Pembrolizumab with or Without Lenvatinib as First-line Therapy for Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma (LEAP-011): A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib has shown antitumor activity and acceptable safety in patients with platinum-refractory urothelial carcinoma (UC). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pembrolizumab plus either lenvatinib or placebo as first-line therapy for advanced UC in the phase 3 LEAP-011 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with advanced UC who were ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy or any platinum-based chemotherapy were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus either lenvatinib 20 mg or placebo orally once daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An external data monitoring committee (DMC) regularly reviewed safety and efficacy data every 3 mo. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between June 25, 2019 and July 21, 2021, 487 patients were allocated to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n = 245) or placebo plus pembrolizumab (n = 242). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff date (July 26, 2021) was 12.8 mo (interquartile range, 6.9-19.3). The median PFS was 4.5 mo in the combination arm and 4.0 mo in the pembrolizumab arm (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.72-1.14]). The median OS was 11.8 mo for the combination arm and 12.9 mo for the pembrolizumab arm (HR 1.14 [95% CI 0.87-1.48]). Grade 3-5 adverse events attributed to trial treatment occurred in 123 of 241 patients (51%) treated with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab and in 66 of 242 patients (27%) treated with placebo plus pembrolizumab. This trial was terminated earlier than initially planned based on recommendation from the DMC. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit-to-risk ratio for first-line lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was not considered favorable versus pembrolizumab plus placebo as first-line therapy in patients with advanced UC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was not more effective than pembrolizumab plus placebo in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Plain language summary of erdafitinib in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a phase 2 study with long-term follow-up.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of two articles describing the results from a study called BLC2001. The study examined the effect of a medication called erdafitinib on participants with a type of cancer known as urothelial carcinoma that had either spread beyond the bladder or urinary tract into surrounding organs and/or nearby muscles (locally advanced) and was not removable by surgery (unresectable) or had spread to other parts of the body (metastatic). In this study, researchers wanted to learn if erdafitinib was safe and effective at stopping or reducing tumor growth in participants with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with certain genetic alterations (changes in DNA sequence) in two related genes called fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) and 3 (FGFR3). Treatment options for people with this disease are very limited; some may not have responded to other therapies, or their tumors continued to grow after they received other treatments. 212 participants took part in the study. 111 participants were treated with oral (by mouth) erdafitinib at different doses to find a recommended dose regimen. 101 additional participants then received the recommended starting dose of erdafitinib at 8 mg daily with possible increase to 9 mg daily, these participants make up the 8 mg regimen group. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE BLC2001 STUDY IN THE 8 MG REGIMEN GROUP?: Researchers found that tumors decreased in size or completely disappeared in 40% of participants. With approximately 1 year of follow-up, an estimated 55% of participants were still alive, and after 2 years, an estimated 31% of participants were still alive. Common side effects of erdafitinib included high phosphate levels in the blood (hyperphosphatemia), an inflamed and sore mouth, diarrhea, and dry mouth. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Participants had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with certain FGFR gene alterations that had been treated with erdafitinib after previous chemotherapy and/or a type of medicine that uses the immune system to help the body fight cancer (immunotherapy). The BLC2001 study found that some participants treated with 8 mg erdafitinib had the benefit of a longer period without their cancer growing or spreading to other parts of the body. About 80% of participants achieved some level of disease control where their tumor shrank or remained stable.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes in Patients Diagnosed With Nonmetastatic Plasmacytoid Variant of Bladder Cancer: A 20-Year University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience.

