Cancer vaccines are designed to promote tumor specific immune responses, particularly cytotoxic CD8 positive T cells that are specific to tumor antigens. The earliest vaccines, which were developed in 1994-95, tested non-mutated, shared tumor associated antigens that had been shown to be immunogenic and capable of inducing clinical responses in a minority of people with late stage cancer. Technological developments in the past few years have enabled the investigation of vaccines that target mutated antigens that are patient specific. Several platforms for cancer vaccination are being tested, including peptides, proteins, antigen presenting cells, tumor cells, and viral vectors. Standard of care treatments, such as surgery and ablation, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, can also induce antitumor immunity, thereby having cancer vaccine effects. The monitoring of patients' immune responses at baseline and after standard of care treatment is shedding light on immune biomarkers. Combination therapies are being tested in clinical trials and are likely to be the best approach to improving patient outcomes.

RNA modification is manifested as chemically altered nucleotides, widely exists in diverse natural RNAs, and is closely related to RNA structure and function. Currently, mRNA-based vaccines have received great attention and rapid development as novel and mighty fighters against various diseases including cancer. The achievement of RNA vaccines in clinical application is largely attributed to some methodological innovations including the incorporation of modified nucleotides into the synthetic RNA. The selection of optimal RNA modifications aimed at reducing the instability and immunogenicity of RNA molecules is a very critical task to improve the efficacy and safety of mRNA vaccines. This review summarizes the functions of RNA modifications and their application in mRNA vaccines, highlights recent advances of mRNA vaccines in cancer immunotherapy, and provides perspectives for future development of mRNA vaccines in the context of personalized tumor therapy.

During the past 2 decades, the possibility that preparations capable of eliciting tumor-specific immune responses would mediate robust therapeutic effects in cancer patients has received renovated interest. In this context, several approaches to vaccinate cancer patients against their own malignancies have been conceived, including the administration of DNA constructs coding for one or more tumor-associated antigens (TAAs). Such DNA-based vaccines conceptually differ from other types of gene therapy in that they are not devised to directly kill cancer cells or sensitize them to the cytotoxic activity of a drug, but rather to elicit a tumor-specific immune response. In spite of an intense wave of preclinical development, the introduction of this immunotherapeutic paradigm into the clinical practice is facing difficulties. Indeed, while most DNA-based anticancer vaccines are well tolerated by cancer patients, they often fail to generate therapeutically relevant clinical responses. In this Trial Watch, we discuss the latest advances on the use of DNA-based vaccines in cancer therapy, discussing the literature that has been produced around this topic during the last 13 months as well as clinical studies that have been launched in the same time frame to assess the actual therapeutic potential of this intervention.

Due to their rapid and widespread development, DNA vaccines have entered into a variety of human clinical trials for vaccines against various diseases including cancer. Evidence that DNA vaccines are well tolerated and have an excellent safety profile proved to be of advantage as many clinical trials combines the first phase with the second, saving both time and money. It is clear from the results obtained in clinical trials that such DNA vaccines require much improvement in antigen expression and delivery methods to make them sufficiently effective in the clinic. Similarly, it is clear that additional strategies are required to activate effective immunity against poorly immunogenic tumor antigens. Engineering vaccine design for manipulating antigen presentation and processing pathways is one of the most important aspects that can be easily handled in the DNA vaccine technology. Several approaches have been investigated including DNA vaccine engineering, co-delivery of immunomodulatory molecules, safe routes of administration, prime-boost regimen and strategies to break the immunosuppressive networks mechanisms adopted by malignant cells to prevent immune cell function. Combined or single strategies to enhance the efficacy and immunogenicity of DNA vaccines are applied in completed and ongoing clinical trials, where the safety and tolerability of the DNA platform are substantiated. In this review on DNA vaccines, salient aspects on this topic going from basic research to the clinic are evaluated. Some representative DNA cancer vaccine studies are also discussed.

