The application of cancer gene therapy has heretofore been restricted to local, or locoregional, neoplastic disease contexts. This is owing to the lack of gene transfer vectors, which embody the requisite target cell selectivity in vivo required for metastatic disease applications. To this end, we have explored novel vector engineering paradigms to adapt adenovirus for this purpose. Our novel strategy exploits three distinct targeting modalities that operate in functional synergy. Transcriptional targeting is achieved via the hROBO4 promoter, which restricts transgene expression to proliferative vascular endothelium. Viral binding is modified by incorporation of an RGD4C peptide in the HI loop of the fiber knob for recognition of cellular integrins. Liver sequestration is mitigated by ablation of factor X binding to the major capsid protein hexon by a serotype swap approach. The combination of these technologies into the context of a single-vector agent represents a highly original approach. Studies in a murine model of disseminated cancer validated the in vivo target cell selectivity of our vector agent. Of note, clear gains in therapeutic index accrued these vector modifications. Whereas there is universal recognition of the value of vector targeting, very few reports have validated its direct utility in the context of cancer gene therapy. In this regard, our article validates the direct gains that may accrue these methods in the stringent delivery context of disseminated neoplastic disease. Efforts to improve vector targeting thus represent a critical direction to fully realize the promise of cancer gene therapy.

A wide range of strategies have been developed to apply gene therapy to the context of neoplastic disease (1–4). The central goal embodied in these molecular interventions is the achievement of an improved therapeutic index compared with conventional cancer therapies. Heretofore, such in vivo cancer gene therapies have been applied for local, or locoregional, neoplastic disease. This is owing to the fact that currently available gene transfer vectors lack the in vivo target cell selectivity mandated for the clinical context of disseminated disease.

In this regard, there has been a field-wide recognition of the need for gene transfer vectors, which embody the capacity for target cell selectivity (5). Indeed, an NIH report on gene therapy highlighted this goal as the highest mandate for the field. For cancer, such a vector-targeting capacity thus represents the sine qua non for practical advancement of these promising strategies to the problematic clinical setting of metastatic disease. Given this consideration, the paucity of reports of the successful application of vector targeting for cancer gene therapy is noteworthy.

To this end, we have endeavored modification of adenoviral vectors (Ad) to address this key gene delivery mandate. On the basis of the unique molecular promiscuity of the parent virus, we hypothesized that targeting might be achieved by exploiting multiple biologic axes. Furthermore, we sought to combine such distinct targeting strategies to realize functional synergy vis-à-vis the achievement of target cell selectivity. On this basis, the requirement for in vivo selectivity, in the context of disseminated neoplastic disease, might be achieved.

Adenovirus production

The replication incompetent E1-deleted Ad5 vectors used for the study were prepared using a two-plasmid cloning method. Untargeted or triple-targeted Ad5 encoding the GFP reporter gene or the HSVtk therapeutic gene were produced in accordance with the standard techniques (6). Briefly, adenoviral genome–including plasmids were digested with PacI for releasing the recombinant viral genomes, and transfected into HEK293 cells. Rescued viruses were serially amplified, and then purified by centrifugation on CsCl gradients according to the standard protocols. For in vitro and in vivo study, viruses were dialyzed against PBS containing 10% glycerol, and stored at −80°C. The titers of physical viral particles were determined by methods described by Maizel and colleagues (7).

In vitro validation of adenovirus

HUVEC (human primary endothelial), bEnd-3 (mouse primary endothelial), and NIH/3T3 (mouse embryonic fibroblast) cells were obtained from the ATCC and maintained for assays according to the manufacturer's instructions. Total expression levels of HSVtk proteins in whole-cell lysate were determined with anti-tk antibody (kindly provided by Dr. William Summers, Yale University, New Haven, CT) by Western blot analysis in accordance with the standard protocols. For HSVtk/ganciclovir-killing activity assay, cells were infected with virus encoding either GFP or HSVtk gene, ganciclovir (Selleckchem) prodrug was administered to cells via serial diluted drug concentration. To measure the cellular ATP contents (Promega) as a marker for cell viability, assay plates were read in a microplate luminometer (Berthold detection system) and cell viability was analyzed. Dose–response analysis curves were plotted by Graph Pad Prism v7.0c software.

