Adjuvant Pembrolizumab versus Observation in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma is an aggressive disease with high rates of relapse. Whether pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy would be effective in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma after radical surgery is unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive pembrolizumab at a dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks for 1 year or to undergo observation. Randomization was stratified according to pathological stage, centrally tested programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, and previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The coprimary end points were disease-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We considered the trial to be successful if either disease-free survival or overall survival was significantly longer with pembrolizumab than with observation. RESULTS: A total of 702 patients underwent randomization; 354 were assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 348 were assigned to observation. As of July 5, 2024, the median duration of follow-up for disease-free survival was 44.8 months. The median disease-free survival was 29.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.0 to 40.7) with pembrolizumab and 14.2 months (95% CI, 11.0 to 20.2) with observation (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.90; two-sided P = 0.003). Grade 3 or higher adverse events (regardless of attribution) occurred in 50.7% of the patients in the pembrolizumab group and in 31.6% of the patients in the observation group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma after radical surgery, disease-free survival was significantly longer with adjuvant pembrolizumab than with observation. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health and others; Alliance A031501 AMBASSADOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03244384.).

Nivolumab plus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: No new agent has improved overall survival in patients with unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma when added to first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: In this phase 3, multinational, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma either to receive intravenous nivolumab (at a dose of 360 mg) plus gemcitabine-cisplatin (nivolumab combination) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles, followed by nivolumab (at a dose of 480 mg) every 4 weeks for a maximum of 2 years, or to receive gemcitabine-cisplatin alone every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary outcomes were overall and progression-free survival. The objective response and safety were exploratory outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients underwent randomization (304 to each group). At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, overall survival was longer with nivolumab-combination therapy than with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.96; P = 0.02); the median survival was 21.7 months (95% CI, 18.6 to 26.4) as compared with 18.9 months (95% CI, 14.7 to 22.4), respectively. Progression-free survival was also longer with nivolumab-combination therapy than with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88; P = 0.001). The median progression-free survival was 7.9 months and 7.6 months, respectively. At 12 months, progression-free survival was 34.2% and 21.8%, respectively. The overall objective response was 57.6% (complete response, 21.7%) with nivolumab-combination therapy and 43.1% (complete response, 11.8%) with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone. The median duration of complete response was 37.1 months with nivolumab-combination therapy and 13.2 months with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 61.8% and 51.7% of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with nivolumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin resulted in significantly better outcomes in patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma than gemcitabine-cisplatin alone. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 901 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03036098.).

Enfortumab Vedotin in Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma have poor overall survival after platinum-containing chemotherapy and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor treatment. METHODS: We conducted a global, open-label, phase 3 trial of enfortumab vedotin for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had previously received platinum-containing chemotherapy and had had disease progression during or after treatment with a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) or investigator-chosen chemotherapy (standard docetaxel, paclitaxel, or vinflunine), administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients underwent randomization; 301 were assigned to receive enfortumab vedotin and 307 to receive chemotherapy. As of July 15, 2020, a total of 301 deaths had occurred (134 in the enfortumab vedotin group and 167 in the chemotherapy group). At the prespecified interim analysis, the median follow-up was 11.1 months. Overall survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (median overall survival, 12.88 vs. 8.97 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.89; P = 0.001). Progression-free survival was also longer in the enfortumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (median progression-free survival, 5.55 vs. 3.71 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (93.9% in the enfortumab vedotin group and 91.8% in the chemotherapy group); the incidence of events of grade 3 or higher was also similar in the two groups (51.4% and 49.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Enfortumab vedotin significantly prolonged survival as compared with standard chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had previously received platinum-based treatment and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and Seagen; EV-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03474107.).

