RECOMBINANT ADENOVIRUS VECTORS THAT ARE REPLICATION-COMPETENT IN TERT-EXPRESSING CELLS

Abstract: Novel adenovirus vectors which overexpress an adenovirus death protein and which are replication-competent in and, preferably, replication-restricted to cells expressing telomerase. One embodiment provides for efficient destruction and removal of viral-infected host cells expressing telomerase. Still further, another embodiment provides for additional restriction and safety by disrupting E1A's ability to bid p300 and/or members of the Rb family members. Compositions of the novel vectors and methods for promoting death of cells expressig telomerase with these vectors are also disclosed.

Description: RECOMBINANT ADENOVIRUS VECTORS THAT ARE REPLICATION-COMPETENT IN TERT-EXPRESSING CELLS Reference to Government Grant This invention was made with government support under a grant from the National Institutes of Health, Grant Number ROl CA71704. The government has certain rights in this invention. Related Application This application claims the benefit of the filing date of provisional application serial no. 60/233,872, filed on September 20, 2000, entitled "A Method to Restrict the Replication of Replication-competent Adenovirus Vectors to Neoplastic Cells". Provisional application 60/233,872 is herein incorporated by reference in its entirety. This application is also a continuation-in-part of U.S. Application No. 09/351,778, filed on July 12, 1999, incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. BACKGROUND OF INVENTION (1) Field of the Invention This invention relates generally to recombinant adenovirus vectors which overexpress adenovirus death proteins (ADP) and which are replication-restricted to cells expressing telomerase. (2) Description of the Related Art Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States and elsewhere. Depending on the type of cancer, it is typically treated with surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation. These treatments often fail: surgery may not remove all the cancer; some cancers are resistant to chemotherapy and radiation therapy; and chemotherapy- resistant tumors frequently develop. New therapies are necessary, to be used alone or in combination with classical techniques. One potential therapy under active investigation is treating tumors with recombinant viral vectors expressing anti-cancer therapeutic proteins. Adenovirus- based vectors contain several characteristics that make them conceptually appealing for use in treating cancer, as well as for therapy of genetic disorders. Adenoviruses (hereinafter used interchangeably with "Ads") can easily be grown in culture to high titer stocks that are stable. They have a broad host range, replicating in most human cancer cell types. Their genome can be manipulated by site-directed mutation and insertion of foreign genes expressed from foreign promoters. The adenovirion consists of a DNA-protein core within a protein capsid (reviewed by Stewart et al., "Adenovirus structure by x-ray crystallography and electron microscopy." in: The Molecular Repertoire of Adenoviruses, Doerfler, W. et al., (ed), Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany, p. 25-38). Virions bind to a specific cellular receptor, are endocytosed, and the genome is extruded from endosomes and transported to the nucleus. The genome is a linear double-stranded DNA of about 36 kbp, encoding about 36 genes (Fig. 1A). In the nucleus, the "immediate early" EIA proteins are expressed initially, and these proteins induce expression of the "delayed early" proteins encoded by the E1B, E2, E3, and E4 transcription units (reviewed by Shenk, T. "Adenoviridae: the viruses and their replication" in: Fields Virology, Fields, B.N. et al., Lippencott-Raven, Philadelphia, p. 2111-2148). EIA proteins also induce or repress cellular genes, resulting in stimulation of the cell cycle. About 23 early proteins function to usurp the host cell and initiate viral DNA replication. Cellular protein synthesis is shut off, and the cell becomes a factory for making viral proteins. Virions assemble in the nucleus at about 1 day post infection (p.i.), and after 2-3 days the cell lyses and releases progeny virus. Cell lysis is mediated by the E3 11.6K protein, which has been renamed "adenovirus death protein" (ADP) (Tollefson et al., J. Virol. 70:2296-2306, 1996; Tollefson et al., Virol. 220:152-162, 1996). The term ADP as used herein in a generic sense refers collectively to ADP's from adenoviruses such as, e.g. Ad type 1 (Adl), Ad type 2 (Ad2), Ad type 5 (Ad5) or Ad type 6 (Ad6) all of which express homologous ADP's with a high degree of sequence similarity. The Ad vectors being investigated for use in anti-cancer and gene therapy are based on recombinant Ad's that are either replication-defective or replication- competent. Typical replication-defective Ad vectors lack the EIA and E1B genes (collectively known as El) and contain in their place an expression cassette consisting of a promoter and pre-mRNA processing signals which drive expression of a foreign gene. (See e.g. Felzmann et al., Gene Ther. 4: 1322-1329, 1997; Topf et al., Gene Ther. 5:507-513, 1998; Putzer et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:10889-10894, 1997; Arai et al, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94:13862-13867, 1997). These vectors are unable to replicate because they lack the EIA genes required to induce Ad gene expression and DNA replication. In addition, the E3 genes are usually deleted because they are not essential for virus replication in cultured cells. It is recognized in the art that replication-defective Ad vectors have several characteristics that make them suboptimal for use in therapy. For example, production of replication-defective vectors requires that they be grown on a complementing cell line that provides the EIA proteins in trans. Such cell lines are fastidious, and generation of virus stocks is time-consuming and expensive. In addition, although many foreign proteins have been expressed from such vectors, the level of expression is low compared to Ad late proteins. To address these problems, several groups have proposed using replication- competent Ad vectors for therapeutic use. Replication-competent vectors retain Ad genes essential for replication and thus, do not require complementing cell lines to replicate. Replication-competent Ad vectors lyse cells as a natural part of the life cycle of the vector. Another advantage of replication-competent Ad vectors occurs when the vector is engineered to encode and express a foreign protein. (See e.g. Lubeck et al, AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 10:1443-1449, 1994). Such vectors would be expected to greatly amplify synthesis of the encoded protein in vivo as the vector replicates. For use as anti-cancer agents, replication-competent viral vectors would theoretically also be advantageous in that they should replicate and spread throughout the tumor, not just in the initially infected cells as is the case with replication-defective vectors. Because many human tissues are permissive for Ad infection, a method should be devised to limit the replication of the virus to the target cells. To specifically target tumor cells, several research laboratories have manipulated the EIB and EIA regions of the adenovirus. For example, Onyx Pharmaceuticals recently reported on adenovirus-based anti-cancer vectors which are replication-deficient in non-neoplastic cells, but which exhibit a replication phenotype in neoplastic cells lacking functional p53 and/or retinoblastoma (pRB) tumor suppressor proteins (U.S. Patent No. 5,677,178; Heise et al, Nature Med. 6:639-645, 1997; Bischoff et al., Science 214:313-316, 1996). This phenotype is reportedly accomplished by using recombinant adenoviruses containing a mutation in the EIB region that renders the encoded E1B-55K protein incapable of binding to p53 and/or a mutation(s) in the EIA region which make the encoded EIA protein (p289R or p243R) incapable of bmding to pRB and/or p300 and/or pl07 . E1B-55K has at least two independent functions: it binds and inactivates the tumor suppressor protein p53, and it is required for efficient transport of Ad mRNA from the nucleus. Because these EIB and EIA viral proteins are involved in forcing cells into S-phase, which is required for replication of adenovirus DNA, and because the p53 and pRB proteins block cell cycle progression, the recombinant adenovirus vectors described by Onyx should replicate in cells defective in p53 and/or pRB, which is the case for many cancer cells, but not in cells with wild-type p53 and/or pRB. Onyx has reported that replication of an adenovirus lacking E1B-55K, named ONYX-015, was restricted to p53-minus cancer cell lines (Bischoff et al., supra), and that ONYX-015 slowed the growth or caused regression of a p53-minus human tumor growing in nude mice (Heise et al., supra). Others have challenged the Onyx report claiming that replication of ONYX- 015 is independent of p53 genotype and occurs efficiently in some primary cultured human cells (Harada and Berk, J. Virol 73:5333-5344, 1999). ONYX-015 does not replicate as well as wild-type adenovirus because E1B-55K is not available to facilitate viral mRNA transport from the nucleus. Also, ONYX-015 expresses less ADP than wild-type virus. As an extension of the ONYX-015 concept, a replication-competent adenovirus vector was designed that has the gene for E1B-55K replaced with the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene (Wilder et al., Gene Therapy 6:57-62, 1999). The group that constructed this vector reported that the combination of the vector plus gancyclovir showed a therapeutic effect on a human colon cancer in a nude mouse model (Wilder et al., Cancer Res. 59:410-413, 1999). However, this vector lacks the gene for ADP, and accordingly, the vector will lyse cells and spread from cell-to-cell less efficiently than an equivalent vector that expresses ADP. To target tumor cells, other research groups have taken advantage of the differential expression of telomerase in dividing cells. Telomerase is a ribonucleoprotein enzyme which is responsible for the maintenance of telomeres. Telomeres are long tandem repetitions of a simple sequence, for example TTAGGG, at both ends of the chromosomes, the very ends of which, because of the nature of DNA replication do not get duplicated (review Blackburn, E.H. Nature 350:569-573, 1991). As a result, telomeres shorten by each round of cell division (Harley, CB. et al. Nature 345 :458-460, 1990), in the long run causing chromosomal instability and cellular senescence (Greider, C.W. Cell 67:645-647, 1991). To counteract this effect, embryonic cells, germ cells, stem cells, and hematopoietic cells (Ulaner, G/A. et al. Cancer Res. 58:4168-4172, 1998; Broccoli, D. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92, 9082-9086, 1995; Kalquist, K.A. et al. Nature Genetics 19:182-186, 1998) produce the telomerase enzyme, which maintains the original length of the telomeres. Some epithelial basal cells in the skin and intestine also express low levels of telomerase (Yasumoto, S. et al. Oncogene 13:433-439, 1996; Harle-Bachor, C. andBoukamp, P. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:6476-6481, 1996). Cancerous cells, on the other hand, are continuously dividing, without going into senescence. After an initial period of shortening in these dividing cells, the lengths of the telomeres stabilize. Further research proved that this stabilization was due to the reactivation of telomerase (Blasco, M.A. et al. Nature Genetics 12:200-204, 1996). A systematic search showed that late stage tumors exhibit high levels of telomerase activity (Kim, N.W. et al. Science 266:2011-2015, 1994; Shay, J.W. andBachetti, S. Eur. J. Cancer, 33:787- 791, 1997; Yan, P. et al. Cancer Res. 59:3166-3170, 1999). The telomerase holoenzyme consists of two subunits: an RNA molecule and a protein (Morin, G.B. Cell 59:521-529, 1989). The RNA serves as the template for the telomere sequences (Feng, J. et al. Science 269:1236-1241, 1995), while the protein (human Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase or "hTERT") harbors reverse transcriptase activity (Harrington, L. et al. Science 275:973-977, 1997). The expression of hTERT is tightly regulated (Meyerson, M. et al. Cell 90:785-789, 1997). The regulatory role of hTERT in telomerase activity is further evidenced by the fact that introducing hTERT into telomerase-negative cells results in telomerase activation (Bodnar, A.G. et al. Science 279:349-352, 1998). The regulation occurs mainly at the transcriptional level, though other mechanisms-alternative splicing (Ulaner, G.A. et al. Int. J. Cancer 85:330-335, 2000)- have been implicated, too. The promoter of hTERT was cloned and sequenced by several groups (Cong, Y-S. et al Hum. Mol. Genet. 8:137-142, 1999, Horikawa, I. et al. Cancer Res. 59:826-830, 1999; Takakura, M. et al Cancer Res. 59:551-559, 1999; Wick, M. et al. Gene 232:97-106, 1999). It was shown that the isolated hTERT promoter was unable to direct the transcription of a reporter gene in cells with no telomerase activity, but it worked effectively in established telomerase positive cell lines (Horikawa et al.). The hTERT promoter binds various transcription factors (review Poole, J.C. et al. Gene 269:1-12, 2001). Of these, the cMyc/Max/Madl factors seem to be the most important for regulation. The promoter contains two binding sites (E-boxes) that can bind either the cMyc/Max or the Madl/Max heterodimer. While the former one activates, the latter represses hTERT transcription. The distribution of cMyc and Madl in adult organs/tissues coincides with the activity -or lack of activity- of the hTERT promoter in those tissues (Gϋnes, C. et al. Cancer Res. 60:2116-2121, 2000). In certain organs (endometrium, ovary) estrogen (Misiti, S. et al. Molec. Cell. Biol. 20:3764-3771, 2000), in others (kidney, spleen) the Wilms' Tumor 1 tumor suppressor (WT1) (Oh, S. et al. J. Biol. Chem. 174:37473-37478, 1999), might have a regulatory role. By using the hTERT promoter, any protein can be expressed selectively in telomerase positive, that is -at least in adult human- neoplastic cells. Researchers have expressed pro-apoptotic proteins (Koga, S. et al. Hum. Gene. Ther. 11:1397- 1406, 2000), bacterial toxins (Abduol-Ghani, R. et al. Molecular Therapy 2:539-544, 2000), and prodrug converting enzymes (Majumdar, A.S. et al. Gene Therapy 8:568- 578, 2001) using various hTERT promoter containing vectors. Though limited to telomerase positive cells, these expression vectors do not effectively deliver the anti- cancer agent to neighboring tumor cells. Instead, to be effective, the vector would need to be introduced into each tumor cell. Thus, there is a continuing need for an efficient and effective anti-cancer adenovirus vector that could specifically target neoplastic cells, while replicating poorly or not at all in normal tissue, and efficiently spreading to neighboring neoplastic cells, thereby maximizing the cancer-killing ability of the adenovirus vector. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION Briefly, therefore, the present invention is directed to novel adenovirus vectors which overexpress an adenovirus death protein ("ADP") and which are replication- restricted to cells expressing telomerase. Overexpression of ADP by a recombinant adenovirus allows the construction of a replication-competent adenovirus that kills cells expressing telomerase and spreads from cell-to-cell at a rate similar to or faster than that exhibited by adenoviruses expressing wild-type levels of ADP, even when the recombinant adenovirus contains a mutation that would otherwise reduce its replication rate in non-neoplastic cells. The work herein demonstrates that substitution of the human telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter ("hTERT") for the adenovirus E4 promoter allows restriction of replication of the adenovirus to cells expressing telomerase without the need for complementation to achieve replication competence in these cells. In one embodiment of the invention, the recombinant adenovirus vector comprises an ADP gene, a hTERT promoter, and at least one mutation in the E3 region. In a preferred embodiment, the hTERT- ADP-expressing vector comprises a recombinant adenovirus vector lacking expression of at least one E3 protein selected from the group consisting of: gpl9K; RJDa (also known as 10.4K); RTDβ (also known as 14.5K) and 14JK. Because wild-type E3 proteins inhibit immune- mediated inflammation and/or apoptosis of Ad-infected cells, it is believed that a recombinant adenovirus lacking one or more of these E3 proteins will stimulate infiltration of inflammatory and immune cells into a tumor treated with the adenovirus and that this host immune response will aid in destruction of the tumor as well as tumors that have metastasized. A mutation in the E3 region would impair its wild- type function, making the viral-infected host susceptible to attack by the host's immune system. Such a vector is identified as GZ3-TERT and its sequence is represented in SEQ ID NO. 1. In still another embodiment of the invention, the recombinant adenovirus vector comprises an ADP gene, a hTERT promoter, and at least one inactivating mutation in the EIA region, resulting in a loss of transformation of resting cells by EIA without inhibiting its function in the targeted cells. The mutation in the EIA region disrupts EIA protein bmding to p300 and/or members of the Rb family. Without this binding, EIA cannot provoke Go exit and subsequent entry into S phase, an essential progression for synthesis of molecules necessary for adenoviral replication. Thus, a resting cell (i.e. one in G 0 state) cannot support replication of the recombinant adenovirus vector of the present invention. Such a vector is identified as KD3-TERT and its sequence is represented in SEQ ID NO. 2. Another embodiment of the invention involves a pharmaceutical composition comprising the recombinant adenovirus vector of the present invention in association with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. Yet another embodiment of the invention is directed at an in vitro method and kit for promoting death of cells expressing telomerase comprising contacting said cell with an effective amount of KD3-TERT, GZ3-TERT, or both. Still another embodiment of the invention is directed at a method for promoting death of neoplastic cells in a patient, comprising administering an effective amount of the adenovirus vector(s) of the present invention to said patient. Among the several advantages found to be achieved by the present invention, therefore, may be noted the provision of repUcation-competent adenovirus vectors, which rapidly kill cancer cells and spread from cell-to-cell in a tumor; the provision of such vectors whose replication can be restricted to cells expressing telomerase; the provision of pharmaceutical compositions for anti-cancer therapy which cause little to no side effects in normal tissues; and the provision for methods and kits for promoting death in cells expressing telomerase, such as neoplastic cells. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) and the adenovirus vectors, respectively. Ad5. The horizontal bar indicates the duplex DNA genome of 36 kbp encoding ca. 34 genes. The arrows indicate transcription units. The "immediate early" EIA proteins induce expression of the "delayed early" proteins coded by the EIB, E2, E3, and E4 transcription units. Viral DNA begins to replicate at about 7 h postinfection (p.i.), then "late" proteins derived from the major late transcription unit are synthesized. The major late mRNAs are formed by alternative splicing and polyadenylation of a large pre-mRNA initiated at the single major late promoter and extending to the right end of the genome. All late mRNAs have a tripartite leader (leaders 1, 2, and 3) at their 5' termini that facilitates translation. Beginning at 20-24 h p.i., virions begin to assemble in the cell nucleus, then after 2-3 days the cells begin to lyse and release virions, with lysis complete by about 5-6 days. Efficient cell lysis is mediated by ADP. ADP is a late protein derived from the major late transcription unit. KD3. KD3 lacks all E3 genes but the 12.5K gene. The adp gene is reinserted into the deletion such that the ADP major late mRNA will be formed abundantly with the tripartite leader at its 5'-terminus. GZ3. This is identical to KD3 except it has wild-type EIA. KD3-TERT. Identical to KD3 except it has the E4 promoter replaced by the cancer-specific TERT promoter. GZ3-TERT. Identical to GZ3 except it has the E4 promoter replaced by the cancer-specific TERT promoter. Figure 2 shows the cytopathic effect caused by GZ3-TERT and GZ3 in SW480 cells. SW480 colon cancer cells were grown in monolayers and infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3-TERT or GZ3 and were visualized by phase contrast microscopy and then photographed. Figure 3 shows the cytopathic effect caused by GZ3-TERT and GZ3 in LNCaP cells. LNCaP prostate cancer cells were grown in monolayers and infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3-TERT or GZ3 and were visualized by phase contrast microscopy and then photographed. Figure 4 shows the results of a cell viability assay of LS513 carcinoma (cecum, human) cells, SW1116 adenocarcinoma (colon, human) cells, LS174T adenocarcinoma (colorectal, human) cells, HepG2 hepatocellular carcinoma (human) cells, SW480 colon cancer cells, and LNCaP prostate cancer cells. These cells were grown in monolayers and were either mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu per cell of dl309, GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. The low molecular weight dye Trypan blue was added. Trypan blue stains cells with compromised membrane integrity, i.e. dead cells. The percent viability was calculated by counting the number of live (non-blue) cells for each test condition, dividing by the total number of cells, and multiplying by 100. The bars show the % viability. Figure 5 shows the result of a cell viability assay of HT29 adenocarcinoma (colon, human) cells, NCI-H441 bronchioalveolar carcinoma (human, lung) cells, and MCF-7 adenocarcinoma (breast, human) cells. The cells were grown in monolayers and were either mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. The low molecular weight dye Trypan blue was added, and the percent of viable cells was calculated. Figure 6 shows the result of a cell viability assay in Hep3B liver cancer cells. These cells were grown in monolayers and were either mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. The low molecular weight dye Trypan blue was added, and the percent viability was calculated. Figure 7 shows the result of an indirect immuno fluorescence assay for EIA and E4ORF3 adenovirus proteins in HeLa cervical cancer cells. The cells were grown in monolayers and infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3 (Panels A, C) or GZ3-TERT (Panels B, D). At approximately 2 days postinfection, cells were incubated with primary antibodies against the Ad5 EIA protein (Panels A, B) (mouse monoclonal antibody) or the Ad5 E4ORF3 protein (Panels C, D) (rabbit antiserum). Cells were washed incubated with secondary antibodies (goat anti-rabbit IgG-FITC conjugate and goat anti-mouse IgG-RITC conjugate) to visualize expression and localization of the Ad5 EIA and E4ORF3 proteins. Panels A and C show the same field of cells. Panels B and D show the same field of cells. Figure 8 shows the result of an indirect immunofluorescence assay for the DBP (DNA binding protein) (Panels A, B) and fiber (Panels C, D) adenovirus proteins in HeLa cervical cancer cells. The cells were grown in monolayers and infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3 (Panels A, C) or GZ3-TERT (Panels B, D). At approximately 2 days postinfection, the cells were incubated with primary antibodies against the Ad5 DBP (rabbit antipeptide antiserum) or against the Ad5 fiber protein (mouse monoclonal antibody). Cells were washed and incubated with secondary antibodies (goat anti-rabbit IgG-FITC conjugate and goat anti-mouse IgG-RITC conjugate) to visualize expression and localization of the Ad5 proteins. Panels A and C show the same field of cells as do Panels B and D. Figure 9 shows the result of an indirect immunofluorescence assay of El A (Panels A, B) and E4ORF3 (Panels C, D) proteins in A549 lung alveolar cancer cells infected with GZ3 (Panels A, C) or GZ3-TERT (Panels B, D). The methods for infection and immunostaining were similar to those described in the legend to Fig. 7. Panels A and C show the same field of cells as do Panels B and D. Figure 10 shows the result of a indirect immunofluorescence assay for DBP (Panels A, B) and fiber (Panels C, D) in A549 cells infected with GZ3 (Panels A,C) or GZ3-TERT (Panels B, D). The methods for infection and immunostaining were similar to those described in the legend for Fig. 8. Panels A and C show the same field of cells as do Panels B and D. Figure 11 shows an indirect immunofluorescence assay for El A (Panels A, B) and E4ORF3 (Panels C, D) proteins in Hep3B liver cancer cells infected with GZ3 (Panels A, C) or GZ3-TERT (Panels B, D). The methods for infection and immunostaining were similar to those described for Fig. 7. Panels A and C show the same filed of cells as do Panels B and D. Figure 12 shows an indirect immunofluorescence assay for DBP (Panels A, B) and fiber (Panels C, D) in Hep3B cells infected with GZ3 (Panels A, C) or GZ3- TERT (Panels B, D). The methods for infection and immunostaining were similar to those described for Fig. 8. Panels A and C show the same field of cells as do Panels B and D. Figure 13 shows the ability of GZ3, GZ3-TERT and <i 309 to replicate within and destroy A549, S W480, or LS513 cancer cell lines. Cells were grown to 70 to 80% confluency in 48 well plates. These cell lines, growing in monolayers, were either mock-infected or infected with various multiplicities (serial dilutions ranging from 10 1 to 10 "4 pfu/cell) of ci/309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT in duplicate. The cells were stained with crystal violet dye (1% crystal violet, 10% formaldehyde, 20% methanol) at 7 or 10 days postinfection, or 12 or 13 days postinfection, depending on the cell line. The crystal violet stain was aspirated from the cell surface after 15 minutes and the plates were washed. Cells attached to the surface stained blue. Figure 14 shows a single step growth curve for GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 in DU145 human prostate cancer cells. The cells were grown to about 60-70% confluency in 35 mm Petri dishes. The cells were infected at a multiplicity of 10 pfu/cell with Ad5, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT (8 dishes per virus). After 1 hour, cells were washed with medium three times to clear away any non-attached virus. Complete medium (2 ml) was added back to the dishes. One dish was frozen from each set of eight at this time, and then every day for 7 consecutive days. The cells were freeze- thawed three times, and then the lysates were cleared by low speed centrifugation. The virus yield was determined by titering the supematants on 293 E4 cells. 293 E4 cells are a human embryonic kidney cell line that contains the Ad5, EIA, EIB, and E4 genes (Krougliak and Graham, Hum Gene Ther 6:1575-1586, 1995). Figure 15 shows a single step growth curve for GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 in A549 human lung cancer cells. The methods used were identical to those used for Fig. 14. Figure 16 shows a single step growth curve for GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 in SW480 human colon cancer cells. The methods used were identical to those for Fig. 14. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF INVENTION Definitions "Acceptable carrier" refers to a carrier that is compatible with the other ingredients of the formulation and is not deleterious to the recipient thereof. "Adenovirus" refers to human adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5). "Adenovirus vector" or "vector" refers to a recombinant molecular vehicle of adenoviral origin that can effectively deliver an anti-cancer agent to a susceptible host cell. "Overexpress" or "overexpression" refers to the ability of the recombinant adenovirus vector to express more ADP molecules per viral genome present in a host cell infected by the vector than expressed by a nonrecombinant adenovirus vector. "Replication-competent" refers to vectors that can replicate in a host cell without the need for complementation. "Reputation-restricted" refers to vectors that replicate exclusively or almost exclusively in dividing cells, preferably cells that express telomerase, more preferably in dividing neoplastic cells. Description Unless otherwise indicated, the practice of the present invention employs conventional techniques of cell culture, molecular biology, microbiology, recombinant DNA manipulation, immunology science, which are within the skill of the art. Such techniques are explained fully in the literature. See, e.g., DNA CLONING, Volumes I and II (D.N. Glover, ed., 1985); OLIGONUCLEOTIDE - SYNTHESIS (MJ. Gait ed., 1984); NUCLEIC ACID HYBRIDIZATION (B.D. Hames and S.J. Higgins, eds., 1984); B. Perbal, A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO MOLECULAR CLONING (1984); the series, METHODS IN ENZYMOLOGY (Academic Press, Inc.); VECTORS: A SURVEY OF MOLECULAR CLONING VECTORS AND THEIR USES (R.L. Rodriguez and D.T. Denhardt, eds., 1987, Butterworths); Sambrook et al. (1989), MOLECULAR CLONING, A LABORATORY MANUAL, second ed., Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; Sambrook et al. (1989), MOLECULAR CLONING, A LABORATORY MANUAL, second ed-., Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; and Ausubel et al. (1995), SHORT PROTOCOLS IN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, John Wiley and Sons. The present invention is based in part on the discovery that an adenovirus protein, named Adenovirus Death Protein (ADP), could be advantageously overexpressed (expressed in larger amounts than with normal Ad5) in vectors whose replication is specifically targeted to cells expressing telomerase. As described above, the present invention advantageously provides for replication-competent adenovirus vectors capable of replicating in cells expressing telomerase, preferably replication-restricted to such cells. The adenovirus vectors of the present invention overexpress ADP. The over-abundance of ADP results in lysis of the infected cells, infection of neighboring tumor cells, and eventually elimination of the whole tumor mass. Replication of the adenovirus could be restricted to cells expressing telomerase without the loss of replication competence. Because E4 gene products are essential for Ad replication, placing their expression under the control of a tumor- specific promoter should restrict replication of the vector to cells in which the promoter is activated. Viruses with deleted E4 region are not viable. The E4 (early region 4) region of Ad5 is comprised of a set of genes, the products of which are involved in viral RNA processing, transcriptional activation and other processes. Viruses that lack the E4 genes can be propagated in cell culture using cell lines that stably express E4 proteins and therefore complement the virus. Either the E4ORF3 or E4ORF6 protein is sufficient for complementation. All E4 open reading frames (ORF's) are transcribed from a single promoter, located close to the right inverted terminal repeat (ITR) of the viral genome (Shenk, T. 1996. Adenoviridae: the viruses and their replication, p. 2111-2148. In B.N. Fields, D.M. Knipe, and P.M. Howley (eds.) Fields Virology. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia). The present invention retains the E4 function. Thus, the adenovirus vector could efficiently and specifically propagate in these cells without the need for complementation. Preferably, the vector restricts its expression to cells expressing telomerase. Tissue-specific growth of an adenovirus vector can be achieved as demonstrated by the present inventors in pending U.S. Application No. 09/351,778, incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. The present inventors have shown earlier that substitution of the E4 promoter for the SPB (Surfactant Protein B) promoter achieves tissue specific growth of the virus. The properties of the vector with this substitution, named KD1-SPB, have been published in a high quality peer- reviewed journal (Doronin, K., Kuppuswamy, M., Toth, K., Tollefson, A.E., Krajcsi, P., Krougliak, V., and Wold, W.S.M. Tissue-Specific, Tumor-Selective, Replication- Competent Adenovirus Vector for Cancer Gene Therapy. J. Virol. 75:3314-3324, 2001). In the present invention, the E4 promoter has been replaced with the human telomerase reverse transcriptase ('hTERT') promoter (SEQ ID NO. 3), thereby preferably restricting replication of the adenovirus to telomerase-expressing cells. The present invention is based, in part, on the differential expression of telomerase between normal and neoplastic cells. DNA at chromosome ends is maintained in a dynamic balance of loss and addition of telomeric simple sequence repeats. Sequence loss occurs during cell replication, in part from incomplete replication of chromosome termini by DNA-dependent DNA polymerase. Telomeric repeat addition is catalyzed by the enzyme telomerase: a ribonucleoprotein enzyme which uses a short region within the RNA as a template for the polymerase reaction. Although cells can maintain a constant number of telomeric repeats by balancing repeat loss and addition, not all cells do so. Human germline and cancer cells maintain a constant number of telomeric repeats, while normal human somatic cells lose telomeric repeats with each cycle of cell division. Cells which do not maintain stable telomere length demonstrate a limited proliferative capacity; these cells senesce after a number of population doublings correlated with the erosion of telomeres to a critical minimum length. Because normal somatic cells do not appear to express or require telomerase and do not maintain chromosome ends, and because all or almost all cancer cells express high levels of telomerase activity (see e.g. Koga S. et al., Hum Gene Ther 1; 11(10): 1397-406, 2000) , the present invention, therefore, provides a recombinant adenovirus vector comprising a hTERT promoter that is replication-competent in cells expressing telomerase, preferably replication-restricted to such cells. Upon infection of a host, the adenovirus overcomes the replication machinery of the cell expressing telomerase and diverts the host's machinery to the synthesis of adenoviral RNA, DNA, and proteins. The adenoviral DNA and certain proteins will be assembled into virions within the cell, and the cell will lyse and release the virion particles. As most tumors express hTERT, this adenovirus vector will be a possible curative agent for the vast maj ority of human tumors. The adenovirus will be severely restricted in most normal cells that down regulate the activity of the telomerase promoter, thus not causing damage to them. In one embodiment, the adenovirus vector comprises a gene that overexpresses ADP, that has expression of E4 genes under the control of the hTERT promoter, and has at least one inactivating mutation in the E3 region. To escape the host's immune surveillance, adenoviruses normally express E3, which disrupts antigen presentation by the MHC class I molecules and prevents early apoptosis of the viral- infected host. That disruption allows the virus to persist in the host for a longer period of time. By inactivating the E3 region of the adenovirus vector, the present inventors have removed this viral protective shield, allowing effective destruction and removal of the viral-infected cell by the host's immune system. In a preferred embodiment, the recombinant adenovirus vector of the present invention has a deletion that includes the genes for the Ad5, gpl9K, RIDα, RIDβ, and 14JK proteins in the E3 region. The precise nature of this deletion was described for the vector named KD3 (U.S. Application No. 09/351,778; Doronin et al., J. Virol. 74:6147-6155, 2000). The vectors named GZ3 and GZ3-TERT have this same deletion in the E3 region. In some examples to be presented later, the Ad5 mutant named -f/309 was used as a control. <f/309 lacks three genes in the E3 transcription unit (the genes for the RIDα, RIDβ, and 14JK proteins), but retains and expresses other Ad5 genes, including that for ADP (Tollefson et al, 1996, J. Virol.). The gpl9K, RIDα, RIDβ, and 14.7K proteins of the E3 region are not essential for Ad5 replication in cultured cells. In a still further embodiment, the inventors recognize that neoplastic cells can not only express telomerase, but also enter S (synthesis) phase of the cell cycle on their own. Taking advantage of this characteristic of neoplastic cells, the current invention further limits replication of the vector named KD3-TERT to neoplastic cells by targeting cells that are in the S phase. The inventors have advantageously manipulated the El A region to disrupt El As ability to interact with p300 and/or RB proteins, while not affecting its transactivation function. Without this interaction, EIA cannot promote cell progression from Go to S phase. For its replication, the adenovirus vector of the present invention would need enzymes and precursors of macromolecule synthesis that are abundant in cells only in the S phase of cell cycle. Most normal tissues in an adult human consist of resting (G 0 ) cells. Neoplastic cells, in contrast, can enter S phase on their own. Accordingly, the adenovirus vector of the present invention targets neoplastic cells that enter S phase, while essentially bypassing normal resting cells. The present invention also provides for a pharmaceutical composition comprising the adenovirus vector of the invention in association with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. While any suitable carrier known to those of ordinary skill in the art may be employed in the pharmaceutical compositions of this invention, the type of carrier will vary depending on the mode of administration. For parenteral administration, such as subcutaneous injection, the carrier preferably comprises water, saline, alcohol, a fat, a wax or a buffer. For oral administration, any of the above carriers or a solid carrier, such as mannitol, lactose, starch, magnesium stearate, sodium saccharine, talcum, cellulose, glucose, sucrose, and magnesium carbonate, may be employed. Biodegradable microspheres (e.g., polylactic galactide) may also be employed as carriers for the pharmaceutical compositions of this invention. Suitable biodegradable microspheres are disclosed, for example, in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,897,268 and 5,075,109. In addition, the present invention provides for methods and kits for promoting death of neoplastic cells by contacting said cells with an effective amount of vector(s) of the mvention. For example, the inventors envisions that the vector would be injected at multiple sites in a solid tumor in a human patient. One example of a tumor would be a head and neck tumor. However, any type of solid tumor could be injected. The vector would come into contact with the tumor cells and would infect the cells in the normal way that adenovirus infects cells. The adenovirus early genes would be expressed, adenoviral DNA would replicate, adenoviral late genes would be expressed including the gene for ADP, and adenovirions would assemble. The cell would lyse and the adenovirus vector would be released from the cells. The vector would then infect other tumor cells and repeat the process. This process would continue to occur, with the vector spreading from cell to cell throughout the tumor. Preferably, all the cells in the tumor would be destroyed. Theoretically, the vector would be able to infect some non-cancerous cells in the body, and certain adenovirus early genes would be expressed. However, the E4 genes would not be expressed because their expression is controlled by the TERT promoter in the vector and the TERT promoter is not expressed in the vast majority of non-cancerous cells. Since the E4 genes are not expressed, vector DNA synthesis and late gene