Double-blind, randomized trial of docetaxel plus vandetanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in platinum-pretreated metastatic urothelial cancer

Landscape of targeted therapies for advanced urothelial carcinoma

Bladder cancer (BC) is the tenth most common malignancy globally. Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a major type of BC, and advanced UC (aUC) is associated with poor clinical outcomes and limited survival rates. Current options for aUC treatment mainly include chemotherapy and immunotherapy. These options have moderate efficacy and modest impact on overall survival and thus highlight the need for novel therapeutic approaches. aUC patients harbor a high tumor mutation burden and abundant molecular alterations, which are the basis for targeted therapies. Erdafitinib is currently the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved targeted therapy for aUC. Many potential targeted therapeutics aiming at other molecular alterations are under investigation. This review summarizes the current understanding of molecular alterations associated with aUC targeted therapy. It also comprehensively discusses the related interventions for treatment in clinical research and the potential of using novel targeted drugs in combination therapy.

Immuno-Oncology Advances in Genitourinary Cancers

Immuno-oncology (IO) has made monumental gains in the past decade in the genitourinary space. In this review, we highlight advances with IO in renal cell carcinoma where it now has become standard-of-care frontline therapy in the metastatic setting but also discuss challenges with the initial approach. In urothelial carcinoma, we discuss the growing use of IO including exciting recent updates with IO-based regimens that may soon become the new standard of care. We further discuss difficulties with IO in prostate cancer, germ cell tumors, and penile squamous cell carcinoma. Finally, we highlight advances in IO approaches beyond checkpoint inhibition including the role of the gut microbiome and T-cell redirecting therapies.

Hyperprogression after anti-programmed death-1 therapy in a patient with urothelial bladder carcinoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, including programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and programmed death-1 (PD-1) have recently been approved to treat locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). However, some patients experience rapid tumor progression rather than any clinical benefit from anti-PD-L1/PD-1 therapy.

CASE SUMMARY

A 73-year-old woman with bladder UC showed the progression of multiple metastases after surgery and chemotherapy for over 12 mo. The patient could not tolerate further chemotherapy. Next-generation sequencing was performed, and the results indicated that the tumor mutational burden was 6.4 mutations/Mb. The patient received the anti-PD-L1 agent toripalimab combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel. Compared with the baseline staging before immunotherapy, the patient had a treatment failure time of < 2 mo, an increase in tumor burden of > 50%, and a > 2-fold increase in progression, indicating hyperprogression.

CONCLUSION

Selecting patients most likely to respond to treatment with immunotherapeutic agents remains challenging. For older patients with advanced UC who have already exhausted multi-line chemotherapy options, immunotherapy should be used prudently if no effective biomarker is available. Further studies are required to clarify the causes and mechanisms of hyperprogression.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of avelumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone as first-line maintenance treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. The JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial showed that avelumab as first-line maintenance plus best supportive care significantly prolonged overall survival and progression-free survival versus best supportive care alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that had not progressed with first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy.

AIMS

We assessed whether avelumab plus best supportive care is a cost-effective treatment option versus best supportive care alone in this patient group in Taiwan.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A partitioned survival model was used to estimate the costs and effects of avelumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone over a 20-year time horizon from the perspective of Taiwan's National Health Insurance Administration. Patient-level data from JAVELIN Bladder 100 on efficacy, safety, utility, and time on treatment were analyzed to provide parameters for the model. Log-normal and Weibull distributions were used for overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. Costs of healthcare resources, drug acquisition, adverse events, and progression were identified through publicly available data sources and clinician interviews. The model estimated total costs, life years, and quality-adjusted life years. In the modeled base case, avelumab plus best supportive care increased survival versus best supportive care alone by 0.79 life years (2.93 vs. 2.14) and 0.61 quality-adjusted life years (2.15 vs. 1.54). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for avelumab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone was NT$1 827 680. Most (78%) of the probabilistic sensitivity analyses fell below three times the gross domestic product per capita. Scenario analysis indicated that life year and quality-adjusted life year gains were most sensitive to alternative survival extrapolations for both avelumab plus best supportive care and best supportive care alone.

CONCLUSION

Avelumab first-line maintenance therapy combined with best supportive care was determined as a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients in Taiwan diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that had not progressed with platinum-containing chemotherapy.

Evolving systemic management of urothelial cancers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bladder cancer is the 12th most common cancer worldwide. Historically, the systemic management of urothelial carcinoma has been confined to platinum-based chemotherapy. In this review, we discuss the evolving landscape of systemic treatment for urothelial carcinoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since 2016, when the Food and Drug Administration approved the first immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI), programmed cell death 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors have been evaluated in the nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer, localized muscle invasive bladder cancer as well as advanced/metastatic bladder cancer settings. Newer approved treatments such as fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) represent second-line and third-line options. These novel treatments are now being assessed in combination as well as with older traditional platinum-based chemotherapy.

SUMMARY

Novel therapies continue to improve bladder cancer outcomes. Personalized approach with well validated biomarkers are important to predict response to therapy.

Survival trends in chemotherapy exposed metastatic bladder cancer patients and chemotherapy effect across different age, sex, and race/ethnicity

PURPOSE

To test for survival differences in metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder (mUCUB) patients, according to years of diagnosis, age, sex, and race/ethnicity over time and for the effect of chemotherapy on overall mortality (OM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (2000-2016), we identified 6860 mUCUB patients. Of those, 3,249 were exposed to chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox regression models focused on OM. First, we tested the effect of years of diagnosis (historical [2000-2005] vs. intermediate [2006-2011] vs. contemporary [2012-2016]) in chemotherapy exposed mUCUB patients. Second, we tested the effect of chemotherapy in all mUCUB patients.

RESULTS

In chemotherapy exposed mUCUB patients according to historical vs. intermediate vs. contemporary years, median overall survival was 11 vs. 13 vs. 14 months respectively, which translated into hazard ratios (HR) of 0.86 (P = 0.005) and 0.75 (P < 0.001) in intermediate and contemporary vs. historical, respectively. Subgroup analyses in <70 years old, males and Caucasians were in agreement regarding statistically significant differences between historical vs. intermediate vs. contemporary, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression models fitted in the entire mUCUB cohort, chemotherapy exposure reduced OM (HR: 0.46; P < 0.001). Virtually the same results were recorded in age, sex, and race/ethnicity subgroups analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary chemotherapy exposed mUCUB patients exhibited better survival than their historical and intermediate counterparts. Chemotherapy reduced mortality by half, across all patient types.

Survival Outcomes Associated with First and Second-Line Palliative Systemic Therapies in Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer

Background: Real-world data on palliative systemic therapies (PST) in treating metastatic bladder cancer (mBC) is limited. This study investigates current trends in treating mBC with first- (1L) and second-line (2L) chemotherapy (CT) and immunotherapy (IT). Methods: A chart review was conducted on patients diagnosed with stage II-IV bladder cancer in 2014–2016. Survival outcomes were compared between chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and supportive care. Results: out of 297 patients, 77% were male. 44% had stage IV disease at diagnosis. Median age at metastasis was 73 years. 40% of patients received 1L PST and 34% received 2L PST. Median overall survival (mOS) was longer in those receiving PST versus no treatment (p < 0.001). Patients receiving CT and IT sequentially had the longest mOS (18.99 months). First-line IT and CT mOS from treatment start dates were 5.03 and 9.13 months, respectively (p = 0.81). Gemcitabine with cisplatin (8.88 months) or carboplatin (9.13 months) were the most utilized 1L chemotherapy regimens (p = 0.85). 2L IT and CT mOS from treatment start dates were 6.72 and 3.78 months, respectively (p = 0.15). Conclusion: real-world mOS of >1.5 years in mBC is unprecedented and supports using multiple lines of PST. Furthermore, immunotherapy may be a comparable alternative to chemotherapy in both 1L and 2L settings.