Total Margin Control Is Superior to Traditional Margin Assessment for Treatment of Low-Stage Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Penile cancer is rare, with significant morbidity and limited literature assessing utility of peripheral and deep en face margin assessment (PDEMA) vs traditional margin assessment (vertical sections) on treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a 32-year retrospective multicenter cohort study at 3 academic tertiary care centers. The cohort consisted of 189 patients with histologic diagnosis of in situ or T1a cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the penis at Brigham and Women's, Massachusetts General Hospital (1988-2020), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (1995-2020) treated with PDEMA surgical excision, excision/circumcision, or penectomy/glansectomy. Local recurrence, metastasis, and disease-specific death were assessed via multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 189 patients. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years. Median tumor diameter was 1.3 cm. The following outcomes of interest occurred: 30 local recurrences, 13 metastases, and 5 disease-specific deaths. Primary tumors were excised with PDEMA (N = 30), excision/circumcision (N = 110), or penectomy/glansectomy (N = 49). Of patients treated with traditional margin assessment (non-PDEMA), 12% had narrow or positive margins. Five-year proportions were as follows with respect to local recurrence-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and disease-specific survival/progression-free survival, respectively: 100%, 100%, and 100% following PDEMA; 82%, 96%, and 99% following excision/circumcision; 83%, 91%, and 95% following penectomy/glansectomy. A limitation is that this multi-institutional cohort study was not externally validated. CONCLUSIONS: Initial results are encouraging that PDEMA surgical management effectively controls early-stage penile squamous cell carcinoma.

Factors predictive of recurrence, metastasis and death in node-negative penile squamous cell carcinoma: A retrospective multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC) carries significant morbidity and mortality. Literature is limited regarding prognostic factors, especially prognostic factors for development of metastasis. OBJECTIVES: To identify independent prognostic factors associated with poor outcomes, defined as local recurrence (LR), metastasis and disease-specific death (DSD) in clinically node-negative PSCC undergoing local therapy. METHODS: Thirty-two-year Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study of 265 patients with histologically diagnosed PSCC at three tertiary care centres. Predictive models based on patient or tumour characteristics were developed. RESULTS: Local recurrence occurred in 56 patients, metastasis in 52 patients and DSD in 40 patients. In multivariable models, the following five factors were independent prognostic factors based on subhazard ratio (SHR): history of balanitis (LR SHR: 2.3; 95% CI 1.2-4.2), poor differentiation (metastasis SHR 1.9; 95% CI 1.0-3.6), invasion into the corpora (metastasis SHR: 3.0; 95% CI 1.5-5.8 and DSD SHR: 4.5; 95% CI 1.7-12.1), perineural invasion (PNI) (metastasis SHR: 2.8; 95% CI 1.4-5.5 and DSD SHR: 3.5; 95% CI, 1.6-7.8) and a history of phimosis (DSD SHR: 2.5; 95% CI 1.2-5.3). The 5-year cumulative incidence of metastasis was higher for tumours with PNI [cumulative incidence function (CIF) = 55%, 95% CI 38-75 vs. CIF 15%, 95% CI 11-22], corporal invasion (CIF: 35%, 95% CI 26-47 vs. 12%, 95% CI 7-19) and poorly differentiated tumours (CIF = 46%, 95% CI 31-64 vs. CIF 15%, 95% CI 11-22). CONCLUSIONS: History of balanitis, history of phimosis, PNI, corporal invasion and poor differentiation are independent risk factors associated with poor outcomes. Since poor differentiation and PNI currently constitute only T1b disease, prognostic staging can likely be improved.

Phase II trial of CV301 vaccine combined with atezolizumab in advanced urothelial carcinoma.

