequent booster doses of a fowlpox virus encoding PSA, demonstrated OS benefit in prostate cancer (44). However, a more recent phase III trial of PROSTVAC in castration-resistant prostate cancer was discontinued as a result of futility (45).

Viruses have also been engineered to simultaneously express targeted antigens and immunomodulatory molecules to disrupt the TME. TG4010 contains the modified vaccinia virus (MVA)-expressing tumor antigen, MUC-1, and immunostimulatory cytokine, IL2 (46, 47). TroVax is an MVA-expressing oncofetal antigen 5T4 (MVA-5T4; ref. 48). MG1 is a version of the oncolytic Maraba virus engineered with added transgene capacity for targeted expression of TAAs and immunomodulatory agents (49) being evaluated in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; ref. 50) and human papilloma virus (HPV)-positive tumors (51).

More recently, several fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapies based on herpes simplex virus (HSV-1; RP1, RP2, and RP3) were engineered to express gibbon-ape leukemia virus envelope proteins (52). In addition, MEDI5395, an attenuated Newcastle disease virus (NDV) genetically modified to express GM-CSF, entered phase I clinical trials for intravenous administration late in 2019. In murine models, intravenous delivery of NDV leads to long-lasting tumor-selective replication, transgene expression, and TME transformation (53). Finally, a B cell/monocyte-based vaccine, BVAC-C, transfected with recombinant HPV 16/18 E6/E7 showed efficacy in activating virus-specific T cells in a phase I study of patients with recurrent cervical cancer. A phase II study of BVAC-C in patients with cervical cancer is underway (54), as is a phase I study of BVAC-B, transfected with recombinant HER2/neu, in patients with gastric cancer (55).

Nanoparticles as vaccine delivery systems

Nanoparticle-based cancer vaccines and adjuvants have been used to target cancers through modification of surface properties and/or composition to prolong bioavailability, protect antigens from degradation, and control antigen release (56). Nanoparticles tested include polymeric nanoparticles, liposomes, micelles, carbon nanotubes, mesoporous silica nanoparticles, gold nanoparticles, and virus nanoparticles, which have been assessed in cancer types such as melanoma, NSCLC, breast, prostate, and cervical (56). However, further studies are needed to address concerns of poor reproducibility with uniform size and shape, aggregation, instability, and rapid clearance before widespread clinical use (56). To date, only one nanoparticle vaccine, tecemotide (L-BLP25), an MUC1 antigen-specific vaccine, has reached clinical trial. In a phase III trial of tecemotide compared with placebo for stage III NSCLC no difference in OS was found (57). Similarly, a phase II trial in early breast cancer demonstrated a good safety profile, but showed no significant difference in residual cancer burden or pathologic complete response with tecemotide compared with standard of care (58).

Peptide-based vaccines

Synthetic long peptide (SLP) immunotherapeutics have been developed, consisting of highly immunogenic long peptides designed to avoid central tolerance mechanisms by efficiently delivering antigens to DCs, inducing CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses (59). In a phase II trial, an SLP vaccine, ISA101, combined with the anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint antibody, nivolumab, was found to be well-tolerated in patients with HPV-16–positive cancer (n = 24), with additive effects observed relative to nivolumab monotherapy (60). In addition, a phase I/II study of ISA101 in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapy in patients with HPV-16–positive cervical cancer (n = 77) demonstrated a longer OS in patients who expressed a stronger-than-median vaccine-induced HPV-16–specific T-cell response (61). A phase II study of ISA101 with cemiplimab for oropharyngeal cancer is underway (NCT03669718).

SVN53-67/M57-KLH (SurVaxM) is a vaccine containing an SLP mimic designed to stimulate an immune response targeting survivin, a TSA which is highly expressed in glioblastomas, among other cancers types (62, 63). In a phase II trial (NCT024455557), patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma who received SurVaxM in the adjuvant setting demonstrated a significantly longer 12-month OS of 93.4% from diagnosis, compared with 65% survival from historic studies (64, 65). Interestingly, SurVaxM is now being investigated in a phase I study of patients with survivin-positive neuroendocrine tumors (NCT03879694; ref. 66).

A novel technology platform, T-win, was developed to allow identification, design, and validation of immune modulatory peptide-based vaccine candidates targeting the TME (67). T-win vaccines engage and activate a subset of naturally occurring proinflammatory T cells specific for immune inhibitory molecules, for example, indoleamine 2,3 dehydrogenase (IDO), PD-ligand 1 (L1), PD-L2, arginase, or CCL22 (68, 69). These T cells were initially termed “antiregulatory T cells” (“anti-Tregs”) for their specificity against cells with immunoregulatory functions. These autoreactive T cells, found in high frequencies in patients with cancer, recognize and kill both tumor cells and normal immune cells that express their cognate targets (70, 71), as well as assist in expansion of effector T cells against viral and tumor antigens in vitro (70, 72). Importantly, both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells also contribute to the immunoregulatory function of anti-Tregs through the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines (73, 74). Thus, these T cells assist the adaptive immune response either through their involvement in the direct elimination of the immunosuppressive cells or through the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines (75, 76). In preclinical models, T-win vaccination has led to an antitumor response and synergizes with anti-PD-1 antibody treatment (77). In mice treated with a T-win vaccine against IDO, a substantial reduction of IDO+ immune suppressor cells in the TME was observed, accompanied by an increased expansion of infiltrating tumor-specific T cells (77). Taken together, evidence suggests that T-win vaccination can lead to the expansion of T cells that counteract and modulate the immune suppressive environment within TME, allowing for efficient antitumor responses to take place. Because T-win vaccines aim to expand intrinsic/preexisting T cells in patients with cancer, T-win vaccines do not need to “break tolerance” in the same way as cancer vaccines targeting TAAs (67).

The major challenge of the T-win technology is to activate the most potent anti-Treg immune response without inducing autoimmunity and toxicity. However, circulation of a measurable number of such specific T cells in patients with cancer has been described without autoimmunity; thus, the risk of potential long-term toxicity because of vaccine-induced autoimmune mechanisms appears to be minimal, illustrated in murine in vivo studies and clinical trials to date (67). Table 3 summarizes the T-win technology compounds currently in clinical trials.

Table 3.

T-win technology compounds in clinical development.