expression will not occur, and the non-cancerous cell will not be harmed. Some non-cancerous cells, e.g. hen atopoietic precursor cells, do express telomerase and, therefore, could be affected by the vector. However, hematopoietic cells are not infected efficiently by adenovirus, so it is expected that most hematopoietic cells will not be harmed by the vector. Another use envisioned for the vectors is to inject them into the blood stream or into cavities, e.g. the peritoneal cavity, in which the tumor is located. As described above, the vector would infect and destroy the tumor cells but would spare the vast majority of non-tumor cells. The inventors envision multiple therapeutic uses for the present invention. For example, the vector may be used in combination with radiation therapy for the treatment of cancer. The radiation therapy can be any form of radiation therapy used in the art such as for example, external beam radiation such as x-ray treatment, radiation delivered by insertion of radioactive materials within the body near or at the tumor site such as treatment with gamma ray emitting radionuclides, particle beam therapy which utilizes neutrons or charged particles and the like. In addition, use of more than one of the vectors of the present invention in a cocktail in combination with radiation therapy is also contemplated. The inventors further contemplate use of the vector of the present invention in combination with chemotherapy as has been disclosed for other adenovirus vectors (U.S. Patent No. 5,846,945). Chemotherapeutic agents are known in the art and include antimetabolites including pyrimidine-analogue and purine-analogue antimetabolites, plant alkaloids, antitumor antibiotics, alkylating agents and the like. The use of more than one of the vectors of the present invention with a chemotherapeutic agent or agents is also contemplated within this embodiment. EXAMPLES EXAMPLE 1 Construction of KD3-TERT and GZ3-TERT. This example illustrates the construction of GZ3-TERT and KD3-TERT anti- cancer vectors. First, the inventors used the plasmid pKl 11 which contains the ADP overexpressing Ad GZ3 genome beginning from a BamHI site (nucleotide number 21256 in Ad5) to the right end of the genome. In pKl 11, the E4 promoter was deleted using a PCR-based technique, and a BstZ17I restriction site was inserted into the deletion, resulting in the plasmid p--7E4P. The resulting pdlΕAP plasmid provides for easy replacement of the Ad E4 promoter with a foreign promoter. This plasmid will be a valuable tool for producing further vectors, where the E4 promoter will be substituted with a tumor specific promoter. Using pdlE4P, a DNA fragment containing the hTERT promoter sequence, flanked by BstZ17I sites (obtained by PCR amplification from human placental cells genomic DNA), was cloned into this newly created restriction site, resulting in plasmid p-i/E4TERT. This plasmid was co- transfected into 293 E4 cells together with EcoRI (nucleotide number 27331 in Ad5) cut dll 101/1107 or dl321 DNA, resulting in KD3-TERT (SEQ ID NO. 1) or GZ3- TERT (SEQ ID NO. 2), respectively, via homologous recombination of overlapping DNA sequences. The Ad5 mutants named dll 101/1107 (also referred to as dlOl/01) and dl321 were described in U.S. Application No. 09/351,778 and that application describes the general method of constructing the vectors KD3 and GZ3. Mutant dll 101/1107 has the same two small deletions in the EIA gene as do the vectors named KD3 and KD3-TERT. When EcoRI cleaves dll 101/1107 DNA, a large fragment is produced comprising approximate adenovirus map units 0-59. Again, this fragment contains the small EIA deletions. In the method to construct KD3-TERT as described above, this large fragment undergoes homologous recombination with plasmid p-itE4TERT. Mutant -i/327 has wild type (normal, non-mutated) Ad5 sequences in the region from DNA map positions 0-59. As is the case with dll 101/1107 DNA, when EcoRI cleaves dl321 DNA, the fragment comprising map position 0-59 is generated. In the method to construct GZ3-TERT as described above, this fragment undergoes homologous recombination with the plasmid pd/E4TERT. Plaques expected to be KD3-TERT or GZ3-TERT were picked, and selected plaques were expanded in 293 E4 cells. Viral DNA was extracted from these cells and examined by restriction endonuclease digestion and the polymerase chain reaction for the anticipated EIA mutation (KD3-TERT), E3 deletion and ADP gene presence, and the TERT promoter. One plaque of KD3-TERT and one plaque of GZ3-TERT with the correct properties was plaque purified three times, then grown up to high titers and purified by isopicnic centrifugation. All the methods used are known to a person of ordinary skill in the art. GZ3-TERT has wild-type EIA; its selective replication relies on the tumor selective activity of the hTERT promoter. KD3-TERT, on the other hand, has deletions in the EIA gene, which offer an additional level of safety. The overexpression of ADP in both vectors will improve the oncolytic properties of the virus. EXAMPLE 2 Assays for cytopathic effect caused by GZ3-TERT and KD3-TERT. This example illustrates the ability of GZ3-TERT to replicate within and destroy SW480 adenocarcinoma (colorectal, human) cells. Various cell lines were grown to about 60-70% confluency in 35mm Petri dishes. The cells were infected at a multiplicity of 10 pfu/cell with -Z/309, GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. pfu refers to plaque forming units, i.e. units of infectious vector. The monolayers were visualized by phase contrast microscopy and photographed at certain time points post infection. The ability of GZ3-TERT to grow within and destroy cancer cells was compared to that of GZ3 and "wild-type" adenovirus by several methods in a variety of human cancer cell lines. As described earlier, and in U.S. Application No. 09/351,778, GZ3 has wild type Ad5 EIA and a large deletion in the E3 region that removes the genes for the ADP, gpl9K, RIDα, RIDβ, and 14JK proteins. The adp gene has been reinserted into the E3 region in such a manner that the ADP protein is overexpressed at late stages of infection. GZ3 has a wild type Ad5 E4 promoter. GZ3-TERT is the same as GZ3, except it has the E4 promoter replaced by the TERT promoter. The Ad5 mutant -f/309 serves as the "wild-type" adenovirus control. Mutant /309 lacks three genes in the E3 transcription unit (the genes for the RIDα, RIDβ, and 14.7K proteins), but retains and expresses other Ad5 genes including that for ADP (Tollefson et al., J. Virol. 70:2296-2306, 1996). ADP is synthesized at normal levels, i.e. levels similar to that of Ad5. Figure 2 shows the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by GZ3-TERT and GZ3 in SW480 cells. CPE is considered to be a strong indicator of virus replication and cell death. Cells growing in monolayers were infected with 10 plaque forming units (pfu) per cell of GZ3-TERT or GZ3, and were visualized by phase contrast microscopy and then photographed. With the mock infection, the cells appeared as a disorganized nearly complete monolayer (Fig. 2A). With the GZ3 infection, the cells had rounded up, shrunk, and detached, and nearly all the cells appeared lysed (Fig. 2B). With the GZ3-TERT infection, most of the cells had rounded up and detached (Fig. 2C). These results indicate that both GZ3 and GZ3-TERT replicate in SW480 cells. The CPE seen with GZ3-TERT was not quite as pronounced as that seen with GZ3, suggesting that the time course of infection with GZ3-TERT is slightly delayed compared to GZ3. Nevertheless, despite the substitution of the E4 promoter with hTERT promoter, GZ3-TERT replicates very well in SW480 cells. This conclusion is consistent with other experiments described below. Figure 3 shows the CPE induced by these vectors in LNCaP carcinoma (prostate, human) cells. As with the SW480 cells, the mock-infected cells appeared as a disorganized monolayer (Fig. 3A). The GZ3-infected cells had rounded up, shrunk, and detached, and nearly all the cells appeared lysed (Fig. 3B). The GZ3-TERT- infected cells were also rounded up and detached with a large number of cells appearing lysed (Fig. 3C), but the CPE was not as extensive as that seen with GZ3. These results indicate that GZ3-TERT also replicates in LNCaP cells, although not quite as efficiently as does GZ3. EXAMPLE 3 Assay to measure cell viability after virus infection. The Trypan blue exclusion assay was used to compare the cell destroying effect of GZ3-TERT vs. GZ3 on cancer cells. At the end of the virus replication cycle, cells die and their membranes become porous. Trypan blue enters those cells with a porous cell membrane. Various cell lines were grown to about 60-70% confluency in 35mm Petri dishes. Cells growing in monolayers were either mock-infected or infected at a multiplicity of 10 pfu/cell with dl309, GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. Cells were trypsinized at 5 or 10 days post infection, and stained with Trypan blue. Approximately 400 cells were counted in a hemacytometer, and ratios of stained and unstained cells were calculated for each sample. Figure 4 A shows the percentage of viable cells remaining at 5 and 10 days after LS513 carcinoma (cecum, human) cells were infected with mock (i.e. were mock-infected), dl309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. Approximately 62% of the mock- infected cells were viable at 5 days post infection as compared to 25% of the dl309- infected cells, 13% of the GZ3-infected cells, and 24% of the GZ3-TERT-infected cells. At 10 days postinfection, 52% of the mock-infected cells were viable, approximately 5% of the /309-infected cells were viable, no GZ3-infected cells were viable, and only 3% of GZ3-TERT-infected cells remained viable. These results indicate that GZ3-TERT kills LS513 cells at approximately the same rate as does dl309. This very important result attests to the potency of GZ3-TERT because, as discussed above, /309 is the "wild-type" Ad5 control. Stated another way, GZ3- TERT is as effective as wild-type Ad5 in killing LS513 cancer cells. Cell death is associated