Murine xenograft models

Triple immunodeficient NOD/SCID/IL2Rγ (NSG) mice were injected subcutaneously with 1 × 106 786-0 renal carcinoma cells (mCherry expressed cell line). Two weeks later, the mice were intravenously injected with 1 × 1011 viral particles of untargeted Ad5.CMV.GFP or triple-targeted Ad-GFP viruses. To perform histopathologic analysis in tumor or organs, mice were sacrificed under anesthesia (Avertin, Sigma-Aldrich) at 3 days post-virus injection. The tumor-bearing tissues were harvested, followed by postfixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 2 hours at room temperature, cryopreserved in 30% sucrose for 16 hours at 4°C, and cryo-embedded in NEG50 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) over 2-methylbutane/liquid nitrogen. Histopathologic images were captured by epifluorescence microscopy. To perform histopathologic analysis in SPC6 subcutaneous tumor, all assay procedures were conducted in accordance with the same protocols.

Tissue harvest and immunofluorescence staining

Mice were administrated with 1 × 1011 viral particles of triple-targeted adenoviral vectors via tail vein injection. Three days post-virus infection, mice were anesthetized and tissues (liver, lung, pancreas, spleen, kidney, small bowel, heart, muscle, and brain) harvested for immunofluorescence staining. For frozen sections, organ slices were cryo-preserved in 30% sucrose in PBS at 4°C overnight, embedded in NEG50 Mounting Medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific), and then frozen in a liquid nitrogen prechilled 2-methylbutane containing bucket. Sectioning of frozen organs was carried out using the CryoJane Taping System (Leica Biosystems Inc). All frozen section slides were subject to immunofluorescence staining analysis in accordance with the standard techniques (8). Primary antibodies used in this study included hamster anti-CD31 (EMD Millipore), rat anti-endomucin (eBioscience), rat anti-PDGFRβ (eBioscience), rabbit anti-HSVtk (Dr. Summers's laboratory), and Alexa Fluor 488 or 594-conjugated secondary antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories).

Animal studies for therapeutic index gains

Triple-immunodeficient NSG mice allow for modeling of all metastatic sites as published previously (8, 9). For systemic metastases, mice were injected intracardially with 5 × 105 786-0 renal carcinoma cells (Luciferase gene expressed). Tumor growth was monitored and quantified using bioluminescence imaging (BLI) analysis. Three weeks after tumor implantation, mice were intravenously injected via tail vein with 1 × 1011 viral particles of each virus. During the following 7 days, mice received daily intraperitoneal injection of ganciclovir (50 mg/kg/7 days) according to the different treatment groups [(n = 8 mice/group): untargeted Ad5-GFP, untargeted Ad5-HSVtk, and triple-targeted Ad-HSVtk plus ganciclovir]. Mice were weighed daily to gauge health and survival during the assays. For study of tumor progression, final ROI values were monitored and compared (increased fold = last ROl value/initial ROl value) in the survival mice. Survival data were plotted on a Kaplan–Meier curve in all animal groups by Graph Pad Prism v7.0c software. The studied was terminated at 8 weeks (56 days posttumor implantation) according to the approved protocols and pursuant to NIH guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals’ standards. All animal experiments were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the Washington University in St. Louis, School of Medicine (protocol #.20160292, St. Louis, MO).