T-win technology CompoundTarget tumor antigenClinical trialsPublication/status
IO101 IDO Phase I NCT01219348 (completed; refs. 76, 100) 
  IO102 + aldara + montanide  
  Stage III–IV NSCLC  
  n = 15
  • 3 of 15 patients are still alive corresponding to a 6-year OS of 20%

  • 2 patients continued monthly vaccinations for 5 years; 1 of these developed a PR of liver lesions 15 months after the first vaccine and has remained in PR ever since

 
 
IO102 IDO Phase I n/a (101) 
  IO102 + ipilimumab  
  MM  
  Phase I/II IO102–012/KN-764; NCT03562871 (recruiting; ref. 102) 
  IO102 + pembrolizumab alone or with chemotherapy  
  Stage III–IV NSCLC  
IO103 PD-L1 Phase IIa NCT03714529 (recruiting) 
  IO103 monotherapy + montanide  
  BCC  
  Phase II NCT03939234 (recruiting) 
  IO103 + IO120 (targeting PD-L2)  
  Untreated CLL  
  Phase IIa NCT03850522 (recruiting) 
  IO103 monotherapy  
  High-risk smoldering multiple myeloma  
  Phase I/II NCT03047928 (recruiting; ref. 103) 
  IO102 + IO103 + nivolumab  
  Treatment-naïve and PD-1/PD-L1 mAb refractory MM  
IO112 Arginase 1 Phase I NCT03689192 (recruiting; ref. 104) 
  IO112  
  Arginase-positive solid tumors  
IO160 CalR exon 9–mutant peptide Phase I NCT03566446 (active, not recruiting; ref. 105) 
  IO160  
  CalR-mutant myeloproliferative neoplasms  
T-win technology CompoundTarget tumor antigenClinical trialsPublication/status
IO101 IDO Phase I NCT01219348 (completed; refs. 76, 100) 
  IO102 + aldara + montanide  
  Stage III–IV NSCLC  
  n = 15
  • 3 of 15 patients are still alive corresponding to a 6-year OS of 20%

  • 2 patients continued monthly vaccinations for 5 years; 1 of these developed a PR of liver lesions 15 months after the first vaccine and has remained in PR ever since

 
 
IO102 IDO Phase I n/a (101) 
  IO102 + ipilimumab  
  MM  
  Phase I/II IO102–012/KN-764; NCT03562871 (recruiting; ref. 102) 
  IO102 + pembrolizumab alone or with chemotherapy  
  Stage III–IV NSCLC  
IO103 PD-L1 Phase IIa NCT03714529 (recruiting) 
  IO103 monotherapy + montanide  
  BCC  
  Phase II NCT03939234 (recruiting) 
  IO103 + IO120 (targeting PD-L2)  
  Untreated CLL  
  Phase IIa NCT03850522 (recruiting) 
  IO103 monotherapy  
  High-risk smoldering multiple myeloma  
  Phase I/II NCT03047928 (recruiting; ref. 103) 
  IO102 + IO103 + nivolumab  
  Treatment-naïve and PD-1/PD-L1 mAb refractory MM  
IO112 Arginase 1 Phase I NCT03689192 (recruiting; ref. 104) 
  IO112  
  Arginase-positive solid tumors  
IO160 CalR exon 9–mutant peptide Phase I NCT03566446 (active, not recruiting; ref. 105) 
  IO160  
  CalR-mutant myeloproliferative neoplasms  

Abbreviations: BCC, basal cell carcinoma; CalR, calreticulin R; CLL, chronic lymphatic leukemia; MM, metastatic melanoma; n/a, not applicable (study does not have an NCT number).

Personalized vaccine strategies

With the availability of next-generation sequencing, personalized neoantigen-based immunotherapies are emerging. Sequence data from a patient's tumor biopsy are analyzed to predict which mutations will generate tumor-specific neoantigens likely to be presented by MHC molecules on the tumor cell surface in that patient. Most efforts focus on identifying antigen sequences that generate epitopes fitting the groove of a patient's MHC-I molecules. Although personalized cancer vaccines have shown encouraging results (78, 79), neoepitope prediction algorithms return a large number of “candidates,” of which very few trigger genuine antitumor responses (80). To eliminate the tumor, it is likely to be necessary to target clonal or truncal neoantigens present in every cancer cell. Targeting only subclonal or branch mutations, present in a subset of cells, will not eliminate the tumor and can cause resistance to therapy (81). Interestingly, some have proposed that neoantigens may have inhibitory properties that enable tumors to evade immune detection. A few recently emerging personalized neoantigen vaccines and technologies are summarized here and in Table 4.

Table 4.

Neoantigen-targeted cancer vaccines.

VaccineOff the shelf?Mechanism of actionClinical trial and interventionPublication
GRANITE-001 No Personalized Phase I/II NCT03639714 (recruiting; ref. 83) 
  Targeting a cassette of 20 patient- and tumor-specific neoantigens identified by EDGE GRT-C901 and GRT-R902 (heterologous prime/boost) + nivolumab and ipilimumab  
   NSCLC, microsatellite stable CRC, gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, urothelial cancer  
SLATE Yes Shared Phase I NCT03953235 (recruiting; ref. 84) 
  Targeting the top 20 tumor-specific shared neoantigens, identified by EDGE GRT-C903 and GRT-R904 (heterologous prime/boost) + CPIs (anti-PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4)  
   NSCLC, microsatellite stable CRC, pancreatic cancer, shared neoantigen-positive tumors  
GEN-009 No Personalized Phase I/II NCT03633110 (active, not recruiting; refs. 86, 87) 
  Targeting neoantigens to which patients have preconfirmed responses in vitro GEN-009-101 trial  
   Part A: GEN-009 adjuvanted vaccine monotherapy; solid tumors  
   Part B: GEN-009 + nivolumab or pembrolizumab; cutaneous melanoma, NSCLC, SCCHN, urothelial carcinoma, RCC  
   N = 8
  • No recurrent disease, to date.

  • OR for immune response against individual peptide with peptide concentration: 1.26, P ≤ 0.0001

 
 
NEO-PV-01 No Personalized Phase I NCT03380871 (active, not recruiting) 
   NEO-PV-01 + pembrolizumab + carboplatin + pemetrexed vs pembrolizumab + carboplatin + pemetrexed  
   NSCLC  
   Phase I NCT02897765 (active, not recruiting) 
   NEO-PV-01 + nivolumab  
   MM, NSCLC or transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder  
   Phase I NCT03597282 (active, not recruiting) 
   NEO-PV-01 + (APX005M or ipilimumab) + nivolumab  
   MM  
BNT111, BNT113, and BNT114 Yes Shared Phase I NCT02410733 (recruiting; ref. 90) 
mRNA-based  Targeting shared tumor-specific neoantigens (FixVac platform) BNT111; Lipo-MERIT (tetravalent RNA-lipoplex cancer vaccine targeting 4 TAAs (RBL001.1, RBL002.2, RBL003.1, and RBL004.1)  
   MM  
   N = 89 (interim analysis)  
   Monotherapy group (n = 25)
  • PR: n = 3; SD: n = 7; complete metabolic remission: n = 1

 
 
   FixVac + anti-PD-1 (n = 17)
  • PR: n = 6, all 6 had polyepitopic and strong CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell immunity against vaccine antigens

 
 
   Phase I/II (ongoing) 
   BNT113  
   HPV-positive cancers including but not exclusively HNSCC  
   Phase I (ongoing) 
   BNT114  
   TNBC  
RO7198457 (BNT122) No Personalized (iNeST platform) Phase II NCT03815058 (ongoing) 
   RO7198457 (BNT122) + pembrolizumab  
   MM  
mRNA-based   Phase Ia/Ib NCT03289962 (ongoing; refs. 91, 92) 
   RO7198457 (BNT122)  
   Solid tumors  
   Phase Ia  
   N = 29
  • CR ongoing for ≥10 months: 4%

  • SD: 42%

  • Discontinued due to PD (prior to completing 6 weeks of therapy): 28%

 
 