Current Systemic Treatment Options in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma after Progression on Checkpoint Inhibition Therapy-A Systemic Review Combined with Single-Group Meta-Analysis of Three Studies Testing Enfortumab Vedotin

BACKGROUND

In the first and second-line therapy of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) such as Pembrolizumab and Atezolizumab have been widely implemented. Little is currently known about what therapeutic options are effective after therapy with CPI. This article presents a systemic review of current treatment options in this setting.

METHODS

From August 2020 to 15 April 2021, a literature search was performed through the PubMed/Medline. Subsequently, a single-group meta-analysis of three studies testing Enfortumab vedotin (EV) was conducted.

RESULTS

Five therapy regimens tested in the post-CPI setting with adequate data were identified: Chemotherapy (CT), Ramucirumab plus Docetaxel, Erdafitinib (Erd), EV, and Sacituzumab govitecan (SG). In n = 74 + 125 + 288 patients, the single-group meta-analysis showed an objective response rate of 42.1% for EV compared to 17.9% for CT in a similar setting. EV was also ahead in progression free survival (5.9 months with EV vs. 3.7 months with CT) and overall survival (12.8 months with EV vs. 9.0 months with CT).

CONCLUSION

Most data are currently available for EV. Further research is needed on the question of which patients' subcollectives particularly benefit from which therapeutic approach.

Current Therapy for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a highly lethal malignancy in the metastatic state. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens have been the backbone treatment for patients with advanced UC in the first-line setting. However, a large subset of patients are suboptimal candidates for these combinations owing to poor renal function and/or other comorbidities. Patients who are unable to tolerate or who progress after frontline platinum chemotherapy face a poor outcome. Recent insights into UC biology and immunology are being translated into new therapies for metastatic UC (mUC) including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), erdafitinib, a FGFR inhibitor, and antibody drug conjugates (ADC) such enfortumab vedotin.

Angiogenesis related gene expression significantly associated with the prognostic role of an urothelial bladder carcinoma

Background

Bladder urothelial carcinoma (BLCA) is still one of the most malignant diseases and has a dismal outcome. Angiogenesis has confirmed its critical role in the development of malignant neoplasms. In this study, we uncovered the prognostic implications of the angiogenesis-related gene panel in urothelial tumors.

Methods

The RNA-seq data and clinical records of 402 patients with BLCA were collected from the TCGA database. The panel, including 145 genes involved in angiogenesis, was retrieved from the Uniprot database and the published work. The patients with similar expressed profiles were clustered, and the differences in gene expression were compared. The correlation of gene expression and BLCA outcomes or clinical features were analyzed.

Results

There were two clusters of BLCA patients identified on the expressed basis of angiogenesis-related genes. A significant difference was detected in the tumor stages between the two clusters (P<0.001) and a striking advantaged prognosis shown in cluster_1 (86.83 vs. 27.06 months, P=0.001). According to statistics, 115 genes showed a discrepancy in expression between the two clusters, and 16 genes positively correlated to tumor stage progression. Separately analyzed the correlation of those stage-related genes and overall survivals (OS) revealed that high expression of 8 genes, including ECM1 (HR =1.72, P<0.001), FN1 (HR =1.564, P=0.004), FGF1 (HR =1.519, P=0.005), FAP (HR =1.449, P=0.020), JAM3 (HR =1.396, P=0.026), THBS1 (HR =1.402, P=0.028), MFGE8 (HR =1.394, P=0.028) and COL8A2 (HR =1.388, P=0.035), were showed worse prognosis of BLCA, respectively.

Conclusions

This study showed an integrated profile of angiogenesis-related genes and identified the different BLCA subgroups with favorable prognosis and poor prognosis depended on the expression pattern of angiogenesis-related genes. Furthermore, this work revealed the single gene expressions of ECM1, FN1, FGF1, FAP, JAM3, THBS1, MFGE8 and COL8A2 involved in angiogenesis associated the prognosis remarkably.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of chemotherapy treatment in patients with muscle-invasive or metastatic bladder cancer in the Netherlands

This retrospective study was performed to evaluate real-world oncological outcomes of patients treated with chemo-based therapy for muscle-invasive or metastatic bladder cancer (MIBC/mBC) and compare results to data from RCTs and other cohorts. Among 1578 patients diagnosed, 470 (30%) had MIBC/mBC. Median overall survival (mOS) for RC alone (47 months), first-line (13 months) and second-line (7 months) chemotherapy, and chemotherapy for recurrent disease (8 months) were similar to literature. Treatment with neoadjuvant and induction chemotherapy (NAIC) was only utilized in 9% of patients, and often in patients with poor disease status, resulting in a lower mOS compared to literature (35 and 20 months, respectively). Patients treated with chemotherapy had many adversities to treatment, with only 50%, 13%, 18% and 7% of patients in NAIC, first-line, salvage after RC, and second-line setting completing the full pre-planned chemotherapy treatment. Real-world data shows NAIC before RC is underutilized. Adversities during chemotherapy treatment are frequent, with many patients requiring dose reduction or early treatment termination, resulting in poor treatment response. Although treatment efficacy between RCTs and real-world patients is quite similar, there are large differences in baseline characteristics and treatment patterns. Possibly, results from retrospective studies on real-world data can deliver missing evidence on efficacy of chemotherapy treatment on older and ‘unfit’ patients.

The cost effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy or atezolizumab as second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma in the United States

Aims: Pembrolizumab demonstrated significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) vs. chemotherapy in the Phase III KEYNOTE-045 trial, and is approved in the US for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) who progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. Using longer follow-up and individual patient-data from KEYNOTE-045, this study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab vs. chemotherapy or atezolizumab from a US payer perspective.Materials and methods: A partitioned-survival model was developed over a 20-year time horizon. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS for pembrolizumab and chemotherapy were extrapolated using a piecewise modelling approach, where patient-level data from KEYNOTE-045 were used for the initial period followed by parametric distributions. OS of atezolizumab was estimated by indirect treatment comparisons based on KEYNOTE-045 and IMvigor211. Different scenarios were explored in the absence of indirect comparisons on PFS and time-on-treatment (ToT) between pembrolizumab and atezolizumab. Drug acquisition/administration, disease management, adverse events, and terminal care costs were considered.Results: Compared with chemotherapy, pembrolizumab resulted in a mean gain of 1.33 life-years and 1.14 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and an incremental cost of $106,299, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $93,481/QALY gained. Pembrolizumab dominated atezolizumab in extending patients' life by 0.89 years and 0.76 QALYs, while reducing costs by $26,458. Key drivers of cost-effectiveness included survival extrapolation, OS hazard ratio of pembrolizumab vs. atezolizumab, and time horizon. Pembrolizumab had a 66% and 100% probability of being cost-effective vs. chemotherapy and atezolizumab, respectively, at a $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold.Limitations and conclusions: Uncertainties remain with extrapolated PFS and OS for pembrolizumab, OS indirect comparison, and ToT for atezolizumab. Despite these limitations, the model used robust methods to estimate key clinical endpoints with patient-level data from longer follow-up of KEYNOTE-045. Pembrolizumab dominates atezolizumab and is very likely cost-effective vs. chemotherapy in 2 L mUC at a $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold.