The foundation of modern vaccinology dates back to the 1790s, when the English physician Edward Jenner uncovered the tremendous medical potential of prophylactic vaccination. Jenner's work ignited a wave of nationwide vaccination campaigns abating the incidence of multiple life-threatening infectious diseases and culminating with the eradication of natural smallpox virus, which was definitively certified by the WHO in 1980. The possibility of using vaccines against cancer was first proposed at the end of the 19th century by Paul Ehrlich and William Coley. However, it was not until the 1990s that such a hypothesis began to be intensively investigated, following the realization that the immune system is not completely unresponsive to tumors and that neoplastic cells express immunogenic tumor-associated antigens (TAAs). Nowadays, anticancer vaccines are rapidly moving from the bench to the bedside, and a few prophylactic and therapeutic preparations have already been approved by FDA for use in humans. In this setting, one interesting approach is constituted by DNA vaccines, i.e., TAA-encoding circularized DNA constructs, often of bacterial origin, that are delivered to patients as such or by means of specific vectors, including (but not limited to) liposomal preparations, nanoparticles, bacteria and viruses. The administration of DNA vaccines is most often performed via the intramuscular or subcutaneous route and is expected to cause (1) the endogenous synthesis of the TAA by myocytes and/or resident antigen-presenting cells; (2) the presentation of TAA-derived peptides on the cell surface, in association with MHC class I molecules; and (3) the activation of potentially therapeutic tumor-specific immune responses. In this Trial Watch, we will summarize the results of recent clinical trials that have evaluated/are evaluating DNA vaccines as therapeutic interventions against cancer.

Prophylactic vaccination constitutes one of the most prominent medical achievements of history. This concept was first demonstrated by the pioneer work of Edward Jenner, dating back to the late 1790s, after which an array of preparations that confer life-long protective immunity against several infectious agents has been developed. The ensuing implementation of nation-wide vaccination programs has de facto abated the incidence of dreadful diseases including rabies, typhoid, cholera and many others. Among all, the most impressive result of vaccination campaigns is surely represented by the eradication of natural smallpox infection, which was definitively certified by the WHO in 1980. The idea of employing vaccines as anticancer interventions was first theorized in the 1890s by Paul Ehrlich and William Coley. However, it soon became clear that while vaccination could be efficiently employed as a preventive measure against infectious agents, anticancer vaccines would have to (1) operate as therapeutic, rather than preventive, interventions (at least in the vast majority of settings), and (2) circumvent the fact that tumor cells often fail to elicit immune responses. During the past 30 y, along with the recognition that the immune system is not irresponsive to tumors (as it was initially thought) and that malignant cells express tumor-associated antigens whereby they can be discriminated from normal cells, considerable efforts have been dedicated to the development of anticancer vaccines. Some of these approaches, encompassing cell-based, DNA-based and purified component-based preparations, have already been shown to exert conspicuous anticancer effects in cohorts of patients affected by both hematological and solid malignancies. In this Trial Watch, we will summarize the results of recent clinical trials that have evaluated/are evaluating purified peptides or full-length proteins as therapeutic interventions against cancer.

Besides the uncertainty about colorectal cancer stem cell (CCSC) markers, isolating, purifying, and enriching CCSCs to produce CCSC vaccines is highly challenging. However, allogeneic vaccines developed from CRC cell lines can provide universal, comprehensive, inexpensive, simple, and fast approach to cancer treatment.