with virus replication and late gene expression (including ADP expression at late stages of infection). Although GZ3-TERT was as effective as 309 killing LS513 cells, it was not as effective as GZ3. Figure 4B shows the percentage of viable SW1116 adenocarcinoma (colon, human) cells remaining at 5 and 10 days postinfection with mock, /309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. With the mock infection, 46% of the cells were viable after 5 days. With the /309 infection, 43% of the cells were viable after 5 days. With the GZ3 infection, 18% of the cells were viable after 5 days. With the GZ3-TERT infection, 46%) of cells were viable after 5 days. At 10 days postinfection, 64% of the mock- infected cells were viable, less than 1% of either the /309 or GZ3-infected cells were viable, and 3% of the GZ3-TERT-infected cells were viable. The results demonstrate that, as was the case with the LS513 cells, GZ3-TERT kills SW1116 cells as well as dl309, although not as efficiently as GZ3. Figure 4C shows the percentage of viable LS174T adenocarcinoma (colorectal, human) cells remaining at 7 and 10 days postinfection with mock, dl309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. After 7 days, approximately 65% of mock-infected cells were viable, 41% of /309-infected cells were viable, 15% of GZ3-infected cells were viable, and 42% of GZ3-TERT-infected cells were viable. At 10 days postinfection, 50% of mock-infected cells remained viable, 6% of ti/309-infected cells remained viable, 2% of GZ3-infected cells remained viable, and 8% of GZ3-infected cells remained viable. Again, these results indicate that GZ3-TERT kills LS174T cells as well as does dl309, although not as efficiently as GZ3. Figure 4D shows the percentage of viable HepG2 hepatocellular carcinoma (human) cells remaining at 5 and 11 days post-infection with mock, dl309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. With the mock infection, 71% of the cells were viable after 5 days. With the dl309, GZ3, and GZ3-TERT infections, 13%, 5%, and 21%, respectively, of the cells were viable after 5 days. At 11 days postinfection, 69% of mock-infected cells were viable and less than 1 % of GZ3-TERT-infected cells were viable. There were no dl309 or GZ3-infected cells viable at 11 days postinfection. These results indicate that GZ3-TERT kills HeρG2 cells as well as does dl309. Interestingly, GZ3- TERT killed these cells nearly as well as GZ3. Figure 4E shows the percentage of viable SW480 colon cancer cells remaining at 5 and 11 days post-infection with mock, /309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. At 5 days post-infection, approximately 72% of the mock-infected cells were viable, 30% of the /309-infected cells were viable, 12% of the GZ3 -infected cells were viable, and 34% of the GZ3-TERT cells were viable. At 11 days postinfection, 64% of the mock- infected cells remained viable, less than 1% of the dl309- or the GZ3-infected cells remained viable, and 3% of the GZ3-TERT-infected cells remained viable. This resembles the phase contrast results described earlier: GZ3-TERT kills SW480 cancer cells, but not as efficiently as GZ3. Importantly, however, GZ3-TERT kills cells as well as does dl309. Figure 4F shows the percentage of viable LNCaP prostate cancer cells remaining at 8 and 13 days postinfection with mock, <i/309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. With the mock infection, 68% of the cells were viable after 8 days. With the d7309, GZ3, and GZ3-TERT infections, 21%, 10%, and 11%, respectively, of the cells were viable after 8 days. At 13 days postinfection, 44% of the mock-infected cells were viable, 1% of the ti/309-infected cells were viable, and less than 1% of either the GZ3- or the GZ3-TERT-infected cells were viable. These results indicate that similar to the phase contrast microscopy results discussed previously, GZ3-TERT kills as efficiently as GZ3 in LNCaP cancer cells. GZ3-TERT kills LNCaP as well or better than does dl309. Figures 5A, 5B, and 5C show the results of a Trypan blue exclusion assay on additional cancer cell lines that were either mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. Figure 5 A shows the percentage of viable HT29 adenocarcinoma (colon, human) cells remaining at 9 and 16 days postinfection. With the mock infection, 89% of the cells were viable after 9 days. With the GZ3 infection, 8% of the cells were viable after 9 days. With the GZ3-TERT infection, 39%) of the cells were viable after 9 days. At 16 days postinfection, 86% of the mock- infected cells remained viable, less than 1% of the GZ3 -infected cells remained viable, and 6% of the GZ3-TERT-infected cells remained viable. These results indicate that both GZ3-TERT and GZ3 kills HT29 cells. Figure 5B shows the percentage of viable NCI-H441 bronchioalveolar carcinoma (human, lung) cells remaining at 5 and 9 days postinfection with mock, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. At 5 days postinfection, approximately 87% of mock-infected cells, 9% of GZ3-infected cells, and 27% of GZ3-TERT-infected cells were viable. At 9 days postinfection, 60% of mock-infected cells, less than 1% of GZ3-infected cells, and approximately 11% of GZ3-TERT-infected cells remained viable. These results indicate that GZ3-TERT kills H441 cells, but not as efficiently as GZ3. Figure 5C shows the percentage of viable MCF-7 adenocarcinoma (breast, human) cells remaining at 5 and 9 days postinfection with mock, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT. At 5 days postinfection, 63%, 60%, and 64% of the mock-, GZ3-, and GZ3-TERT- infected cells, respectively, were viable. At 9 days postinfection, 61% of the mock- infected cells, 13% of the GZ3-infected cells, and 27% of the GZ3-TERT-infected cells were viable. These results indicate that both GZ3-TERT and GZ3 show delayed killing in MCF-7 cells. Figure 6 shows the results of a Trypan blue exclusion assay on yet another cancer cell line, Hep3B (hepatocellular carcinoma, human) cells. Cells growing in monolayers were mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu per cell of GZ3 or GZ3- TERT. With the mock infection, 83% of the cells were viable after 5 days. With the GZ3 and GZ3-TERT infections, 4% and 18% of cells, respectively, were viable after 5 days. These results indicate that GZ3-TERT kills Hep3B cells, but not as efficiently as GZ3. EXAMPLE 4 Immunofluorescence staining. The purpose of this example is to show that GZ3 and GZ3-TERT both express the Ad5 EIA, E4ORF3, DNA binding protein (DBP), and fiber proteins in various cancer cell lines. The EIA protein should be expressed in all cells regardless of whether the vector replicates. This is also true for DBP, whose synthesis is induced by the EIA proteins. However, the E4ORF3 protein should only be expressed when the TERT promoter is active. This is also true for the fiber protein which is only expressed at late stages of infection after the E4 proteins have been expressed and the vector DNA has replicated. Various cell lines were grown to about 60-70% confluency on Corning no.l coverglasses in 35mm Petri dishes. The cells were infected at a multiplicity of 10 pfu/cell with -i/309, GZ3 or GZ3-TERT in duplicate. At approximately 2 days postinfection, cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS, and then permeabilized with methanol at -20°C. After rehydration in PBS, cells were incubated with (A) primary antibodies against the Ad5 EIA protein (mouse monoclonal antibody) or the Ad5 E4ORF3 protein (rabbit antiserum) or, on parallel coverslips, (B) primary antibodies against the Ad5 DBP (rabbit antipeptide antiserum) or against the Ad5 fiber protein (mouse monoclonal antibody). Cells were washed and incubated with secondary antibodies (goat anti-rabbit IgG-FITC conjugate and goat anti-mouse IgG-RITC conjugate) to visualize expression and localization of the Ad5 proteins. Photographs were taken on a Nikon epifluorescence microscope using a 100X Planapo lens and TMAX 400 film (Kodak). Figures 7 and 8 show viral proteins made during virus replication in HeLa epithelioid carcinoma (cervix, human) cells. Figures 7A and 7B demonstrate the presence of the Ad EIA proteins in both GZ3-infected cells and GZ3-TERT-infected cells. EIA proteins are the initial proteins made after virus infection and are necessary for the production of the other Ad early proteins, such as the DBP and E4ORF3 proteins. Figures 7C and 7D show the expression of the E4ORF3 protein in both the GZ3 and the GZ3-TERT-infected cells. The presence of E4ORF3 proteins in the GZ3-TERT-infected cells demonstrates a sufficient amount of TERT promoter activity in HeLa cells to allow expression of the E4 transcription unit. Figures 8 A and 8B show the presence of DBP in both GZ3 and GZ3-TERT-infected cells. Although DBP is made at early stages of infection independently of E4 expression, much more DBP is made at late stages of infection following E4 expression and vector DNA replication. Thus, the abundant quantities of DBP seen in Fig. 8 A and 8B suggests that the vectors were able to undergo replication. Figures 8C and 8D show the existence of the late protein called fiber which is produced from the major late transcription unit. Transcription of the major late region is only possible after viral DNA replication. Thus, the presence of fiber in both GZ3 and GZ3-TERT-infected cells indicates that viral replication had occurred. Figures 9 and 10 show Ad proteins produced during virus replication in A549 lung carcinoma (human) cells infected with GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. Figures 9A and 9B show that the EIA proteins were made. Figures 9C and 9D show that the E4ORF3 protein was made. It appears that the amount of the E4ORF3 protein produced in the GZ3-infected cells may be greater than the GZ3-TERT-infected cells, however, the amount of TERT promoter activity in A549 cells is sufficient to allow expression of the E4 transcription unit. Figures 10A and 10B show that the E2 protein DBP was made in both GZ3 and GZ3-TERT-infected cells. Figures IOC and 10D show the presence of the fiber protein. It appears that there may be more fiber protein present in the GZ3-infected cells than the GZ3-TERT-infected cells. Nevertheless, and more importantly, because the fiber protein is made after viral DNA replication, its presence indicates that GZ3-TERT replicates in A549 cells. Figures 11 and 12 show proteins made during virus replication in Hep3B liver cancer cells infected with GZ3 or GZ3-TERT. Figures 11 A and 1 IB show that the EIA proteins were made in both GZ3 and GZ3-TERT-infected cells. Figures 1 IC and 1 ID show that the E4ORF3 protein was made in both GZ3- and GZ3-TERT- infected cells. Figures 12A and 12B show that the protein DBP was made in both GZ3- and GZ3-TERT-infected cells. Figures 12C and 12D show the presence of the fiber protein in both the GZ3 and GZ3-TERT-infected cells. Again, the presence of the fiber protein indicates that GZ3 and GZ3-TERT replicate in Hep3B cells. EXAMPLE 5 Virus spread assays. An additional method to compare the ability of GZ3-TERT, dl309, and GZ3 to replicate in and destroy cells is the virus spread assay. This assay measures not only the ability of the vector to replicate in cells, but also its ability to spread from cell to cell at low multiplicities of infection (low pfu/cell) (Doronin et al., J. Virol. 