A randomised Phase II trial of carboplatin and gemcitabine ± vandetanib in first-line treatment of patients with advanced urothelial cell cancer not suitable to receive cisplatin

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of the dual epidermal growth factor receptor/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, vandetanib, in combination with carboplatin and gemcitabine in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma urothelial cancer (UC) who were unsuitable for cisplatin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2011 to 2014, 82 patients were randomised from 16 hospitals across the UK into the TOUCAN double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised Phase II trial, receiving six 21-day cycles of intravenous carboplatin (target area under the concentration versus time curve 4.5, day 1) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 days 1 and 8) combined with either oral vandetanib 100 mg or placebo (once daily). Progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint), adverse events, tolerability and feasibility of use, objective response rate and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were used to analyse the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

The 82 patients were randomised 1:1 to vandetanib (n = 40) or placebo (n = 42), and 25 patients (30%) completed six cycles of all allocated treatment. Toxicity Grade ≥3 was experienced in 80% (n = 32) and 76% (n = 32) of patients in the vandetanib and placebo arms, respectively. The median PFS was 6.8 and 8.8 months for the vandetanib and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.76; P = 0.71); the median OS was 10.8 vs 13.8 months (HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.79-2.52; P = 0.88); and radiological response rates were 50% and 55%.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence that vandetanib improves clinical outcome in this setting. Our present data do not support its adoption as the regimen of choice for first-line treatment in patients with UC who were unfit for cisplatin.

Systemic treatment for advanced urothelial cancer: an update on recent clinical trials and current treatment options

After cisplatin-based chemotherapy became the standard treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), very little progress has been made in the treatment landscape of this condition until recently. With increased knowledge about the molecular biology of mUC and advances in the field of cancer immunobiology, there has been an explosion in the number of clinical trials for mUC, and systemic treatment of mUC is rapidly changing. Despite the availability of several novel therapeutic agents, cisplatin-based cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the standard, first-line treatment option. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including programmed death-1 and programmed death ligand-1 inhibitors, are preferred second-line treatment options that are also used in first-line cisplatin-ineligible settings. For patients with actionable fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) or FGFR3 genomic alterations, erdafitinib can be considered after platinum-based treatment. Enfortumab vedotin, a monoclonal antibody targeting nectin-4 conjugated to monomethyl auristatin E, has been approved for patients who do not respond to both cytotoxic chemotherapy and ICIs. In this review, we address the clinical trial data that have established the current standard treatments and ongoing clinical trials of various agents with different mechanisms as well as provide a brief overview of current practice guidelines and recommendations in patients with mUC.

Current Strategies and Novel Therapeutic Approaches for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a frequent cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Metastatic UC has been historically associated with poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of approximately 15 months and a 5-year survival rate of 18%. Although platinum-based chemotherapy remains the mainstay of medical treatment for patients with metastatic UC, chemotherapy clinical trials produced modest benefit with short-lived, disappointing responses. In recent years, the better understanding of the role of immune system in cancer control has led to the development and approval of several immunotherapeutic approaches in UC therapy, where immune checkpoint inhibitors have been revolutionizing the treatment of metastatic UC. Because of a better tumor molecular profiling, FGFR inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, anti-HER2 agents, and antibody drug conjugates targeting Nectin-4 are also emerging as new therapeutic options. Moreover, a wide number of trials is ongoing with the aim to evaluate several other alterations and pathways as new potential targets in metastatic UC. In this review, we will discuss the recent advances and highlight future directions of the medical treatment of UC, with a particular focus on recently published data and ongoing active and recruiting trials.

Emerging biomarkers in urothelial carcinoma: Challenges and opportunities

Advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a very important cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality with, until recently, only a few available therapeutic options. The treatment landscape has dramatically changed in recent years with the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and the development of novel targeted agents, such as erdafitinib, and antibody-drug conjugates, such as enfortumab vedotin. Cost-effective utilization of this rapidly expanding therapeutic armamentarium can be further optimized via the identification and validation of reliable prognostic and predictive biomarkers that inform prognostication and patient selection. In this review, we aim to summarize examples of recent developments in the rapidly expanding field of emerging biomarkers in UC, outlining challenges and opportunities.

VEGF inhibition in urothelial cancer: the past, present and future

PURPOSE

To describe the role of anti-angiogenic agents that have been used as a treatment approach for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancers and to propose future directions.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE was searched for articles related to VEGF inhibition and locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer.

RESULTS

Angiogenesis is a fundamental process for urothelial cancer initiation and progression. First-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer includes cisplatin-based chemotherapy combinations; subsequent systemic therapy includes taxanes, nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab) paclitaxel, or pemetrexed. More recently, several anti-PD-L1 and anti-PD-1 antibodies have shown promising activity in the first-line and post-platinum setting; however, immunotherapy remains ineffective in most patients. FGFR inhibitor erdafitinib was recently approved in the third-line setting. Studies on bevacizumab, pazopanib and ramucirumab have shown improved response rates when added to chemotherapy in selected patients, but have not led to overall survival (OS) benefit in randomized controlled studies.

CONCLUSION

Anti-angiogenic agents have shown promise in recent studies treating locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, further work is needed to elucidate ideal treatment combinations in selected patient populations to maximize benefit, with the ultimate goal of being added to the FDA-approved treatment armamentarium for this disease.

Repurposing Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors to Overcome Multidrug Resistance in Cancer: A Focus on Transporters and Lysosomal Sequestration

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are being increasingly used to treat various malignancies. Although they were designed to target aberrant tyrosine kinases, they are also intimately linked with the mechanisms of multidrug resistance (MDR) in cancer cells. MDR-related solute carrier (SLC) and ATB-binding cassette (ABC) transporters are responsible for TKI uptake and efflux, respectively. However, the role of TKIs appears to be dual because they can act as substrates and/or inhibitors of these transporters. In addition, several TKIs have been identified to be sequestered into lysosomes either due to their physiochemical properties or via ABC transporters expressed on the lysosomal membrane. Since the development of MDR represents a great concern in anticancer treatment, it is important to elucidate the interactions of TKIs with MDR-related transporters as well as to improve the properties that would prevent TKIs from diffusing into lysosomes. These findings not only help to avoid MDR, but also help to define the possible impact of combining TKIs with other anticancer drugs, leading to more efficient therapy and fewer adverse effects in patients.

Optimizing management of advanced urothelial carcinoma: A review of emerging therapies and biomarker-driven patient selection

INTRODUCTION

Advanced urothelial carcinoma has been challenging to treat due to limited treatment options, poor response rates, and poor long-term survival. New treatment options hold the promise of improved outcomes for these patients.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary working group drafted a management algorithm for advanced urothelial carcinoma using "consensus development conference" methodology. A targeted literature search identified new and emerging treatments for inclusion in the management algorithm. Published clinical data were considered during the algorithm development process, as well as the risks and benefits of the treatment options. Biomarkers to guide patient selection in clinical trials for new treatments were incorporated into the algorithm.

RESULTS

The advanced urothelial carcinoma management algorithm includes newly approved first-line anti-programmed death receptor-1 (PD1)/ programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapies, a newly approved anti-fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) therapy, and an emerging anti-Nectin 4 therapy, which have had encouraging results in phase 2 trials for second-line and third-line therapy, respectively. This algorithm also incorporates suggestions for biomarker testing of PD-L1 expression and FGFR gene alterations.

CONCLUSIONS

Newly approved and emerging therapies are starting to cover an unmet need for more treatment options, better response rates, and improved overall survival in advanced urothelial carcinoma. The management algorithm provides guidance on how to incorporate these new options, and their associated biomarkers, into clinical practice.

Incidence and risk of proteinuria associated with newly approved vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in cancer patients: an up-to-date meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective: We performed a meta-analysis to quantify the overall incidence and risk of proteinuria associated with five newly approved VEGFR-TKIs (regorafenib, vandetanib, cabozantinib, lenvatinib, axitinib) in cancer patients.Methods: Pubmed, Embase, ASCO abstracts, and ESMO abstracts were searched to identify relevant studies. Overall incidence rates, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using random or fixed effects models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.Results: A total of 9,446 patients from 20 RCTs were included for the meta-analysis. The use of newly approved VEGFR-TKIs was associated with an increased risk of all-grade (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.69-3.27, P < 0.001) and high-grade (RR 3.70, 95% CI 2.09-6.54, P < 0.001) proteinuria. On subgroup analysis, lenvatinib, axitinib, and vandetanib significantly increased the risk of all-grade proteinuria, and lenvatinib was associated with an increased risk of high-grade proteinuria. In addition, the risk of developing high-grade proteinuria events was significant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but not for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and thyroid cancer (TC).Conclusion: Treatment with newly approved VEGFR-TKIs significantly increases the risk of developing proteinuria events in cancer patients, especially for patients treated with lenvatinib.

