Current Treatment and Outcomes Benchmark for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer From a Large UK-Based Single Centre

Treatment Patterns for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Across Eight Mexican Centers: The ALEBRIJE Study

PURPOSE

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) poses a challenge to health care systems, given its treatment complexity and mortality. We aimed to describe the characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes of Mexican patients with mUC.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted across eight centers for adults with mUC from January /2001 to December 2021. We recorded medical history, eligibility for first-line platinum therapy, treatment lines received, and access to novel drugs. Descriptive statistics were used and survival analysis, including Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model, was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 379 patients with mUC; 37 were excluded, and 76% was male, with a median age of 67 years. The median follow-up was 8.4 months. Among those who received a first-line treatment (65%), cisplatin-based chemotherapy (45%) was the most common followed by carboplatin (39%). Causes of cisplatin ineligibility were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ≥2 (41%) and glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min (33%). The overall response rate to up-front platinum therapy was 33%, with a median progression-free survival of 6.1 months (95% CI, 4.9 to 6.9). Second-, third-, and fourth-line treatment was given to 24.6%, 8.8%, and 3.5%, respectively. Chemotherapy was the most common regimen prescribed. Access to novel drugs was limited, 14 patients received avelumab, and 25% received immunotherapy as second-line treatment. The median overall survival was 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.2 to 15.2). Multivariate analysis showed that first-line treatment was independently associated with better survival, whereas poor performance status and visceral disease were associated with worse survival.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, these data represent the first effort to delineate treatment trends of mUC in Mexico. First-line treatment prescription and rates of progression to platinum therapy were higher than those described worldwide. Factors affecting survival included performance status, first-line treatment, and visceral disease. Our study highlights unequal access to novel treatments, underscoring the need for equitable care.

Patient Preferences for First-Line Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: An Application of Multidimensional Thresholding

OBJECTIVES

Patient preferences have the potential to influence the development of new treatments for locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC), and therefore we explored how patients with la/mUC value different attributes of first-line treatments.

METHODS

An online preference survey and multidimensional thresholding (MDT) exercise were developed following a targeted literature review and qualitative interviews with physicians, patients with la/mUC, and their caregivers. Treatment attributes included two benefits (overall response rate [ORR], pain related to bladder cancer [scored 0-100; 100 being the worst pain possible]) and four treatment-related risks (peripheral neuropathy, severe side effects, mild to moderate nausea, mild to moderate skin reactions). A Dirichlet regression was used to estimate average preference weights. Marginal utility and the reduction in ORR that patients would accept in exchange for a 10-point decrease or a 10% decrease in other attributes were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were recruited and self-completed the survey and MDT. Mean patient age was 64.9 years (standard deviation, 7.6), 54% were female, and 38% identified as white. All included treatment attributes had a statistically significant impact on preferences. Changes in ORR had the largest impact, followed by cancer-related pain and treatment-related risks. Patients were willing to accept an 8.4% decrease in ORR to reduce their pain level by 10 points or a 7.8% decrease in ORR to reduce the risk of peripheral neuropathy by 10%. For a 10% decrease in severe side effects, mild to moderate nausea, or skin reaction, patients would accept decreases in ORR of 5.5%, 3.7%, or 3.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the attributes tested, changes in ORR were most important to patients. Patients made tradeoffs between treatment attributes indicating that a lower ORR may be acceptable for an improvement in other attributes such as reduced cancer-related pain or the risk of treatment-related adverse events.