PURPOSE: The treated natural history of nonmetastatic plasmacytoid variant of bladder cancer (PV-BCa) is poorly understood owing to its rarity. We sought to examine the disease recurrence and metastasis patterns in this select group of patients in order to identify opportunities for intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a natural language processing algorithm-augmented retrospective chart review of 56 consecutive patients who were treated with curative intent for nonmetastatic PV-BCa at our institution between 1998 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression methods were used for survival analyses. RESULTS: The stage at presentation was: ≤ cT2N0 in 22 (39.3%), cT3N0 in 15 (26.8%), cT4N0 in 13 (23.2%), and ≥ cN1 in 6 patients (10.7%). Forty-nine patients (87.5%) received chemotherapy, and 42 (75%) were able to undergo the planned surgery. Notably, only 4 patients (7.2%) had pT0 stage, while 22 (52.4%) had pN+ disease at the time of surgery. At 36-month follow-up, 28.4% of patients (95% CI: 22.1%-34.5%) were alive and 22.2% (95% CI: 16.1%-28.5%) were free of metastatic disease. The benefit of surgical extirpation was stage specific: successful completion of surgery was associated with improved metastasis-free survival (at 36 months 32.4% vs 0%, log-rank P < .001) in patients with localized or locally advanced disease (≤cT2N0/cT3N0); however, in patients with regionally advanced disease (cT4N0/≥cN1), consolidative surgery following chemotherapy was not associated with improved metastasis-free survival (12.5% vs 10% at 36 months, log-rank P = .49). The median time to metastasis from primary treatment end was 6.5 months (IQR: 2.9-14.7). The predominant site of recurrence/metastasis was the peritoneum (76.1%), either in isolation or along with extraperitoneal lesions. Salvage immunotherapy in these patients significantly reduced the risk of death (HR = 0.11, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: PV-BCa is a disease with high lethality. Despite multimodal treatment, a vast majority of patients develop atypical intraperitoneal metastasis soon after therapy and rapidly succumb to it. Clinical trials evaluating utility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy may be warranted in this high-risk population.

Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Treatment Strategies for Surgically Resectable Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Urinary Tract.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCTX) has been recommended as the optimal strategy in surgically resectable neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) of the urinary tract (NEC-URO). OBJECTIVE: To determine the systemic therapy regimen and timing, which are most active against NEC-URO. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used our institutional historical clinical and pathological database to study 203 patients (cT2, 74%; cT3/4a, 22%; and cTx, 4%) with surgically resectable NEC-URO between November 1985 and May 2020. A total of 141 patients received neoCTX and 62 underwent initial radical surgery, 24 of whom received adjuvant CTX (adjCTX). INTERVENTION: Neoadjuvant CTX with etoposide/cisplatin (EP), an alternating doublet of ifosfamide/doxorubicin (IA) and EP, dose-dense methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin (MVAC), gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC), or others. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS), downstaging rate, and pathological complete response using a multivariable model adjusting for tumor- and patient-related factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Downstaging rate was significantly improved with neoCTX versus initial surgery (49.6% vs 14.5%, p < 0.0001), stage cT2N0 versus cT3/4N0 (44% vs 25%, p = 0.01), or presence of carcinoma in situ (47% vs 28%, p = 0.01). Downstaging was greatest with IA/EP (65%) versus EP (39%), MVAC/GC (27%), or others (36%, p = 0.04). After adjusting for age and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, IA/EP was still associated with improved downstaging (odds ratio = 3.7 [1.3-10.2], p = 0.01). At a median follow-up of 59.7 mo, 5-yr OS rates for neoCTX followed by surgery, surgery alone, and surgery followed by adjCTX were 57%, 22%, and 30%, respectively. An NEC regimen (IA/EP or EP) versus a urothelial regimen (MVAC/GC or others) was associated with improved survival (145.4 vs 42.5 mo, hazard ratio = 0.49, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant CTX remains the standard-of-care treatment for NEC-URO with an advantage for NEC regimens over traditional urothelial regimens. IA/EP improves pathological downstaging at the time of surgery compared with EP, but is reserved for younger and higher function patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes from invasive neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary tract in a large US population. We found that the outcomes varied with treatment strategy. We conclude that the best outcomes are seen in patients treated with chemotherapy prior to surgery and regimens tailored to histology and tolerance.

Erdafitinib or Chemotherapy in Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who have progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The effects of erdafitinib in patients with FGFR-altered metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progression during or after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1] or anti-programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] agents) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global phase 3 trial of erdafitinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who had progression after one or two previous treatments that included an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive erdafitinib or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel or vinflunine). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients underwent randomization: 136 to the erdafitinib group and 130 to the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 15.9 months. The median overall survival was significantly longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.88; P = 0.005). The median progression-free survival was also longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78; P<0.001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (45.9% in the erdafitinib group and 46.4% in the chemotherapy group). Treatment-related adverse events that led to death were less common with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (in 0.7% vs. 5.4% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alterations after previous anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; THOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03390504.).

