Outcomes with atezolizumab in metastatic urothelial cancer: real-world data from a single institution

Purpose Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been incorporated in the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) upon platinum-based chemotherapy according to the positive results of large clinical trials. Nevertheless, results from unselected populations reflecting real-world data (RWD) are highly informative to the clinician. We reviewed daily clinical practice outcomes in patients with mUC who received atezolizumab in our institution. Methods Here we evaluated the clinical activity and safety of atezolizumab in an unselected population of mUC patients who received atezolizumab between 2018 and 2022 reflecting RWD. Efficacy and safety information were retrospectively collected. Results A total of 63 patients were included. The mean age was 68 years and the objective response rate was 14.3%. The median progression-free survival was 3 months and the median overall survival 6 months. At 1 year, 42% of the patients were alive. ECOG (0 vs 1) and neutrophil–lymphocytes ratio < 2 at the start of ICI were positive prognostic factors that discriminated between long vs short survivors. Overall tolerance was good with no new safety signals. Five patients (17%) had treatment-related adverse events grade ≥ 2 that required corticosteroids. Conclusion In this retrospective study, atezolizumab was an effective and tolerable treatment option for patients with mUC after progression to platinum-based chemotherapy. Yet, patient selection remains critical to improve outcomes (AU)

Case–control study assessing the impact of COVID19 in advanced kidney cancer patients treated with antiangiogenics or immunotherapy: the COVID-REN study

Background Cancer is a risk factor for developing severe COVID19. Additionally, SARS-CoV2 has a special tropism for renal cells and complications like thrombosis or cytokine storm could be enhanced by standard treatments in kidney cancer (i.e., antiangiogenics or immunotherapy). Thus, understanding the impact of COVID19 in patients with this tumor is key for their correct management. Methods We designed a retrospective case–control study comparing the outcome of three groups of advanced kidney cancer patients on systemic treatment: cohort A (developed COVID19 while on antiangiogenics), cohort B (developed COVID19 while on immunotherapy) and cohort C (non-infected). Matching factors were age, gender, and treatment. Results 95 patients were recruited in 16 centers in Spain from September 2020 to May 2021. Finally, 85 were deemed as eligible (23 cohort A, 21 cohort B, 41 cohort C). Patients with COVID required more dose interruptions (25 vs. six) and hospitalizations (10 vs. none) than those without COVID (both p = 0.001). No difference between cohorts A and B was observed regarding hospitalization or length of stay. No ICU admission was registered and one patient in cohort B died due to COVID19. Regarding cancer evolution, three patients in cohort A presented progressive disease after COVID19 compared to two in cohort B. One case in cohort B, initially deemed as stable disease, achieved a partial response after COVID19. Conclusions Kidney cancer patients who developed COVID19 while on systemic therapy required more treatment interruptions and hospitalizations than those non-infected. However, no significant impact on cancer outcome was observed. Also, no difference was seen between cases on antiangiogenics or immunotherapy (AU)

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with dose-dense MVAC in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a tertiary center experience

Purpose Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients has proven beneficial in overall survival. However, the optimal regimen is still a matter of debate. Materials and method In this retrospective analysis, we evaluate the results obtained in 42 patients treated in our center with 4 cycles of neoadjuvant dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (dd-MVAC) followed by radical cystectomy from August 2015 to October 2020. All patients had cT2 or higher non-metastatic MIBC. Clinical and pathological outcomes are reported. Results Of the 42 patients, 90.5% were men (n = 38) and the mean age was 65 years. All of them had ECOG 0–1 at diagnosis and most tumors had an initial clinical stage T2N0 (76%). Thirty-six patients (85.7%) completed 4 cycles of neoadjuvant treatment, and 21.4% required a dose reduction. The most frequent adverse event (AE) was grade 1–2 asthenia (81%), while neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 or higher AE (38%). Complete pathological response (ypT0, ypN0) was achieved in 50% of patients (n = 21), and down-staging was observed in 57.1% (n = 24). Only one patient presented radiological progressive disease during neoadjuvant treatment (2.4%), and after a mean follow-up time of 31.5 months, 33.3% of patients experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 4 cycles of dd-MVAC is an effective regimen with high rates of pathological complete responses and down-staging along with an acceptable toxicity profile. DD-MVAC should be considered as an alternative to cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with good clinical performance status (AU)