CV301 comprises recombinant poxviruses, Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) and Fowlpox (FPV), encoding CEA, MUC-1, and co-stimulatory Molecules (TRICOM) ICAM-1, LFA-3, and B7-1. MVA-BN-CV301 is used for priming and FPV-CV301 is used for boosting. A Phase 2, single-arm trial was designed to evaluate CV301 plus atezolizumab as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) (Cohort 1) or progressing after platinum chemotherapy (Cohort 2). MVA-CV301 was given subcutaneously (SC) on Days 1 and 22 and FPV-CV301 SC from day 43 every 21 days for 4 doses, then tapered gradually over up to 2 years. Atezolizumab 1200 mg IV was given every 21 days. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Overall, 43 evaluable patients received therapy: 19 in Cohort 1; 24 in Cohort 2; nine experienced ≥ Grade 3 therapy-related adverse events. In Cohort 1, one had partial response (PR) (ORR 5.3%, 90% CI 0.3, 22.6). In Cohort 2, 1 complete response and 1 PR were noted (ORR 8.3%, 90% CI 1.5, 24.0). The trial was halted for futility. Patients exhibiting benefit demonstrated T-cell response to CEA and MUC-1. The trial illustrates the challenges in the development of vaccines, which should be guided by robust preclinical data.

Emerging monoclonal antibody therapies in the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment landscape for advanced-stage, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has shifted dramatically over a short period of time, with new therapeutic agents available for clinical use. However, despite these recent advances in the field, mUC continues to be a disease with significant morbidity and mortality and remains generally incurable. While platinum-based therapy remains the backbone of therapy, many patients are ineligible for chemotherapy or have failed initial chemotherapy treatment. In post-platinum treated patients, immunotherapy and antibody drug conjugates have provided incremental advances, but agents with better therapeutic index guided by precision medicine are needed. AREAS COVERED: This article covers the available monoclonal antibody therapies in mUC excluding immunotherapy and antibody drug conjugates. Included are a review of data utilizing monoclonal antibodies targeting VEG-F, HER-2, FGFR, and KIR-2 in the setting of mUC. A literature search from 6/2022- 9/2022 was performed utilizing PubMed with key terms including urothelial carcinoma, monoclonal antibody, VEG-F, HER-2, FGFR. EXPERT OPINION: Often used in combination with immunotherapy or other therapeutic agents, monoclonal antibody therapies have exhibited efficacy in mUC in early trials. Upcoming clinical trials will further explore their full clinical utility in treating mUC patients.

Efficacy of enfortumab vedotin in advanced urothelial cancer: Analysis from the Urothelial Cancer Network to Investigate Therapeutic Experiences (UNITE) study.

BACKGROUND: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) is a novel antibody-drug conjugate approved for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) refractory to prior therapy. In the Urothelial Cancer Network to Investigate Therapeutic Experiences (UNITE) study, the authors looked at the experience with EV in patient subsets of interest for which activity had not been well defined in clinical trials. METHODS: UNITE was a retrospective study of patients with aUC treated with recently approved agents. This initial analysis focused on patients treated with EV. Patient data were abstracted from chart reviews by investigators at each site. The observed response rate (ORR) was investigator-assessed for patients with at least 1 post-baseline scan or clear evidence of clinical progression. ORRs were compared across subsets of interest for patients treated with EV monotherapy. RESULTS: The initial UNITE analysis included 304 patients from 16 institutions; 260 of these patients were treated with EV monotherapy and included in the analyses. In the monotherapy cohort, the ORR was 52%, and it was >40% in all reported subsets of interest, including patients with comorbidities previously excluded from clinical trials (baseline renal impairment, diabetes, and neuropathy) and patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) alterations. Progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.8 and 14.4 months, respectively. Patients with a pure urothelial histology had a higher ORR than patients with a variant histology component (58% vs 42%; P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: In a large retrospective cohort, responses to EV monotherapy were consistent with data previously reported in clinical trials and were also observed in various patient subsets, including patients with variant histology, patients with FGFR3 alterations, and patients previously excluded from clinical trials with an estimated glomerular filtration rate < 30 mL/min and significant comorbidities. LAY SUMMARY: Enfortumab vedotin, approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2019, is an important new drug for the treatment of patients with advanced bladder cancer. This study looks at the effectiveness of enfortumab vedotin as it has been used at multiple centers since approval, and focuses on important patient populations previously excluded from clinical trials. These populations include patients with decreased kidney function, diabetes, and important mutations. Enfortumab vedotin is effective for treating these patients. Previously reported clinical trial data have been replicated in this real-world setting, and support the use of this drug in broader patient populations.

