ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: No treatment has surpassed platinum-based chemotherapy in improving overall survival in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, open-label, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab with the efficacy and safety of platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive 3-week cycles of enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously on days 1 and 8) and pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg intravenously on day 1) (enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group) or gemcitabine and either cisplatin or carboplatin (determined on the basis of eligibility to receive cisplatin) (chemotherapy group). The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 886 patients underwent randomization: 442 to the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 444 to the chemotherapy group. As of August 8, 2023, the median duration of follow-up for survival was 17.2 months. Progression-free survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median, 12.5 months vs. 6.3 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.54; P<0.001), as was overall survival (median, 31.5 months vs. 16.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.58; P<0.001). The median number of cycles was 12 (range, 1 to 46) in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 6 (range, 1 to 6) in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55.9% of the patients in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and in 69.5% of those in the chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab resulted in significantly better outcomes than chemotherapy in patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with a safety profile consistent with that in previous reports. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and others; EV-302 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04223856.).
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antineoplastic Agents , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urologic Neoplasms , Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/secondary , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Gemcitabine/administration & dosage , Gemcitabine/adverse effects , Gemcitabine/therapeutic use , Carboplatin/administration & dosage , Carboplatin/adverse effects , Carboplatin/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Survival Analysis , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Urologic Neoplasms/secondaryABSTRACT
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.).
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Cisplatin , Gemcitabine , Nivolumab , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Humans , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Gemcitabine/administration & dosage , Gemcitabine/adverse effects , Nivolumab/administration & dosage , Nivolumab/adverse effects , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , Administration, IntravenousABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer is one of the most common cancer types worldwide. Generally, research relies on invasive sampling strategies. METHODS: Here, we generate bladder cancer organoids directly from urine (urinoids). In this project, we establish 12 urinoid lines from 22 patients with non-muscle and muscle-invasive bladder tumours, with an efficiency of 55%. RESULTS: The histopathological features of the urinoids accurately resemble those of the original bladder tumours. Genetically, there is a high concordance of single nucleotide polymorphisms (92.56%) and insertions & deletions (91.54%) between urinoids and original tumours from patient 4. Furthermore, these urinoids show sensitivity to bladder cancer drugs, similar to their tissue-derived organoid counterparts. Genetic analysis of longitudinally generated tumoroids and urinoids from one patient receiving systemic immunotherapy, identify alterations that may guide the choice for second-line therapy. Successful treatment adaptation was subsequently demonstrated in the urinoid setting. CONCLUSION: Therefore, urinoids can advance precision medicine in bladder cancer as a non-invasive platform for tumour pathogenesis, longitudinal drug-response monitoring, and therapy adaptation.
Subject(s)
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Humans , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/genetics , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , Urinary Bladder/pathology , Immunotherapy , Precision Medicine , Organoids/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Indoleamine 2,3- dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is an immunosuppressive enzyme that has been correlated with shorter disease-specific survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC). IDO1 may counteract the antitumor effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Epacadostat is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of IDO1. In the phase I/II ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 study, epacadostat plus pembrolizumab resulted in a preliminary objective response rate (ORR) of 35% in a cohort of patients with advanced UC. METHODS: ECHO-307/KEYNOTE-672 was a double-blinded, randomized, phase III study. Eligible adults had confirmed locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic UC of the urinary tract and were ineligible to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive epacadostat (100 mg twice daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or placebo plus pembrolizumab for up to 35 pembrolizumab infusions. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were randomized (epacadostat plus pembrolizumab, n = 44; placebo plus pembrolizumab, n = 49). Enrollment was stopped early due to emerging data from the phase III ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 study. The median duration of follow-up was 64 days in both arms. Based on all available data at cutoff, ORR (unconfirmed) was 31.8% (95% CI, 22.46-55.24%) for epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 24.5% (95% CI, 15.33-43.67%) for placebo plus pembrolizumab. Circulating kynurenine levels numerically increased from C1D1 to C2D1 in the placebo-plus-pembrolizumab arm and decreased in the epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab arm. Epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab combination treatment was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to the placebo arm. Treatment discontinuations due to treatment-related adverse events were more frequent with epacadostat (11.6% vs. 4.