   Phase Ib  
   N = 132
  • ORR: 8% (including CR, n = 1)

  • SD: 49%

  • Discontinued due to PD (prior to completing 6 weeks of therapy): 16%

 
 
   Phase II NCT04267237 (recruiting) 
   RO7198457 (BNT122) + atezolizumab  
   Stage II-III NSCLC  
mRNA-4157 No Personalized Phase I (KEYNOTE-603) NCT03313778 (recruiting; ref. 56) 
mRNA-based   mRNA-4157; resected solid tumors  
   mRNA-4157 + pembrolizumab; unresectable solid tumors  
   N = 33 (monotherapy, n = 13; +pembrolizumab, n = 20)
  • CR: n = 1 of 20

  • PR: n = 2 of 20

  • SD: n = 5 of 20

 
 
NCI-4650 No Personalized Phase I/II NCT03480152 (terminated) 
   NCI-4650  
   MM, CC, GI cancer, GU cancer, HCC  
mRNA-5671/V941 Yes Shared Phase I NCT03948763 
   mRNA-5671/V941 ± pembrolizumab  
   KRAS-mutant NSCLC, CRC, or pancreatic adenocarcinoma  
GAPVAC-101 APVAC1: yes APVAC1: shared Phase I NCT02149225 (completed; ref. 96) 
 APVAC2: no APVAC2: personalized APVAC1 vaccine plus poly-ICLC and GM-CSF  
   followed by  
   APVAC2 vaccine plus poly-ICLC and GM-CSF  
   Newly diagnosed glioblastoma  
VaccineOff the shelf?Mechanism of actionClinical trial and interventionPublication
GRANITE-001 No Personalized Phase I/II NCT03639714 (recruiting; ref. 83) 
  Targeting a cassette of 20 patient- and tumor-specific neoantigens identified by EDGE GRT-C901 and GRT-R902 (heterologous prime/boost) + nivolumab and ipilimumab  
   NSCLC, microsatellite stable CRC, gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, urothelial cancer  
SLATE Yes Shared Phase I NCT03953235 (recruiting; ref. 84) 
  Targeting the top 20 tumor-specific shared neoantigens, identified by EDGE GRT-C903 and GRT-R904 (heterologous prime/boost) + CPIs (anti-PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4)  
   NSCLC, microsatellite stable CRC, pancreatic cancer, shared neoantigen-positive tumors  
GEN-009 No Personalized Phase I/II NCT03633110 (active, not recruiting; refs. 86, 87) 
  Targeting neoantigens to which patients have preconfirmed responses in vitro GEN-009-101 trial  
   Part A: GEN-009 adjuvanted vaccine monotherapy; solid tumors  
   Part B: GEN-009 + nivolumab or pembrolizumab; cutaneous melanoma, NSCLC, SCCHN, urothelial carcinoma, RCC  
   N = 8
  • No recurrent disease, to date.

  • OR for immune response against individual peptide with peptide concentration: 1.26, P ≤ 0.0001

 
 
NEO-PV-01 No Personalized Phase I NCT03380871 (active, not recruiting) 
   NEO-PV-01 + pembrolizumab + carboplatin + pemetrexed vs pembrolizumab + carboplatin + pemetrexed  
   NSCLC  
   Phase I NCT02897765 (active, not recruiting) 
   NEO-PV-01 + nivolumab  
   MM, NSCLC or transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder  
   Phase I NCT03597282 (active, not recruiting) 
   NEO-PV-01 + (APX005M or ipilimumab) + nivolumab  
   MM  
BNT111, BNT113, and BNT114 Yes Shared Phase I NCT02410733 (recruiting; ref. 90) 
mRNA-based  Targeting shared tumor-specific neoantigens (FixVac platform) BNT111; Lipo-MERIT (tetravalent RNA-lipoplex cancer vaccine targeting 4 TAAs (RBL001.1, RBL002.2, RBL003.1, and RBL004.1)  
   MM  
   N = 89 (interim analysis)  
   Monotherapy group (n = 25)
  • PR: n = 3; SD: n = 7; complete metabolic remission: n = 1

 
 
   FixVac + anti-PD-1 (n = 17)
  • PR: n = 6, all 6 had polyepitopic and strong CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell immunity against vaccine antigens

 
 
   Phase I/II (ongoing) 
   BNT113  
   HPV-positive cancers including but not exclusively HNSCC  
   Phase I (ongoing) 
   BNT114  
   TNBC  
RO7198457 (BNT122) No Personalized (iNeST platform) Phase II NCT03815058 (ongoing) 
   RO7198457 (BNT122) + pembrolizumab  
   MM  
mRNA-based   Phase Ia/Ib NCT03289962 (ongoing; refs. 91, 92) 
   RO7198457 (BNT122)  
   Solid tumors  
   Phase Ia  
   N = 29
  • CR ongoing for ≥10 months: 4%

  • SD: 42%

  • Discontinued due to PD (prior to completing 6 weeks of therapy): 28%

 
 
   Phase Ib  
   N = 132
  • ORR: 8% (including CR, n = 1)

  • SD: 49%

  • Discontinued due to PD (prior to completing 6 weeks of therapy): 16%

 
 
   Phase II NCT04267237 (recruiting) 
   RO7198457 (BNT122) + atezolizumab  
   Stage II-III NSCLC  
mRNA-4157 No Personalized Phase I (KEYNOTE-603) NCT03313778 (recruiting; ref. 56) 
mRNA-based   mRNA-4157; resected solid tumors  
   mRNA-4157 + pembrolizumab; unresectable solid tumors  
   N = 33 (monotherapy, n = 13; +pembrolizumab, n = 20)
  • CR: n = 1 of 20

  • PR: n = 2 of 20

  • SD: n = 5 of 20

 
 
NCI-4650 No Personalized Phase I/II NCT03480152 (terminated) 
   NCI-4650  
   MM, CC, GI cancer, GU cancer, HCC  
mRNA-5671/V941 Yes Shared Phase I NCT03948763 
   mRNA-5671/V941 ± pembrolizumab  
   KRAS-mutant NSCLC, CRC, or pancreatic adenocarcinoma  
GAPVAC-101 APVAC1: yes APVAC1: shared Phase I NCT02149225 (completed; ref. 96) 
 APVAC2: no APVAC2: personalized APVAC1 vaccine plus poly-ICLC and GM-CSF  
   followed by  
   APVAC2 vaccine plus poly-ICLC and GM-CSF  
   Newly diagnosed glioblastoma  

Abbreviations: CC, colon cancer; CR, complete response; CRC, colorectal cancer; CTLA-4, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4; GI, gastrointestinal; GU, genitourinary; HCC, hepatocellular cancer; HNC, head and neck cancer; MM, metastatic melanoma; PR, partial response; RCC, renal cell carcinoma; SCCHN, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck; SD, stable disease; TNBC, triple-negative breast cancer.