Serial ctDNA analysis predicts clinical progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Targeted sequencing of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is a promising tool to monitor dynamic changes in the variant allele frequencies (VAF) of genomic alterations and predict clinical outcomes in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). METHODS: We performed targeted sequencing of 182 serial ctDNA samples from 53 patients with advanced UC. RESULTS: Serial ctDNA-derived metrics predicted the clinical outcomes in patients with advanced UC. Combining serial ctDNA aggregate VAF (aVAF) values with clinical factors, including age, sex, and liver metastasis, improved the performance of prognostic models. An increase of the ctDNA aVAF by ≥1 in serial ctDNA samples predicted disease progression within 6 months in 90% of patients. The majority of patients with aVAFs ≤0.7 in three consecutive ctDNA samples achieved durable clinical responses (≥6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Serial ctDNA analysis predicts disease progression and enables dynamic monitoring to guide precision medicine in patients with advanced UC.

CDH1 germline variants are enriched in patients with colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, and breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: CDH1 germline variants have been linked to heritability in diffuse gastric (DGC) and lobular breast cancer (LBC). Studies have not yet assessed whether CDH1 is a cancer-susceptibility gene in other cancers. Herein, we mapped the landscape of pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variants in CDH1 across various cancers and ethnicities. METHODS: We evaluated CDH1 germline P/LP variants in 212,944 patients at one CLIA-certified laboratory (Invitae) and described their frequency in 7 cancer types. We screened for CDH1 variant enrichment in each cancer relative to a cancer-free population from The Genome Aggregation Database version 3 (gnomADv3). RESULTS: CDH1 P/LP variants were identified in 141 patients, most commonly in patients with DGC (27/408, 6.6%) followed by colorectal signet-ring cell cancer (CSRCC; 3/79, 3.8%), gastric cancer (56/2756, 2%), and LBC (22/6809, 0.3%). CDH1 P/LP variants were enriched in specific ethnic populations with breast cancer, gastric cancer, CRC, LBC, DGC, and CSRCC compared to matched ethnicities from gnomADv3. CONCLUSION: We report for the first time the prevalence of P/LP CDH1 variants across several cancers and show significant enrichment in CDH1 P/LP variants for patients with CSRCC, DGC, and LBC across various ethnicities. Future prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings.

Longitudinal Evaluation of Circulating Tumor DNA Using Sensitive Amplicon-Based Next-Generation Sequencing to Identify Resistance Mechanisms to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

Serial evaluation of circulating tumor DNA may allow noninvasive assessment of drivers of resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced urothelial cancer (aUC). We used a novel, amplicon-based next-generation sequencing assay to identify genomic alterations (GAs) pre- and post-therapy in 39 patients with aUC receiving ICI and 6 receiving platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC). One or more GA was seen in 95% and 100% of pre- and post-ICI samples, respectively, commonly in TP53 (54% and 54%), TERT (49% and 59%), and BRCA1/BRCA2 (33% and 33%). Clearance of ≥1 GA was seen in 7 of 9 patients responding to ICI, commonly in TP53 (n = 4), PIK3CA (n = 2), and BRCA1/BRCA2 (n = 2). A new GA was seen in 17 of 20 patients progressing on ICI, frequently in BRCA1/BRCA2 (n = 6), PIK3CA (n = 3), and TP53 (n = 3), which seldom emerged in patients receiving PBC. These findings highlight the potential for longitudinal circulating tumor DNA evaluation in tracking response and resistance to therapy.

