Coming of Age of Immunotherapy of Urothelial Cancer

Tumor Mutational Burden as a Predictor of First-Line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Versus Carboplatin Benefit in Cisplatin-Unfit Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma

PURPOSE

In real-world settings, patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) are often more frail than clinical trials, underscoring an unmet need to identify patients who might be spared first-line chemotherapy. We sought to determine whether tumor mutational burden (TMB) identifies patients with comparable or superior clinical benefit of first-line single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI) in real-world patients deemed cisplatin-unfit.

METHODS

Patients with mUC treated in first-line advanced setting (N = 401) received ICPI (n = 245) or carboplatin regiment without ICPI (n = 156) at physician's discretion in standard-of-care settings across approximately 280 US academic or community-based cancer clinics between March 2014 and July 2021. Deidentified data were captured into a real-world clinicogenomic database. All patients underwent testing using Foundation Medicine assays. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) comparing ICPI versus chemotherapy were adjusted for known treatment assignment imbalances using propensity scores.

RESULTS

TMB ≥ 10 was detected in 122 of 401 (30.4%) patients. Among patients receiving ICPI, those with TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable PFS (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.85), TTNT (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83), and OS (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.68). Comparing ICPI versus carboplatin, adjusting for imbalances, patients with TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable PFS (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.82), TTNT (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.91), and OS (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.08) on ICPI versus chemotherapy, but not TMB < 10. Comparisons unadjusted for imbalances had similar associations.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world settings, mUC patients with TMB ≥ 10 have more favorable outcomes on first-line single-agent ICPI than carboplatin, adding clinical validity to TMB assessed by an existing US Food and Drug Administration-approved platform.

Checkpoint Inhibition in Bladder Cancer: Clinical Expectations, Current Evidence, and Proposal of Future Strategies Based on a Tumor-Specific Immunobiological Approach

Simple Summary

In contrast with other strategies, immunotherapy is a treatment aimed at empowering the patient’s immune system in order to increase immunity and the response against cancer. Recently, a new class of drugs, immune checkpoint inhibitors, has shown potential in increasing treatment chances for patients with bladder cancers, improving their survival. However, predicting the response to immune checkpoint inhibition is important, since only a group of patients develop a good response. Biomarkers to predict the response to checkpoint inhibition must identify tumors’ and patients’ specific profiles. This study reviews the current knowledge on this most relevant clinical topic, focusing on bladder cancer, going from basic science to ongoing clinical trials and available clinical evidence. Finally, a critical analysis of published data is provided, and an original panel of biomarkers, able to select the right patients for treatments, based on patient-specific immune profiling, is proposed.

Abstract

In contrast with other strategies, immunotherapy is the only treatment aimed at empowering the immune system to increase the response against tumor growth. Immunotherapy has a role in the treatment of bladder cancer (BC) due to these tumors’ high tumor mutational burden (TMB) and mostly prominent immune infiltrate. The therapy or combination has to be adjusted to the tumor’s immunobiology. Recently, a new class of immunotherapeutic agents, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), has shown potential in increasing treatment chances for patients with genitourinary cancers, improving their oncological outcomes. The clinical efficacy of ICI has been shown in both the first-line treatment of cisplatin-ineligible patients, with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors (atezolizumab, pembrolizumab), and in second-line settings, for progression after platinum-based chemotherapy (atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab for FDA and EMA; durvalumab and avelumab for FDA alone). Predicting the response to ICI is important since only a subset of patients undergoing ICI therapy develop a concrete and lasting response. Most of the patients require a different therapy or therapy combination to achieve tumor control. The cancer immunity cycle provides a conceptual framework to assist therapy selection. Biomarkers to predict response to ICI must identify where the cancer immunity cycle is disrupted. We reviewed the current knowledge on ICI treatment in BC, going from basic science to current data and available clinical evidence. Secondly, a critical analysis of published data is provided, and an original panel of biomarkers able to predict response to ICI treatment, based on tumor-specific immune profiling, is proposed.