Generated triple-targeting vector for gene therapy

As the main limit to the systemic employment of adenoviral vectors is liver sequestration (10), we first sought to address this issue. Our studies, and those of others, had linked this phenomenon to vector capsid association with serum factor X (11, 12). On this basis, we employed a strategy of capsid chimerism whereby the major capsid protein hexon of the serotype 5 vector base was substituted with a cognate from the alternate human adenovirus serotype 3. We had previously shown that this modification substantially mitigated sequestration in the reticuloendothelial system in the context of systemic vector administration (12, 13). This liver “untargeting” method was then combined with modifications designed to direct the expression of delivered transgenes to tumor vascular endothelium. Specific vector particle binding was enhanced for the target cells by the incorporation into the adenoviral vectors capsid fiber knob of the RGD4C peptide (14, 15). This ligand exhibits preferentiality for integrins of αvβ3 and αVβ3 class overexpressed in angiogenic endothelium. This approach was also combined with a transcriptional targeting strategy to restrict transgene expression target cells. In this case, the promoter of the roundabout guidance receptor 4 (ROBO4) gene, which is selectively inductive for proliferative endothelium, was employed. We hypothesized that the combination of the liver untargeting and vector-targeting methods (Fig. 1) would provide functional synergy with respect to the achievement of the in vivo selectivity mandated for disseminated neoplastic disease cancer gene therapy.

Figure 1.

Schema of “triple-targeted” genetic modifications of adenovirus to accomplish in vivo targeting of tumor endothelium. Liver untargeting has previously been accomplished via genetic modification of hexon domains that can associate with serum factor X. Hexon ectodomain hypervariable regions (HVR7) of the vector were replaced with base human adenovirus serotype 5 with the corresponding domains from human adenovirus serotype 3 (H5/H3). In addition, for transcriptional targeting, the 5′ upstream region of the therapeutic gene for roundabout 4 (ROBO4; endothelial-specific promoter) was configured within the deleted adenovirus E1A/B site. The integrin targeting peptide RGD4C (CDCRGDCFC) was incorporated into HI loop of adenoviral vectors fiber knob for transductional targeting.

Figure 1.

Schema of “triple-targeted” genetic modifications of adenovirus to accomplish in vivo targeting of tumor endothelium. Liver untargeting has previously been accomplished via genetic modification of hexon domains that can associate with serum factor X. Hexon ectodomain hypervariable regions (HVR7) of the vector were replaced with base human adenovirus serotype 5 with the corresponding domains from human adenovirus serotype 3 (H5/H3). In addition, for transcriptional targeting, the 5′ upstream region of the therapeutic gene for roundabout 4 (ROBO4; endothelial-specific promoter) was configured within the deleted adenovirus E1A/B site. The integrin targeting peptide RGD4C (CDCRGDCFC) was incorporated into HI loop of adenoviral vectors fiber knob for transductional targeting.

Close modal

Evaluated vector for cancer gene therapy

Such a triple-targeted adenoviral vectors was thus constructed to achieve expression of the HSVtk therapeutic gene selectively within proliferative tumor endothelium in vitro. This gene has been applied historically for molecular chemotherapy cancer gene therapy approaches (16, 17). Its employment here thus served to reconcile our findings with the extensive literature relating to the use of HSVtk for cancer gene therapy. After rescue and upscale, the virion was subjected to genomic analysis (Fig. 2A). This study confirmed that the control untargeted adenovirus, and the triple-targeted adenovirus, both contained the cassette with the HSVtk therapeutic gene. Infection of human endothelial cells (HUVEC), with follow-on Western blot analysis, confirmed expression of HSVtk in cells infected via both vectors (Fig. 2B). Next, analysis of the specificity of expression was carried out utilizing an in vitro assay whereby HSVtk expression sensitized cells to the cytotoxic effects of ganciclovir. Target cells were human endothelial (HUVEC) or murine endothelial cells (bEnd-3). In this analysis, it could be seen that the target cells were sensitive to vector-mediated cytotoxicity exclusively after infection with the triple-targeted adenoviral vectors encoding HSVtk (Fig. 2C), under ganciclovir treatment. In addition, regarding to the transduction efficacy, we confirmed with NIH/3TC cells (mouse embryonic fibroblast) including demonstration of the target cells specificity (Fig. 2D). These studies thus validated the endothelial selectivity of our vector targeting schema.

