Microbial Interventions in Cancer Therapy: Molecular Mechanisms, Engineering Strategies and Translational Constraints

Ummulkhairi Tukur *

Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, Turkey.

Imran Yahaya Umar

Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria.

Aminat Oyiza Musa

Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria.

Hassan Ibrahim Zogirma

Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria.

Abdullahi Umar Muhammad

Marwadi University, Rajkot, India.

Ibrahim Sammani Auwal

Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria.

Precious A. Idakwoji

Prince Abubakar Audu University, Anyigba, Kogi State, Nigeria.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Microbial interventions are being developed as anticancer agents, local drug factories, replicating immunotherapies and modifiers of treatment response. Their appeal arises from properties that conventional medicines do not readily reproduce: active replication, environmental sensing, penetration of poorly perfused tissue, programmable payload production and the capacity to engage innate and adaptive immunity. This critical narrative review evaluates tumour-targeting bacteria, engineered bacterial therapeutics, oncolytic viruses and manipulation of the host microbiome from a molecular-biology perspective. Literature published from 1 January 1990 to 29 May 2026 was selected through a transparent search of PubMed/MEDLINE, reference chaining and bibliographic verification of article identity and Digital Object Identifiers. The evidence indicates that microbial therapies operate through partially shared molecular modules: selective localisation or replication, pattern-recognition receptor signalling, immunogenic cell injury, antigen release and cross-presentation, metabolic reprogramming, and spatially restricted expression of therapeutic cargo. Yet the maturity of evidence differs sharply across platforms. Bacillus Calmette–Guérin and talimogene laherparepvec demonstrate that live microbial products can achieve clinical utility, whereas most engineered bacteria remain supported mainly by murine models and early-phase studies. Oncolytic viruses have produced durable responses in selected settings, but apparently strong phase I or II signals have not always translated into improved survival in randomised trials. Gut-microbiome associations with immune-checkpoint inhibitor outcomes are reproducible at a broad ecological level but inconsistent at the level of individual taxa; early faecal microbiota transplantation studies provide proof of principle rather than definitive efficacy. Across platforms, the central translational problem is not simply potency but control: biodistribution, genetic stability, inflammatory dose, immune clearance, manufacturing consistency and reversibility must be treated as molecular design variables. Progress will depend on mechanism-linked biomarkers, standardised pharmacodynamic measurements, rational combination trials and containment architectures that are validated under clinically realistic conditions.

Keywords: Bacterial cancer therapy, oncolytic viruses, tumour microbiome, synthetic biology, Immune-checkpoint blockade, faecal microbiota transplantation, STING signalling, living biotherapeutics.


How to Cite

Tukur, Ummulkhairi, Imran Yahaya Umar, Aminat Oyiza Musa, Hassan Ibrahim Zogirma, Abdullahi Umar Muhammad, Ibrahim Sammani Auwal, and Precious A. Idakwoji. 2026. “Microbial Interventions in Cancer Therapy: Molecular Mechanisms, Engineering Strategies and Translational Constraints”. Asian Journal of Research in Biochemistry 16 (5):56-76. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajrb/2026/v16i5511.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.