EDGE is an artificial intelligence platform used to investigate sequence data from tumor biopsies and identify tumor-specific neoantigens (82). GRANITE-001 is a personalized cancer vaccine based on individual patients' predicted neoantigens, targeting a cassette of 20 patient- and tumor-specific neoantigens identified by EDGE. An ongoing phase I/II clinical study is evaluating GRANITE-001 in combination with CPIs for solid tumor treatment (83). Similarly, SLATE is an immunotherapy directed at the top 20 tumor-specific neoantigens shared by a subset of patients, identified by EDGE. For these patients, an “off-the-shelf” therapy that works across multiple tumor types may be appropriate. An ongoing phase I study is evaluating SLATE in combination with CPIs for solid tumor treatment (84). Both GRANITE-001 and SLATE use a priming adenoviral vector and a self-amplifying RNA vector to deliver the neoantigen cassette in a repeated boost sequence.

ATLAS is another technology platform that uses patient's T-cell immune response machinery to identify optimal patient- and tumor-specific neoantigens (85). By including neoantigens to which patients have had preconfirmed responses in vitro, personalized cancer vaccines are created that the patients' immune systems are already primed for. GEN-009 is being investigated in a phase I/IIa trial for multiple tumor types (GEN-009-101), with positive initial results (86, 87), and GEN-011 is in preclinical development.

A RECON Bioinformatics Engine for prediction and identification of therapeutically relevant neoantigen targets (88) was used to investigate cancer vaccines targeting both patient- and tumor-specific and shared neoantigens (present on the same tumor type in multiple patients). NEO-PV-01, a personalized neoantigen vaccine, custom designed on the basis of unique mutational fingerprints of individual patients, is under investigation in multiple phase Ib clinical trials. NEO-SV-01, an “off-the-shelf” multivalent neoantigen vaccine for treatment of a genetically defined subset of hormone receptor–positive breast cancer, is in preclinical development (88).

Several candidate mRNA-based cancer vaccines are being evaluated in phase I trials, based on a “FixVac” platform (fixed combination of shared cancer antigens; ref. 89). These include BNT111 in metastatic melanoma (90), BNT113 in HPV-positive head and neck cancers, and BNT114 in triple-negative breast cancer. Another mRNA-based cancer vaccine candidate, RO7198457 (BNT122), based on an individualized Neoantigen Specific Immunotherapy (iNeST) platform, is being investigated in combination with pembrolizumab for melanoma (phase II), alone and with atezolizumab for solid tumors (phase I; refs. 91, 92), and with atezolizumab for NSCLC (phase II).

Additional personalized mRNA-based cancer vaccines in phase I testing include (93): mRNA-4157 alone or combined with pembrolizumab in solid tumors (KEYNOTE-603; ref, 56) and NCI-4650 (study now terminated). A vaccine encoding the four most common KRAS mutations, mRNA-5671, is also in phase I testing for patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC, colorectal cancer, or pancreatic adenocarcinoma (93).

Response to immunotherapy often correlates with high tumor mutation load (94) and consequent higher numbers of predicted neoantigens. Researchers at La Jolla Institute for Immunology (La Jolla, CA) and University of California San Diego (San Diego, CA) are working to identify clinically relevant neoantigens in malignancies of moderate or low mutational burden, for example, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Validated neoantigens will be further analyzed in HNSCC tumor models (95). They also plan to explore the role of T-cell exhaustion in mouse and human HNSCC, with a view to being able to counteract this and reinvigorate T cells.

Hilf and colleagues are investigating more effective immunotherapies for low mutational load tumors, by integrating highly individualized vaccinations with unmutated antigens and tumor neoepitopes (96). A phase I trial is investigating novel patient-tailored vaccines, APVAC1 (“off the shelf” glioblastoma-associated peptides) and APVAC2 (de novo synthesized patient-specific glioblastoma-associated tumor-mutated peptides), in glioblastoma (96).

It is an exciting time in the field of therapeutic cancer vaccines, with promising developments in both existing strategies for cancer vaccines and in several new cancer vaccine platforms, antigen targets, and methods to identify them. More research is required before the ultimate goal of personalized cancer therapies can be achieved, but there are currently a wealth of ongoing and upcoming trials in therapeutic cancer vaccine that are expected to lend credence to the value of these strategies. In the move toward personalized cancer immunotherapy, panels of genomic and proteomic biomarkers predictive for response following molecular profiling of tumor and host cells using next-generation sequencing, are expected to further aid decision making and improve outcomes (97).

Overall, cancer vaccines could be the next preferred combination partner for long-term cancer treatment, providing a platform that is easily combined with existing therapies, with minimal toxicity and a good safety profile established in vaccines studied to date.

K.J. Harrington reports personal fees from Amgen, Arch Oncology, ISA Therapeutics, Merck-Serono, Oncolys, and Pfizer, and grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, and Replimune during the conduct of the study (all of the aforementioned were paid to institution). M.-B. Zocca reports personal fees from IO Biotech (CEO and shareholder) and Valo Therapeutics (member, board of directors) outside the submitted work. E. Ehrnrooth reports other from IO Biotech (employment) outside the submitted work. E.E.W. Cohen reports personal fees from BioNTech and Pact Pharma outside the submitted work. No disclosures were reported by the other author.

The authors thank Jane Blackburn and Jacqueline Harte, of Watermeadow Medical, an Ashfield company, part of UDG Healthcare plc (funded by IO Biotech ApS), for medical writing and editing assistance. The authors would also like to thank Ayako Wakatsuki Pedersen, employee of IO Biotech ApS, for assisting the authors in addressing peer reviewer comments in relation to antiregulatory T cells. This work was supported by IO Biotech ApS.