Phase II Clinical and Translational Study of Everolimus ± Paclitaxel as First-Line Therapy in Cisplatin-Ineligible Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options have been historically limited for cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Given the need for alternatives to platinum-based chemotherapy, including non-chemotherapy regimens for patients with both impaired renal function and borderline functional status, in 2010 (prior to the immune checkpoint blockade era in metastatic UC), we initiated a phase II trial to test the activity of everolimus or everolimus plus paclitaxel in the cisplatin-ineligible setting. METHODS: This was an open-label phase II trial conducted within the US-based Hoosier Cancer Research Network (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01215136). Patients who were cisplatin-ineligible with previously untreated advanced UC were enrolled. Patients with both impaired renal function and poor performance status were enrolled into cohort 1; patients with either were enrolled into cohort 2. Patients received everolimus 10 mg daily alone (cohort 1) or with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (cohort 2). The primary outcome was clinical benefit at 4 months. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS), and 1-year overall survival (OS). Exploratory endpoints included genomic correlates of outcomes. The trial was not designed for comparison between cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 36 patients were enrolled from 2010 to 2018 (cohort 1, N = 7; cohort 2, N = 29); the trial was terminated due to slow accrual. Clinical benefit at 4 months was attained by 0 (0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-41.0%) patients in cohort 1 and 11 patients (37.9%, 95% CI 20.7-57.7%) in cohort 2. Median PFS was 2.33 (95% CI 1.81-Inf) months in cohort 1 and 5.85 (95% CI 2.99-8.61) months in cohort 2. Treatment was discontinued due to adverse events for 2 patients (29%) in cohort 1 and 11 patients (38%) in cohort 2. Molecular alterations in microtubule associated genes may be associated with treatment benefit but this requires further testing. CONCLUSION: Everolimus plus paclitaxel demonstrates clinical activity in cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic UC, although the specific contribution of everolimus cannot be delineated. Patients with both impaired renal function and borderline functional status may be difficult to enroll to prospective trials. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01215136).

Association of prior local therapy and outcomes with programmed-death ligand-1 inhibitors in advanced urothelial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical outcomes with programmed-death ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who have vs have not undergone radical surgery (RS) or radiation therapy (RT) prior to developing metastatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study collecting clinicopathological, treatment and outcomes data for patients with aUC receiving ICIs across 25 institutions. We compared outcomes (observed response rate [ORR], progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS]) between patients with vs without prior RS, and by type of prior locoregional treatment (RS vs RT vs no locoregional treatment). Patients with de novo advanced disease were excluded. Analysis was stratified by treatment line (first-line and second-line or greater [second-plus line]). Logistic regression was used to compare ORR, while Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression were used for PFS and OS. Multivariable models were adjusted for known prognostic factors. RESULTS: We included 562 patients (first-line: 342 and second-plus line: 220). There was no difference in outcomes based on prior locoregional treatment among those treated with first-line ICIs. In the second-plus-line setting, prior RS was associated with higher ORR (adjusted odds ratio 2.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.19-5.74]), longer OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.88) and PFS (aHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.89) vs no prior RS. This association remained significant when type of prior locoregional treatment (RS and RT) was modelled separately. CONCLUSION: Prior RS before developing advanced disease was associated with better outcomes in patients with aUC treated with ICIs in the second-plus-line but not in the first-line setting. While further validation is needed, our findings could have implications for prognostic estimates in clinical discussions and benchmarking for clinical trials. Limitations include the study's retrospective nature, lack of randomization, and possible selection and confounding biases.

Innovative systemic therapies for penile cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to look at recent advancements and treatment options of systemic therapies to treat penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC). PSCC is a rare cancer that remains with limited funding for research and systemic therapy development. This review aims to discuss the most recent advancements in systemic treatments and our understanding of PSCC. RECENT FINDINGS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and adjuvant therapy remain integral parts of treatment in locally advanced PSCC. New potential drug regimens are being studied to expand on the availability of first-line regimen options. There has been a large development in discoveries of cellular pathways and immune system targets as potential treatment options but these therapies as of today have limited trial evidence and currently have no support to be used in a clinical setting. SUMMARY: PSCC is a rare genitourinary cancer with limited treatment options for patients with advanced disease that is refractory to chemotherapy. Although many new therapies targeting the immune system and cellular pathways are being developed for other studies, clinical and translational research for PSCC are still understudied and underfunded.