Outcomes with atezolizumab in metastatic urothelial cancer: real-world data from a single institution.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been incorporated in the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) upon platinum-based chemotherapy according to the positive results of large clinical trials. Nevertheless, results from unselected populations reflecting real-world data (RWD) are highly informative to the clinician. We reviewed daily clinical practice outcomes in patients with mUC who received atezolizumab in our institution. METHODS: Here we evaluated the clinical activity and safety of atezolizumab in an unselected population of mUC patients who received atezolizumab between 2018 and 2022 reflecting RWD. Efficacy and safety information were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were included. The mean age was 68 years and the objective response rate was 14.3%. The median progression-free survival was 3 months and the median overall survival 6 months. At 1 year, 42% of the patients were alive. ECOG (0 vs 1) and neutrophil-lymphocytes ratio < 2 at the start of ICI were positive prognostic factors that discriminated between long vs short survivors. Overall tolerance was good with no new safety signals. Five patients (17%) had treatment-related adverse events grade ≥ 2 that required corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, atezolizumab was an effective and tolerable treatment option for patients with mUC after progression to platinum-based chemotherapy. Yet, patient selection remains critical to improve outcomes.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with dose-dense MVAC in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a tertiary center experience.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients has proven beneficial in overall survival. However, the optimal regimen is still a matter of debate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, we evaluate the results obtained in 42 patients treated in our center with 4 cycles of neoadjuvant dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (dd-MVAC) followed by radical cystectomy from August 2015 to October 2020. All patients had cT2 or higher non-metastatic MIBC. Clinical and pathological outcomes are reported. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, 90.5% were men (n = 38) and the mean age was 65 years. All of them had ECOG 0-1 at diagnosis and most tumors had an initial clinical stage T2N0 (76%). Thirty-six patients (85.7%) completed 4 cycles of neoadjuvant treatment, and 21.4% required a dose reduction. The most frequent adverse event (AE) was grade 1-2 asthenia (81%), while neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 or higher AE (38%). Complete pathological response (ypT0, ypN0) was achieved in 50% of patients (n = 21), and down-staging was observed in 57.1% (n = 24). Only one patient presented radiological progressive disease during neoadjuvant treatment (2.4%), and after a mean follow-up time of 31.5 months, 33.3% of patients experienced disease recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 4 cycles of dd-MVAC is an effective regimen with high rates of pathological complete responses and down-staging along with an acceptable toxicity profile. DD-MVAC should be considered as an alternative to cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with good clinical performance status.

Case-control study assessing the impact of COVID19 in advanced kidney cancer patients treated with antiangiogenics or immunotherapy: the COVID-REN study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a risk factor for developing severe COVID19. Additionally, SARS-CoV2 has a special tropism for renal cells and complications like thrombosis or cytokine storm could be enhanced by standard treatments in kidney cancer (i.e., antiangiogenics or immunotherapy). Thus, understanding the impact of COVID19 in patients with this tumor is key for their correct management. METHODS: We designed a retrospective case-control study comparing the outcome of three groups of advanced kidney cancer patients on systemic treatment: cohort A (developed COVID19 while on antiangiogenics), cohort B (developed COVID19 while on immunotherapy) and cohort C (non-infected). Matching factors were age, gender, and treatment. RESULTS: 95 patients were recruited in 16 centers in Spain from September 2020 to May 2021. Finally, 85 were deemed as eligible (23 cohort A, 21 cohort B, 41 cohort C). Patients with COVID required more dose interruptions (25 vs. six) and hospitalizations (10 vs. none) than those without COVID (both p = 0.001). No difference between cohorts A and B was observed regarding hospitalization or length of stay. No ICU admission was registered and one patient in cohort B died due to COVID19. Regarding cancer evolution, three patients in cohort A presented progressive disease after COVID19 compared to two in cohort B. One case in cohort B, initially deemed as stable disease, achieved a partial response after COVID19. CONCLUSIONS: Kidney cancer patients who developed COVID19 while on systemic therapy required more treatment interruptions and hospitalizations than those non-infected. However, no significant impact on cancer outcome was observed. Also, no difference was seen between cases on antiangiogenics or immunotherapy.