1.
Hollingsworth
RE
,
Jansen
K
. 
Turning the corner on therapeutic cancer vaccines
.
NPJ Vaccines
2019
;
4
:
7
.
2.
Pedersen
SR
,
Sorensen
MR
,
Buus
S
,
Christensen
JP
,
Thomsen
AR
. 
Comparison of vaccine-induced effector CD8 T cell responses directed against self- and non-self-tumor antigens: implications for cancer immunotherapy
.
J Immunol
2013
;
191
:
3955
67
.
3.
Osipov
A
,
Murphy
A
,
Zheng
L
. 
From immune checkpoints to vaccines: the past, present and future of cancer immunotherapy
.
Adv Cancer Res
2019
;
143
:
63
144
.
4.
Le
DT
,
Pardoll
DM
,
Jaffee
EM
. 
Cellular vaccine approaches
.
Cancer J
2010
;
16
:
304
10
.
5.
Harrington
K
,
Freeman
DJ
,
Kelly
B
,
Harper
J
,
Soria
JC
. 
Optimizing oncolytic virotherapy in cancer treatment
.
Nat Rev Drug Discov
2019
;
18
:
689
706
.
6.
Wieczorek
M
,
Abualrous
ET
,
Sticht
J
,
Álvaro-Benito
M
,
Stolzenberg
S
,
Noé
F
, et al
Major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and MHC class II proteins: conformational plasticity in antigen presentation
.
Front Immunol
2017
;
8
:
292
.
7.
Slingluff
CL
 Jr
. 
The present and future of peptide vaccines for cancer: single or multiple, long or short, alone or in combination?
Cancer J
2011
;
17
:
343
50
.
8.
Liu
J
,
Miao
L
,
Sui
J
,
Hao
Y
,
Huang
G
. 
Nanoparticle cancer vaccines: design considerations and recent advances
.
Asian J Pharm Sci
2020
;
15
:
576
90
.
9.
Hurez
V
,
Padron
A
,
Svatek
RS
,
Curiel
TJ
. 
Considerations for successful cancer immunotherapy in aged hosts
.
Exp Gerontol
2018
;
107
:
27
36
.
10.
Thommen
DS
,
Schumacher
TN
. 
T cell dysfunction in cancer
.
Cancer Cell
2018
;
33
:
547
62
.
11.
Wang
M
,
Zhao
J
,
Zhang
L
,
Wei
F
,
Lian
Y
,
Wu
Y
, et al
Role of tumor microenvironment in tumorigenesis
.
J Cancer
2017
;
8
:
761
73
.
12.
Xu
X
,
Li
J
,
Zou
J
,
Feng
X
,
Zhang
C
,
Zheng
R
, et al
Association of germline variants in natural killer cells with tumor immune microenvironment subtypes, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, immunotherapy response, clinical outcomes and cancer risk
.
JAMA Netw Open
2019
;
2
:
e199292
.
13.
Blankenstein
T
,
Coulie
PG
,
Gilboa
E
,
Jaffee
EM
. 
The determinants of tumour immunogenicity
.
Nat Rev Cancer
2012
;
12
:
307
13
.
14.
Hegde
PS
,
Chen
DS
. 
Top 10 challenges in cancer immunotherapy
.
Immunity
2020
;
52
:
17
35
.
15.
Zaretsky
JM
,
Garcia-Diaz
A
,
Shin
DS
,
Escuin-Ordinas
H
,
Hugo
W
,
Hu-Lieskovan
S
, et al
Mutations associated with acquired resistance to PD-1 blockade in melanoma
.
N Engl J Med
2016
;
375
:
819
29
.
16.
Milo
I
,
Bedora-Faure
M
,
Garcia
Z
,
Thibaut
R
,
Perie
L
,
Shakhar
G
, et al
The immune system profoundly restricts intratumor genetic heterogeneity
.
Science immunology
2018
;
3
:
eaat1435
.
17.
Beatty
GL
,
Gladney
WL
. 
Immune escape mechanisms as a guide for cancer immunotherapy
.
Clin Cancer Res
2015
;
21
:
687
92
.
18.
Kaneno
R
,
Shurin
GV
,
Kaneno
FM
,
Naiditch
H
,
Luo
J
,
Shurin
MR
. 
Chemotherapeutic agents in low noncytotoxic concentrations increase immunogenicity of human colon cancer cells
.
Cell Oncol
2011
;
34
:
97
106
.
19.
Chiriva-Internati
M
,
Grizzi
F
,
Pinkston
J
,
Morrow
KJ
,
D'Cunha
N
,
Frezza
EE
, et al
Gamma-radiation upregulates MHC class I/II and ICAM-I molecules in multiple myeloma cell lines and primary tumors
.
In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim
2006
;
42
:
89
95
.
20.
Prendergast
GC
,
Smith
C
,
Thomas
S
,
Mandik-Nayak
L
,
Laury-Kleintop
L
,
Metz
R
, et al
Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase pathways of pathogenic inflammation and immune escape in cancer
.
Cancer Immunol Immunother
2014
;
63
:
721
35
.
21.
Laheru
D
,
Lutz
E
,
Burke
J
,
Biedrzycki
B
,
Solt
S
,
Onners
B
, et al
Allogeneic granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor-secreting tumor immunotherapy alone or in sequence with cyclophosphamide for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a pilot study of safety, feasibility, and immune activation
.
Clin Cancer Res
2008
;
14
:
1455
63
.
22.
Le
DT
,
Lutz
E
,
Uram
JN
,
Sugar
EA
,
Onners
B
,
Solt
S
, et al
Evaluation of ipilimumab in combination with allogeneic pancreatic tumor cells transfected with a GM-CSF gene in previously treated pancreatic cancer
.
J Immunother
2013
;
36
:
382
9
.
23.
Hopkins
AC
,
Yarchoan
M
,
Durham
JN
,
Yusko
EC
,
Rytlewski
JA
,
Robins
HS
, et al
T cell receptor repertoire features associated with survival in immunotherapy-treated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
.
JCI insight
2018
;
3
:
e122092
.
24.
Lutz
E
,
Yeo
CJ
,
Lillemoe
KD
,
Biedrzycki
B
,
Kobrin
B
,
Herman
J
, et al
A lethally irradiated allogeneic granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor-secreting tumor vaccine for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A phase II trial of safety, efficacy, and immune activation
.
Ann Surg
2011
;
253
:
328
35
.
25.
Higano
CS
,
Corman
JM
,
Smith
DC
,
Centeno
AS
,
Steidle
CP
,
Gittleman
M
, et al
Phase 1/2 dose-escalation study of a GM-CSF-secreting, allogeneic, cellular immunotherapy for metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer
.
Cancer
2008
;
113
:
975
84
.
26.
Small
EJ
,
Sacks
N
,
Nemunaitis
J
,
Urba
WJ
,
Dula
E
,
Centeno
AS
, et al
Granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor - secreting allogeneic cellular immunotherapy for hormone-refractory prostate cancer
.
Clin Cancer Res
2007
;
13
:
3883
91
.
27.
Rocconi
R
,
Grosen
E
,
Ghamande
S
,
Chan
J
,
Barve
M
,
Oh
J
, et al
Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of primary maintenance vigil immunotherapy (VITAL study) in stage III/IV ovarian cancer: efficacy assessment in BRCA1/2 -wt patients
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
6017
.
28.
Rocconi
RP
,
Stevens
EE
,
Bottsford-Miller
JN
,
Ghamande
SA
,
Aaron
P
,
Wallraven
G
, et al
A phase I combination study of vigil and atezolizumab in recurrent/refractory advanced-stage ovarian cancer: efficacy assessment in BRCA1/2-wt patients
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
3002
.
29.
Small
EJDT
,
Gerritsen
WR
, et al
A phase