Reevaluating the role of platinum-based chemotherapy in the evolving treatment landscape for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma

Platinum-based chemotherapy has been the standard first-line (1L) treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) for decades, based on the proven efficacy and established safety profiles of cisplatin- and carboplatin-based regimens. With the emergence of novel regimens, it is important to reevaluate and contextualize the role of 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. Platinum-based chemotherapy followed by avelumab 1L maintenance in patients without disease progression following platinum-based chemotherapy was established as a standard 1L regimen based on the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase III trial. More recently, the EV-302 phase III trial showed the superiority of 1L enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab versus platinum-based chemotherapy, and the Checkmate 901 phase III trial showed the superiority of 1L nivolumab + cisplatin/gemcitabine versus cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. These 2 regimens have now been included as standard 1L options in treatment guidelines for advanced UC. EV + pembrolizumab is now the preferred 1L treatment, and in locations where EV + pembrolizumab is not available or individual patients are not considered suitable, recommended options are platinum-based chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance or nivolumab + cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In this review, we discuss current treatment options for advanced UC recommended in guidelines, practical considerations with platinum-based chemotherapy, the role of avelumab 1L maintenance, recent phase III trials of EV + pembrolizumab and nivolumab + cisplatin/gemcitabine, safety profiles of recommended 1L treatments, and second-line treatment options.

Factors associated with receipt of systemic anticancer treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in England: a population-based study

INTRODUCTION

Systemic anticancer therapy for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) is associated with efficacy benefits, including longer overall survival (OS), but many patients remain untreated. This observational, real-world, national study aimed to investigate factors associated with receiving systemic anticancer therapy for la/mUC in England.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adults diagnosed with la/mUC between 2013 and 2019 were identified in the National Cancer Registration Dataset and followed until March 2021. Healthcare and comorbidity data were obtained from Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care and Outpatient datasets. Treatment data were obtained from the Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy dataset. Factors associated with treatment were identified using multivariable logistic regression. OS from la/mUC diagnosis was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology.

RESULTS

Of 16,610 patients diagnosed with la/mUC, 5,191 (31%) received systemic anticancer therapy; 4,700 (91%) received platinum-based chemotherapy. Only 18% of patients were cisplatin ineligible. Patients were significantly less likely to receive treatment if they were female, cisplatin ineligible, older, or diagnosed before 2018; had laUC, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >1, or greater comorbidity; or resided outside London or in income-deprived areas. Median OS (95% CI) from diagnosis in treated vs. untreated patients was 19.9 (19.4-20.6) vs. 5.8 (5.6-6.0) months, respectively. Limitations include retrospective analysis of data not initially collected for research purposes.

CONCLUSION

From 2013 to 2019, ≈70% of patients with la/mUC in England were untreated, which is high given the availability of effective treatments. Reasons for undertreatment should be addressed. Given the evolving treatment landscape, analysis of more recent data would be informative.

MICROABSTRACT

This study investigated systemic anticancer treatment for patients diagnosed with advanced urothelial carcinoma in England between 2013 and 2019. Of 16,610 patients, 31% received treatment. Various factors were associated with not receiving treatment, including female sex, older age, worse performance status, greater comorbidity, and resident in income-deprived areas. Median overall survival in treated vs. untreated patients was 19.9 vs. 5.8 months.

The Impact of Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Alterations in Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Real-World Data From a Latin American Population

INTRODUCTION

Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) mutations and fusions are relevant biomarkers in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, the prevalence of genomic alterations and their impact on clinical outcomes in a Latin American population remains unknown. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of FGFR mutations and/or fusions in patients with mUC in Latin America (LATAM) and its association with clinicopathological characteristics, Bellmunt's prognostic model, and survival outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study from 2016 to 2019 of patients with mUC from several LACOG LATAM institutions. FGFR alterations were analyzed by real-time PCR and/or next-generation sequencing in tumor samples and clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes data were collected. The prevalence of FGFR, patient characteristics, and treatment in real-world settings were summarized. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the associations of FGFR mutation and/or fusion status with median overall survival (mOS), median time to treatment failure (mTTF), and clinicopathological characteristics.

RESULTS

In total, 222 patients were screened. Of these, 196 patients were considered eligible and were included in the analysis. FGFR mutations and/or fusions were found in 35 (17.9%) patients. There was no statistical difference in mOS and mTTF in FGFR-altered and non-altered patients (13.1 vs. 16.8 months, P = .20 and 3.9 vs. 4.1 months, P = .96, respectively). Bellmunt's prognostic model correctly predicted overall survival (P = .049).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study evaluating the prevalence of FGFR alterations in patients with mUC in the LATAM population. FGFR alterations in mUC were found in 17.9% of the patients, and the presence of this biomarker was not associated with OS. We validated Bellmunt's prognostic model in this cohort.

