Immuno-oncology therapy in metastatic bladder cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Stratifying the Risk of Disease Progression among Surgically Treated Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Eligible for Adjuvant Nivolumab

Background: Check-Mate 274 has demonstrated the disease-free survival (DFS) benefit of adjuvant nivolumab in surgically treated muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Since immunotherapy represents an expensive treatment with potential side effects, a better understanding of patient-specific risks of disease progression might be useful for clinicians when weighing the indication for adjuvant nivolumab. Objective: To identify the criteria for risk stratification of disease progression among MIBC patients eligible for adjuvant nivolumab. Materials and methods: A single-institution, prospectively maintained database was queried to identify patients eligible for adjuvant nivolumab according to Check-Mate 274 criteria. To account for immortal bias, patients who died or were lost to follow-up within 3 months of undergoing a radical cystectomy (RC) were excluded. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses addressed DFS, defined as the time frame from diagnosis to the first documented recurrence or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Regression tree analysis was implemented to identify criteria for risk stratification. Results: Between 2011 and 2022, 304 patients were identified, with a median follow-up of 50 (IQR 24-72) months. After multivariable adjustment, including NAC as a potential confounder, higher CCI (HR 1.56, 95%CI 1.10-2.21, p = 0.013), T stage (HR 2.06, 95%CI 1.01-4.17, p = 0.046), N stage (HR 1.73, 95%CI 1.26-2.38, p = 0.001) and presence of LVI (HR 1.52, 95%CI 1.07-2.15, p = 0.019) increased the risk of disease recurrence or death. Finally, a two-tier classification was developed. Here, five-year DFS rates were 56.1% vs. 18.1 for low vs. high risk (HR: 2.54, 95%CI 1.79-3.62, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The current risk classification, if externally validated on larger samples, may be useful when weighing the risk and benefit of adjuvant nivolumab treatment and making patients more aware about their disease and about the need for additional treatment after RC.

Real-World Evidence of Tumor and Patient Characteristics and Survival with Avelumab Maintenance after Chemotherapy for Advanced and Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Despite the prospective randomized controlled JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial, no real-world evidence exists regarding tumor characteristics, adverse events (AEs), and survival of avelumab maintenance (AVM)-treated patients with partial/complete response or stable disease after previous platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC).

METHODS

We relied on our institutional database to identify mUC patients who received AVM between January, 2021 and December, 2023. The main outcomes consisted of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and were computed by Kaplan-Meier estimates. Stratification was performed according to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 AVM patients were identified at a median age of 71 (interquartile range [IQR]: 67-76) years, of which 67% were males. Of these, 63%, 21%, and 17% received AVM therapy for bladder cancer and upper tract urothelial carcinoma or both, respectively. PD-L1 status was positive in 45% of patients. During AVM treatment, AEs were observed in 33% of patients; however, they were limited to ≤2 grade AEs. At a median follow-up of eight (IQR 4-20) months, 71% of patients had progressed under AVM with median PFS of 6.2 months (confidence interval [CI]: 3.2-18.2). Median OS was 13.4 (CI: 6.9 - not reached [NR]) months. One-year OS after AVM was 52%. In PD-L1-positive patients, median PFS and OS were 6.4 (CI: 2.7 - NR) months and 13.4 (CI: 7.7 months - NR), respectively.

CONCLUSION

AVM is associated with moderate AE rates. Despite similarities in baseline characteristics compared to trial-selected JAVELIN Bladder 100 mUC patients, AVM resulted in longer/similar PFS but significantly shorter OS in real-world setting.

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.

Emerging strategy for the treatment of urothelial carcinoma: Advances in antibody-drug conjugates combination therapy

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a prevalent malignant tumor involving the urinary system. Although there are various treatment modalities, including surgery, chemotherapy, and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, some patients experience disease recurrence and metastasis with poor prognosis and dismal long-term survival. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), which combine the targeting ability of antibody drugs with the cytotoxicity of chemotherapeutic drugs, have recently emerged as a prominent research focus in the development of individualized precision cancer therapy. Although ADCs have improved the overall response rate in patients with UC, their effectiveness remains limited. Currently, ADC-based combination therapies, particularly ADC combined with ICIs, have demonstrated promising efficacy. This combination approach has advanced the treatment of UC, exhibiting the potential to become the standard first-line therapy for advanced UC in the future. This article reviewed clinical trials involving ADC-based combination therapy for UC and discussed the possible challenges and future perspectives to provide guidance for the clinical treatment of UC.