74:6147- 6155, 2000). That is, for example, if only one in ten or one in one hundred cells were initially infected, destruction of the monolayer would not be observed unless the vector replicated in the original cell, lysed it, spread to other cells, replicated in these cells, and lysed these cells. A549, SW480, and LS513 cells were grown to 70 to 80% confluency in 48 well plates. These cell lines, growing in monolayers, were either mock-infected or infected with various multiplicities (serial dilutions ranging from 10 2 to 10 "4 pfu/cell) of dl309, GZ3, or GZ3-TERT in duplicate. The cells were stained with crystal violet dye (1% crystal violet, 10% formaldehyde, 20% methanol) at 7 or 10 days post infection, or 12 or 13 days post infection, depending on the cell line. The crystal violet stain was aspirated from the cell surface after 15 minutes and the plates were washed. Cells attached to the surface stained blue. Figure 13 shows A549, SW480, and LS513 cancer cells at 7 days postinfection. Figure 10A shows that GZ3-TERT, -i/309, and GZ3 killed A549 cells with equal efficiency at 10 1 pfu/cell initial infection. At 10° pfu/cell infection, GZ3- TERT and GZ3 were equally efficient in killing A549 cells; dl309, however, killed with slightly less efficiency. At 10 "1 pfu/cell infection, only GZ3 appeared to efficiently kill cells, and at 10 "2 pfu/cell or less, GZ3 was also not able to destroy A549 cells. At 10 days postinfection, GZ3-TERT, dl309, and GZ3 were equal in their ability to kill A549 cells between 10 1 and 10 "1 pfu/cell initial infection. Between 10 "2 and 10 "3 pfu/cell infection, GZ3-TERT and ti 309 were less efficient at killing than GZ3. At 10 "4 pfu/cell, only GZ3 was efficient in killing A549 cells. Importantly, GZ3-TERT was at least as effective as dl309, indicating that GZ3-TERT grows and spreads from cell to cell as well as does wild type Ad5. GZ3 was more efficient at killing and spreading than -f/309 demonstrating that vectors that overexpress ADP have enhanced ability to kill cells and spread from cell to cell as compared to wild type Ad5. These same results and conclusions were seen and derived with the SW480 and LS513 cells as described below. Figure 13B shows that S W480 colon cells were also killed by GZ3-TERT, -i/309, and GZ3 at 7 days postinfection. GZ3-TERT, dl309, and GZ3 appeared to be equally efficient at killing cells infected with 10 1 pfu/cell; however, at 10° pfu/cell infection, -#309 appeared slightly less efficient than GZ3-TERT or GZ3. At 10 "1 pfu/cell or less, neither GZ3-TERT, dl309, nor GZ3 appeared to kill cells efficiently. At 10 days postinfection, GZ3-TERT, dl309, and GZ3 appeared equal in their ability to kill SW480 cells at 10 1 pfu/cell. At an initial infection of 10° pfu/cell or less, GZ3- TERT and GZ3 appeared to be more efficient than /309 in killing SW480 cells. Figure 13C shows that GZ3-TERT, /309, and GZ3 were all very efficient at killing LS513 colon cancer cells at 7 and 10 days postinfection. At initial infections between 10 1 and 10 "1 , GZ3-TERT, dl309, and GZ3 were equally efficient at killing cells at 7 days postinfection. However, at 10 "2 pfu/cell, dl309, and GZ3-TERT appeared to be slightly less efficient than GZ3 in killing LS513 cells. At Ϊ0 "3 pfu/cell or less, only GZ3 appeared to efficiently kill cells. At 10 days postinfection, GZ3- 1 TERT and GZ3 were equal in their efficiency to kill LS513 cells between 10 and 10 " pfu/cell infection, with -i/309 showing slightly less efficiency. At initial infections of 10 "3 pfu/cell or less, GZ3 appeared more efficient than either dl309 or GZ3-TERT in killing LS513 cells. Again, one important conclusion from these experiments is that GZ3-TERT is as effective as wild type Ad5 in replicating in cells and spreading from cell to cell. Since wild type Ad5 (or /309) cannot (at present) be used for cancer therapy, and since the replication of GZ3-TERT is restricted to cancer cells expressing telomerase, GZ3-TERT should be an effective and practical vector to treat human cancer. EXAMPLE 6 Single-step growth curves. The next series of experiments shows that GZ3-TERT replicates to the same quantity and at the same rate as Ad5 or GZ3 in three different cancer cell lines. Stated another way, the experiments show that if every cell in the culture dish is infected at the start of the experiment, approximately the same amount of progeny virus is produced in the culture dish, and at approximately the same rate. A549, DU145, and SW480 cells were grown to about 60-70% confluency in 35mm Petri dishes. The cells were infected at a multiplicity of 10 pfu/cell with /309, GZ3 or GZ3-TERT (8 dishes per virus). After an hour, cells were washed with medium three times to clear away any non-attached virus. Complete medium (2 ml) was added back to the dishes. One dish was frozen from each set of eight at this time, and then every day for 7 consecutive days. The cells were freeze-thawed three times, and then the lysates were cleared up by low-speed centrifugation. The virus yield was determined by titering the supernatants on 293E4 cells. To determine whether GZ3-TERT grows as well as Ad5 and/or GZ3, DU145 carcinoma (prostate, human) cells, A549 lung cancer cells and SW480 colon cancer cells were infected with 10 pfu per cell of these viruses for 1 hr. Cells were washed and harvested immediately to provide a zero time point and then daily for 7 days. The harvested cells were lysed and titered on 293-E4 cells. Figure 14 shows the virus yield in DU145 cells of GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 titered on 293E4 cells. By day 3 postinfection, the titer of all viruses was similar. This result indicates that while GZ3- TERT may initially be slightly slower growing than Ad5 and GZ3, at 3 days postinfection, the amount of GZ3-TERT produced was equivalent to Ad5 and GZ3. Figure 15 shows the virus yield in A549 lung cancer cells of GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 titered on 293E4 cells. At 3 days postinfection, it appeared that the virus titer of GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 was similar. As with DU145 cells, GZ3- TERT may initially be slower growing than Ad5 or GZ3, but the amount of GZ3- TERT at 3 days postinfection was equivalent to Ad5 or GZ3. Figure 16 shows the virus yield in S W480 colon cancer cells of GZ3-TERT, GZ3, and Ad5 titered on 293E4 cells. At 2 days postinfection, GZ3-TERT grew at a rate similar to that of Ad5 or GZ3. The final amount of GZ3-TERT produced was slightly lower than that with Ad5 and GZ3, but it was still very significant. EXAMPLE 7 KD3-TERT will replicate in cancer cells. The vector named KD3 was .described in U.S. Application No. 09/351,778 and in Doronin et al. (J. Virol. 74:6147-6155, 2000). KD3 has two small deletions in the EIA gene that restrict the replication of KD3 to cancer cells. In fact, KD3 grows well on most cancer cell lines tested (Doronin et al., J. Virol. 74:6147-6155, 2000). The examples presented for GZ3-TERT show that the E4 promoter can be replaced by the TERT promoter without seriously compromising the ability of the vector to replicate in cancer cells. The vector named KD3-TERT has the same E4 promoter deletion and TERT promoter substitution as GZ3-TERT. The inventors tested the ability of KD3- TERT to replicate in neoplastic cell lines in a series of experiments as described in Examples 1-6 and 8, substituting KD3-TERT for GZ3-TERT. In one experiment, a series of dishes of A549 cells are mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu/cell of KD3- TERT and KD3. Cells are washed, and the cells are collected, one dish of mock, KD3, and KD3-TERT infected cells, and frozen. Cells are similarly collected and frozen each day from day 1 to day 8 following infection. Cells are freeze-thawed three times, and the virus released is titered on 293 E4 cells. For both KD3-TERT and KD3, there is a similar increase in titer at days 1, 2, and 3, reaching a plateau of about 10 8 pfu after 3 days. The results show that KD3-TERT replicates to approximately the same amount and at approximately the same rate as does KD3. EXAMPLE 8 KD3-TERT and GZ3-TERT is replication-restricted to neoplastic cells expressing telomerase. The present inventors envision that GZ3-TERT and KD3-TERT will be replication-restricted to neoplastic cells expressing telomerase. Primary human cells are a good model for normal cells in the body. First, KD3 does not grow (or grows very poorly) in human primary cells. The cells specifically examined were human bronchial epithelial cells, human small airway epithelial cells, and human endothelial cells (Doronin et al., 2000). Since KD3-TERT has the same EIA gene deletion as does KD3, the inventors expect that KD3-TERT will not replicate in primary human cells. Second, primary human cells are not expected to express telomerase. Therefore, the inventors