Bladder-preserving strategies for Bacillus Calmette-Guérin unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer; where are we and what will be expected?

Bladder sparing by short-course radiotherapy combined with toripalimab in high-risk/extremely high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (HOPE-04): study protocol for a single-arm, prospective, phase II trial

INTRODUCTION

Radical cystectomy remains the standard treatment for intravesical Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) because potential bladder-preserving therapies are not well established. Combination of radiotherapy with programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibody may offer an optional bladder preservation treatment for high-risk/extremely high risk NMIBC. Hence, the current study aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of short-course radiotherapy (5×5 Gy) and toripalimab (PD-1 antibody) as a novel bladder sparing treatment in this population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

HOPE-04 is an open-label, single-arm, phase II study, designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of short-course radiotherapy and toripalimab in patients with high-risk/extremely high risk NMIBC. Fifty-five patients with pathological and imaging diagnosed NMIBC with or without BCG treatment will be recruited. Radiotherapy of 5×5 Gy will be given to the whole bladder followed by a focal tumour bed boost and concomitant administration of toripalimab of 240 mg intravenous infusion every 21 days for 12 cycles (about 1 year). The primary endpoints are disease-free survival and safety. The secondary endpoint is overall survival. Additional indicators include implementation rate of salvage surgery and quality of life.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial has been approved by the Ethics Committee of West China Hospital, Sichuan University. Trial findings will be disseminated via peer reviewed journals and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Chinese Ethics Committee of Registering Clinical Trials (ChiCTR2200059970).

Treatment and disease management patterns for bacillus Calmette–Guérin unresponsive nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer in North America, Europe and Asia

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Checkpoint inhibitors in BCG-unresponsive nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer: can they help spare the bladder?

Intravesical BCG therapy has been for years, the standard of care in nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer. But upon recurrence/relapse, radical cystectomy is imposed, due to the paucity of other therapeutic options. Immunotherapy has been revolutionizing cancer treatment, and its indications continue to broaden. It has been approved for the treatment of advanced urothelial cancer of the bladder, mainly as a second-line therapy. Its activity is being studied in nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer that is not responsive to BCG; we herein report the trials investigating these checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab and avelumab) in this particular setting.

Intravesical gemcitabine for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether people with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) benefit from intravesical gemcitabine compared to other agents in the primary or recurrent setting following transurethral resection of a bladder tumor. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2012. Since that time, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative effectiveness and toxicity of intravesical gemcitabine instillation for NMIBC.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, trial registries, and conference proceedings to 11 September 2020, with no restrictions on the language or status of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs in which participants received intravesical gemcitabine for primary or recurrent NMIBC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the included studies and extracted data for the primary outcomes: time to recurrence, time to progression, grade III to V adverse events determined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 (CTCAE v5.0), and the secondary outcomes: time to death from bladder cancer, time to death from any cause, grade I or II adverse events determined by the CTCAE v5.0 and disease-specific quality of life. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and rated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies with 1222 participants with NMIBC across five comparisons. This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes of the three most clinically relevant comparisons. 1. Gemcitabine versus saline: based on two years' to four years' follow-up, gemcitabine may reduce the risk of recurrence over time compared to saline (39% versus 47% recurrence rate, hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54 to 1.09; studies = 2, participants = 734; I2 = 49%; low-certainty evidence), but the CI included the possibility of no effect.  Gemcitabine may result in little to no difference in the risk of progression over time compared to saline (4.6% versus 4.8% progression rate, HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.19 to 4.71; studies = 2, participants = 654; I2 = 53%; low-certainty evidence).  Gemcitabine may result in little to no difference in the CTCAE grade III to V adverse events compared to saline (5.9% versus 4.7% adverse events rate, risk ratio [RR] 1.26, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.75; studies = 2, participants = 668; I2 = 24%; low-certainty evidence).  2. Gemcitabine versus mitomycin: based on three years' follow-up (studies = 1, participants = 109), gemcitabine may reduce the risk of recurrence over time compared to mitomycin (17% versus 40% recurrence rate, HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.69; low-certainty evidence). Gemcitabine may reduce the risk of progression over time compared to mitomycin (11% versus  18% progression rate, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.01; low-certainty evidence), but the CI included the possibility of no effect.  We are very uncertain about the effect of gemcitabine on the CTCAE grade III to V adverse events compared to mitomycin (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.93; very low-certainty evidence). The analysis was only based on recurrent NMIBC. 3. Gemcitabine versus Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) for recurrent (one-course BCG failure) high-risk NMIBC: based on 6 months' to 22 months' follow-up (studies = 1, participants = 80), gemcitabine may reduce the risk of recurrence compared to BCG (41% versus 97% recurrence rate, HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; low-certainty evidence) and progression over time (16% versus 33% progression rate, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.76; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of gemcitabine on the CTCAE grade III to V adverse events compared to BCG (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.66; very low-certainty evidence).  In addition, the review provides information on  the comparison of gemcitabine versus BCG and gemcitabine versus one-third dose BCG.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on findings of this review, gemcitabine may have a more favorable impact on recurrence and progression-free survival than mitomycin but we are very uncertain as to how major adverse events compare. The same is true when comparing gemcitabine to BCG in individuals with high risk disease who have previously failed BCG. The underlying low- to very low-certainty evidence indicates that our confidence in these results is limited; the true effects may be substantially different from these findings; therefore, better quality studies are needed.