III trial of GVAX immunotherapy for prostate cancer in combination with docetaxel versus docetaxel plus prednisone in symptomatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) [abstract]
. In:
ASCO Annual Meeting Abstracts 2009
; 
2009 May 29–Jun 2
;
Orlando, FL
.
LBA150
;
a07
.
30.
Hsueh
EC
,
Morton
DL
. 
Antigen-based immunotherapy of melanoma: canvaxin therapeutic polyvalent cancer vaccine
.
Semin Cancer Biol
2003
;
13
:
401
7
.
31.
Faries
MB
,
Mozzillo
N
,
Kashani-Sabet
M
,
Thompson
JF
,
Kelley
MC
,
DeConti
RC
, et al
Long-term survival after complete surgical resection and adjuvant immunotherapy for distant melanoma metastases
.
Ann Surg Oncol
2017
;
24
:
3991
4000
.
32.
Rinde
M
. 
Sipuleucel-T shows potential with new trial data, but questions regarding clinical relevance remain
.
Targeted Therapies Oncol
2019
;
8
.
33.
Lawson
DH
,
Lee
S
,
Zhao
F
,
Tarhini
AA
,
Margolin
KA
,
Ernstoff
MS
, et al
Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of yeast-derived granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) versus peptide vaccination versus GM-CSF plus peptide vaccination versus placebo in patients with no evidence of disease after complete surgical resection of locally advanced and/or stage IV melanoma: a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group (E4697)
.
J Clin Oncol
2015
;
33
:
4066
76
.
34.
Tanyi
JL
,
Bobisse
S
,
Ophir
E
,
Tuyaerts
S
,
Roberti
A
,
Genolet
R
, et al
Personalized cancer vaccine effectively mobilizes antitumor T cell immunity in ovarian cancer
.
Sci Transl Med
2018
;
10
:
eaao5931
.
35.
Hickerson
A
,
Clifton
GT
,
Brown
TA
,
Campf
J
,
Myers
JW
,
Vreeland
TJ
, et al
Clinical efficacy of vaccination with the autologous tumor lysate particle loaded dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine in metastatic melanoma
.
J Clin Oncol
2019
;
37
:
e21025
.
36.
Chick
R
,
Kemp Bohan
P
,
Vreeland
T
,
Hickerson
A
,
Cindass
J
,
Hale
D
, et al
Impact of disease-free interval on recurrence in high-risk melanoma patients in a phase IIb trial of the tumor lysate particle loaded dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine
.
[abstract]
. In:
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27–28 and Jun 22–24
.
Philadelphia (PA)
:
AACR
; 
2020
.
Abstract nr 6537
.
37.
Chick
R
,
Faries
M
,
Hale
D
,
Bohan
P
,
Hickerson
A
,
Vreeland
T
, et al
Multi-institutional, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb trial of the tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine to prevent recurrence in high-risk melanoma patients: a subgroup analysis
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
63
.
38.
Herbert
GS
,
Vreeland
TJ
,
Clifton
GT
,
Greene
JM
,
Jackson
DO
,
Hardin
MO
, et al
Initial phase I/IIa trial results of an autologous tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine in patients with solid tumors
.
Vaccine
2018
;
36
:
3247
53
.
39.
Lindskog
M
,
Laurell
A
,
Kjellman
A
,
Melichar
B
,
Niezabitowski
J
,
Maroto
P
, et al
A randomized phase II study with ilixadencel, a cell-based immune primer, plus sunitinib versus sunitinib alone in synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
11
.
40.
Conry
RM
,
Westbrook
B
,
McKee
S
,
Norwood
TG
. 
Talimogene laherparepvec: first in class oncolytic virotherapy
.
Hum Vaccin Immunother
2018
;
14
:
839
46
.
41.
Andtbacka
RH
,
Kaufman
HL
,
Collichio
F
,
Amatruda
T
,
Senzer
N
,
Chesney
J
, et al
Talimogene laherparepvec improves durable response rate in patients with advanced melanoma
.
J Clin Oncol
2015
;
33
:
2780
8
.
42.
Chesney
J
,
Puzanov
I
,
Collichio
F
,
Singh
P
,
Milhem
MM
,
Glaspy
J
, et al
Randomized, open-label phase II study evaluating the efficacy and safety of talimogene laherparepvec in combination with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced, unresectable melanoma
.
J Clin Oncol
2018
;
36
:
1658
67
.
43.
Milhem
MM
,
Harrington
KJ
,
Collichio
FA
,
Amatruda
T
,
Chesney
JA
,
Agarwala
SS
, et al
Progression-free survival (PFS) in unresectable melanoma patients (pts) treated with talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) versus granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in OPTiM
.
J Clin Oncol
2019
;
37
:
9524.
44.
Kantoff
PW
,
Gulley
JL
,
Pico-Navarro
C
. 
Revised overall survival analysis of a phase II, randomized, double-blind, controlled study of PROSTVAC in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2017
;
35
:
124
5
.
45.
Gulley
JL
,
Borre
M
,
Vogelzang
NJ
,
Ng
S
,
Agarwal
N
,
Parker
CC
, et al
Phase III trial of PROSTVAC in asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2019
;
37
:
1051
61
.
46.
Oudard
S
,
Rixe
O
,
Beuselinck
B
,
Linassier
C
,
Banu
E
,
Machiels
JP
, et al
A phase II study of the cancer vaccine TG4010 alone and in combination with cytokines in patients with metastatic renal clear-cell carcinoma: clinical and immunological findings
.
Cancer Immunol Immunother
2011
;
60
:
261
71
.
47.
Tosch
C
,
Bastien
B
,
Barraud
L
,
Grellier
B
,
Nourtier
V
,
Gantzer
M
, et al
Viral based vaccine TG4010 induces broadening of specific immune response and improves outcome in advanced NSCLC
.
J Immunother Cancer
2017
;
5
:
70
.
48.
Amato
RJ
,
Hawkins
RE
,
Kaufman
HL
,
Thompson
JA
,
Tomczak
P
,
Szczylik
C
, et al
Vaccination of metastatic renal cancer patients with MVA-5T4: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study
.
Clin Cancer Res
2010
;
16
:
5539
47
.
49.
Pol
JG
,
Zhang
L
,
Bridle
BW
,
Stephenson
KB
,
Resseguier
J
,
Hanson
S
, et al
Maraba virus as a potent oncolytic vaccine vector
.
Mol Ther
2014
;
22
:
420
9
.
50.
Pol
JG
,
Acuna
SA
,
Yadollahi
B
,
Tang
N
,
Stephenson
KB
,
Atherton
MJ
, et al
Preclinical evaluation of a MAGE-A3 vaccination utilizing the oncolytic Maraba virus currently in first-in-human trials
.
Oncoimmunology
2019
;
8
:
e1512329
.
51.
Atherton
MJ
,
Stephenson
KB
,
Pol
J
,
Wang
F
,
Lefebvre
C
,
Stojdl
DF
, et al
Customized viral immunotherapy for HPV-associated cancer
.
Cancer Immunol Res
2017
;
5
:
847
59
.
52.
Thomas
S
,
Kuncheria
L
,
Roulstone
V
,
Kyula
JN
,
Mansfield
D
,
Bommareddy