Treatment Patterns and Real-World Outcomes for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer in the Era of Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There are limited data on real-world outcomes for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) since immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) became available. Our objective was to analyze outcomes for patients with mUC since ICIs became available.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 131 patients with mUC attending the outpatient clinic of a single tertiary care center who received systemic therapy between June 2017 and July 2021 with follow-up up to December 2022. Summary and descriptive statistics were calculated for categorical and continuous variables. The Kaplan-Meier method was applied to calculate survival, and a Cox proportional-hazards model was used to explore associations between clinical variables and outcomes.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

The median patient age was 68 yr (range 35-90). The first systemic therapy administered was platinum-based in 79% of cases and ICI-based in 21%. Some 61% of the cohort received a second systemic treatment, with 75% of these an ICI. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 24 mo (interquartile range 9-35). Patients on ICI therapy for ≥6 mo had median overall survival of 59 mo (95% confidence interval 39 mo-not reached). Metastatic sites on initiation of ICI therapy and C-reactive protein kinetics were prognostic in patients receiving ICIs. Limitations include the retrospective design and inherent selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

More than 60% of patients with mUC received second-line treatment, and 75% of these received an ICI. Patients staying on immunotherapy for more than 6 mo have substantially better outcomes in comparison to patients with less time on immunotherapy and historical cohorts.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at the lines of therapy and outcomes for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer of the urinary tract, starting from when immunotherapy drugs called immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) became available. We found that 60% of patients have received second-line therapy, which is a double the rate in comparison to historical groups of patients. Patients with long-term ICI therapy (>6 months) had significantly better outcomes, with a median survival of more than 3 years.

Cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line maintenance therapy for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in France

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance therapy plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone for adults with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) that had not progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy in France.

METHODS

A three-state partitioned survival model was developed to assess the lifetime costs and effects of avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone. Data from the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (NCT02603432) were used to inform estimates of clinical and utility values considering a 10-year time horizon and a weekly cycle length. Cost data were estimated from a collective perspective and included treatment acquisition, administration, follow-up, adverse event-related hospitalization, transport, post-progression, and end-of-life costs. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-years gained. Costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 2.5% per annum. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare cost-effectiveness and willingness to pay in France. Uncertainty was assessed using a range of sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Avelumab plus BSC was associated with a gain of 2.49 QALYs and total discounted costs of €136,917; BSC alone was associated with 1.82 QALYs and €39,751. Although avelumab plus BSC was associated with increased acquisition costs compared with BSC alone, offsets of -€20,424 and -€351 were observed for post-progression and end-of-life costs, respectively. The base case analysis ICER was €145,626/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the reference case and showed that efficacy parameters (overall survival, time to treatment discontinuation), post-progression time on immunotherapy, and post-progression costs had the largest impact on the ICER.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrated that avelumab plus BSC is associated with a favorable cost-effectiveness profile for patients with la/mUC who are eligible for 1L maintenance therapy in France.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a German retrospective real-world analysis

Aim: This study assessed real-world treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in Germany. Materials & methods: Patients diagnosed with mUC from 2015 to 2019 were identified in two claims databases: AOK PLUS and GWQ. Results: 3226 patients with mUC were analyzed; 1286 (39.9%) received systemic treatment within 12 months of diagnosis (platinum-based chemotherapy: 64.2%). Factors associated with receiving treatment were: younger age, male sex, less comorbidity and recent diagnosis. In AOK PLUS and GWQ populations, unadjusted median overall survival (interquartile range) from diagnosis in treated patients was 13.7 (6.8-32.9) and 13.8 (7.1-41.7) months, and in untreated patients was 3.0 (1.2-10.8) and 3.6 (1.2-18.8) months, respectively. Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients with mUC in Germany receive no systemic treatment.