The current landscape of salvage therapies for patients with bacillus Calmette-Guérin unresponsive nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although radical cystectomy represents the gold standard treatment for patients with high-risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) whose disease does not respond to bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), many patients are unable or unwilling to undergo surgery. The need remains for effective bladder-preserving therapies. This review aims to describe existing treatments, contemporary research in this field and ongoing trials of salvage therapies for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC.

RECENT FINDINGS

Intravesical chemotherapy has been utilized frequently in this setting. Emerging data on combination regimens such as intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel and intravesical cabazitaxel, gemcitabine and cisplatin are promising; nevertheless, larger, prospective trials are needed. Meanwhile, the intravenous checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab was recently FDA-approved for patients BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. Encouraging clinical trial results for intravesical nadofaragene firadenovec, oportuzumab monatox and ALT-803 + BCG have been released, while data from trials of other treatment strategies, including novel chemotherapy and drug delivery, augmented BCG immunotherapy, adenoviral and gene therapy, targeted therapy, and combination systemic immunotherapy with intravesical agents, are eagerly awaited.

SUMMARY

Several novel salvage therapies offer promise for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. Patient selection, efficacy, safety, cost and ease of administration must be carefully considered to determine the optimal treatment approach.

Impact of systemic inflammatory markers on the response to Hyperthermic IntraVEsical Chemotherapy (HIVEC) in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer after bacillus Calmette-Guérin failure

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of pre- and post-treatment systemic inflammatory markers on the response to Hyperthermic IntraVEsical Chemotherapy (HIVEC) treatment in a cohort of patients with high-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) failure or intolerance who were unsuitable or unwilling to undergo early radical cystectomy. As a secondary endpoint, we assessed the influence of some demographic, clinical and pathological factors on the response to chemo-hyperthermia.

Patients and methods: Between March 2017 and December 2019, 72 consecutive patients were retrospectively analysed. Patients with diseases or conditions that could interfere with systemic inflammatory status or full blood count were excluded. The HIVEC protocol consisted of six weekly intravesical treatments with 40 mg Mitomycin-C diluted in 50 mL distilled water. The drug was heated to a temperature of 43°C. Association of categorical variables with response to HIVEC was evaluated using Yates’ chi-squared test and differences in continuous variable were analysed using the Mann–Whitney test. Logistic regression analysis was performed to define independent predictors of response to HIVEC.

Results: Patients who failed HIVEC were more likely to have multiple tumours (P = 0.039) at transurethral resection of bladder and a recurrence rate of >1/year (P = 0.046). Lower post-HIVEC inflammatory indices [C-reactive protein (P = 0.021), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (P = 0.027)] and lower pre- (P = 0.014) and post-treatment (P = 0.004) neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) values were significantly associated with the response to the HIVEC regimen (no bladder cancer recurrence or progression). In the multivariate analysis, patients with a recurrence rate of >1/year were eight-times more likely to experience failure of HIVEC (P = 0.007). Higher pre- (P = 0.023) and post-treatment NLR values (P = 0.046) were associated with a worse response to the HIVEC regimen.

Conclusions: The recurrence rate and systemic inflammatory response markers could be useful tools to predict the likelihood of obtaining a response with the HIVEC regimen. These markers might help to guide patients about the behaviour of the tumour after BCG failure, predicting failure or success of a conservative treatment.

Abbreviations: CHT: chemo-hyperthermia; CIS: carcinoma in situ; CRP: C-reactive protein; EAU: European Association of Urology; ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate; HG: high grade; HIVEC: Hyperthermic IntraVEsical Chemotherapy; ICD: immunogenic cell death; IL: interleukin; MMC: Mitomycin-C; NK: natural killer; NLR: neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; NMIBC: non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer; PLR: platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; RC: radical cystectomy; SIR: systemic inflammatory response; TURB: transurethral resection of bladder