Combining Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors with Anti-Angiogenic Agents

Immunotherapy has recently emerged as a novel strategy for treating different types of solid tumors, with promising results. However, still a large fraction of patients do not primarily respond to such approaches, and even responders sooner or later develop resistance. Moreover, immunotherapy is a promising strategy for certain malignancies but not for others, with this discrepancy having been attributed to a more immunogenic microenvironment of some tumors. As abnormal and augmented tumor vessels often occur in cancerogenesis, anti-angiogenic drugs have already demonstrated their effectiveness both in preclinical and in clinical settings. By targeting abnormal formation of tumor vessels, anti-angiogenetic agents potentially result in an enhanced infiltration of immune effector cells. Moreover, crosstalks downstream of the immune checkpoint axis and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) signaling may result in synergistic effects of combined treatment in tumor cells. In this review, we will describe and discuss the biological rationale of a combined therapy, underlying the modification in tumor microenvironment as well as in tumor cells after exposure to checkpoint inhibitors and anti-angiogenic drugs. Moreover, we will highlight this strategy as a possible way for overcoming drug resistance. By first discussing potential prognostic and predictive factors for combined treatment, we will then turn to clinical settings, focusing on clinical trials where this strategy is currently being investigated.

Second-line treatment strategy for urothelial cancer patients who progress or are unfit for cisplatin therapy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Second-line treatment for urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients is used if progression or failure after platinum-based chemotherapy occurs or if patients are cisplatin-unfit. However, there is still no widely accepted treatment strategy. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness and safety of second-line treatment strategies for UC patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included UC patients who were cisplatin-ineligible or unfit up to April 19, 2019. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Thirteen trials that assessed 3502 UC patients were included. This study divided the network comparisons into three parts. The first part contained studies comparing taxanes and other interventions; the second part assessed investigator's choice chemotherapy (ICC)-related comparisons; and the third part assessed best support care (BSC). In the OS results of the first part, pembrolizumab (87.5%), ramucirumab plus docetaxel (74.6%), and atezolizumab (71.1%) had a relative advantage. Pembrolizumab also had advantages in ORR and severe adverse effect (SAE) results. Vinflunine and ramucirumab plus docetaxel had a relatively high surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) rank by exploratory cluster analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concluded that atezolizumab and pembrolizumab are superior to other treatments, mainly in OS results, but no treatment confers a significant advantage in PFS. Pembrolizumab still has relative advantages in ORR and SAE results compared to ICC. Due to limitations, more studies are necessary to confirm the conclusions.

Outcomes With First-line PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibition in Advanced Urothelial Cancer: A Single Institution Experience

BACKGROUND

First-line PD-inhibition in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer represents a novel clinical setting, with uncertainty concerning second-line outcomes. Specifying second-line treatment and outcomes will provide guidance in this new sequence. We performed a retrospective chart review to document the outcomes of these patients treated at our institution.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our cohort consisted of 43 patients with advanced urothelial cancer receiving first-line checkpoint inhibition. Baseline factors, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, treatments, and outcomes during and beyond the first line were obtained. Response was scored using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 criteria. Log rank tests were used to compare outcomes in prognostic subgroups, and outcome associations with PD-L1 status were analyzed with Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients received first-line atezolizumab or pembrolizumab from June 2014 until June 2018. The median age was 76.8 years, and the population was 74% male, with 60% having visceral metastases. Reasons for cisplatin ineligibility were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 2%, 30%; renal insufficiency, 44%, and both, 21%. First-line objective response rate (ORR) was 30%, and complete response was 14%. The median overall survival was 11.7 months. Of 29 patients progressing, 17 received second-line treatment (most commonly, gemcitabine/carboplatin [10 patients]). The second-line response rate was 33%, and the ORR was 11%. The second-line median overall survival was 6.2 months. No association was found between PD-L1 status and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes with first-line immunotherapy are consistent with historical outcomes. The ORR after first-line checkpoint inhibition falls short of historical comparators; however, the response rate compares favorably to those of chemotherapies used in previous second-line regimens. The older age and poorer performance status may have contributed to second-line outcomes.

Nivolumab for Treating Metastatic or Unresectable Urothelial Cancer: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer (Bristol-Myers Squibb) of nivolumab (Opdivo^®) to submit evidence of its clinical and cost effectiveness for metastatic or unresectable urothelial cancer. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, in collaboration with Maastricht University Medical Centre+, was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG), which produced a detailed review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology, based on the company's submission to NICE. Nivolumab was compared with docetaxel, paclitaxel, best supportive care and retreatment with platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin plus gemcitabine, but only for patients whose disease has had an adequate response in first-line treatment). Two ongoing, phase I/II, single-arm studies for nivolumab were identified, but no studies directly compared nivolumab with any specified comparator. Evidence from directly examining the single arms of the trial data indicated little difference between the outcomes measured from the nivolumab and comparator studies. A simulated treatment comparison (STC) analysis was used in an attempt to reduce the bias induced by naïve comparison, but there was no clear evidence that risk of bias was reduced. Multiple limitations in the STC were identified and remained. The effect of an analysis based on different combinations of covariates in the prediction model remains unknown. The ERG's concerns regarding the economic analysis included the use of a non-established response-based survival analysis method, which introduced additional uncertainty. The use of time-dependent hazard ratios produced overfitting and was not represented in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The use of a treatment stopping rule to cap treatment cost left treatment effectiveness unaltered. A relevant comparator was excluded from the base-case analysis. The revised ERG deterministic base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios based on the company's Appraisal Consultation Document response were £58,791, £78,869 and £62,352 per quality-adjusted life-year gained versus paclitaxel, docetaxel and best supportive care, respectively. Nivolumab was dominated by cisplatin plus gemcitabine in the ERG base case. Substantial uncertainties about the relative treatment effectiveness comparing nivolumab against all comparators remained. NICE did not recommend nivolumab, within its marketing authorisation, as an option for treating locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults who have had platinum-containing therapy, and considered that nivolumab was not suitable for use within the Cancer Drugs Fund.

Treatment of Urothelial Cancer in Elderly Patients: Focus on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Urothelial carcinoma, or bladder cancer, is a malignancy that most commonly affects older patients. The median age at diagnosis is 73 years, and care of these patients requires consideration not just of the disease-related factors such as stage and histology, but also of patient-related factors. Many of these patients have concurrent medical morbidities and additional changes related to the aging process. Older patients with cancer are a unique population requiring additional considerations and assessment in treatment decision-making. It is important to look beyond chronologic age. The traditional treatment for advanced disease has relied on platinum-based chemotherapy. These multi-agent regimens require consideration of baseline organ function as well as competing conditions that may heighten toxicity. The advent of a new class of cancer therapeutics, the immune checkpoint inhibitors, has changed the care of patients with advanced disease considerably. These immunotherapeutics have been approved for treating patients with disease progression on chemotherapy, or those who are ineligible (or unfit) to receive cisplatin-based therapy. This expansion of the population of patients eligible for treatment has great applicability to the unique considerations in an older patient population. In general, these new immunotherapies are well tolerated and effective in this group of patients.