Management of Fibroblast Growth Factor Inhibitor Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Interest in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

Background: Erdafitinib is indicated for the treatment of adults with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations progressing on/after one or more lines of prior platinum-based chemotherapy. Objective: To better understand the frequency and management of select treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) to enable optimal fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitor (FGFRi) treatment. Design setting and participants: Longer-term efficacy and safety results of the BLC2001 (NCT02365597) trial in patients with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma were studied. Intervention: Erdafitinib schedule of 8 mg/d continuous in 28-d cycles, with uptitration to 9 mg/d if serum phosphate level was <5.5 mg/dl and no significant TEAEs occurred. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Adverse events were graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The Kaplan-Meier methodology was used for the cumulative incidence of the first onset of TEAEs by grade. Time to resolution of TEAEs was summarized descriptively. Results and limitations: At data cutoff, the median treatment duration was 5.4 mo among 101 patients receiving erdafitinib. Select TEAEs (total; grade 3) were hyperphosphatemia (78%; 2.0%), stomatitis (59%; 14%), nail events (59%; 15%), non-central serous retinopathy (non-CSR) eye disorders (56%; 5.0%), skin events (55%; 7.9%), diarrhea (55%; 4.0%), and CSR (27%; 4.0%). Select TEAEs were mostly of grade 1 or 2, and were managed effectively with dose modifications, including dose reductions or interruptions, and/or supportive concomitant therapies, resulting in few events leading to treatment discontinuation. Further work is needed to determine whether management is generalizable to the nonprotocol/general population. Conclusions: Identification of select TEAEs and appropriate management with dose modification and/or concomitant therapies resulted in improvement or resolution of most TEAEs in patients, allowing for continuation of FGFRi treatment to ensure maximum benefit. Patient summary: Early identification and proactive management are warranted to mitigate or possibly prevent erdafitinib side effects to allow for maximum drug benefit in patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer.

Outcomes of Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma after Anti-programmed Death-(ligand) 1 Therapy by Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Gene Alteration Status: An Observational Study.

Background: Clinical outcomes of anti-programmed death­(ligand) 1 (anti-PD-[L]1) therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) and fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations (FGFRa+) remain unclear; recent studies have reported either comparable or poorer outcomes versus patients without FGFR alterations (FGFRa-). Objective: To analyze the outcomes of patients with mUC and any FGFRa (mutations or fusions) who received anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Design setting and participants: In this noninterventional, retrospective, multicenter study, clinical practice data were collected from FGFRa+/- patients who received prior immunotherapy between May 2018 and July 2019. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Investigator­determined overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and overall survival (OS) were assessed in multivariate and unadjusted analyses. Results and limitations: Ninety-four patients (66% men; median age, 63 yr) with mUC and known FGFR status were included; 38 (40%) were FGFRa+ and 56 (60%) were FGFRa-. In FGFRa+ versus FGFRa- patients who received any line of anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (n = 92), ORR, DCR, and OS were 16% versus 26%, 29% versus 52% (relative risk: 1.14 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.92-1.40]; p = 0.3), and 8.57 versus 13.2 mo (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.33 [95% CI, 0.77-2.30]; p = 0.3), respectively. A multivariate analysis provided some evidence supporting shorter OS in FGFRa+ versus FGFRa- (any line of anti-PD-L[1] therapy; HR: 1.81 [95% CI, 0.99-3.31]; p = 0.054). Limitations include this study's retrospective nature and a potential selection bias from small sample size. Conclusions: Some evidence of lower response rates and shortened OS following anti-PD-(L)1 therapy was observed in FGFRa+ patients. The phase 3 THOR study (NCT03390504) will prospectively compare FGFRa+ patients with advanced mUC treated with erdafitinib versus pembrolizumab. Patient summary: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations (FGFRa) potentially have worse clinical outcomes when treated with anti-PD-(L)1 therapy than those without FGFRa.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022.

The NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer and other urinary tract cancers (upper tract tumors, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, primary carcinoma of the urethra). These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines regarding the treatment of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, including how to treat in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage; new roles for immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-muscle invasive, muscle-invasive, and metastatic bladder cancer; and the addition of antibody-drug conjugates for metastatic bladder cancer.