A phase II clinical trial of neoadjuvant sasanlimab and stereotactic body radiation therapy as an in situ vaccine for cisplatin-ineligible MIBC: the RAD VACCINE MIBC trial.

The utilization of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, specifically anti-PD-1/L1 agents, prior to radical cystectomy is an emerging paradigm in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). In situ vaccination represents a strategy to manipulate the tumor in order to augment the immune response toward improved local and distant cancer control. The authors describe the study rationale, design and objectives for RAD VACCINE MIBC, a single-arm, single-institution, phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of combination neoadjuvant sasanlimab (humanized IgG monoclonal antibody that targets PD-1) with stereotactic body radiotherapy as an in situ vaccine in cisplatin-ineligible patients with MIBC. The results from this trial will establish the safety profile of this combination strategy and evaluate pathologic complete response rates.

RAD VACCINE MIBC is a phase II clinical trial that aims to determine the safety and effectiveness of a study drug called sasanlimab (an immune checkpoint inhibitor), combined with radiation therapy (stereotactic body radiation therapy) prior to surgery to remove the bladder (known as radical cystectomy [RC]) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients. For this type of cancer, patients typically receive chemotherapy followed by RC as the standard of care. However, many patients who have pre-existing medical conditions such as poor kidney function are unable to receive chemotherapy. These patients undergo RC alone at the risk of less optimal cancer control. Bladder cancer is known to inhibit the immune cells (T cells) from attacking it, which is an important way in which the body controls cancer cells. Sasanlimab allows T cells that are specific to the cancer to potentially reactivate. Ongoing studies have shown that drugs similar to sasanlimab can be used to achieve improvement in cancer control in the bladder (as measured by shrinking the cancer or eradicating it) before surgery. The authors are studying the use of the study drug with the addition of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as a combined therapy. The role of SBRT as a combined therapy to immune checkpoint inhibition has been well studied to help improve the process of how immune cells recognize cancer cells. By giving both the study drug and SBRT together before RC, the authors aim to demonstrate the safety of this technique and its effectiveness in eradicating all cancer in the bladder. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05241340 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Targeting FGFR3 alterations with adjuvant infigratinib in invasive urothelial carcinoma: the phase III PROOF 302 trial.

PROOF 302 is an ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, adjuvant phase III trial (NCT04197986) in approximately 218 patients from 120 centers worldwide. Eligibility criteria include post-surgical high-risk muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial cancer (85% of patients) or urothelial bladder cancer (15%), susceptible FGFR3 alterations (activating mutations, gene fusions or rearrangements), ≤120 days following radical surgery and ineligible for/or refusing cisplatin-based (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients receive either oral infigratinib 125 mg or placebo daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for up to 52 weeks or until recurrence, unacceptable toxicity or death. Primary end point: centrally determined disease-free survival (DFS); secondary end points: investigator-assessed DFS, metastasis-free survival, overall survival and safety/tolerability; exploratory end points: correlative biomarker analysis, quality-of-life and infigratinib pharmacokinetics.

Cancers of the bladder and other parts in the urinary system, especially those that are invasive and grow into the muscle layer, may need extra treatment after surgical removal of the tumor, particularly if there is a high risk of the cancer coming back. Chemotherapy regimens that include cisplatin are often used postoperatively, although some patients are unable to tolerate this treatment or refuse it. FGFR3, a protein that is encoded by the FGFR3 gene, is often changed in these cancers. This helps the tumor grow. Infigratinib is an investigational drug that targets FGFR3 and inhibits the abnormal growth of the tumor. In the PROOF 302 study, patients are randomly assigned to treatment with infigratinib or a placebo pill for 1 year after surgery to see if the drug is effective. The aim is to see if patients who take infigratinib have a longer time free from the disease than those who receive a placebo. The study will also look at how long patients remain free from cancer spread and how long they live overall. The study will also investigate how safe the treatment is and how easy it is to live with it. PROOF 302 is an important study as it will define the role of infigratinib in patients with cancers of the bladder and urinary system who also have FGFR3 changes, for whom more treatment choices are needed. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04197986 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Results of a multicenter, phase 2 study of nivolumab and ipilimumab for patients with advanced rare genitourinary malignancies.