Figure 2.

In vitro validation of adenoviral vectors. A, Assessment of inclusion of the HSVtk gene into E1 region from purified viral genomes (i, Ad5; ii, Ad5.CMV.HSVtk; and iii, triple-targeted Ad-HSVtk) by PCR using HSVtk-specific primers. Viral genomes are shown with the black arrow, and amplified HSVtk gene from each of the viral genomes is shown with the red arrow. B, Validation of HSVtk gene delivery and expression via adenoviral vectors in HUVEC cells using Western blotting analysis. C, Evaluation of cell killing efficiency by HSVtk/ganciclovir (GCV) treatment on endothelial cells. Each of HUVEC (human) and bEnd-3 (mouse) were infected with each virus encoding either GFP or HSVtk and then treated with ganciclovir prodrug (serial diluted drug concentration shown in x-axis). Results are presented as the relative percentage of cell viability measured by cellular ATP contents. D, Assessment of transduction efficacy in vitro. Each of NIH/3T3 (mouse embryonic fibroblast) and bEnd-3 (mouse endothelial cell) were infected with triple-targeted Ad5-GFP with two different MOI (500 and 1,000). Blue, nuclei (stained with DAPI) and green, GFP signal through adenoviral vectors.

Figure 2.

In vitro validation of adenoviral vectors. A, Assessment of inclusion of the HSVtk gene into E1 region from purified viral genomes (i, Ad5; ii, Ad5.CMV.HSVtk; and iii, triple-targeted Ad-HSVtk) by PCR using HSVtk-specific primers. Viral genomes are shown with the black arrow, and amplified HSVtk gene from each of the viral genomes is shown with the red arrow. B, Validation of HSVtk gene delivery and expression via adenoviral vectors in HUVEC cells using Western blotting analysis. C, Evaluation of cell killing efficiency by HSVtk/ganciclovir (GCV) treatment on endothelial cells. Each of HUVEC (human) and bEnd-3 (mouse) were infected with each virus encoding either GFP or HSVtk and then treated with ganciclovir prodrug (serial diluted drug concentration shown in x-axis). Results are presented as the relative percentage of cell viability measured by cellular ATP contents. D, Assessment of transduction efficacy in vitro. Each of NIH/3T3 (mouse embryonic fibroblast) and bEnd-3 (mouse endothelial cell) were infected with triple-targeted Ad5-GFP with two different MOI (500 and 1,000). Blue, nuclei (stained with DAPI) and green, GFP signal through adenoviral vectors.

Close modal

Advanced vector targeting to tumor in vivo

We next sought to validate the in vivo selectivity of our vector methods in a systemic delivery context. For this analysis, we derived versions of the control and triple-targeted adenovirus, which encoded the GFP reporter gene. Immunodeficient NSG mice were xenografted with subcutaneous nodules of the human renal carcinoma cell line 786-0 (8). Animals were then treated with 1 × 1011 particles of the control and targeted adenoviral vectors with analysis of harvested tumor and organs at 3 days later. As the major site for ectopic adenoviral vectors localization is the liver, analysis was limited to this site and target tumor. In these studies it could be seen that untargeted adenoviral vectors was largely sequestered in the liver, with no detectable reporter noted within vascular areas of the tumor (Fig. 3A). In marked contrast, the triple-targeted adenoviral vectors avoided ectopic localization within the liver and spleen. Of note, high levels of reporter gene were seen within the harvested subcutaneous tumor nodules via secondary staining analysis that confirmed the identity of gene modified cells as tumor endothelium (Fig 3B). Our findings confirm that the hexon modification of our triple-targeted adenoviral vectors achieves the desired goal of liver untargeting, without the accrual of major new sites of ectopic gene delivery (Fig. 3C). Furthermore, as an even more stringent model (xenografted with subcutaneous nodules of the Syrian golden hamster pancreatic carcinoma cell line, SHPC6), the targeting specificity of our triple-targeted adenovirus in the context of other tumors could be seen (Fig. 3D). Thus, our triple-targeting strategy achieves highly specific in vivo selectivity.