Throughout the past 3 decades, along with the recognition that the immune system not only influences oncogenesis and tumor progression, but also determines how established neoplastic lesions respond therapy, renovated enthusiasm has gathered around the possibility of using vaccines as anticancer agents. Such an enthusiasm quickly tempered when it became clear that anticancer vaccines would have to be devised as therapeutic, rather than prophylactic, measures, and that malignant cells often fail to elicit (or actively suppress) innate and adaptive immune responses. Nonetheless, accumulating evidence indicates that a variety of anticancer vaccines, including cell-based, DNA-based, and purified component-based preparations, are capable of circumventing the poorly immunogenic and highly immunosuppressive nature of most tumors and elicit (at least under some circumstances) therapeutically relevant immune responses. Great efforts are currently being devoted to the identification of strategies that may provide anticancer vaccines with the capacity of breaking immunological tolerance and eliciting tumor-associated antigen-specific immunity in a majority of patients. In this sense, promising results have been obtained by combining anticancer vaccines with a relatively varied panels of adjuvants, including multiple immunostimulatory cytokines, Toll-like receptor agonists as well as inhibitors of immune checkpoints. One year ago, in the December issue of OncoImmunology, we discussed the biological mechanisms that underlie the antineoplastic effects of peptide-based vaccines and presented an abundant literature demonstrating the prominent clinical potential of such an approach. Here, we review the latest developments in this exciting area of research, focusing on high-profile studies that have been published during the last 13 mo and clinical trials launched in the same period to evaluate purified peptides or full-length proteins as therapeutic anticancer agents.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the subtype of breast cancer with the poorest outcomes, and is associated with a high risk of relapse and metastasis. The treatment choices for this malignancy have been confined to conventional chemotherapeutic agents, due to a lack of expression of the canonical molecular targets. Immunotherapy has been recently changing the treatment paradigm for many types of tumors, and the approach of evoking active immune responses in the milieu of breast tumors through cancer vaccines has been introduced as one of the most novel immunotherapeutic approaches. Accordingly, a number of vaccines for the treatment or prevention of recurrence have been developed and are currently being studied in TNBC patients, while none have yet received any approvals. To elucidate the efficacy and safety of these vaccines, we performed a systematic review of the available literature on the topic. After searching the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar databases, a total of 5701 results were obtained, from which 42 clinical studies were eventually included based on the predefined criteria. The overall quality of the included studies was acceptable. However, due to a lack of reporting outcomes of survival or progression in some studies (which were presented as conference abstracts) as well as the heterogeneity of the reported outcomes and study designs, we were not able to carry out a meta-analysis. A total of 32 different vaccines have so far been evaluated in TNBC patients, with the majority belonging to the peptide-based vaccine type. The other vaccines were in the cell or nucleic acid (RNA/DNA)-based categories. Most vaccines proved to be safe with low-grade, local adverse events and could efficiently evoke cellular immune responses; however, most trials were not able to demonstrate significant improvements in clinical indices of efficacy. This is in part due to the limited number of randomized studies, as well as the limited TNBC population of each trial. However, due to the encouraging results of the currently published trials, we anticipate that this strategy could show its potential through larger, phase III randomized studies in the near future.

New DNA sequencing platforms have revolutionized human genome sequencing. The dramatic advances in genome sequencing technologies predict that the $1,000 genome will become a reality within the next few years. Applied to cancer, the availability of cancer genome sequences permits real-time decision-making with the potential to affect diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment, and has opened the door towards personalized medicine. A promising strategy is the identification of mutated tumor antigens, and the design of personalized cancer vaccines. Supporting this notion are preliminary analyses of the epitope landscape in breast cancer suggesting that individual tumors express significant numbers of novel antigens to the immune system that can be specifically targeted through cancer vaccines.

Dendritic cells (DCs) have the potential for cancer immunotherapy due to their ability to process and present antigens to T-cells and also in stimulating immune responses. However, DC-based vaccines have only exhibited minimal effectiveness against established tumours in mice and humans. The use of appropriate adjuvant enhances the efficacy of DC based cancer vaccines in treating tumours.

Recently it was demonstrated that tumors induce specific changes to the surface of human endothelial cells thereby providing the basis for designing endothelial cell-based vaccines that directly target antigens expressed by the tumor endothelium. The present report extends these studies in vitro by investigating the efficacy of allogeneic antigens with regard to their ability to target immune responses against the tumor vasculature since alloantigens simplify vaccine development and implementation in clinical practice. We demonstrated that allogeneic SANTAVAC (Set of All Natural Target Antigens for Vaccination Against Cancer), which presents a specifically prepared composition of cell surface antigens from tumor-stimulated endothelial cells, allows targeting of the tumor vasculature with efficacy of 17, where efficacy represents the killing rate of target cells before normal cells are adversely affected, and efficacy of 60, where efficacy represents the fold decrease in the number of target cells and directly relates to tumor growth arrest. These data suggest that allogeneic SANTAVAC may be considered an antigenic composition that following administration in the presence of respective adjuvants may be clinically tested as a therapeutic or prophylactic universal cancer vaccine without adverse side effects to the normal vasculature.