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with epacadostat plus pembrolizumab resulted in a similar ORR and safety profile as placebo plus pembrolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible patients with previously untreated locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic UC. At a dose of 100 mg twice daily, epacadostat did not appear to completely normalize circulating kynurenine levels when administered with pembrolizumab. Larger studies with longer follow-up and possibly testing higher doses of epacadostat, potentially in different therapy settings, may be warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03361865, retrospectively registered December 5, 2017.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Cisplatin , Sulfonamides , Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Male , Female , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Aged , Sulfonamides/therapeutic use , Sulfonamides/administration & dosage , Sulfonamides/adverse effects , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Middle Aged , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Adult , Indoleamine-Pyrrole 2,3,-Dioxygenase/antagonists & inhibitors , Indoleamine-Pyrrole 2,3,-Dioxygenase/metabolism , OximesABSTRACT
Therapeutic antibodies that block the programmed death-1 (PD-1)-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway can induce robust and durable responses in patients with various cancers, including metastatic urothelial cancer. However, these responses only occur in a subset of patients. Elucidating the determinants of response and resistance is key to improving outcomes and developing new treatment strategies. Here we examined tumours from a large cohort of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer who were treated with an anti-PD-L1 agent (atezolizumab) and identified major determinants of clinical outcome. Response to treatment was associated with CD8+ T-effector cell phenotype and, to an even greater extent, high neoantigen or tumour mutation burden. Lack of response was associated with a signature of transforming growth factor ß (TGFß) signalling in fibroblasts. This occurred particularly in patients with tumours, which showed exclusion of CD8+ T cells from the tumour parenchyma that were instead found in the fibroblast- and collagen-rich peritumoural stroma; a common phenotype among patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. Using a mouse model that recapitulates this immune-excluded phenotype, we found that therapeutic co-administration of TGFß-blocking and anti-PD-L1 antibodies reduced TGFß signalling in stromal cells, facilitated T-cell penetration into the centre of tumours, and provoked vigorous anti-tumour immunity and tumour regression. Integration of these three independent biological features provides the best basis for understanding patient outcome in this setting and suggests that TGFß shapes the tumour microenvironment to restrain anti-tumour immunity by restricting T-cell infiltration.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , B7-H1 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/drug effects , Transforming Growth Factor beta/metabolism , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/immunology , Urothelium/pathology , Animals , Antibodies/immunology , Antibodies/pharmacology , Antibodies/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antigens, Neoplasm/analysis , Antigens, Neoplasm/immunology , Antigens, Neoplasm/metabolism , B7-H1 Antigen/immunology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/cytology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Cell Cycle Checkpoints/drug effects , Cohort Studies , Collagen/metabolism , Disease Models, Animal , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm/drug effects , Fibroblasts/metabolism , Humans , Immunotherapy , Mice , Mutation , Neoplasm Metastasis , Phenotype , Signal Transduction/drug effects , Transforming Growth Factor beta/antagonists & inhibitors , Treatment Outcome , Tumor Microenvironment/immunology , Urologic Neoplasms/genetics , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Urothelium/drug effects , Urothelium/immunologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate variant histologies (VHs) for disease-specific survival (DSS) in patients with invasive urothelial bladder cancer (BCa) undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed a multi-institutional cohort of 1082 patients treated with upfront RC for cT1-4aN0M0 urothelial BCa at eight centres. Univariable and multivariable Cox' regression analyses were used to assess the effect of different VHs on DSS in overall cohort and three stage-based analyses. The stages were defined as 'organ-confined' (≤pT2N0), 'locally advanced' (pT3-4N0) and 'node-positive' (pTanyN1-3). RESULTS: Overall, 784 patients (72.5%) had pure urothelial carcinoma (UC), while the remaining 298 (27.5%) harboured a VH. Squamous differentiation was the most common VH, observed in 166 patients (15.3%), followed by micropapillary (40 patients [3.7%]), sarcomatoid (29 patients [2.7%]), glandular (18 patients [1.7%]), lymphoepithelioma-like (14 patients [1.3%]), small-cell (13 patients [1.2%]), clear-cell (eight patients [0.7%]), nested (seven patients [0.6%]) and plasmacytoid VH (three patients [0.3%]). The median follow-up was 2.3 years. Overall, 534 (49.4%) disease-related deaths occurred. In uni- and multivariable analyses, plasmacytoid and small-cell VHs were associated with worse DSS in the overall cohort (both P = 0.04). In univariable analyses, sarcomatoid VH was significantly associated with worse DSS, while lymphoepithelioma-like VH had favourable DSS compared to pure UC. Clear-cell (P = 0.015) and small-cell (P = 0.011) VH were associated with worse DSS in the organ-confined and node-positive cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: More than 25% of patients harboured a VH at time of RC. Compared to pure UC, clear-cell, plasmacytoid, small-cell and sarcomatoid VHs were associated with worse DSS, while lymphoepithelioma-like VH was characterized by a DSS benefit. Accurate pathological diagnosis of VHs may ensure tailored counselling to identify patients who require more intensive management.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Humans , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology , Prognosis , Cystectomy , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A summary of recent literature to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of systemic perioperative treatment combinations for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). RECENT FINDINGS: We discuss recent developments in standard and experimental treatment modalities. The VESPER trial has shown that six cycles of neoadjuvant dose-dense MVAC are superior to four cycles of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC), though it is unclear whether the superiority is derived from the specific regimen or number of cycles. Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, a subject of longstanding debate, was shown to have comparable overall survival-benefit to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in an updated meta-analysis. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and anti-PD-(L)1 show encouraging results, but with no comparative studies to standard care, context is lacking. Immunotherapeutic neoadjuvant anti-CTLA-4/PD-(L)1 combinations or combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with antibody-drug-conjugates are in early stages of development and show promising preliminary results. SUMMARY: Six cycles of neoadjuvant dose-dense MVAC are superior to four cycles of gemcitabine/cisplatin. Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is a viable option for patients with high-risk tumours who did not receive prior neoadjuvant treatment. The added value of anti-PD-(L)1 to chemotherapy still needs to be established. Novel developments in immunotherapy combinations, while promising, are still in an early stage and randomized studies are ongoing.
Subject(s)
Cisplatin , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Humans , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Gemcitabine , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Retrospective Studies , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgery , Deoxycytidine/therapeutic use , Deoxycytidine/adverse effects , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Cystectomy , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Muscles/pathologyABSTRACT
Despite treatment with cisplatin-based chemotherapy and surgical resection, clinical outcomes of patients with locally advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) remain poor. We compared neoadjuvant/induction platinum-based combination chemotherapy (NAIC) with combination immune checkpoint inhibition (cICI). We identified 602 patients who attended our outpatient bladder cancer clinic in 2018 to 2019. Patients were included if they received NAIC or cICI for cT3-4aN0M0 or cT1-4aN1-3M0 UC. NAIC consisted of cisplatin-based chemotherapy or gemcitabine-carboplatin in case of cisplatin-ineligibility. A subset of patients (cisplatin-ineligibility or refusal of NAIC) received ipilimumab plus nivolumab in the NABUCCO-trial (NCT03387761). Treatments were compared using the log-rank test and propensity score-weighted Cox regression models. We included 107 Stage III UC patients treated with NAIC (n = 83) or cICI (n = 24). NAIC was discontinued in 11 patients due to progression (n = 6; 7%) or toxicity (n = 5; 6%), while cICI was discontinued in 6 patients (25%) after 2 cycles due to toxicity (P = .205). After NAIC, patients had surgical resection (n = 50; 60%), chemoradiation (n = 26; 30%), or no consolidating treatment due to progression (n = 5; 6%) or toxicity (n = 2; 2%). After cICI, all patients underwent resection. After resection (n = 74), complete pathological response (ypT0N0) was achieved in 11 (22%) NAIC-patients and 11 (46%) cICI-patients (P = .056). Median (IQR) follow-up was 26 (20-32) months. cICI was associated with superior progression-free survival (P = .003) and overall survival (P = .003) compared to NAIC. Our study showed superior survival in Stage III UC patients pretreated with cICI if compared to NAIC. Our findings provide a strong rationale for validation of cICI for locally advanced UC in a comparative phase-3 trial.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Carboplatin , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Cisplatin , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Immunotherapy , Ipilimumab/therapeutic use , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Nivolumab/therapeutic use , Platinum/therapeutic use , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
AIMS: Patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) who progress after platinum-based chemotherapy have a poor prognosis, and there is a medical need to improve current treatment options. Ramucirumab plus docetaxel significantly improved progression-free survival but not overall survival (OS) in platinum-refractory advanced UC (RANGE trial; NCT02426125). Here, we report the exposure-response (ER) of ramucirumab plus docetaxel using data from the RANGE trial. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic (PK) samples were collected (cycle 1-3, 5, 9 [day 1] and 30 days from treatment discontinuation), and PK data were analysed using population PK (popPK) analysis. The minimum ramucirumab concentration after first dose administration (Cmin,1 , or trough concentration immediately prior to the second dose) was derived by popPK analysis and used as the exposure parameter for ER analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression models and matched case-control analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between Cmin,1 and OS. The Cmin,1 relationship with safety was assessed descriptively. RESULTS: Several poor prognostic factors (ECOG 1, haemoglobin concentration <100 g/L, presence of liver metastases) appeared more frequently in the lower exposure quartiles, suggesting a possible disease-PK interaction. A significant association was identified between Cmin,1 and OS (P = .0108). Higher exposure quartiles were associated with longer survival and smaller hazard ratios compared to placebo. No new exposure-safety trends were observed within the exposure range (ramucirumab 10 mg/kg once every 3 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: This prespecified ER analyses suggests a positive relationship between efficacy and ramucirumab exposure, with an imbalance associated with disease prognostic factors. Further investigation may elucidate a possible disease-PK relationship.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Docetaxel , Humans , Platinum/therapeutic use , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , RamucirumabABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma is generally incurable and has scarce treatment options, especially for cisplatin-ineligible patients previously treated with PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy. Enfortumab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate directed at Nectin-4, a protein highly expressed in urothelial carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin in the post-immunotherapy setting in cisplatin-ineligible patients. METHODS: EV-201 is a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study of enfortumab vedotin in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma previously treated with PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors. Cohort 2 included adults (aged ≥18 years) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less who were considered ineligible for cisplatin at enrolment and who had not received platinum-containing chemotherapy in the locally advanced or metastatic setting. Enfortumab vedotin was given intravenously at a dose of 1·25 mg/kg on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 assessed by blinded independent central review. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of enfortumab vedotin. EV-201 is an ongoing study and the primary analysis is complete. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03219333. FINDINGS: Between Oct 8, 2017, and Feb 11, 2020, 91 patients were enrolled at 40 sites globally, of whom 89 received treatment. Median follow-up was 13·4 months (IQR 11·3-18·9). At data cutoff (Sept 8, 2020), the confirmed objective response rate was 52% (46 of 89 patients; 95% CI 41-62), with 18 (20%) of 89 patients achieving a complete response and 28 (31%) achieving a partial response. 49 (55%) of 89 patients had grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (eight [9%] patients), maculopapular rash (seven [8%] patients), and fatigue (six [7%] patients). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 15 (17%) patients. Three (3%) patients died due to acute kidney injury, metabolic acidosis, and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (one [1%] each) within 30 days of first dose and these deaths were considered by the investigator to be related to treatment; a fourth death from pneumonitis occurred more than 30 days after the last dose and was also considered to be related to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with enfortumab vedotin was tolerable and confirmed responses were seen in 52% of cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who were previously treated with PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors. These patients have few treatment options, and enfortumab vedotin could be a promising new therapy for a patient population with a high unmet need. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma Global Development and Seagen.
Subject(s)
B7-H1 Antigen/genetics , Carcinoma/drug therapy , Cell Adhesion Molecules/genetics , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/genetics , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , B7-H1 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Carcinoma/genetics , Carcinoma/pathology , Cisplatin/adverse effects , Disease-Free Survival , Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic/drug effects , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Male , Middle Aged , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors , Urologic Neoplasms/genetics , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Urothelium/drug effects , Urothelium/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite standard curative-intent treatment with neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by radical surgery in eligible patients, muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma has a high recurrence rate and no level 1 evidence for adjuvant therapy. We aimed to evaluate atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. METHOD: In the IMvigor010 study, a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 192 hospitals, academic centres, and community oncology practices across 24 countries or regions, patients aged 18 years and older with histologically confirmed muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2 were enrolled within 14 weeks after radical cystectomy or nephroureterectomy with lymph node dissection. Patients had ypT2-4a or ypN+ tumours following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or pT3-4a or pN+ tumours if no neoadjuvant chemotherapy was received. Patients not treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy must have been ineligible for or declined cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy. No post-surgical radiotherapy or previous adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a permuted block (block size of four) method and interactive voice-web response system to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab given intravenously every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or up to 1 year, whichever occurred first, or to observation. Randomisation was stratified by previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, number of lymph nodes resected, pathological nodal status, tumour stage, and PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who either received at least one dose of atezolizumab or had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02450331, and is ongoing but not recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Oct 5, 2015, and July 30, 2018, we enrolled 809 patients, of whom 406 were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 403 were assigned to the observation group. Median follow-up was 21·9 months (IQR 13·2-29·8). Median disease-free survival was 19·4 months (95% CI 15·9-24·8) with atezolizumab and 16·6 months (11·2-24·8) with observation (stratified hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·24). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were urinary tract infection (31 [8%] of 390 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 20 [5%] of 397 patients in the observation group), pyelonephritis (12 [3%]) vs 14 [4%]), and anaemia (eight [2%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 122 (31%) patients who received atezolizumab and 71 (18%) who underwent observation. 63 (16%) patients who received atezolizumab had a treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse event. One treatment-related death, due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, occurred in the atezolizumab group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, IMvigor010 is the largest, first-completed phase 3 adjuvant study to evaluate the role of a checkpoint inhibitor in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improved disease-free survival in the atezolizumab group over observation. Atezolizumab was generally tolerable, with no new safety signals; however, higher frequencies of adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported than in metastatic urothelial carcinoma studies. These data do not support the use of adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor therapy in the setting evaluated in IMvigor010 at this time. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.