Figure 3.

Evaluation of vector targeting via systemic delivery in murine xenograft models (triple immunodeficient NSG mice). A, Comparison analysis of targeting capacity with GFP reporter maker by histopathologic methods. Experimental procedures for this study are described in Materials and Methods. The cryo sections of the liver (top) and tumor (bottom) were obtained from each of the Ad5 or triple-targeted Ad5-GFP–injected mice at 3 days later. All assays were conducted and compared in parallel conditions. Blue, nuclei (stained with Hoechst 33258); red, mouse CD31/endomucin in the liver; or mCherry signal from the tumor and green, GFP signal through adenoviral vectors. B,In vivo confirmation of triple-targeted Ad5-GFP transduction on tumor endothelium. The cryo section of the tumor (human 786-0 subcutaneous) was obtained from triple-targeted Ad5-GFP–infected mice (same as A) and was subject to immunofluorescence staining analysis with specific antibodies (anti-Cd31/anti-endomucine or anti-PDGFPβ) as an endothelium marker. In the tumor, endothelium and triple-targeted Ad5-GFP are colocalized in yellow. C,In vivo validation of ectopic gene delivery and transduction with our triple-targeted Ad5-GFP. NSG mice were intravenously injected with 1 × 1011 viral particles (each of Ad5-GFP or triple-targeted Ad5-GFP) and then harvested of all tissues (liver, lung, spleen, kidney, heart, small bowel, pancreas, brain, and muscle) for histopathologic assay by immunofluorescence staining. Blue, nuclei (stained with Hoechst 33258); red, mouse CD31/endomucin. D, Evaluation of targeting specificity of our triple-targeted Ad5-GFP in the context of SGH SHPC6 subcutaneous tumor (SHPC6: Syrian hamster pancreatic carcinoma). Experimental procedures for this study were in accordance as in A. Blue, nuclei (stained with Hoechst 33258); red, mouse CD31/endomucin in the tumor; and green, GFP signal through triple-targeted adenoviral vectors. Tumor endothelium and triple-targeted Ad5-GFP are colocalized in yellow (arrow).

Figure 3.

Evaluation of vector targeting via systemic delivery in murine xenograft models (triple immunodeficient NSG mice). A, Comparison analysis of targeting capacity with GFP reporter maker by histopathologic methods. Experimental procedures for this study are described in Materials and Methods. The cryo sections of the liver (top) and tumor (bottom) were obtained from each of the Ad5 or triple-targeted Ad5-GFP–injected mice at 3 days later. All assays were conducted and compared in parallel conditions. Blue, nuclei (stained with Hoechst 33258); red, mouse CD31/endomucin in the liver; or mCherry signal from the tumor and green, GFP signal through adenoviral vectors. B,In vivo confirmation of triple-targeted Ad5-GFP transduction on tumor endothelium. The cryo section of the tumor (human 786-0 subcutaneous) was obtained from triple-targeted Ad5-GFP–infected mice (same as A) and was subject to immunofluorescence staining analysis with specific antibodies (anti-Cd31/anti-endomucine or anti-PDGFPβ) as an endothelium marker. In the tumor, endothelium and triple-targeted Ad5-GFP are colocalized in yellow. C,In vivo validation of ectopic gene delivery and transduction with our triple-targeted Ad5-GFP. NSG mice were intravenously injected with 1 × 1011 viral particles (each of Ad5-GFP or triple-targeted Ad5-GFP) and then harvested of all tissues (liver, lung, spleen, kidney, heart, small bowel, pancreas, brain, and muscle) for histopathologic assay by immunofluorescence staining. Blue, nuclei (stained with Hoechst 33258); red, mouse CD31/endomucin. D, Evaluation of targeting specificity of our triple-targeted Ad5-GFP in the context of SGH SHPC6 subcutaneous tumor (SHPC6: Syrian hamster pancreatic carcinoma). Experimental procedures for this study were in accordance as in A. Blue, nuclei (stained with Hoechst 33258); red, mouse CD31/endomucin in the tumor; and green, GFP signal through triple-targeted adenoviral vectors. Tumor endothelium and triple-targeted Ad5-GFP are colocalized in yellow (arrow).