Genetic vaccines are emerging as a powerful modality to induce T-cell responses to target tumor associated antigens (TAA). Viral or plasmid DNA or RNA vectors harbor an expression cassette encoding the antigen of choice delivered in vivo by vaccination. In this context, immunizations with minigenes containing selected, highly antigenic, T-cell epitopes of TAAs may have several advantages relative to full-length proteins. The objective of this study was to identify an optimal scaffold for minigene construction. We generated a number of minigenes containing epitopes from the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) model TAA and utilized muscle DNA electro-gene-transfer (DNA-EGT) to vaccinate HLA-A*0201 (HHD) and CEA/HHD double transgenic mice. The components utilized to construct the minigenes included CD8+ T cell epitopes and (or) anchor modified analogs that were selected on the basis of their predicted binding to HLA-*A0201, their uniqueness in the human proteome, and the likelihood of cancer cell natural processing and presentation via MHC-I. Other candidate components comparatively tested included: helper CD4+ T-cell epitopes, flanking regions for optimal epitope processing (including both proteasome-dependent and furin-dependent polypeptide processing mechanisms), and immunoenhancing moieties. Through a series of comparative studies and iterations we have identified an optimal minigene scaffold comprising the following elements: human tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) signal peptide, T-cell epitopes connected by furin sensitive linkers, and the E. Coli enterotoxin B subunit. The selected epitope modified minigenes (EMM) delivered by DNA-EGT were able to break immune tolerance in CEA/HHD mice and induce a strong immune response against all epitopes tested, independently of their relative positions within the scaffold. Furthermore, the optimized EMMs delivered via DNA-EGT were more immunogenic and exerted more powerful antitumor effects in a B16-CEA/HHD metastatic melanoma model than a DNA vector encoding the full-length protein or a mixture of the same peptides injected subcutaneously. Our data may shed light on the optimal design of a universal vehicle for epitope-targeted, genetic cancer vaccines.

(1) Background: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/neu-driven carcinogenesis is delayed by preventive vaccines able to elicit autochthonous antibodies against HER2/neu. Since cooperation between different receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) can occur in human as well as in experimental tumors, we investigated the set-up of DNA and cell vaccines to elicit an antibody response co-targeting two RTKs: HER2/neu and the Insulin-like Growth Factor Receptor-1 (IGF1R). (2) Methods: Plasmid vectors carrying the murine optimized IGF1R sequence or the human IGF1R isoform were used as electroporated DNA vaccines. IGF1R plasmids were transfected in allogeneic HER2/neu-positive IL12-producing murine cancer cells to obtain adjuvanted cell vaccines co-expressing HER2/neu and IGF1R. Vaccination was administered in the preneoplastic stage to mice prone to develop HER2/neu-driven, IGF1R-dependent rhabdomyosarcoma. (3) Results: Electroporated DNA vaccines for murine IGF1R did not elicit anti-mIGF1R antibodies, even when combined with Treg-depletion and/or IL12, while DNA vaccines carrying the human IGF1R elicited antibodies recognizing only the human IGF1R isoform. Cell vaccines co-expressing HER2/neu and murine or human IGF1R succeeded in eliciting antibodies recognizing the murine IGF1R isoform. Cell vaccines co-targeting HER2/neu and murine IGF1R induced the highest level of anti-IGF1R antibodies and nearly significantly delayed the onset of spontaneous rhabdomyosarcomas. (4) Conclusions: Multi-engineered adjuvanted cancer cell vaccines can break the tolerance towards a highly tolerized RTK, such as IGF1R. Cell vaccines co-targeting HER2/neu and IGF1R elicited low levels of specific antibodies that slightly delayed onset of HER2/neu-driven, IGF1R-dependent tumors.