Management of metastatic bladder cancer

Important advances in the understanding of the biology and mechanisms of tumor progression of urothelial carcinoma (UC) have been achieved over the past decade. The treatment landscape for advanced-stage, unresectable or metastatic UC has shifted dramatically over a short period of time, with 6 new therapeutic agents available for clinical use. The use of traditional chemotherapy and new immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) directed at programmed cell-death protein 1 (PD-1) or its ligand has led to unprecedented survival benefits in selected patients with metastatic UC. Data show that anti-PD-1 ICIs are not only improving long-term clinical benefit, but also quality of life for patients in the second-line setting. In the front-line setting, regulatory agencies have restricted the indications of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab (both ICIs) to patients with PD-L1positivity with advanced UC and who are platinum-ineligible. Very recently, erdafitinib, a pan-FGFR inhibitor, has been granted accelerated approval by FDA for platinum-pretreated advanced metastatic UC with susceptible FGFR3 or FGFR2 genetic alterations. Enfortumab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate, have been granted breakthrough designation by the FDA for the treatment of metastatic UC. Here we review the clinical trial data that have established standard-of-care treatment for advanced-stage UC. In addition, mechanisms of resistance and biomarkers of response to platinum-based chemotherapies and immunotherapies are also discussed, along with the clinical benefits and limitations of these therapies.

Current Status and Future Direction of Immunotherapy in Urothelial Carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Since 2016, five new programmed cell death protein 1/ligand 1 (PD-1/L1) checkpoint inhibitors have been approved for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. This review will summarize the data supporting the widespread use of these agents and highlight areas of ongoing clinical development.

RECENT FINDINGS

PD-1/L1 axis inhibition has demonstrated clear superiority to chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer in the second-line setting. A multitude of ongoing studies are investigating the feasibility and efficacy of incorporating established and novel immunotherapies into earlier lines of therapy, including non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer and even non-muscle-invasive disease. Early-phase clinical trials have begun to explore the safety and activity of novel immune-oncology combinations across a range of clinical settings. Immunotherapy has a clearly defined role in the treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer both in the platinum-refractory setting and in the first-line cisplatin-ineligible setting. Ongoing clinical trials will dictate how to best incorporate immunotherapy into earlier lines of therapy and define the safety and activity of novel immunotherapy agents and combinations.

Second-line therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Defining the best treatment option among immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and antiangiogenic targeted therapies. A systematic review and meta-analysis

There is no second-line standard of care universally accepted for platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Immunotherapy and anti-VEGF(R) targeted therapies are 2 emerging strategies with promising though inconclusive results. We perform a systematic meta-analysis to assess the available options. We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and American society of clinical oncology (ASCO) Meeting abstracts to identify prospective studies. Data extraction was conduced according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The measured outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Seven randomized controlled trials were selected for final analysis, with a total of 2,451 evaluable patients. Chemotherapy with vinflunine did not reduce the risk of progression (HR = 1.11; 95%CI 0.78-1.57; P = .56) or death (HR = 0.97; 95%CI 0.70-1.34; P = .87) compared to taxanes. Immunotherapy with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAb improved OS over chemotherapy (HR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.71-0.92; P<.0009). The OS benefit of immunotherapy was retained when compared to taxanes, but not compared to vinflunine, although without a significant difference between the 2 subgroups (P = .30). A lack of PFS (HR = 0.73; P = .08) and OS (HR = 1.0; P = .99) benefit was observed with an anti-VEGF(R) plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone. No PFS (P = .14) or OS (P = .13) differences were detected when comparing anti-VEGF(R) ± chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Immunotherapy significantly improved OS compared to chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma unselected for PD-L1 status. The addition of anti-VEGF(R) to chemotherapy did not provide any statistically significant benefit in terms of PFS or OS. Single agent taxanes or vinflunine can be considered given their similar efficacy but different toxicity profiles.

Conceptual Framework for Therapeutic Development Beyond Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in Urothelial Cancer

Platinum-based chemotherapy has been the standard of care in advanced urothelial cancer, but long-term outcomes have remained poor. Immune checkpoint inhibitors, with their favorable toxicity profiles and noteworthy efficacy, have steered a new era in advanced urothelial cancer, with five agents targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, most patients do not achieve response, whereas immunotherapy-related adverse events may cause morbidity, increased health care use, and-rarely-mortality. Therefore, there is an urgent need for additional therapeutic modalities across the disease spectrum. A plethora of clinical trials are ongoing in various disease settings, including chemotherapy regimens, radiotherapy, antibody-drug conjugates, agents targeting additional immune checkpoint pathways, vaccine, cytokines, adoptive cell therapies, as well as targeted and anti-angiogenic agents. Two agents, enfortumab vedotin and erdafitinib, have breakthrough designation by the FDA but are not approved yet (at the time of this paper's preparation). Novel combinations with various treatment modalities and optimal sequencing of active therapies are being investigated in prospective clinical trials. Evaluation of new treatments has met with substantial challenges for many reasons, for example, molecular heterogeneity, clonal evolution, and genomic instability. In the era of precision molecular medicine, and because patients do not respond uniformly to current therapies, there is a growing need for identification and validation of biomarkers that can accurately predict treatment response and assist in patient selection. Here, we review current updates and future directions of experimental therapeutics in urothelial cancer, including examples (but not an exhaustive list) of ongoing clinical trials.

Contemporary best practice in the management of urothelial carcinomas of the renal pelvis and ureter

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) accounts for 5% of urothelial carcinomas (UCs), the estimated annual incidence being 1-2 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. Similarly to bladder UC, divergent differentiations and histologic variants confer an adverse risk factor in comparison with pure UTUC. Molecular and genomic characterization studies on UTUC have shown changes occurring at differing frequencies from bladder cancer, with unique molecular and clinical subtypes, potentially with different responses to treatment. Systemic chemotherapy is the standard approach for patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic UCs. Although initial response rates are high, the median survival with combination chemotherapy is about 15 months. In first-line chemotherapy several cisplatin-based regimens have been proposed. For patients with advanced UC who progress to first-line treatment, the only product licensed in Europe is vinflunine, a third-generation, semisynthetic, vinca alkaloid. Better response rates (15-60%), with higher toxicity rates and no overall survival (OS) benefit, are generally achieved in multidrug combinations, which often include taxanes and gemcitabine. The US FDA has recently approved five agents targeting the programmed death-1 and programmed death ligand-1 pathway as a second-line therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC with disease progression during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy. Potential therapeutic targets are present in 69% of tumours analyzed. Specific molecular alterations include those involved in the RTK/Ras/PI(3)K, cell-cycle regulation and chromatin-remodeling pathways, many of them have either targeted therapies approved or under investigation. Angiogenic agents, anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy, phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway inhibitors and immunotherapeutic drugs are being successfully investigated.

Mocetinostat for patients with previously treated, locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and inactivating alterations of acetyltransferase genes

Background

The authors evaluated mocetinostat (a class I/IV histone deacetylase inhibitor) in patients with urothelial carcinoma harboring inactivating mutations or deletions in CREB binding protein [CREBBP] and/or E1A binding protein p300 [EP300] histone acetyltransferase genes in a single‐arm, open‐label phase 2 study.

Methods

Eligible patients with platinum‐treated, advanced/metastatic disease received oral mocetinostat (at a dose of 70 mg 3 times per week [TIW] escalating to 90 mg TIW) in 28‐day cycles in a 3‐stage study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02236195). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate.

Results

Genomic testing was feasible in 155 of 175 patients (89%). Qualifying tumor mutations were CREBBP (15%), EP300 (8%), and both CREBBP and EP300 (1%). A total of 17 patients were enrolled into stage 1 (the intent‐to‐treat population); no patients were enrolled in subsequent stages. One partial response was observed (11% [1 of 9 patients; the population that was evaluable for efficacy comprised 9 of the 15 planned patients]); activity was deemed insufficient to progress to stage 2 (null hypothesis: objective response rate of ≤15%). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event, most commonly nausea (13 of 17 patients; 77%) and fatigue (12 of 17 patients; 71%). The median duration of treatment was 46 days; treatment interruptions (14 of 17 patients; 82%) and dose reductions (5 of 17 patients; 29%) were common. Mocetinostat exposure was lower than anticipated (dose‐normalized maximum serum concentration [C_max] after TIW dosing of 0.2 ng/mL/mg).