Close modal

Improved vector to achieve the therapeutic index gains in vivo

Finally, we endeavored evaluation of the therapeutic index gains, which accrue synergistic targeting. The therapy experiment with targeted adenovirus (vs. nontargeted adenovirus) was employed in a murine model of metastatic disease. The triple-targeting specificity mitigated the vector-associated toxicity known to be associated with the systemic application of untargeted adenoviral vectors encoding HSVtk (ref. 18; Fig. 4A). In parallel with that, of note, it could be seen that extended survival time accrued to the treatment group that received only the triple-targeted adenoviral vectors encoding HSVtk with significant differences (**, P < 0.005; Fig. 4C). Our demonstration of antitumor therapy was accomplished in a context more stringent than that required only for local control; however, it could be seen as the potential for improvement of the therapeutic effect (Fig. 4B). Also, it could be seen the persistence of the vector in the metastatic tumor as well. These findings demonstrated directly the improved therapeutic index, which accrued the employment of vector targeting for this established cancer gene therapy approach.

Figure 4.

Assessment of the therapeutic index gains in metastatic murine models. A, The immunodeficient NSG mice were intracardiacally injected with 5 × 105 786-0 renal carcinoma cells (Luciferase/mCherry gene expressed cell line). Three weeks after tumor implantation, NSG mice were intravenously injected with 1 × 1011 viral particles of viruses (n = 8 mice/each of group with Ad5.CMV.GFP, Ad5.CMV.HSVtk, and triple-targeted Ad-HSVtk) and treated with ganciclovir (50 mg/kg/7 days by intraperitoneal injection). Mice were weighed daily to gauge health and survival, upon a 20% or more decrease in initial body weight mice were considered nonviable and sacrificed. The comparative analysis of therapeutic index gains was assessed between the groups by the tumor progression in B and survival time in C. The statistical significance of differences between data determined as a P value (**, P < 0.05, by Graph Pad Prism v7.0c software). Tumor progression was detected through ROI value (final ROI value divided by initial ROl) by BLI analysis. The final ROI values were only determined from the three surviving mice at the conclusion of the study (56 days post–tumor implantation). All mice from Ad5.CMV.HSVtk virus–injected group died 3 weeks later due to hepatotoxicity as shown in A.

Figure 4.

Assessment of the therapeutic index gains in metastatic murine models. A, The immunodeficient NSG mice were intracardiacally injected with 5 × 105 786-0 renal carcinoma cells (Luciferase/mCherry gene expressed cell line). Three weeks after tumor implantation, NSG mice were intravenously injected with 1 × 1011 viral particles of viruses (n = 8 mice/each of group with Ad5.CMV.GFP, Ad5.CMV.HSVtk, and triple-targeted Ad-HSVtk) and treated with ganciclovir (50 mg/kg/7 days by intraperitoneal injection). Mice were weighed daily to gauge health and survival, upon a 20% or more decrease in initial body weight mice were considered nonviable and sacrificed. The comparative analysis of therapeutic index gains was assessed between the groups by the tumor progression in B and survival time in C. The statistical significance of differences between data determined as a P value (**, P < 0.05, by Graph Pad Prism v7.0c software). Tumor progression was detected through ROI value (final ROI value divided by initial ROl) by BLI analysis. The final ROI values were only determined from the three surviving mice at the conclusion of the study (56 days post–tumor implantation). All mice from Ad5.CMV.HSVtk virus–injected group died 3 weeks later due to hepatotoxicity as shown in A.

