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.

Enfortumab Vedotin With or Without Pembrolizumab in Cisplatin-Ineligible Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer

PURPOSE

Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC) who are ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy have limited first-line (1L) treatment options and significant need for improved therapies. Enfortumab vedotin (EV) and pembrolizumab (Pembro) individually have shown a survival benefit in urothelial cancer in second-line + la/mUC settings. Here, we present data from the pivotal trial of EV plus Pembro (EV + Pembro) in the 1L setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In Cohort K of the EV-103 phase Ib/II study, cisplatin-ineligible patients with previously untreated la/mUC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive EV as monotherapy or in combination with Pembro. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (cORR) per blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR) and safety. There were no formal statistical comparisons between treatment arms.

RESULTS

The cORR was 64.5% (95% CI, 52.7 to 75.1) and 45.2% (95% CI, 33.5 to 57.3) for patients treated with EV + Pembro (N = 76) and EV monotherapy (N = 73), respectively. The median DOR was not reached for the combination and was 13.2 months for monotherapy; 65.4% and 56.3% of patients who responded to the combination and monotherapy, respectively, maintained a response at 12 months. The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in patients treated with the combination were maculopapular rash (17.1%), fatigue (9.2%), and neutropenia (9.2%). EV TRAEs of special interest (any grade) in the combination arm included skin reactions (67.1%) and peripheral neuropathy (60.5%).

CONCLUSION

EV + Pembro showed a high cORR with durable responses as 1L treatment in cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC. Patients who received EV monotherapy had a response and safety profile consistent with previous studies. Adverse events for EV + Pembro were manageable, with no new safety signals observed.

Response to Anti-PD1/L1 Antibodies in Advanced Urothelial Cancer in the 'Real-Life' Setting

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now the standard of care for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients. Our aim was to describe the activity of ICIs in mUC and find the clinical parameters associated with response. This is a retrospective, single-center chart review of mUC patients receiving ICIs. The overall survival (OS) was plotted using the Kaplan–Meier method and was compared using a log-rank test. Associations between the variables and responses were analyzed by univariate and multivariable analyses, using either logistic regression or a Chi-square/Fisher’s exact test. Ninety-four patients received ICIs, 85% of which were in the second line or beyond; the median age was 71.8 years, and 82% were men. Six (6.4%), 11 (11.7%), 7 (7.4%) and 70 (74.5%) patients achieved a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), mixed response/stable disease (M/SD) or progressive disease (PD), respectively. The median overall survival was 3.2 months for the entire cohort and was significantly different according to the response pattern—not reached, 32.3, 6.4 and 2.0 months for CR, PR, M/SD and PD, respectively. The response was not significantly associated with the line of treatment. ‘Site of metastasis’ was associated with the response, and the absolute neutrophil count was borderline associated with the response. In summary, we found a substantial variance in the potential benefit from ICIs in mUC, emphasizing the need for predictive biomarkers and frequent monitoring of mUC patients receiving ICIs.

Emerging Role of Immunotherapy in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) has long been treated preferably with cisplatin-based chemotherapy, but many patients are cisplatin-ineligible whereas for those who progress on a platinum-based regimen treatment options are limited. We review key recent data regarding immune checkpoint inhibitors that are changing this treatment landscape.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since May 2016, five different agents targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway (atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, avelumab, durvalumab) have received FDA approval for the treatment of aUC in the platinum-refractory setting, while pembrolizumab and atezolizumab are FDA-approved for cisplatin-ineligible patients in the first-line setting. Clinical outcomes and safety profiles of these agents appear relatively comparable across separate trials; however, only pembrolizumab is supported by level I evidence from a large randomized phase III trial showing overall survival benefit over conventional cytotoxic salvage chemotherapy in the platinum-refractory setting. Pembrolizumab has the highest level of evidence in platinum-refractory aUC, whereas pembrolizumab and atezolizumab have comparable level of evidence in the frontline setting in cisplatin-ineligible patients. Ongoing research is evaluating novel agents, various rational combinations, and sequences, as well as predictive and prognostic biomarkers.