Subject(s)
B7-H1 Antigen/genetics , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Muscles/pathology , Urothelium/pathology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , B7-H1 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Muscles/drug effects , Neoplasm Invasiveness/immunology , Neoplasm Invasiveness/pathology , Progression-Free Survival , Urothelium/drug effectsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Atezolizumab is an established treatment option for pretreated urothelial carcinoma, demonstrating efficacy in phase II/III trials. The SAUL study enrolled a broader patient population to determine safety and efficacy in underrepresented subgroups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic urinary tract carcinoma received atezolizumab 1,200 mg every 3 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, loss of clinical benefit, or patient/physician decision. The primary endpoint was safety. Efficacy was a secondary endpoint. Analyses by programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) status, age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and renal impairment were prespecified; post hoc analyses explored outcomes by tumor location. RESULTS: A total of 1,004 patients were enrolled. Subgroup analyses in patients with older age, renal impairment, or upper tract urothelial carcinoma showed safety and efficacy similar to those in patients without these characteristics. Patients with ECOG PS 2 had clinical features typically associated with aggressive disease; median overall survival was 2.3 months versus 10.0 months in patients with ECOG PS0/1. Patients with PD-L1 expression on ≥5% of tumor-infiltrating immune cells tended to have better outcomes than those with <5% PD-L1 expression, although conclusions on the relative efficacy of atezolizumab cannot be drawn from this single-arm study. CONCLUSIONS: The understudied populations included in the SAUL study had similar outcomes to those in more selected populations included in phase II/III trials of atezolizumab, except for those with ECOG PS 2. Age ≥80 years and/or creatinine clearance <30 ml/minute does not preclude administration of atezolizumab; however, treatment risk versus benefit must be carefully assessed in patients with ECOG PS 2.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Disease Progression , Endpoint Determination , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
The choice of first-line therapy for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) is based on cisplatin-eligibility and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status. For patients with mUC who are ineligible for cisplatin and with low PD-L1 expression, chemotherapy-based regimens are the only approved first-line option. In a Phase I/II trial of the chemotherapy-free regimen, bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG; NKTR-214) plus nivolumab, patients with locally advanced or mUC experienced tumor responses regardless of baseline PD-L1 expression (objective response rates: 50 and 45% in patients with PD-L1-positive and -negative tumors, respectively). The Phase II PIVOT-10 study (NCT03785925), evaluates efficacy and safety of first-line BEMPEG plus nivolumab in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced or mUC. Most patients will have low PD-L1 expression. Primary end point: objective response rates (including complete response).