Close modal

Our study highlights the direct benefits that may derive from the application of vector-targeting methods to the context of cancer gene therapy. In this regard, in vivo cancer gene therapies have been restricted to local diseases contexts owing to the limits of currently available gene transfer vectors. Thus, the problematic clinical context of metastatic cancer has not been addressable to this point via gene therapy methods. Further in this regard, the universal recognition of the potential value of vector targeting has not been translated to the context of cancer gene therapy studies demonstrating therapeutic gains. The advent of our novel vector-targeting technology now provides adequate selectivity in vivo to test this hypothesis of field-wide significance. Our early finding reported here thus provide the rationale for future studies designed to apply cancer gene therapy to this problematic clinical context most warranties novel interventions.

D.T. Curiel is a paid consultant for Samyang Biopharmaceuticals and is an advisory board member (unpaid consultant) for Precision Virologics, Inc., Unleash Immuno Oncolytics, Inc., DNAtri, Inc., and Altimmune, Inc. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by the other authors.

Conception and design: M. Lee, Z.H. Lu, I.P. Dmitriev, D.T. Curiel

Development of methodology: Z.H. Lu, E.A. Kashentseva, I.P. Dmitriev, S.A. Mendonca

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): M. Lee, Z.H. Lu, E.A. Kashentseva

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): M. Lee, J. Li

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: M. Lee, Z.H. Lu, I.P. Dmitriev, D.T. Curiel

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): M. Lee, E.A. Kashentseva, I.P. Dmitriev