PK
, et al
Development of a new fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy platform based on herpes simplex virus type 1
.
J Immunother Cancer
2019
;
7
:
214
.
53.
Harper
JA
,
Burke
S
,
Leinster
A
,
Rath
N
,
Cheng
X
,
Jin
H
, et al
MEDI5395: a recombinant oncolytic virus with oncolytic and immune modulatory properties
.
[abstract]
. In:
Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29–Apr 3; Atlanta, GA
.
Philadelphia (PA)
:
AACR
; 
2019
.
Abstract nr 1456
.
54.
Choi
CH
,
Choi
HJ
,
Lee
JW
,
Kang
ES
,
Cho
D
,
Park
BK
, et al
Phase I study of a B cell-based and monocyte-based immunotherapeutic vaccine, BVAC-C in human papillomavirus type 16- or 18-positive recurrent cervical cancer
.
J Clin Med
2020
;
9
:
147
.
55.
Lee
JB
,
Kwon
WS
,
Kim
HS
,
Jung
M
,
Kim
S
,
Park
M
, et al
First-in-human phase I study of BVAC-B cell therapy in HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
4534
.
56.
Burris
HA
,
Patel
MR
,
Cho
DC
,
Clarke
JM
,
Gutierrez
M
,
Zaks
TZ
, et al
A phase I multicenter study to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of mRNA-4157 alone in patients with resected solid tumors and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable solid tumors
.
J Clin Oncol
2019
;
37
:
2523
.
57.
Butts
C
,
Socinski
MA
,
Mitchell
PL
,
Thatcher
N
,
Havel
L
,
Krzakowski
M
, et al
Tecemotide (L-BLP25) versus placebo after chemoradiotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (START): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial
.
Lancet Oncol
2014
;
15
:
59
68
.
58.
Singer
CF
,
Pfeiler
G
,
Hubalek
M
,
Bartsch
R
,
Stöger
H
,
Pichler
A
, et al
Efficacy and safety of the therapeutic cancer vaccine tecemotide (L-BLP25) in early breast cancer: Results from a prospective, randomised, neoadjuvant phase II study (ABCSG 34)
.
Eur J Cancer
2020
;
132
:
43
52
.
59.
Melief
CJM
,
van Hall
T
,
Arens
R
,
Ossendorp
F
,
van der Burg
SH
. 
Therapeutic cancer vaccines
.
J Clin Invest
2015
;
125
:
3401
12
.
60.
Massarelli
E
,
William
W
,
Johnson
F
,
Kies
M
,
Ferrarotto
R
,
Guo
M
, et al
Combining immune checkpoint blockade and tumor-specific vaccine for patients with incurable human papillomavirus 16-related cancer: a phase 2 clinical trial
.
JAMA Oncol
2019
;
5
:
67
73
.
61.
Melief
CJM
,
Welters
MJP
,
Vergote
I
,
Kroep
JR
,
Kenter
GG
,
Ottevanger
PB
, et al
Strong vaccine responses during chemotherapy are associated with prolonged cancer survival
.
Sci Transl Med
2020
;
12
:
eaaz8235
.
62.
Fenstermaker
RA
,
Figel
SA
,
Qiu
J-X
,
Barone
TA
,
Dharma
SS
,
Winograd
EK
, et al
Survivin monoclonal antibodies detect survivin cell surface expression and inhibit tumor growth in vivo
.
Clin Cancer Res
2018
;
24
:
2642
52
.
63.
Fenstermaker
RA
,
Ciesielski
MJ
,
Qiu
J
,
Yang
N
,
Frank
CL
,
Lee
KP
, et al
Clinical study of a survivin long peptide vaccine (SurVaxM) in patients with recurrent malignant glioma
.
Cancer Immunol Immunother
2016
;
65
:
1339
52
.
64.
Ahluwalia
MS
,
Reardon
DA
,
Abad
AP
,
Curry
WT
,
Wong
ET
,
Belal
A
, et al
SurVaxM with standard therapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: phase II trial update
.
J Clin Oncol
2019
;
37
:
2016
.
65.
Ostrom
QT
,
Cote
DJ
,
Ascha
M
,
Kruchko
C
,
Barnholtz-Sloan
JS
. 
Adult glioma incidence and survival by race or ethnicity in the United States from 2000 to 2014
.
JAMA Oncol
2018
;
4
:
1254
62
.
66.
Hanif
A
,
Lee
S
,
Gupta
M
,
Chander
A
,
Kannisto
ED
,
Punnanitinont
A
, et al
Exploring the role of survivin in neuroendocrine neoplasms
.
Oncotarget
2020
;
11
:
2246
58
.
67.
Andersen
MH
. 
The T-win(R) technology: immune-modulating vaccines
.
Semin Immunopathol
2019
;
41
:
87
95
.
68.
Andersen
MH
. 
Anti-regulatory T cells
.
Semin Immunopathol
2017
;
39
:
317
26
.
69.
Pedersen
AW
,
Kopp
KL
,
Andersen
MH
,
Zocca
MB
. 
Immunoregulatory antigens-novel targets for cancer immunotherapy
.
Chin Clin Oncol
2018
;
7
:
19
.
70.
Sørensen
RB
,
Hadrup
SR
,
Svane
IM
,
Hjortsø
MC
,
Thor Straten
P
,
Andersen
MH
. 
Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase specific, cytotoxic T cells as immune regulators
.
Blood
2011
;
117
:
2200
10
.
71.
Munir
S
,
Andersen
GH
,
Met
Ö
,
Donia
M
,
Frøsig
TM
,
Larsen
SK
, et al
HLA-restricted CTL that are specific for the immune checkpoint ligand PD-L1 occur with high frequency in cancer patients
.
Cancer Res
2013
;
73
:
1764
76
.
72.
Ahmad
SM
,
Svane
IM
,
Andersen
MH
. 
The stimulation of PD-L1-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes can both directly and indirectly enhance antileukemic immunity
.
Blood Cancer J
2014
;
4
:
e230
.
73.
Munir
S
,
Larsen
SK
,
Iversen
TZ
,
Donia
M
,
Klausen
TW
,
Svane
IM
, et al
Natural CD4+ T-cell responses against indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase
.
PLoS One
2012
;
7
:
e34568
.
74.
Munir
S
,
Andersen
GH
,
Svane
IM
,
Andersen
MH
. 
The immune checkpoint regulator PD-L1 is a specific target for naturally occurring CD4+ T cells
.
Oncoimmunology
2013
;
2
:
e23991
.
75.
Andersen
MH
. 
Immune regulation by self-recognition: novel possibilities for anticancer immunotherapy
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2015
;
107
:
djv154
.
76.
Kjeldsen
JW
,
Iversen
TZ
,
Engell-Noerregaard
L
,
Mellemgaard
A
,
Andersen
MH
,
Svane
IM
. 
Durable clinical responses and long-term follow-up of stage III-IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with IDO peptide vaccine in a phase I study -a brief research report
.
Front Immunol
2018
;
9
:
2145
.
77.
Dey
S
,
Sutanto-Ward
E
,
Kopp
KL
,
DuHadaway
J
,
Mondal
A
,
Ghaban
D
, et al
Peptide vaccination directed against IDO1-expressing immune cells elicits CD8+and CD4+T-cell-mediated antitumor immunity and enhanced anti-PD1 responses
.
J Immunother Cancer
2020
;
8
:
e000605
.
78.
Sahin
U
,
Derhovanessian
E
,
Miller
M
,
Kloke
BP
,
Simon
P
,
Lower
M
, et al
Personalized RNA mutanome vaccines mobilize poly-specific therapeutic immunity against cancer
.
Nature
2017
;
547
:
222
6
.
79.
Ott
PA
,
Hu
Z
,
Keskin
DB
,
Shukla
SA
,
Sun
J
,
Bozym
DJ
, et al
An immunogenic personal neoantigen vaccine for patients with melanoma