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Research Design , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Biomarkers, Tumor , Cisplatin/administration & dosage , Humans , Interleukin-2/administration & dosage , Interleukin-2/analogs & derivatives , Molecular Targeted Therapy , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Metastasis , Neoplasm Staging , Nivolumab/administration & dosage , Polyethylene Glycols/administration & dosage , Prognosis , Urologic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Urologic Neoplasms/etiology , Urologic Neoplasms/mortalityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Survival outcomes are poor for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who receive standard, first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy. We assessed the overall survival of patients who received durvalumab (a PD-L1 inhibitor), with or without tremelimumab (a CTLA-4 inhibitor), as a first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: DANUBE is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in patients with untreated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, conducted at 224 academic research centres, hospitals, and oncology clinics in 23 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to receive durvalumab monotherapy (1500 mg) administered intravenously every 4 weeks; durvalumab (1500 mg) plus tremelimumab (75 mg) administered intravenously every 4 weeks for up to four doses, followed by durvalumab maintenance (1500 mg) every 4 weeks; or standard-of-care chemotherapy (gemcitabine plus cisplatin or gemcitabine plus carboplatin, depending on cisplatin eligibility) administered intravenously for up to six cycles. Randomisation was done through an interactive voice-web response system, with stratification by cisplatin eligibility, PD-L1 status, and presence or absence of liver metastases, lung metastases, or both. The coprimary endpoints were overall survival compared between the durvalumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy groups in the population of patients with high PD-L1 expression (the high PD-L1 population) and between the durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy groups in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). The study has completed enrolment and the final analysis of overall survival is reported. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02516241, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT number 2015-001633-24. FINDINGS: Between Nov 24, 2015, and March 21, 2017, we randomly assigned 1032 patients to receive durvalumab (n=346), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (n=342), or chemotherapy (n=344). At data cutoff (Jan 27, 2020), median follow-up for survival was 41·2 months (IQR 37·9-43·2) for all patients. In the high PD-L1 population, median overall survival was 14·4 months (95% CI 10·4-17·3) in the durvalumab monotherapy group (n=209) versus 12·1 months (10·4-15·0) in the chemotherapy group (n=207; hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·71-1·11; p=0·30). In the intention-to-treat population, median overall survival was 15·1 months (13·1-18·0) in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group versus 12·1 months (10·9-14·0) in the chemotherapy group (0·85, 95% CI 0·72-1·02; p=0·075). In the safety population, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 47 (14%) of 345 patients in the durvalumab group, 93 (27%) of 340 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group, and in 188 (60%) of 313 patients in the chemotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event was increased lipase in the durvalumab group (seven [2%] of 345 patients) and in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group (16 [5%] of 340 patients), and neutropenia in the chemotherapy group (66 [21%] of 313 patients). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 30 (9%) of 345 patients in the durvalumab group, 78 (23%) of 340 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group, and 50 (16%) of 313 patients in the chemotherapy group. Deaths due to study drug toxicity were reported in two (1%) patients in the durvalumab group (acute hepatic failure and hepatitis), two (1%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group (septic shock and pneumonitis), and one (<1%) patient in the chemotherapy group (acute kidney injury). INTERPRETATION: This study did not meet either of its coprimary endpoints. Further research to identify the patients with previously untreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma who benefit from treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, either alone or in combination regimens, is warranted. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Carcinoma/drug therapy , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Carcinoma/mortality , Carcinoma/secondary , Female , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Urologic Neoplasms/mortality , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Urothelium/drug effects , Urothelium/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ramucirumab-an IgG1 vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 antagonist-plus docetaxel was previously reported to improve progression-free survival in platinum-refractory, advanced urothelial carcinoma. Here, we report the secondary endpoint of overall survival results for the RANGE trial. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled from 124 investigative sites (hospitals, clinics, and academic centres) in 23 countries. Previous treatment with one immune checkpoint inhibitor was permitted. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive web response system to receive intravenous ramucirumab 10 mg/kg or placebo 10 mg/kg volume equivalent followed by intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2 (60 mg/m2 in Korea, Taiwan, and Japan) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria were met. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline, and visceral metastasis. Progression-free survival (the primary endpoint) and overall survival (a key secondary endpoint) were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02426125; patient enrolment is complete and the last patient on treatment is being followed up for safety issues. FINDINGS: Between July 20, 2015, and April 4, 2017, 530 patients were randomly allocated to ramucirumab plus docetaxel (n=263) or placebo plus docetaxel (n=267) and comprised the intention-to-treat population. At database lock (March 21, 2018) for the final overall survival analysis, median follow-up was 7·4 months (IQR 3·5-13·9). In our sensitivity analysis of investigator-assessed progression-free survival at the overall survival database lock, median progression-free survival remained significantly improved with ramucirumab compared with placebo (4·1 months [95% CI 3·3-4·8] vs 2·8 months [2·6-2·9]; HR 0·696 [95% CI 0·573-0·845]; p=0·0002). Median overall survival was 9·4 months (95% CI 7·9-11·4) in the ramucirumab group versus 7·9 months (7·0-9·3) in the placebo group (stratified HR 0·887 [95% CI 0·724-1·086]; p=0·25). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events in 5% or more of patients and with an incidence more than 2% higher with ramucirumab than with placebo were febrile neutropenia (24 [9%] of 258 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 16 [6%] of 265 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (17 [7%] of 258 vs six [2%] of 265). Serious adverse events were similar between groups (112 [43%] of 258 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 107 [40%] of 265 patients in the placebo group). Adverse events related to study treatment and leading to death occurred in eight (3%) patients in the ramucirumab group versus five (2%) patients in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Additional follow-up supports that ramucirumab plus docetaxel significantly improves progression-free survival, without a significant improvement in overall survival, for patients with platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma. Clinically meaningful benefit might be restricted in an unselected population. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/mortality , Salvage Therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/mortality , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/secondary , Docetaxel/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Neoplasm Metastasis , Platinum/administration & dosage , Prognosis , Survival Rate , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , RamucirumabABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The level of evidence for current (adjuvant) treatment strategies after node positive inguinal lymphadenectomy is relatively low because of a paucity of prospective studies and controversy exist between the two major guidelines. The present review aims to provide a review of current literature on the available treatment options of patients after a tumor positive inguinal lymph node dissection. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients without inguinal extranodal extension or less than two tumor positive inguinal nodes are at low risk of ipsilateral pelvic nodal disease. Patients with pN1 disease are unlikely to benefit from adjuvant treatment, whereas patients with pN2 disease might benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. For patients with high risk of pelvic nodal disease, prophylactic pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is advised by current guidelines. The InPACT study investigates whether adjuvant chemoradiotherapy could be used instead of prophylactic PLND. Subgroup analyses of retrospective cohorts suggest that patients with pN3 disease based on tumor positive pelvic nodes may benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Given the weak level of evidence and substantial toxicity associated with current regimens, adjuvant chemotherapy cannot be generally recommended. SUMMARY: Despite current treatment strategies, patients with pN2-pN3 disease still have a poor prognosis. Prospective international multicenter studies are necessary to identify the best treatment options for patients with advanced node positive penile squamous cell carcinoma.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery , Penile Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/therapy , Combined Modality Therapy/adverse effects , Combined Modality Therapy/trends , Humans , Lymph Node Excision/methods , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Lymph Nodes/surgery , Lymphatic Metastasis , Male , Neoplasm Staging , Penile Neoplasms/pathology , Penile Neoplasms/therapy , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Risk AssessmentSubject(s)
Neoadjuvant Therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms , Humans , Neoadjuvant Therapy/adverse effects , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgery , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Muscles , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Cystectomy , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Few options exist for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after progression with platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) versus chemotherapy in this patient population. METHODS: We conducted this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial (IMvigor211) at 217 academic medical centres and community oncology practices mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice and web response system with a permuted block design (block size of four), to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg or chemotherapy (physician's choice: vinflunine 320 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, or 75 mg/m2 docetaxel) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression (expression on <1% [IC0] or 1% to <5% [IC1] of tumour-infiltrating immune cells vs ≥5% of tumour-infiltrating immune cells [IC2/3]), chemotherapy type (vinflunine vs taxanes), liver metastases (yes vs no), and number of prognostic factors (none vs one, two, or three). Patients and investigators were aware of group allocation. Patients, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. The primary endpoint of overall survival was tested hierarchically in prespecified populations: IC2/3, followed by IC1/2/3, followed by the intention-to-treat population. This study, which is ongoing but not recruiting participants, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02302807. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2015, and Feb 15, 2016, we randomly assigned 931 patients from 198 sites to receive atezolizumab (n=467) or chemotherapy (n=464). In the IC2/3 population (n=234), overall survival did not differ significantly between patients in the atezolizumab group and those in the chemotherapy group (median 11·1 months [95% CI 8·6-15·5; n=116] vs 10·6 months [8·4-12·2; n=118]; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·63-1·21; p=0·41), thus precluding further formal statistical analysis. Confirmed objective response rates were similar between treatment groups in the IC2/3 population: 26 (23%) of 113 evaluable patients had an objective response in the atezolizumab group compared with 25 (22%) of 116 patients in the chemotherapy group. Duration of response was numerically longer in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median 15·9 months [95% CI 10·4 to not estimable] vs 8·3 months [5·6-13·2]; HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·26-1·26). In the intention-to-treat population, patients receiving atezolizumab had fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events than did those receiving chemotherapy (91 [20%] of 459 vs 189 [43%] of 443 patients), and fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (34 [7%] vs 78 [18%] patients). INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab was not associated with significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma overexpressing PD-L1 (IC2/3). However, the safety profile for atezolizumab was favourable compared with chemotherapy, Exploratory analysis of the intention-to-treat population showed well-tolerated, durable responses in line with previous phase 2 data for atezolizumab in this setting. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma/drug therapy , Paclitaxel/therapeutic use , Taxoids/therapeutic use , Urologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Carcinoma/mortality , Carcinoma/secondary , Docetaxel , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , Urologic Neoplasms/mortality , Urologic Neoplasms/secondary , Vinblastine/analogs & derivatives , Vinblastine/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In this prospective study we evaluated the safety and efficacy of concurrent radiotherapy and panitumumab following neoadjuvant/induction chemotherapy and pelvic lymph node dissection as a bladder preserving therapy for invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with cT1-4N0-2M0 bladder cancer were treated with pelvic lymph node dissection and 4 cycles of platinum based induction chemotherapy followed by a 6½-week schedule of weekly panitumumab (2.5 mg/kg) and concurrent radiotherapy to the bladder (33 × 2 Gy). As the primary objective we compared concurrent radiotherapy and panitumumab toxicity to a historical control toxicity rate of concurrent cisplatin/radiotherapy (less than 35% of patients with Grade 3-5 toxicity). A sample size of 31 patients was estimated. Secondary end points included complete remission at 3-month followup, the bladder preservation rate, EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) expression and RAS mutational status. RESULTS: Of the 38 cases initially included in this study 34 were staged cN0. After pelvic lymph node dissection 7 cases (21%) were up staged to pN+. Of the 38 patients 31 started concurrent radiotherapy and panitumumab. During concurrent radiotherapy and panitumumab 5 patients (16%, 95% CI 0-31) experienced systemic or local grade 3-4 toxicity. Four patients did not complete treatment due to adverse events. Complete remission was achieved in 29 of 31 patients (94%, 95% CI 83-100). At a median followup of 34 months 4 patients had local recurrence, for which 3 (10%) underwent salvage cystectomy. Two tumors showed EGFR or RAS mutation while 84% showed positive EGFR expression. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent radiotherapy and panitumumab following induction chemotherapy and pelvic lymph node dissection has a safety profile that is noninferior to the historical profile of concurrent cisplatin/radiotherapy. The high complete remission and bladder preservation rates are promising and warrant further study.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Panitumumab/therapeutic use , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/therapy , Adult , Aged , Combined Modality Therapy , Female , Humans , Induction Chemotherapy , Lymph Node Excision , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Prospective Studies , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/drug therapy , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/pathology , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/radiotherapyABSTRACT
Urachal cancer (UrC) is a rare but aggressive malignancy often diagnosed in advanced stages requiring systemic treatment. Although cytotoxic chemotherapy is of limited effectiveness, prospective clinical studies can hardly be conducted. Targeted therapeutic treatment approaches and potentially immunotherapy based on a biological rationale may provide an alternative strategy. We therefore subjected 70 urachal adenocarcinomas to targeted next-generation sequencing, conducted in situ and immunohistochemical analyses (including PD-L1 and DNA mismatch repair proteins [MMR]) and evaluated the microsatellite instability (MSI) status. The analytical findings were correlated with clinicopathological and outcome data and Kaplan-Meier and univariable/multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed. The patients had a mean age of 50 years, 66% were male and a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 58% and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of 45% was detected. Sequence variations were observed in TP53 (66%), KRAS (21%), BRAF (4%), PIK3CA (4%), FGFR1 (1%), MET (1%), NRAS (1%), and PDGFRA (1%). Gene amplifications were found in EGFR (5%), ERBB2 (2%), and MET (2%). We detected no evidence of MMR-deficiency (MMR-d)/MSI-high (MSI-h), whereas 10 of 63 cases (16%) expressed PD-L1. Therefore, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy approaches might be tested in UrC. Importantly, we found aberrations in intracellular signal transduction pathways (RAS/RAF/PI3K) in 31% of UrCs with potential implications for anti-EGFR therapy. Less frequent potentially actionable genetic alterations were additionally detected in ERBB2 (HER2), MET, FGFR1, and PDGFRA. The molecular profile strengthens the notion that UrC is a distinct entity on the genomic level with closer resemblance to colorectal than to bladder cancer.