The advent of cancer immunotherapy has revolutionized the field of cancer treatment and offers cancer patients new hope. Although this therapy has proved highly successful for some patients, its efficacy is not all encompassing and several cancer types do not respond. Cancer vaccines offer an alternate approach to promote anti-tumor immunity that differ in their mode of action from antibody-based therapies. Cancer vaccines serve to balance the equilibrium of the crosstalk between the tumor cells and the host immune system. Recent advances in understanding the nature of tumor-mediated tolerogenicity and antigen presentation has aided in the identification of tumor antigens that have the potential to enhance anti-tumor immunity. Cancer vaccines can either be prophylactic (preventative) or therapeutic (curative). An exciting option for therapeutic vaccines is the emergence of personalized vaccines, which are tailor-made and specific for tumor type and individual patient. This review summarizes the current standing of the most promising vaccine strategies with respect to their development and clinical efficacy. We also discuss prospects for future development of stem cell-based prophylactic vaccines.

Cancer vaccines (CVs) represent a long-sought therapeutic and prophylactic immunotherapy strategy to obtain antigen (Ag)-specific T-cell responses and potentially achieve long-term clinical benefit. However, historically, most CV clinical trials have resulted in disappointing outcomes, despite promising signs of immunogenicity across most formulations. In the past decade, technological advances regarding vaccine delivery platforms, tools for immunogenomic profiling, and Ag/epitope selection have occurred. Consequently, the ability of CVs to induce tumor-specific and, in some cases, remarkable clinical responses have been observed in early-phase clinical trials. It is notable that the record-breaking speed of vaccine development in response to the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic mainly relied on manufacturing infrastructures and technological platforms already developed for CVs. In turn, research, clinical data, and infrastructures put in place for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic can further speed CV development processes. This review outlines the main technological advancements as well as major issues to tackle in the development of CVs. Possible applications for unmet clinical needs will be described, putting into perspective the future of cancer vaccinology.

Oncolytic Viruses (OVs) work through two main mechanisms of action: the direct lysis of the virus-infected cancer cells and the release of tumor antigens as a result of the viral burst. In this sc.enario, the OVs act as in situ cancer vaccines, since the immunogenicity of the virus is combined with tumor antigens, that direct the specificity of the anti-tumor adaptive immune response. However, this mechanism in some cases fails in eliciting a strong specific T cell response. One way to overcome this problem and enhance the priming efficiency is the production of genetically modified oncolytic viruses encoding one or more tumor antigens. To avoid the long and expensive process related to the engineering of the OVs, we have exploited an approach based on coating OVs (adenovirus and vaccinia virus) with tumor antigens. In this work, oncolytic viruses encoding tumor antigens and tumor antigen decorated adenoviral platform (PeptiCRAd) have been used as cancer vaccines and evaluated both for their prophylactic and therapeutic efficacy. We have first tested the oncolytic vaccines by exploiting the OVA model, moving then to TRP2, a more clinically relevant tumor antigen. Finally, both approaches have been investigated in tumor neo-antigens settings. Interestingly, both genetically modified oncolytic adenovirus and PeptiCRAd elicited T cells-specific anti-tumor responses. However, in vitro cross-representation experiments, showed an advantage of PeptiCRAd as regards the fast presentation of the model epitope SIINFEKL from OVA in an immunogenic rather than tolerogenic fashion. Here two approaches used as cancer oncolytic vaccines have been explored and characterized for their efficacy. Although the generation of specific anti-tumor T cells was elicited in both approaches, PeptiCRAd retains the advantage of being rapidly adaptable by coating the adenovirus with a different set of tumor antigens, which is crucial in personalized cancer vaccines clinical setting.