Longitudinal GFR trends after neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Renal function dictates sequencing and eligibility for definitive therapy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. We investigated longitudinal glomerular filtration rate (GFR) changes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and nephroureterectomy (RNU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated with ≥3 cycles of chemotherapy prior to RNU for UTUC from 2000 to 2019 were included. GFR was calculated by CKD-Epi before chemotherapy, before RNU, 1 to 3 months, and 12 months post-RNU. Pathologic stage and overall survival were compared in those with stable GFR (+/-10% of baseline) to the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-two patients received ≥3 cycles of NAC, with 121 (79%) receiving at least 1 cycle of cisplatin. Renal function dropped by mean of 22.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 from the beginning of chemotherapy to 1-year post-surgery. In patients receiving cisplatin, a mean decline of 26.2 ml/min/1.73 m2 was observed vs. 8.8 ml/min/1.73 m2 without cisplatin-based NAC (P < 0.01). GFR after RNU was unchanged between 3 and 12 months postoperatively. At 1 to 3 months after RNU, 19% of patients had GFR<30 ml/min/1.73m2. Improvement in GFR during NAC was associated with invasive final pathologic stage (P = 0.018) and worse overall survival (P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: In patients managed with NAC prior to RNU, renal function stabilizes at 1 to 3 months post-operatively and remains clinically similar for cisplatin or non-cisplatin-based therapy. Improvement in GFR during NAC was associated with higher pathologic stage and poorer survival, especially in those receiving non-cisplatin-based therapy, an observation that requires further investigation.

Bempegaldesleukin plus Nivolumab in First-line Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Results from PIVOT-02.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent changes in the treatment landscape, there remains an unmet need for effective, tolerable, chemotherapy-free treatments for patients with advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), especially cisplatin-ineligible patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the immunostimulatory interleukin-2 cytokine prodrug bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/mUC from the phase 2 multicenter PIVOT-02 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, multicohort phase 1/2 study enrolled patients with previously untreated locally advanced/surgically unresectable or mUC (N = 41). INTERVENTION: Patients received BEMPEG 0.006 mg/kg plus nivolumab 360 mg intravenously every 3 wk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary objectives were safety and the objective response rate (ORR) in patients with measurable disease at baseline and at least one postbaseline tumor response assessment (response-evaluable). Secondary objectives were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Exploratory biomarker analyses via univariate logistic regression were performed to test the association between potential biomarkers (CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, tumor mutational burden, and IFN-γ gene expression profile) and response. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The ORR was 35% (13/37 evaluable patients) and the complete response rate was 19% (7/37 patients); the median duration of response was not reached. Median PFS was 4.1 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1-8.7) and median OS was 23.7 mo (95% CI 15.8-not reached). Overall, 40/41 patients (98%) experienced at least one treatment-related adverse event (TRAE); grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 11 patients (27%), most commonly pyrexia (4.9%; 2 patients). Exploratory biomarker analyses showed no association between biomarkers and response. Limitations include the small sample size and single-arm design. CONCLUSIONS: BEMPEG plus nivolumab was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced/mUC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated an immune-stimulating prodrug called bempegaldesleukin plus the antibody nivolumab as the first therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer of the urinary tract. This combination had manageable treatment-related side effects and was effective in a subset of patients. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02983045.

Bempegaldesleukin plus nivolumab in first-line renal cell carcinoma: results from the PIVOT-02 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combinations have expanded the treatment options for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC); however, tolerability remains challenging. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the immunostimulatory interleukin-2 cytokine prodrug bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) plus nivolumab (NIVO) as first-line therapy in patients with advanced clear-cell RCC. METHODS: This was an open-label multicohort, multicenter, single-arm phase 1/2 study; here, we report results from the phase 1/2 first-line RCC cohort (N=49). Patients received BEMPEG 0.006 mg/kg plus NIVO 360 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary objectives were safety and objective response rate (ORR; patients with measurable disease at baseline and at least one postbaseline tumor response assessment). Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Exploratory biomarker analyses: association between baseline biomarkers and ORR. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 32.7 months, the ORR was 34.7% (17/49 patients); 3/49 patients (6.1%) had a complete response. Of the 17 patients with response, 14 remained in response for >6 months, and 6 remained in response for >24 months. Median PFS was 7.7 months (95% CI 3.8 to 13.9), and median OS was not reached (95% CI 37.3 to not reached). Ninety-eight per cent (48/49) of patients experienced ≥1 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) and 38.8% (19/49) had grade 3/4 TRAEs, most commonly syncope (8.2%; 4/49) and increased lipase (6.1%; 3/49). No association between exploratory biomarkers and ORR was observed. Limitations include the small sample size and single-arm design. CONCLUSIONS: BEMPEG plus NIVO showed preliminary antitumor activity as first-line therapy in patients with advanced clear-cell RCC and was well tolerated. These findings warrant further investigation.