Conclusions

To the authors’ knowledge, the current study represents the first clinical trial using genomic‐based selection to identify patients with urothelial cancer who are likely to benefit from selective histone deacetylase inhibition. Mocetinostat was associated with significant toxicities that impacted drug exposure and may have contributed to modest clinical activity in these pretreated patients. The efficacy observed was considered insufficient to warrant further investigation of mocetinostat as a single agent in this setting.

After the genomic‐based selection of patients with urothelial cancer with inactivating mutations/deletions in the histone acetyltransferase genes CREBBP and/or EP300, single‐agent mocetinostat appears to be associated with significant toxicities that limit drug exposure. This may have contributed to the limited activity noted in the current phase 2 study (response rate of 11%) among heavily pretreated patients with platinum‐refractory disease.

The continuing role of chemotherapy in the management of advanced urothelial cancer

Despite intense drug development in the last decade in metastatic urothelial carcinoma and the incorporation of novel compounds to the treatment armamentarium, chemotherapy remains a key treatment strategy for this disease. Platinum-based combinations are still the backbone of first-line therapy in most cases. The role of chemotherapy in the second line has been more ill-defined due to the complexity of this setting, where patient selection remains critical. Nevertheless, two regimens, one in monotherapy (i.e. vinflunine) and one in combination with antiangiogenics (i.e. docetaxel + ramucirumab) have shown efficacy. Immunotherapy through checkpoint inhibition has revealed remarkably durable benefit in a small proportion of patients in the first and second line and is currently the preferred partner for combinations with chemotherapy. Difficult populations such as patients with liver metastases or those progressing to checkpoint inhibition represent a medical challenge and selective ways of delivering cytotoxics, like the antibody-drug conjugates, might represent a valid alternative. This article reviews the current role of chemotherapy in the management of advanced urothelial carcinoma and the ongoing and coming studies involving this treatment strategy.

Evolution of randomized controlled trials and surrogacy of progression-free survival in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer have been difficult to perform. We review the current characteristics of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and evaluate whether PFS could be a potential surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer.

METHODS

We identified trials by a systematic review of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to April 2017. We included RCTs of patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer that involved systemic therapy as an intervention, and those with reported hazards ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for both OS and PFS, or provided Kaplan-Meier curves from which HRs and 95% CI could be calculated. The correlation coefficient between log of HRs for OS and PFS was calculated using linear regression weighted by sample size.

RESULTS

Forty eight trials that enrolled 7019 patients were included in the review and 24 RCTs were included in the surrogacy analysis. 27(56.3%) of identified 48 RCTs were phase II trials, and the median sample size was 107(range, 30-626) for all RCTs. The correlation coefficient between log HR for PFS and log HR for OS was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.58-0.91). The correlation coefficient increased to 0.87 (95% CI, 0.72-0.94) after excluding the only trial with immune checkpoint inhibitor. Multiple sensitivity analyses did not change the results..aph."/> CONCLUSIONS: PFS is strongly correlated with OS in trials of advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer assessing the treatment benefit of new drugs And PFS warrants further exploration as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trial datasets.

Expansion of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) from bladder cancer

Advanced bladder cancer patients have limited therapeutic options resulting in a median overall survival (OS) between 12 and 15 months. Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) using tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) has been used successfully in treating patients with metastatic melanoma, resulting in a median OS of 52 months. In this study, we investigated the feasibility of expanding TIL from the tumors of bladder cancer patients. Primary bladder tumors and lymph node (LN) metastases were collected. Tumor specimens were minced into fragments, placed in individual wells of a 24-well plate, and propagated in high dose IL-2 for four weeks. Expanded TIL were phenotyped by flow cytometry and anti-tumor reactivity was assessed after co-culture with autologous tumor digest and IFN-gamma ELISA. Of the 28 transitional cell bladder or LN tumors collected, 14/20 (70%) primary tumors and all of the LN metastases demonstrated TIL expansion. Expanded TIL were predominantly CD3⁺ (median 63%, range 10-87%) with a median of 30% CD8 + T cells (range 5-70%). TIL secreted IFN-gamma in response to autologous tumor. Addition of agonisitic 4-1BB antibody improved TIL expansion from primary bladder tumors regardless of pre-treatment with chemotherapy. This study establishes the practical first step towards an autologous TIL therapy process for therapeutic testing in patients with bladder cancer.

Systemic Therapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Current Standards and Treatment Considerations

Urothelial carcinoma is the sixth most common malignancy in the United States. Although most are diagnosed with non-muscle-invasive malignancy, many patients will develop recurrent disease within 5 years, with 10% to 20% developing advanced muscle-invasive or more distant incurable disease. For such patients, clinical outcomes have remained suboptimal, although recent therapeutic advances have brought new hope to the field. Here, we discuss the main systemic treatment options available for the treatment of patients with advanced disease. This review begins with traditional chemotherapy, which remains a first-line treatment option for many patients. The second section focuses on the evolving landscape of immunotherapy, specifically on approved checkpoint inhibitors and future challenges. Last, we address advances in targeted treatments, including angiogenesis and fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors as well as antibody-drug conjugates. As the number of available treatment options continues to expand, ongoing trials to investigate the best sequence and combination strategies to incorporate these drugs into clinical practice will help delineate the future.

Apatorsen plus docetaxel versus docetaxel alone in platinum-resistant metastatic urothelial carcinoma (Borealis-2)

BACKGROUND

A randomised study to assess the addition of apatorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide that inhibits Hsp27 expression, to docetaxel in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) relapsed after prior platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

Multicentre, phase II study with 1:1 randomisation to apatorsen (three loading doses at 600 mg intravenous followed by weekly doses) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m² intravenous every 21 days) (A/D) or docetaxel alone. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end point with a P value <0.1 (one-sided) being positive. Progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and effect of Hsp27 levels on outcomes were secondary end points.

RESULTS

Patients randomised to A/D (n = 99) had improved OS compared to docetaxel alone (n = 101): HR: 0.80, 80% CI: 0.65-0.98, P = 0.0784, median 6.4 vs 5.9 months. PFS and ORR were similar in both arms. A/D had more incidence of sepsis and urinary tract infections. Patients with baseline Hsp27 levels <5.7 ng/mL had improved OS compared to those with levels ≥5.7 ng/mL. Patients with a decline or ≤20.5% increase in Hsp27 from baseline benefited more from A/D than those with >20.5% increase.

CONCLUSIONS

A/D met its predefined OS end point in patients with platinum-refractory mUC in this phase II trial. This trial is hypothesis generating requiring further study before informing practice.

A critical review on ramucirumab in the treatment of advanced urothelial cancer

Advanced urothelial cancer (UC) is a lethal disease despite current advances in systemic therapy, including platinum chemotherapy combinations and immune checkpoint inhibition. Tumor angiogenesis is involved in UC growth and metastatic progression. Proangiogenic signaling through the VEGFR is a key process in UC with prognostic significance. Targeting of VEGFR2 with the monoclonal antibody ramucirumab has been tested in various different tumor types. In this review, we discuss the development of the drug in the context of its preclinical and clinical use with a focus on UC. Improvements in our ability to predict responses and resistance are key for maximizing its efficacy and selecting the most appropriate combinations with other active agents.

Nomogram to Assess the Survival Benefit of New Salvage Agents for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in the Era of Immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Optimal end points in phase 2 trials evaluating salvage therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma are necessary to identify promising drugs, particularly immunotherapeutics, where response and progression-free survival may be unreliable. We developed a nomogram using data from phase 2 trials of historical agents to estimate the 12-month overall survival (OS) for patients to which observed survival of nonrandomized data sets receiving immunotherapies could be compared.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Survival and data for major prognostic factors were obtained from phase 2 trials: hemoglobin, performance status, liver metastasis, treatment-free interval, and albumin. A nomogram was developed to estimate 12-month OS. Patients were randomly allotted to discovery:validation data sets in a 2:1 ratio. Calibration plots were constructed in the validation data set and data bootstrapped to assess performance. The nomogram was tested on external nonrandomized cohorts of patients receiving pemetrexed and atezolizumab.