further predict that KD3-TERT will also be unable to replicate in primary human cells, not only because of the EIA gene mutation, but also because of the E4-TERT promoter substitution. Similarly, the inventors further predict that GZ3-TERT will not be able to replicate (or will replicate very poorly) in primary human cells, because again, replication depends on the ability of the TERT promoter. These predictions with KD3-TERT and GZ3-TERT in primary cells are tested using methods similar to those described in Doronin et al. (2000). Primary human cells are purchased, placed in tissue culture, and expanded by minimal passages. Cells in culture are mock-infected or infected with KD3-TERT, GZ3-TERT, KD3, GZ3, dll 101/1107, or Ad5 (or if/309), and studies similar to those described in Examples 1-6 are conducted. Human primary bronchial epithelial cells in multiple dishes are mock-infected or infected with 10 pfu per cell of KD3-TERT, GZ3-TERT , KD3, or GZ3. Cells are washed, and cells from one dish of each test condition are collected and frozen. Cells are similarly collected and frozen each day from day 1 to day 8 postinfection. Cells are freeze-thawed three times, and the released virus is titered on 293 E4 cells. Based on previous experiments, the pfu for GZ3 is expected to increase at days 1, 2, and 3 days postinfection. The pfu plateaus at day 3 at 10 8 pfu per dish. The pfu per dish of GZ3-TERT should increase slowly and gradually by 2 logs at 8 days postinfection. The pfu per dish of KD3 similarly should increase by about one log at day 8. The pfu per dish of KD3-TERT should not increase. These results would indicate that GZ3 grows well in these primary cells, that GZ3-TERT and KD3 grow very poorly, and that KD3-TERT shows little or no growth. EXAMPLE 9. Injection of GZ3-TERT and KD3-TERT vectors in nude mice with tumors. The inventors envision that GZ3-TERT and KD3-TERT adenovirus vectors will be able to inhibit the growth of human tumors in an animal model, thereby providing a method for promoting death of neoplastic cells in a patient with these novel vectors. Nude mice are inoculated into each hind flank with 2 x 10 7 A549 cells. After 1 week tumors form, ranging in size from about 20 μl to 100 μl. Individual tumors are injected three days later, and at subsequent weeks for 4 weeks (total of 5 injections), with 50 μl of buffer or 50 μl of buffer containing 5 x 10 7 pfii of dl309, GZ3-TERT, KD3-TERT, GZ3, KD3, dlOVOl, or pml34.l, with a total virus dose per tumor of 3 x 10 8 pfu. Higher doses of virus may be used in other experiments; up to a maximum dose of 5 x 10 8 pfu per injection. The mutant pml34.l lacks ADP activity due to two nonsense mutations in the gene for ADP, but all other Ad proteins are expected to be synthesized at wild-type levels (Tollefson et al., J " . Virol. 70:2296- 2306, 1996). The efficacy of each virus (or buffer) is tested on six tumors. At weekly intervals, the length (L) and width (W) of tumors are measured using a Mitutoyo digital caliper. Tumor volumes are calculated by multiplying (L x W 2 )/2. This value is divided by the tumor volume at the time of the initial virus injection, the fold- increase in tumor growth is calculated, and the average for the six tumors is graphed. In co-pending U.S. Patent Application No. 09/351,778, the experiments described above were performed using dl309, dlOVOl, KD1, KD3, ovpml34.l. KD1 and KD3 are adenovirus vectors that comprise ADP, but lack the hTERT promoter. The resulting data showed tumors that received buffer continued to grow, increasing about 14-fold by 5 weeks. In contrast, tumors injected with dl3 9, which expresses normal amounts of ADP and lacks the E3 RID and 14JK and proteins, only grew about 2.5-fold by 5 weeks. With rø-734.1, which lacks ADP, the tumors grew as well as those that received buffer. Thus, - 309 markedly decreased the rate of tumor growth, and ADP was required for this decrease. Tumors inoculated with -i/01/07 grew about 8-fold over 5 weeks. Since dlOllOl is identical to 309 except for the EIA mutation, this result indicates that the EIA mutation significantly reduces the ability of Ad to prevent growth of the tumors. This effect is probably due to a reduction in virus replication in the tumors resulting in lower ADP expression, but it could also reflect other properties of El A in the tumor cells, e.g. the inability of the mutant EIA proteins to induce apoptosis. Most importantly, tumors inoculated with KDl or KD3 only grew about 2.5-fold. Thus, overexpression of ADP by KDl and KD3 allows KDl and KD3 to reduce tumor growth to a rate markedly slower than dlOVOl (their parental control virus), and even to a rate similar to that of /309. Tumors that received five injections of vectors, but only one dose of vector, in this case 5 x 10 8 of each of KDlor KD3, are sufficient to significantly reduce the rate of A549 tumor growth. The inventors have conducted other studies that addressed whether an adenovirus replication-competent ADP-overexpressing vector could suppress the growth of human cancer cells as tumors in nude mice. In those studies, they compared the ability of the vectors KD1-SPB and KDl to suppress the growth of H441 (lung cancer, human) and Hep3B (liver cancer, human) cells in nude mice (Doronin et al., J. Virol. 75:3314-3324, 2001). The vector KD1-SPB is similar to KD3-TERT in that both vectors have the same mutation in the EIA gene, they both overexpress the ADP protein, and they both lack the gene for the gpl9K, RTDα, RIDβ, and 14JK proteins in the E3 region. KD3-TERT, as described, has the E4 promoter deleted and replaced with the TERT promoter. KDl-SPB has the E4 promoter deleted and replaced with the SPB (Surfactant Protein B) promoter. The SPB promoter is active only in type II alveolar cells and Clara cells of the lung. KD1- SPB replicates efficiently only in cells were the SPB promoter is active, e.g. H441 cells, and not in cells where the SPB promoter is not active, e.g. Hep3B cells. As expected from the properties of these vectors, both KDl -SPB and KDl were effective in suppressing the growth of H441 tumors in nude mice. In the specific experiment reported (Doronin et al, J. Virol. 75:3314-3324, 2001), H441 or Hep3B cells were injected into flanks of nude mice and allowed to grow to about 100 μl (H441) or 150 μl or with 5 x 10 7 pfii of KDl or KDl -SPB. Infections of the viruses were repeated twice weekly for 3 weeks to a total dose of 3.0 x 10 8 pfu per tumor. Tumors were measured, and the mean fold increase in tumor size was calculated. Mock-infected H441 tumors increased in size by approximately 13-fold over 33 days. Tumors infected with KDl -SPB or KDl grew only about 4-fold. KDl similarly suppressed the growth of Hep3B tumors, but KD1-SPB had little or no effect. The inventors also envision that GZ3-TERT and KD3-TERT can reduce the rate of growth in nude mice of a human colon cancer cell line, SW480. These cells form rapidly growing tumors that are highly vascularized. The hind flank of nude mice are inoculated with 1 x 10 7 of SW480 cells. After tumors reach about 100 μl, they are injected twice per week for 3 weeks with 50μl of buffer or 5 x 10 7 pfu of GZ3-TERT, KD3-TERT or dl309. There are typically 8- 10 tumors per test virus. The tumor sizes are measured and the fold increase in size at 0 to 3.5 weeks following the initial virus injection is graphed as described above for the A549 tumors. Tumors that receive buffer alone are expected to grow 20-fold over 3 weeks. Tumors that receive GZ3-TERT or KD3-TERT are expected to grow about 4-fold, establishing that GZ3-TERT or KD3-TERT can reduce the growth of SW480 tumors in nude mice. The results described in the copending U.S. Patent Application No. 09/351,778 point to the potency of ADP as an anti-tumor agent when expressed in an Ad vector. It is highly probable that GZ3-TERT or KD3-TERT will provide significant clinical benefits when used to infect tumors growing in humans.

Claims: WHAT IS CLAIMED IS: 1. A recombinant adenovirus vector which overexpresses an adenovirus death protein and which is replication-restricted to cells expressing telomerase comprising (a) a human telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter and (b) at least one inactivating mutation in the E3 region. 2. The vector of claim 1 having the sequence as shown in SEQ ID NO. 1. 3. The vector of claim 1, further comprising at least one inactivating mutation in the El A region. 4. The vector of claim 3, wherein at least one inactivating mutation disrupts EIA protein's binding to p300, a member of pRb family, or both. 5. The vector of claim 3 having the sequence as shown in SEQ ID NO. 2. 6. A pharmaceutical composition comprising the vector of claim 1, claim 3, or both and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. 7. An in vitro method for promoting death of a cell expressing telomerase comprising contacting said cell with at least one vector of claim 1, claim 3, or both. 8. A kit for promoting death of cells expressing telomerase comprising (a) the vector of claim 1, claim 3, or both; (b) a cell line expressing telomerase and having a positive lethal response to the vector selected in (a); and (c) a negative control cell line impermissive for replication of the vector selected in (a). 9. A method for promoting death of neoplastic cells in a patient, comprising administering an effective amount of the vector of claiml, claim 3, or both to said patient. 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the vector has the sequence selected from the group consisting of SEQ ID NO. 1, SEQ ID NO 2, and both.

Inventors: DORONIN KONSTANTIN, KUPPUSWAMY MOHAN, TOLLEFSON ANN E, TOTH KAROLY, WOLD WILLIAM S M, DORONIN, KONSTANTIN, KUPPUSWAMY, MOHAN, TOLLEFSON, ANN E., TOTH, KAROLY, WOLD, WILLIAM S., M.
Applicants: DORONIN KONSTANTIN, KUPPUSWAMY MOHAN, TOLLEFSON ANN E, TOTH KAROLY, UNIV SAINT LOUIS, WOLD WILLIAM S M, DORONIN, KONSTANTIN, KUPPUSWAMY, MOHAN, SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY, TOLLEFSON, ANN E., TOTH, KAROLY, WOLD, WILLIAM S., M.
Application year: 2001
Main classification: C07D
IPC codes: C12N15