Multimodal kidney-preserving approach in localised and locally advanced high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Objectives: Multimodal kidney-preserving (MKP) strategies may be an option for patients with localised or locally advanced high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) who have a relative contraindication for nephroureterectomy (NU). Materials and methods: We studied patients with UTUC who were managed with MKP strategies, consisting of systemic anticancer therapy, with or without local/topical strategies after endoscopic control of intraluminal tumours. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Fourteen patients received MKP treatment between August 2013 and April 2020. Median baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 43 mL/min/1.73m2. MKP was mainly pursued to avoid dialysis (10/14, 71%), followed by low performance status and/or comorbidities (2/14, 14%). All patients had received systemic therapy: chemotherapy (64%) and immunotherapy (36%). Endoscopic control and/or laser ablation was feasible in 7 (50%) patients. Calculated overall risk of non-organ confined disease was 35%. Predicted 2-year and 5-year relapse-free probability (RFP) was 74% (24-92%) and 62% (10-85%), respectively. Median follow-up was 31 months (95% CI: 22.6, NE), median OS was 48.1 months (95% CI: 48.1, NE) and 2-year OS probability was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.71, 1). Median metastases-free survival was 48.1 months (95% CI: 26.8, NE), median PFS was 22.4 months (95% CI: 15.6, NE) and 2-year PFS probability was 0.48 (0.26, 0.89). Conclusion: Management of high-risk localised or locally advanced UTUC with MKP strategies was associated with good tolerance, preservation of renal function, and comparable PFS and OS to predicted in vulnerable patients. Prospective studies with more patients are needed to evaluate these possible benefits relative to current standards.

Efficacy and safety of erdafitinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was shown to be clinically active and tolerable in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations in the primary analysis of the BLC2001 study at median 11 months of follow-up. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the selected regimen of erdafitinib determined in the initial part of the study. METHODS: The open-label, non-comparator, phase 2, BLC2001 study was done at 126 medical centres in 14 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, at least one prespecified FGFR alteration, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease after receiving at least one systemic chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or were ineligible for cisplatin. The selected regimen determined in the initial part of the study was continuous once daily 8 mg/day oral erdafitinib in 28-day cycles, with provision for pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg/day (8 mg/day UpT). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of erdafitinib. This is the final analysis of this study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02365597. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2015, and Aug 9, 2018, 2328 patients were screened, of whom 212 were enrolled and 101 were treated with the selected erdafitinib 8 mg/day UpT regimen. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Aug 9, 2019. Median efficacy follow-up was 24·0 months (IQR 22·7-26·6). The investigator-assessed objective response rate for patients treated with the selected erdafitinib regimen was 40 (40%; 95% CI 30-49) of 101 patients. The safety profile remained similar to that in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals reported with longer follow-up. Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any causality occurred in 72 (71%) of 101 patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any cause were stomatitis (in 14 [14%] of 101 patients) and hyponatraemia (in 11 [11%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: With longer follow-up, treatment with the selected regimen of erdafitinib showed consistent activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Evaluation of Technology-Enabled Monitoring of Patient-Reported Outcomes to Detect and Treat Toxic Effects Linked to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors can produce distinct toxic effects that require prompt recognition and timely management. Objective: To develop a technology-enabled, dynamically adaptive protocol that can provide the accurate information needed to inform specific remedies for immune toxic effects in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary referral center from September 6, 2019, to September 3, 2020. The median follow-up duration was 63 (interquartile range, 35.5-122) days. Fifty patients with genitourinary cancers treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors were enrolled. Interventions: A fit-for-purpose electronic platform was developed to enable active patient and care team participation. A smartphone application downloaded onto patients' personal mobile devices prompted them to report their symptoms at least 3 times per week. The set of symptoms and associated queries were paired with alert thresholds for symptoms requiring clinical action. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of this interim analysis was feasibility, as measured by patient and care team adherence, and lack of increase in care team staffing. Operating characteristics were estimated for each symptom alert and used to dynamically adapt the alert thresholds to ensure sensitivity while reducing unnecessary alerts. Results: Of the 50 patients enrolled, 47 had at least 1 follow-up visit and were included in the analysis. Median age was 65 years (range, 37-86), 39 patients (83%) were men, and 39 patients (83%) had metastatic cancer, with the most common being urothelial cell carcinoma and renal cell carcinoma (22 [47%] patients each). After initial onboarding, no further care team training or additional care team staffing was required. Patients had a median study adherence rate of 74% (interquartile range, 60%-86%) and 73% of automated alerts were reviewed within 3 days by the clinic team. Symptoms with the highest positive predictive value for adverse events requiring acute intervention included dizziness (21%), nausea/vomiting (26%), and shortness of breath (14%). The symptoms most likely to result in unnecessary alerts were arthralgia and myalgia, fatigue, and cough. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest an acceptable and fiscally sound method can be developed to create a dynamic learning system to detect and manage immune-related toxic effects.