RESULTS

Data were available from 340 patients receiving sunitinib, everolimus, docetaxel + vandetanib, docetaxel + placebo, pazopanib, paclitaxel, or docetaxel. Calibration and prognostic ability were acceptable (c index = 0.634; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.596-0.652). Observed 12-month survival for patients receiving pemetrexed (n = 127, 23.5%; 95% CI, 16.2-31.7) was similar to nomogram-predicted survival (19%; 95% CI, 16.5-21.5; P > .05), while observed results with atezolizumab (n = 403, 39.0%; 95% CI, 34.1-43.9) exceeded predicted results (24.6%; 95% CI, 23.4-25.8; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This nomogram may be a useful tool to interpret results of nonrandomized phase 2 trials of salvage therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma by assessing the OS contributions of drug intervention independent of prognostic variables.

A Real-World Data Study to Evaluate Treatment Patterns, Clinical Characteristics and Survival Outcomes for First- and Second-Line Treatment in Locally Advanced and Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Patients in Germany

Background: Worldwide, urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. In particular, the incidence of bladder cancer varies widely across Europe; Germany has the ninth highest international age-standardized incidence. For advanced UC or metastatic UC (mUC), platinum-based combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line (1L) treatment; however, there is wide heterogeneity of second-line (2L) treatments, ranging from vinflunine in parts of Europe to taxanes and other agents elsewhere in Europe, in the United States and globally. Limited data exist on treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with advanced UC or mUC in the routine clinical setting in Germany. The objective of this study was to describe clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and subsequent outcomes in this setting. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort analysis evaluated 1L and 2L treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) in patients aged ≥18 years with advanced UC or mUC (T4b, N2-3 and/or M1) at office-based urology and academic as well as nonacademic urology clinics throughout Germany between 1 November 2009 and 2 June 2016. Data were obtained through the GermanOncology database and additional treatment centers using similar electronic case report forms. Results: Among the 435 patients included in the analysis, 435 received 1L treatment and 125 received 2L treatment. Median age at start of 1L treatment was 69 years, 75% of patients were male, 75% were current or ex-smokers, 15% had hemoglobin <10 g/dL and 44% had creatinine clearance<60 mL/min/1.73; proportions were similar with 2L treatment. Cardiovascular disease was the most frequently reported comorbidity (65%), followed by diabetes (19%). Most patients (77%) received 1L platinum-based combination treatment (most commonly gemcitabine + cisplatin, 83%). Of those treated with 2L treatment, 66% received a single agent (most commonly vinflunine, 71%). Median OS (95% CI) with 1L treatment was 16.1 months (13.7-19.2) overall and 17.7 months (14.4-24.2) with 1L cisplatin + gemcitabine. In the 1L setting, 12-month OS was 61%, 24-month OS was 39% and 36-month OS was 26%. Median (95% CI) OS with 2L treatment was 9.2 months (5.5-11.6) overall and 5.9 months (4.1-12.6) with 2L vinflunine. In the 2L setting, OS rates for the same time periods were 40%, 22% and 8%, respectively. Median (95% CI) progression-free survival was 7 months (6.4-8.1) and 4 months (3.0-4.8), respectively, in the 1L and 2L settings. Objective response rates were 34% in the 1L setting and 14% in the 2L setting. No difference in OS by sex or smoking status was noted. Patients with or without renal impairment had a 12-month OS of 54% or 69%, respectively. OS at 12 months was 63% among patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 to 1 vs 53% among patients with an ECOG PS of ≥2. Cox regression analysis found no difference in OS between vinflunine and other 2L treatments (P = 0.69). Conclusions: This study provides a contemporary multicenter assessment of real-world treatment patterns and outcomes among palliatively treated patients with UC in Germany. The findings were generally consistent with the poor treatment outcomes observed globally, underscoring the need for effective 1L and 2L treatment for advanced UC or mUC.

Avelumab for the treatment of urothelial cancer

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) remains an aggressive disease associated with limited treatment options and a reduced survival. In spite of this, the first-line treatment based on platinum-based combinations has remained virtually unchanged for the last 20-30 years. Similarly, before the advent of the immune checkpoint inhibitors, there were no FDA-approved drugs for second-line therapy. In the last few years, impressive signs of anti-tumor activity have been reported with several immunotherapy agents targeting the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway. Avelumab, a PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) inhibitor, is currently being investigated for the treatment of UC. Areas covered: This article will review the pharmacological characteristics of avelumab, the efficacy studies which led to its approval, its safety profile, as well as its place within the management of urothelial carcinoma with immunotherapy. For that matter, we undertook a literature review of all the studies assessing the pharmacology of avelumab and its efficacy within clinical trials. Expert commentary: Avelumab has shown promising antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with UC. Its dual mechanism of action, blocking the interaction between PD-L1 and PD-1 and promoting antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity could potentially be of great interest since it could produce synergistic clinical efficacy.

Atezolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor211): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Few options exist for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after progression with platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) versus chemotherapy in this patient population.

METHODS

We conducted this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial (IMvigor211) at 217 academic medical centres and community oncology practices mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice and web response system with a permuted block design (block size of four), to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg or chemotherapy (physician's choice: vinflunine 320 mg/m², paclitaxel 175 mg/m², or 75 mg/m² docetaxel) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression (expression on <1% [IC0] or 1% to <5% [IC1] of tumour-infiltrating immune cells vs ≥5% of tumour-infiltrating immune cells [IC2/3]), chemotherapy type (vinflunine vs taxanes), liver metastases (yes vs no), and number of prognostic factors (none vs one, two, or three). Patients and investigators were aware of group allocation. Patients, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. The primary endpoint of overall survival was tested hierarchically in prespecified populations: IC2/3, followed by IC1/2/3, followed by the intention-to-treat population. This study, which is ongoing but not recruiting participants, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02302807.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 13, 2015, and Feb 15, 2016, we randomly assigned 931 patients from 198 sites to receive atezolizumab (n=467) or chemotherapy (n=464). In the IC2/3 population (n=234), overall survival did not differ significantly between patients in the atezolizumab group and those in the chemotherapy group (median 11·1 months [95% CI 8·6-15·5; n=116] vs 10·6 months [8·4-12·2; n=118]; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·63-1·21; p=0·41), thus precluding further formal statistical analysis. Confirmed objective response rates were similar between treatment groups in the IC2/3 population: 26 (23%) of 113 evaluable patients had an objective response in the atezolizumab group compared with 25 (22%) of 116 patients in the chemotherapy group. Duration of response was numerically longer in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median 15·9 months [95% CI 10·4 to not estimable] vs 8·3 months [5·6-13·2]; HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·26-1·26). In the intention-to-treat population, patients receiving atezolizumab had fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events than did those receiving chemotherapy (91 [20%] of 459 vs 189 [43%] of 443 patients), and fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (34 [7%] vs 78 [18%] patients).

INTERPRETATION

Atezolizumab was not associated with significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma overexpressing PD-L1 (IC2/3). However, the safety profile for atezolizumab was favourable compared with chemotherapy, Exploratory analysis of the intention-to-treat population showed well-tolerated, durable responses in line with previous phase 2 data for atezolizumab in this setting.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.

Atezolizumab in Platinum-treated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Clinical Experience from an Expanded Access Study in the United States

BACKGROUND

Atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1) was approved in the USA, Europe, and elsewhere for treatment-naive and platinum-treated locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC).