The efficacy and safety of chemotherapy with or without anti-PD-1 for the first-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of first-line anti-PD-1 combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).

METHOD

Patients with advanced UC who received first-line treatment of chemotherapy (n = 51, gemcitabine/paclitaxel [albumin-bound] combined with platinum) or immunochemotherapy (n = 50, PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy) were enrolled. The efficacy and safety were analyzed between the two groups.

RESULTS

This study included data from 101 patients, including 51 patients in the chemotherapy group and 50 patients in the immunochemotherapy group. The median progression-free survival of the immunochemotherapy group was significantly longer than that of the chemotherapy group (11.5 vs. 7.17 m, HR = 0.56, p = 0.009). The two groups' overall survival showed no significant difference (20.3 vs. 17.8 m, p = 0.204). The objective response rates and the disease control rates of the two groups were 38.0% versus 49.0% (p = 0.26) and 88.0% versus 80.4% (p = 0.29). The incidence of adverse reactions (AEs) in the immunochemotherapy group and chemotherapy group were 90.0% and 84.3% (p = 0.394), respectively, and the incidence of Grade III-IV AEs were 32.0% and 35.3% (p = 0.726), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In the first-line treatment of patients with advanced UC, anti-PD-1 therapy combined with chemotherapy might have better efficacy than chemotherapy alone, and AEs are similar between the two groups.

A Phase 1/2 study of the PD-L1 inhibitor, BGB-A333, alone and in combination with the PD-1 inhibitor, tislelizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumours

BACKGROUND

Many patients do not respond or eventually relapse on treatment with programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors due to secondary or acquired resistance; therefore, there is a need to investigate novel PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.

METHODS

This open-label, non-randomised study investigated the safety and anti-tumour activity of BGB-A333, a PD-L1 inhibitor, alone and in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours with progression during/after standard therapy. The primary objectives were to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), safety and tolerability for BGB-A333 alone and in combination with tislelizumab (Phase 1a/1b) and to determine the overall response rate (ORR) with BGB-A333 plus tislelizumab (Phase 2).

RESULTS

Overall, 39 patients across Phase 1a (N = 15), 1b (N = 12) and 2 (N = 12) were enroled. In Phase 1a, an RP2D of 1350 mg was determined. In Phase 1a and 1b/2, serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in five and eight patients, respectively. Two patients experienced TEAEs that led to death. In Phase 2, the ORR was 41.7% (n = 5/12; 95% confidence interval: 15.17%, 72.33%).

CONCLUSIONS

TEAEs reported with BGB-A333 were consistent with other PD-L1 inhibitors. Encouraging preliminary anti-tumour activity was observed with BGB-A333 in combination with tislelizumab.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03379259.

Change of genitourinary cancer patients' perception and expectations over the course of pharmacotherapy

To determine the course of treatment while considering the patients' desires, we examined trends regarding patients' perception and expectations over the course of cancer pharmacotherapy. We retrospectively reviewed interview sheets filled in by patients with advanced urogenital cancers when they started a new pharmacotherapy regimen between 2014 and 2020. The responses to the following questions were analyzed: 1) How did your doctor explain the treatment objectives?; 2) Are you willing to receive treatment?; and 3) When the standard treatment becomes difficult to continue, would you like to try another treatment even if it may cause severe side effects? A total of 277 patients answered the interview sheet. The percentage of patients who accurately perceived the treatment objectives among patients receiving 1st, 2nd, and 3rd line regimens was 67%, 79%, and 93%, respectively. The percentage significantly improved over the course of pharmacotherapy (p = 0.0057). The percentage of patients who indicated that they were willing to receive treatment in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd line regimens was 80%, 83%, and 86%, respectively. The percentage of patients who indicated that they wanted to try another treatment when the standard treatment became difficult to continue in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd line regimens was 56%, 64%, and 59%, respectively. The percentage of patients who accurately perceived the objective of pharmacotherapy increased over the course of pharmacotherapy. The rate of patients who were willing to receive treatment and try other treatments when the standard treatment became too difficult to continue remained consistently high.