BACKGROUND: In this multicenter, single-arm, multicohort, phase 2 trial, the efficacy of nivolumab and ipilimumab was evaluated in patients with advanced rare genitourinary cancers, including bladder and upper tract carcinoma of variant histology (BUTCVH), adrenal tumors, platinum-refractory germ cell tumors, penile carcinoma, and prostate cancer of variant histology (NCT03333616). METHODS: Patients with rare genitourinary malignancies and no prior immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure were enrolled. Patients received nivolumab at 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab at 1 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, and this was followed by 480 mg of nivolumab intravenously every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were enrolled at 6 institutions between April 2018 and July 2019 in 3 cohorts: BUTCVH (n = 19), adrenal tumors (n = 18), and other tumors (n = 18). The median follow-up was 9.9 months (range, 1 to 21 months). Twenty-eight patients (51%) received 4 doses of nivolumab and ipilimumab; 25 patients received nivolumab maintenance for a median of 4 cycles (range, 1-18 cycles). The ORR for the entire study was 16% (80% confidence interval, 10%-25%); the ORR in the BUTCVH cohort, including 2 complete responses, was 37%, and it was 6% in the other 2 cohorts. Twenty-two patients (40%) developed treatment-related grade 3 or higher toxicities; 24% (n = 13) required high-dose steroids (≥40 mg of prednisone or the equivalent). Grade 5 events occurred in 3 patients; 1 death was treatment related. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab and ipilimumab resulted in objective responses in a subset of patients with rare genitourinary malignancies, especially those with BUTCVH. An additional cohort exploring their activity in genitourinary tumors with neuroendocrine differentiation is ongoing. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with rare cancers are often excluded from studies and have limited treatment options. Fifty-five patients with rare tumors of the genitourinary system were enrolled from multiple sites and were treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab, a regimen used for kidney cancer. The regimen showed activity in some patients, particularly those with bladder or upper tract cancers of unusual or variant histology; 37% of those patients responded to therapy. Additional studies are ongoing to better determine who benefits the most from this combination.

A prospective trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in Black and White men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective analyses of randomized trials suggest that Black men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have longer survival than White men. The authors conducted a prospective study of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to explore outcomes by race. METHODS: This race-stratified, multicenter study estimated radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in Black and White men with mCRPC. Secondary end points included prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, overall survival (OS), and safety. Exploratory analysis included genome-wide genotyping to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with progression in a model incorporating genetic ancestry. One hundred patients self-identified as White (n = 50) or Black (n = 50) were enrolled. Eligibility criteria were modified to facilitate the enrollment of individual Black patients. RESULTS: The median rPFS for Black and White patients was 16.6 and 16.8 months, respectively; their times to PSA progression (TTP) were 16.6 and 11.5 months, respectively; and their OS was 35.9 and 35.7 months, respectively. Estimated rates of PSA decline by ≥50% in Black and White patients were 74% and 66%, respectively; and PSA declines to <0.2 ng/mL were 26% and 10%, respectively. Rates of grade 3 and 4 hypertension, hypokalemia, and hyperglycemia were higher in Black men. CONCLUSIONS: Multicenter prospective studies by race are feasible in men with mCRPC but require less restrictive eligibility. Despite higher comorbidity rates, Black patients demonstrated rPFS and OS similar to those of White patients and trended toward greater TTP and PSA declines, consistent with retrospective reports. Importantly, Black men may have higher side-effect rates than White men. This exploratory genome-wide analysis of TTP identified a possible candidate marker of ancestry-dependent treatment outcomes.