OBJECTIVE

To report efficacy and safety from an atezolizumab expanded access study.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This single-arm, open-label study enrolled 218 patients at 36 US sites. Key eligibility criteria included progression during/following ≥1 platinum-based chemotherapy for mUC or in perioperative setting (progression within 12 mo) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2.

INTERVENTION

Patients received atezolizumab1200mg intravenously every 3 wk until loss of clinical benefit, unacceptable toxicity, consent withdrawal, decision to discontinue, death, atezolizumab commercial availability, or study closure.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Key end points reported herein included Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 objective response rate and duration, disease control rate (DCR; response or stable disease), and safety.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

All patients received prior systemic therapy (68% mUC; 27% adjuvant; and 26% neoadjuvant). At baseline, 57% of 214 treated patients had ECOG PS ≥1, 19% had hemoglobin <10g/dl, and 25% had liver metastases. Median treatment duration was 9 wk (interquartile range [IQR], 6-12 wk). Median follow-up duration was 2.3 mo (IQR, 1.6-3.4 mo) overall and 2.7 mo (IQR, 2.0-3.5 mo) in patients not known to have died. Seventeen of 114 evaluable patients (15%) had objective responses (16 ongoing at study termination). DCR was 49%. Treatment-related adverse events (mostly fatigue) occurred in 98 of 214 treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit/risk profile of atezolizumab was consistent with that observed in previous studies, despite pretreatment and poor prognostic factors. These results suggest a potential role for atezolizumab in a broader patient range than typically eligible for phase 1-3 studies.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this expanded access study, atezolizumab was active and tolerable in a range of patients with platinum-treated metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) as second-line therapy for patients with advanced urothelial cancer

There is currently no standard treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer after failure of cisplatin-based therapy. The present retrospective study investigated the efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) (FOLFOX) in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer patients following cisplatin-based treatment. Thirty-three patients who had received one or two cisplatin-based regimens were treated with oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²) as a 2-h infusion on day 1, LV (200 mg/m²) as a 2-h infusion followed by bolus 5-FU (400 mg/m²) on day 1, or a 44-h continuous 5-FU (1,200 mg/m²) infusion. Patients were a mean of 67 years old with two involved organs. Metastases were mostly in the lung (43%), lymph nodes (51%) and liver (46%). Based on an intention-to-treat analysis, nine patients achieved a partial response, with an overall response rate of 27%. Eight (24%) patients had stable disease. Mean progression-free survival was 3 months and mean overall survival was 6.1 months. Toxicity was mild to moderate with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and neuropathy occurring in 5 (15%), 4 (12%) and 2 (6%) patients, respectively. This study demonstrated that oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV was a well-tolerated second-line regimen with moderate activity in patients pretreated with cisplatin-based therapeutics.

Accelerating Early Access to Immunotherapies for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

Within one year, five immunotherapies have been approved for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. The availability of these immunotherapies brings challenges to all stakeholders in the field. Additional research is needed to identify biomarkers that are predictive of individual patient response to different immunotherapies.

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum-based therapy (RANGE): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Few treatments with a distinct mechanism of action are available for patients with platinum-refractory advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of treatment with docetaxel plus either ramucirumab-a human IgG1 VEGFR-2 antagonist-or placebo in this patient population.

METHODS

We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled from 124 sites in 23 countries. Previous treatment with one immune-checkpoint inhibitor was permitted. Patients were randomised (1:1) using an interactive web response system to receive intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2 plus either intravenous ramucirumab 10 mg/kg or matching placebo on day 1 of repeating 21-day cycles, until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed by intention-to-treat in the first 437 randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02426125.

FINDINGS

Between July, 2015, and April, 2017, 530 patients were randomly allocated either ramucirumab plus docetaxel (n=263) or placebo plus docetaxel (n=267). Progression-free survival was prolonged significantly in patients allocated ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel (median 4·07 months [95% CI 2·96-4·47] vs 2·76 months [2·60-2·96]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·757, 95% CI 0·607-0·943; p=0·0118). A blinded independent central analysis was consistent with these results. An objective response was achieved by 53 (24·5%, 95% CI 18·8-30·3) of 216 patients allocated ramucirumab and 31 (14·0%, 9·4-18·6) of 221 assigned placebo. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events, regardless of causality, in either treatment group (any grade) were fatigue, alopecia, diarrhoea, decreased appetite, and nausea. These events occurred predominantly at grade 1-2 severity. The frequency of grade 3 or worse adverse events was similar for patients allocated ramucirumab and placebo (156 [60%] of 258 vs 163 [62%] of 265 had an adverse event), with no unexpected toxic effects. 63 (24%) of 258 patients allocated ramucirumab and 54 (20%) of 265 assigned placebo had a serious adverse event that was judged by the investigator to be related to treatment. 38 (15%) of 258 patients allocated ramucirumab and 43 (16%) of 265 assigned placebo died on treatment or within 30 days of discontinuation, of which eight (3%) and five (2%) deaths were deemed related to treatment by the investigator. Sepsis was the most common adverse event leading to death on treatment (four [2%] vs none [0%]). One fatal event of neutropenic sepsis was reported in a patient allocated ramucirumab.

INTERPRETATION

To the best of our knowledge, ramucirumab plus docetaxel is the first regimen in a phase 3 study to show superior progression-free survival over chemotherapy in patients with platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma. These data validate inhibition of VEGFR-2 signalling as a potential new therapeutic treatment option for patients with urothelial carcinoma.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

The combination of paclitaxel and carboplatin as second-line chemotherapy can be a preferred regimen for patients with urothelial carcinoma after the failure of gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy

There is no established standard second-line chemotherapy after the failure of the first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. With regards to second-line chemotherapy, methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin (MVAC) was used from July 2009 onwards, and paclitaxel and carboplatin (TC) was introduced in April 2014 at the National Kyushu Cancer Center. The present study aimed to assess the prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in second-line treatment that included best supportive care (BSC), and the tolerability and efficacy of TC chemotherapy. In total, 52 patients who were confirmed to have disease progression with first-line gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) between June 2009 and November 2016 were enrolled in the current study. In addition, 28 patients selected BSC as second-line treatment, while 24 patients received second-line chemotherapy (MVAC, n=8; TC, n=16). The median OS for BSC, MVAC and TC was 2.8, 5.4, and 12.7 months, respectively. The difference between BSC and MVAC was not statistically significant (P=0.596). However, the difference between BSC and TC was statistically significant after Bonferroni correction (P=0.002). Multivariate analyses revealed that anemia [hazard ratio (HR), 7.047; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.553-35.636; P=0.011], the presence of visceral metastasis (HR, 4.174; 95% CI, 1.506-13.429; P=0.005) and second-line treatment (TC HR, 0.296; 95% CI, 0.124-0.636; P=0.003) were independent prognostic factors. TC achieved an 18.7% overall response rate and a 56.2% disease control rate. Myelosuppression was the most common grade ≥3 toxicity, but no treatment-associated mortalities occurred during the study period. TC was associated with favorable benefits and safety, and may be considered a preferred regimen after the failure of GC.

Genitourinary tumours in the targeted therapies era: new advances in clinical practice and future perspectives

Genitourinary cancers represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies arising from genitourinary tract, and are responsible for almost 359 000 newly diagnosed cases and 58 420 related deaths in USA. Continuous advances in cancer genetics and genomics have contributed towards changing the management paradigms of these neoplasms. Neoangiogenesis, through the activation of the tyrosine-kinase receptors signalling pathways, represents the key mediator event in promoting tumour proliferation, differentiation, invasiveness and motility. In the last decade, several treatments have been developed with the specific aim of targeting different cell pathways that have been recognized to drive tumour progression. The following review attempts to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature, focusing on new advances in targeted therapies for genitourinary tumours. Furthermore, the promising results of the latest clinical trials and future perspectives will be discussed.