Study supervision: Z.H. Lu, I.P. Dmitriev

We thank Dr. Arbeit for providing critical precedent research. We also appreciate Dr. Summers's laboratory for providing HSVtk antibody essential to this study. We also thank Dr. Toth's laboratory for providing SHPC6 (Syrian Hamster Pancreatic Carcinoma) cells essential to this study. We especially thank Amanda Baker Wilmsmeyer for extensive advice on the article and the scientific graphics. This study was funded by the NIH (RO1's CA211096, to principle investigator D.T. Curiel) research grants.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1.
Hsiao
WC
,
Sung
SY
,
Chung
LWK
,
Hsieh
CL
. 
Osteonectin promoter-mediated suicide gene therapy of prostate cancer
.
Methods Mol Biol
2019
;
1895
:
27
42
.
2.
Sun
W
,
Shi
Q
,
Zhang
H
,
Yang
K
,
Ke
Y
,
Wang
Y
, et al
Advances in the techniques and methodologies of cancer gene therapy
.
Discov Med
2019
;
27
:
45
55
.
3.
Yamamoto
Y
,
Nagasato
M
,
Yoshida
T
,
Aoki
K
. 
Recent advances in genetic modification of adenovirus vectors for cancer treatment
.
Cancer Sci
2017
;
108
:
831
7
.
4.
Piccolo
P
,
Brunetti-Pierri
N
. 
Challenges and prospects for helper-dependent adenoviral vector-mediated gene therapy
.
Biomedicines
2014
;
2
:
132
48
.
5.
Baker
AH
,
Kritz
A
,
Work
LM
,
Nicklin
SA
. 
Cell-selective viral gene delivery vectors for the vasculature
.
Exp Physiol
2005
;
90
:
27
31
.
6.
Chartier
C
,
Degryse
E
,
Gantzer
M
,
Dieterle
A
,
Pavirani
A
,
Mehtali
M
. 
Efficient generation of recombinant adenovirus vectors by homologous recombination in Escherichia coli
.
J Virol
1996
;
70
:
4805
10
.
7.
Sweeney
JA
,
Hennessey
JP
 Jr.
Evaluation of accuracy and precision of adenovirus absorptivity at 260 nm under conditions of complete DNA disruption
.
Virology
2002
;
295
:
284
8
.
8.
Lu
ZH
,
Kaliberov
S
,
Sohn
RE
,
Kaliberova
L
,
Du
Y
,
Prior
JL
, et al
A new model of multi-visceral and bone metastatic prostate cancer with perivascular niche targeting by a novel endothelial specific adenoviral vector
.
Oncotarget
2017
;
8
:
12272
89
.
9.
Lu
ZH
,
Kaliberov
S
,
Sohn
RE
,
Kaliberova
L
,
Curiel
DT
,
Arbeit
JM
. 
Transcriptional targeting of primary and metastatic tumor neovasculature by an adenoviral type 5 roundabout4 vector in mice
.
PLoS One
2013
;
8
:
e83933
.
10.
Rojas
LA
,
Moreno
R
,
Calderon
H
,
Alemany
R
. 
Adenovirus coxsackie adenovirus receptor-mediated binding to human erythrocytes does not preclude systemic transduction
.
Cancer Gene Ther
2016
;
23
:
411
4
.
11.
Lopez-Gordo
E
,
Denby
L
,
Nicklin
SA
,
Baker
AH
. 
The importance of coagulation factors binding to adenovirus: historical perspectives and implications for gene delivery
.
Expert Opin Drug Deliv
2014
;
11
:
1795
813
.
12.
Short
JJ
,
Rivera
AA
,
Wu
H
,
Walter
MR
,
Yamamoto
M
,
Mathis
JM
, et al
Substitution of adenovirus serotype 3 hexon onto a serotype 5 oncolytic adenovirus reduces factor X binding, decreases liver tropism, and improves antitumor efficacy
.
Mol Cancer Ther
2010
;
9
:
2536
44
.
13.
Kaliberov
SA
,
Kaliberova
LN
,
Hong Lu
Z
,
Preuss
MA
,
Barnes
JA
,
Stockard
CR
, et al
Retargeting of gene expression using endothelium specific hexon modified adenoviral vector
.
Virology
2013
;
447
:
312
25
.
14.
Bilbao
G
,
Contreras
JL
,
Dmitriev
I
,
Smyth
CA
,
Jenkins
S
,
Eckhoff
D
, et al
Genetically modified adenovirus vector containing an RGD peptide in the HI loop of the fiber knob improves gene transfer to nonhuman primate isolated pancreatic islets
.
Am J Transplant
2002
;
2
:
237
43
.
15.
Wang
M
,
Hemminki
A
,
Siegal
GP
,
Barnes
MN
,
Dmitriev
I
,
Krasnykh
V
, et al
Adenoviruses with an RGD-4C modification of the fiber knob elicit a neutralizing antibody response but continue to allow enhanced gene delivery
.
Gynecol Oncol
2005
;
96
:
341
8
.
16.
Wildner
O
,
Morris
JC
,
Vahanian
NN
,
Ford
H
 Jr
,
Ramsey
WJ
,
Blaese
RM
. 
Adenoviral vectors capable of replication improve the efficacy of HSVtk/GCV suicide gene therapy of cancer
.
Gene Ther
1999
;
6
:
57
62
.
17.
Hodish
I
,
Tal
R
,
Shaish
A
,
Varda-Bloom
N
,
Greenberger
S
,
Rauchwerger
A
, et al
Systemic administration of radiation-potentiated anti-angiogenic gene therapy against primary and metastatic cancer based on transcriptionally controlled HSV-TK
.
Cancer Biol Ther
2009
;
8
:
424
32
.
18.
Yi
QY
,
Bai
ZS
,
Cai
B
,
Chen
N
,
Chen
LS
,
Yuan
T
, et al
HSVTK/GCV can induce cytotoxicity of retinoblastoma cells through autophagy inhibition by activating MAPK/ERK
.
Oncol Rep
2018
;
40
:
682
92
.