With the regulatory approval of Provenge and Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer and advanced melanoma respectively, and other promising clinical trials outcomes, cancer vaccine is gaining prominence as a cancer therapeutic agent. Cancer vaccine works to induce T cell priming, expansion, and infiltration resulting in antigen-specific cytotoxicity. Such an approach that can drive cytotoxicity within the tumor could complement the success of checkpoint inhibitors as tumors shown to have high immune cell infiltration are those that would respond well to these antibodies. With the advancements in cancer vaccine, methods to monitor and understand how cancer vaccines modify the immune milieu is under rapid development. This includes using ELISpot and intracellular staining to detect cytokine secretion by activated T cells; tetramer and CyTOF to quantitate the level of antigen specific T cells; proliferation and cell killing assay to detect the expansion of T cell and specific killing activity. More recently, T cell profiling has provided unprecedented detail on immune cell subsets and providing clues to the mechanism involved in immune activation. Here, we reviewed cancer vaccines currently in clinical trials and highlight available techniques in monitoring the clinical response in patients.

With the clinical approval of T-cell-dependent immune checkpoint inhibitors for many cancers, therapeutic cancer vaccines have re-emerged as a promising immunotherapy. Cancer vaccines require the addition of immunostimulatory adjuvants to increase vaccine immunogenicity, and increasingly multiple adjuvants are used in combination to bolster further and shape cellular immunity to tumor antigens. However, rigorous quantification of adjuvants' synergistic interactions is challenging due to partial redundancy in costimulatory molecules and cytokine production, leading to the common assumption that combining both adjuvants at the maximum tolerated dose results in optimal efficacy. Herein, we examine this maximum dose assumption and find combinations of these doses are suboptimal. Instead, we optimized dendritic cell activation by extending the Multidimensional Synergy of Combinations (MuSyC) framework that measures the synergy of efficacy and potency between two vaccine adjuvants. Initially, we performed a preliminary in vitro screening of clinically translatable adjuvant receptor targets (TLR, STING, NLL, and RIG-I). We determined that STING agonist (CDN) plus TLR4 agonist (MPL-A) or TLR7/8 agonist (R848) as the best pairwise combinations for dendritic cell activation. In addition, we found that the combination of R848 and CDN is synergistically efficacious and potent in activating both murine and human antigen-presenting cells (APCs) in vitro. These two selected adjuvants were then used to estimate a MuSyC-dose optimized for in vivo T-cell priming using ovalbumin-based peptide vaccines. Finally, using B16 melanoma and MOC1 head and neck cancer models, MuSyC-dose-based adjuvating of cancer vaccines improved the antitumor response, increased tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and induced novel myeloid tumor infiltration changes. Further, the MuSyC-dose-based adjuvants approach did not cause additional weight changes or increased plasma cytokine levels compared to CDN alone. Collectively, our findings offer a proof of principle that our MuSyC-extended approach can be used to optimize cancer vaccine formulations for immunotherapy.

Cancer is a major public health threat, and researchers are constantly looking for new ways to develop effective treatments. One approach is the use of cancer vaccines, which work by boosting the body's immune system to fight cancer. The goal of this study was to develop an effective cancer vaccine using rendered-inactive tumor cells. A CMS5 fibrosarcoma tumor model in BALB/c mice and an E.G7 lymphoma tumor model in C57BL/6 mice were used to evaluate how mitomycin C-inactivated tumor cells mediated tumor protection. The results showed that immunization with inactivated CMS5 cells significantly improved tumor suppression after a challenge with live CMS5 tumor cells, but no effect was observed using the E.G7 tumor model. The results suggested that DC (dendritic cell) responses to tumor antigens are critical. The maturation and activation of DCs were effectively promoted by mitomycin C-treated CMS5 cells, as well as enhanced phagocytosis ability in vitro. The tumor-protective effects established by the vaccination of inactivated CMS5 cells were CD8+ T cell-dependent, as the antitumor responses disappeared after eliminating CD8+ T cells. It was found that the tumor-prevention efficacy was dramatically increased by combining inactivated CM55 tumor cells with anti-CD25 antibodies to temporarily deplete Treg cells (regulatory T cells). This strategy could also significantly induce the rejection against E.G7 tumors. In addition, vaccination with anti-CD25 antibodies plus inactivated CMS5 cells elicited antitumor responses against heterologous tumors. According to the findings of this study, combining the immunization of inactivated tumor cells with an anti-CD25 antibody may be an effective method for cancer prevention.