Loading
Stephen Russell built the engineered measles viruses used against cancer and reported the case in which one intravenous dose put a patient's myeloma into complete remission.
Stephen Russell works in the Department of Molecular Medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, and his recent papers also carry an affiliation to Vyriad, the Rochester company developing oncolytic viruses. His programme built MV-NIS, a measles virus engineered to kill myeloma plasma cells and to carry the sodium iodide symporter gene so that virus replication can be imaged non-invasively with radioiodine.
In 2014 he reported two measles-seronegative patients with drug-refractory myeloma given a single intravenous infusion of 10^11 infectious units of MV-NIS. Both responded and one had a durable complete remission at all disease sites, with imaging confirming virus replication inside the tumours. It remains the most cited demonstration that intravenous oncolytic virotherapy can work, and the clearest illustration of why it usually cannot: the patients were selected for having no pre-existing measles antibodies, which excludes nearly everyone.
With Kah-Whye Peng and John Bell he wrote the 2012 Nature Biotechnology review that set the field's agenda, and with Eleanor Kelly the 2007 history of oncolytic viruses from the first case reports to genetic engineering. He read and commented on the 2024 Croatian self-experimentation case report before publication, which the authors acknowledge.
| Title | Journal | Year |
|---|---|---|
| Remission of disseminated cancer after systemic oncolytic virotherapy | Mayo Clinic Proceedings | 2014 |
| Oncolytic virotherapy | Nature Biotechnology | 2012 |
| History of oncolytic viruses: genesis to genetic engineering | Molecular Therapy | 2007 |
This is the case most often cited to argue that oncolytic viruses can cure. It should be cited with its conditions: two patients, both chosen because they had no pre-existing measles antibodies, and a dose so large that manufacturing it is itself a research problem. It proves the biology is real and simultaneously explains why the approach has not generalised.
Read against what happened next, this review is a fair scorecard. The immune timing problem, the delivery threshold and the manufacturing yield are still the reasons most programmes fail, and the proliferation of platforms the authors warned about is still the reason the field has many products and few randomised wins.
The history is the argument against treating any single dramatic case as proof. For a century, striking individual regressions coexisted with a complete failure to build a reliable treatment, because the same immune response that is needed to kill the tumour also clears the virus. That tension has not been resolved; it has only been engineered around.
Shares Oncolytic viruses and the tags oncolytic-virus, immunotherapy.
Shares John C. Bell, Oncolytic viruses.
Shares Oncolytic viruses and the tag oncolytic-virus.
Shares Oncolytic viruses and the tag oncolytic-virus.
Shares Oncolytic viruses and the tag oncolytic-virus.
Shares Oncolytic viruses and the tag oncolytic-virus.
Shares Oncolytic viruses and the tag oncolytic-virus.
Shares Multiple myeloma and the tag myeloma.