Identification of Somatic Gene Signatures in Circulating Cell-Free DNA Associated with Disease Progression in Metastatic Prostate Cancer by a Novel Machine Learning Platform.

PURPOSE: Progression from metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) to a castration-resistant (mCRPC) state heralds the lethal phenotype of prostate cancer. Identifying genomic alterations associated with mCRPC may help find new targets for drug development. In the majority of patients, obtaining a tumor biopsy is challenging because of the predominance of bone-only metastasis. In this study, we hypothesize that machine learning (ML) algorithms can identify clinically relevant patterns of genomic alterations (GAs) that distinguish mCRPC from mCSPC, as assessed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Retrospective clinical data from men with metastatic prostate cancer were collected. Men with NGS of cfDNA performed at a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified laboratory at time of diagnosis of mCSPC or mCRPC were included. A combination of supervised and unsupervised ML algorithms was used to obtain biologically interpretable, potentially actionable insights into genomic signatures that distinguish mCRPC from mCSPC. RESULTS: GAs that distinguish patients with mCRPC (n = 187) from patients with mCSPC (n = 154) (positive predictive value = 94%, specificity = 91%) were identified using supervised ML algorithms. These GAs, primarily amplifications, corresponded to androgen receptor, Mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling, Phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) signaling, G1/S cell cycle, and receptor tyrosine kinases. We also identified recurrent patterns of gene- and pathway-level alterations associated with mCRPC by using Bayesian networks, an unsupervised machine learning algorithm. CONCLUSION: These results provide clinical evidence that progression from mCSPC to mCRPC is associated with stereotyped concomitant gain-of-function aberrations in these pathways. Furthermore, detection of these aberrations in cfDNA may overcome the challenges associated with obtaining tumor bone biopsies and allow contemporary investigation of combinatorial therapies that target these aberrations. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The progression from castration-sensitive to castration-resistant prostate cancer is characterized by worse prognosis and there is a pressing need for targeted drugs to prevent or delay this transition. This study used machine learning algorithms to examine the cell-free DNA of patients to identify alterations to specific pathways and genes associated with progression. Detection of these alterations in cell-free DNA may overcome the challenges associated with obtaining tumor bone biopsies and allow contemporary investigation of combinatorial therapies that target these aberrations.

Sequencing of PD-1/L1 Inhibitors and Carboplatin Based Chemotherapy for Cisplatin Ineligible Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Current first line treatment options in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma unfit to receive cisplatin containing chemotherapy include PD-1/L1 inhibitors and carboplatin containing chemotherapy. However, the optimal sequencing of these therapies remains unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis. Consecutive cisplatin ineligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with first line carboplatin containing chemotherapy followed sequentially by second line PD-1/L1 inhibitor, or the reverse order, were included. Patient demographics, objective response, time to treatment failure for first line and second line therapy, interval between end of first line and initiation of second line treatment (Interval1L-2L) and overall survival were collected. Multivariate analysis was conducted to examine the association of sequencing on overall survival. RESULTS: In this multicenter retrospective study we identified 146 cisplatin ineligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with first line PD-1/L1 inhibitor therapy followed by second line carboplatin containing chemotherapy (group 1, 43) or the reverse sequence (group 2, 103). In the overall cohort median age was 72, 76% were men and 18% had liver metastasis. In both groups objective response rates were higher with carboplatin containing chemotherapy (45.6% first line, 44.2% second line) compared to PD-1/L1 inhibitors (9.3% first line, 21.3% second line). On multivariate analysis treatment sequence was not associated with overall survival (HR 1.05, p=0.85). Site of metastasis was the only factor significantly associated with overall survival (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this biomarker unselected cohort of cisplatin ineligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma, PD-1/L1 inhibitor followed by carboplatin containing chemotherapy and the reverse sequence had comparable overall survival.