Durable responses in patients with genitourinary cancers following immune checkpoint therapy rechallenge after moderate-to-severe immune-related adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) prolongs survival in subsets of patients with cancer but can also trigger immune-related adverse events (irAEs) requiring treatment discontinuation. Recent studies have investigated safety of ICT rechallenge after irAEs, and evidence suggests that rechallenge may be associated with improved antitumor responses. However, data are limited on response duration after ICT rechallenge, particularly after severe irAEs. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of ICT rechallenge after moderate-to-severe irAEs in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC), urothelial carcinoma (UC), and prostate cancer. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, medical records from September 25, 2013, to June 1, 2020, for patients with genitourinary (GU) cancers at MD Anderson Cancer Center who were rechallenged with the same or different ICT following irAEs were reviewed. Demographics, ICT exposure, irAEs (grade and treatment), ICT discontinuation or rechallenge, rates of subsequent irAEs (new or recurrent) and antitumor activity (objective response rates and response duration) were reviewed. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients with RCC, UC, and prostate cancer were rechallenged with ICT after experiencing 105 total irAEs. Objective response rates after rechallenge, that is, upgrade in response, were 14% in RCC (4/28), 21% in UC (3/14), and 0% in prostate cancer. All seven patients who achieved upgrade in response had initial grade 2 or 3 irAEs. Responses were durable among these seven patients, with median radiographic progression-free survival not reached (range: 3.7-66.4 months) as of the March 8, 2021, data cut-off (median follow-up 40.9 months (95% CI 35.3 to 46.5)). All achieved complete response except one patient who was lost to follow-up. The rate of subsequent grade 3 or 4 irAEs after rechallenge was 30%, with no fatal irAEs. The rate of recrudescence of the same irAE was 26% (16/61). 54% of patients received corticosteroids (33/61), and 21% received targeted immunosuppression (13/61) for the initial irAEs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ICT rechallenge after moderate-to-severe irAEs was associated with deep and durable responses in a subset of patients with RCC and UC, with acceptable safety and no fatal events. Strategies to enable ICT resumption after moderate-to-severe irAEs, such targeted immunosuppression, warrant further study.

Progression of Disease after Bacillus Calmette-Guérin Therapy: Refining Patient Selection for Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy before Radical Cystectomy.

PURPOSE: Data from the pre-neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) era suggests patients who progress on bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) to muscle-invasive bladder cancer (P-MIBC) exhibit worse outcomes compared to de novo MIBC (D-MIBC). Herein, we investigate whether P-MIBC is an independent poor risk factor in the setting of contemporary NAC use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of patients who underwent radical cystectomy (RC) for cT2-3 MIBC from 2005 to 2018 was performed. Patients were stratified into high risk (lymphovascular invasion, variant histology, hydronephrosis, cT3b) vs low risk (no risk factors) and P-MIBC (≤pT1 treated with at least induction BCG who progressed to ≥cT2) vs D-MIBC. RESULTS: Among 801 patients who underwent RC 20.3% had P-MIBC and 79.7% had D-MIBC. In low-risk patients treated without NAC, P-MIBC was associated with pathological upstaging (64.9% vs 42.7%, p=0.004) and worse overall (OS, p=0.006) and cancer-specific survival (CSS, p=0.001) compared to D-MIBC. P-MIBC status conferred uniformly poor survival outcomes to patients who did not receive NAC compared to D-MIBC without NAC (median OS 51.5 months [95% CI 40.0-81.0] vs 85.1 months [95% CI 62.8-96.0], p=0.040; median CSS not reached, p=0.014). However, P-MIBC status did not remain a negative prognostic factor in the setting of NAC (median OS 90.5 months [95% CI 34.0-not estimable] vs 87.8 months [95% CI 68.7-not estimable], p=0.606; median CSS not reached, p=0.448). CONCLUSIONS: P-MIBC confers a poor prognosis when managed with RC alone. Treatment with NAC results in equivalent pathological response and survival outcomes compared to D-MIBC. P-MIBC should be included in risk-stratified approaches to NAC selection.