.
Nature
2017
;
547
:
217
21
.
80.
The problem with neoantigen prediction
.
Nat Biotechnol
2017
;
35
:
97
.
Available from
: https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.3800#citeas
81.
Joshi
K
,
Chain
BM
,
Peggs
KS
,
Quezada
SA
. 
The "Achilles' Heel" of cancer and its implications for the development of novel immunotherapeutic strategies
.
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med
2018
;
8
:
a027086
.
82.
Gritstone Oncology Inc
.
Available from
: https://gritstoneoncology.com.
83.
Gritstone Oncology Inc
. 
Gritstone oncology announces first patient dosed in a clinical study evaluating its personalized immunotherapy, GRANITE-001
.
Available from
: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/03/21/1758939/0/en/Gritstone-Oncology-Announces-First-Patient-Dosed-in-a-Clinical-Study-Evaluating-its-Personalized-Immunotherapy-GRANITE-001.html.
84.
Gritstone Oncology Inc
. 
Gritstone oncology announces first patient dosed with SLATE, its ‘off-the-shelf’ neoantigen immunotherapy
.
Available from
: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/08/14/1901707/0/en/Gritstone-Oncology-Announces-First-Patient-Dosed-with-SLATE-its-Off-The-Shelf-Neoantigen-Immunotherapy.html.
85.
Flechtner
JB
. 
Antigen-screening system - perfecting the promise of T cell therapies for infectious disease & cancer
.
Available from
: https://drug-dev.com/antigen-screening-system-perfecting-the-promise-of-t-cell-therapies-for-infectious-disease-cancer/.
86.
Cohen
RB
,
Johnson
ML
,
Twardowski
P
,
Stein
MN
,
Vaishampayan
UN
,
Dobson
JR
, et al
A phase 1/2a study of GEN-009, a neoantigen vaccine based on autologous peptide immune responses
.
J Clin Oncol
37
:
15s
, 
2019
(
suppl; abstr 2611
).
87.
Cohen
RB
,
Twardowski
P
,
Johnson
ML
,
Gillison
ML
,
Stein
MN
,
Vaishampayan
UN
, et al
GEN-009, a neoantigen vaccine containing ATLAS selected neoantigens, to generate broad sustained immunity against immunogenic tumor mutations and avoid inhibitory peptides
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
3107
.
88.
Neon Therapeutics
.
Available from
: https://neontherapeutics.com/.
90.
Loquai
C
,
Hassel
JC
,
Oehm
P
,
Derhovanessian
E
,
Jabulowsky
RA
,
Gold
M
, et al
A shared tumor-antigen RNA-lipoplex vaccine with/without anti-PD1 in patients with checkpoint-inhibition experienced melanoma
.
J Clin Oncol
2020
;
38
:
3136
.
91.
Braiteh
F
,
LoRusso
P
,
Balmanoukian
A
,
Klempner
S
,
Camidge
DR
,
Hellmann
M
, et al
A phase Ia study to evaluate RO7198457, an individualized Neoantigen Specific immunoTherapy (iNeST), in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors
.
[abstract]
. In:
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020
; 
2020 Apr 27–28 and Jun 22–24
.
Philadelphia (PA)
:
AACR
; 
2020
.
Abstract nr CT169
.
92.
Lopez
JS
,
Camidge
R
,
Iafolla
M
,
Rottey
S
,
Schuler
M
,
Hellmann
M
, et al
A phase Ib study to evaluate RO7198457, an individualized Neoantigen Specific immunoTherapy (iNeST), in combination with atezolizumab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors
.
[abstract]
.
In:
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020
; 
2020 Apr 27–28 and Jun 22–24
.
Philadelphia (PA)
:
AACR
; 
2020
.
Abstract nr CT301
.
94.
Rizvi
NA
,
Hellmann
MD
,
Snyder
A
,
Kvistborg
P
,
Makarov
V
,
Havel
JJ
, et al
Cancer immunology. Mutational landscape determines sensitivity to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer
.
Science
2015
;
348
:
124
8
.
95.
La Jolla Institute for Immunology
. 
La Jolla Institute receives $4.5 mill cancer moonshot award
.
Available from
: https://www.lji.org/news-events/news/post/la-jolla-institute-receives-4-5-mill-cancer-moonshot-award/.
96.
Hilf
N
,
Kuttruff-Coqui
S
,
Frenzel
K
,
Bukur
V
,
Stevanovic
S
,
Gouttefangeas
C
, et al
Actively personalized vaccination trial for newly diagnosed glioblastoma
.
Nature
2019
;
565
:
240
5
.
97.
Lee
EY
,
Kulkarni
RP
. 
Circulating biomarkers predictive of tumor response to cancer immunotherapy
.
Expert Rev Mol Diagn
2019
;
19
:
895
904
.
98.
Higano
CS
,
Schellhammer
PF
,
Small
EJ
,
Burch
PA
,
Nemunaitis
J
,
Yuh
L
, et al
Integrated data from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials of active cellular immunotherapy with sipuleucel-T in advanced prostate cancer
.
Cancer
2009
;
115
:
3670
9
.
99.
Kantoff
PW
,
Higano
CS
,
Shore
ND
,
Berger
ER
,
Small
EJ
,
Penson
DF
, et al
Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer
.
N Engl J Med
2010
;
363
:
411
22
.
100.
Iversen
TZ
,
Engell-Noerregaard
L
,
Ellebaek
E
,
Andersen
R
,
Larsen
SK
,
Bjoern
J
, et al
Long-lasting disease stabilization in the absence of toxicity in metastatic lung cancer patients vaccinated with an epitope derived from indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase
.
Clin Cancer Res
2014
;
20
:
221
32
.
101.
Bjoern
J
,
Iversen
TZ
,
Nitschke
NJ
,
Andersen
MH
,
Svane
IM
. 
Safety, immune and clinical responses in metastatic melanoma patients vaccinated with a long peptide derived from indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase in combination with ipilimumab
.
Cytotherapy
2016
;
18
:
1043
55
.
102.
Spicer
J
,
Provencio
M
,
Garrido Lopez
P
,
Bosch-Barrera
J
,
de Castro Carpeño
FJ
,
Felip
E
, et al
An open-label, randomized, phase I/II trial of IO102 and pembrolizumab, or IO102, pembrolizumab and chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer
.
Ann Oncol
2019
;
30
:
ii38
ii68
.
103.
Kjeldsen
JW
,
Andersen
MH
,
Svane
I-M
. 
94TiP: combination therapy with nivolumab and PD-L1/IDO peptide vaccine to patients with metastatic melanoma. A clinical trial in progress
.
Ann Oncol
2017
;
28
:
mdx711.075
.
104.
Martinenaite
E
,
Mortensen
REJ
,
Hansen
M
,
Orebo Holmstrom
M
,
Munir Ahmad
S
,
Gronne Dahlager Jorgensen
N
, et al
Frequent adaptive immune responses against arginase-1
.
Oncoimmunology
2018
;
7
:
e1404215
.
105.
Holmstrom
MO
,
Martinenaite
E
,
Ahmad
SM
,
Met
O
,
Friese
C
,
Kjaer
L
, et al
The calreticulin (CALR) exon 9 mutations are promising targets for cancer immune therapy
.
Leukemia
2018
;
32
:
429
37
.