Physician reported treatment patterns and outcomes in metastatic bladder cancer in the USA: the CancerMPact® Survey 2020

Aim: This study assessed physician-reported treatment patterns for metastatic bladder cancer. Materials & methods: A total of 106 USA-based physicians were surveyed in 2020 using the CancerMPact® online survey. Results: Among cisplatin-eligible patients, 86.1% received first-line (1L) platinum-containing chemotherapy, most commonly cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and 9.8% received immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy. Among cisplatin-ineligible patients, 46.5% received 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy, most commonly carboplatin plus gemcitabine and 46.2% received 1L immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Approximately 44% of patients who received 1L treatment received second-line (2L) therapy after progression. Conclusion: Platinum-containing chemotherapy was the most widely reported 1L treatment approach. A high proportion of patients received no 2L therapy. Validation in an updated dataset is warranted following the practice-changing approvals of avelumab 1L maintenance and additional 2L options.

Cost-effectiveness analysis for avelumab first-line maintenance treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma in Scotland

Aim: The cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line maintenance treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in Scotland was assessed. Materials & methods: A partitioned survival model was developed comparing avelumab plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone, incorporating JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial data, costs from national databases and published literature and clinical expert validation of assumptions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated using lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Results: Avelumab plus BSC had incremental costs of £9446 and a QALY gain of 0.63, leading to a base-case (deterministic) ICER of £15,046 per QALY gained, supported by robust sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Avelumab first-line maintenance is likely to be a cost-effective treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in Scotland.

Treatment patterns in metastatic bladder cancer in Japan: results of the CancerMPact® survey 2020

Aim: To assess physician-reported treatment of metastatic bladder cancer in Japan. Methods: 76 physicians completed the CancerMPact® survey in July 2020, considering patients treated within 6 months. Results: Physicians treated a mean of 38.1 patients per month. Of cisplatin-eligible and -ineligible patients, 97.6 and 89.3%, respectively, received first-line platinum-based therapy, most commonly cisplatin plus gemcitabine (72.9%) and carboplatin plus gemcitabine (59.7%). 1.6 and 5.6% received first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors, respectively. 48.4 and 45.0%, respectively, progressed and received second-line therapy, most commonly with pembrolizumab (61.7%). Conclusion: In 2020, most patients with metastatic bladder cancer in Japan received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy; however, >50% received no subsequent treatment, highlighting the need for new treatment regimens to improve outcomes and maximize first-line treatment benefits.

Treatment Patterns and Survival Outcomes Before and After Access to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Single-Center Retrospective Study From 2004 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is a lethal disease with limited treatment options. We aimed to compare the treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with mUC who were treated before and after the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) at a tertiary hospital in Barcelona.

METHODS

Single-center retrospective study from 2004 to 2021. Access to ICIs began in December 2014. We analyzed differences in clinical characteristics and survival outcomes, such as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and restricted mean survival time (RMST).

RESULTS

A total of 206 patients were included. The median follow-up was 48.6 months. Ninety and 116 patients were treated during the pre-ICIs and the post-ICIs eras, respectively. We found high treatment attrition rates, with no differences in the number of patients who received second-line (48%) and third-line (26%) therapies between the two eras. In the second-line, ICIs became the predominant therapy (58%), leading to a 30% reduction in the utilisation of platinum-based ChT and non-platinum ChT. Innovative approaches including ICIs in the first-line treatment (18%) and targeted therapies in the third-line setting (34%) were observed. We found no differences in the median OS, 2-year OS, or 24-month RMST between the two periods.

CONCLUSION

ICIs have emerged as a transformative treatment option, reshaping the treatment landscape. Nevertheless, substantial attrition rates from first-line to subsequent lines of systemic therapies might impede the potential impact of ICIs on long-term survival outcomes across the entire population.

Atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

The primary analysis of IMvigor130 showed a significant progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, this finding did not translate into significant overall survival benefit for group A versus group C at the final analysis, precluding formal statistical testing of outcomes with atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) versus group C. Here we report the final overall survival results for group B versus group C; this report is descriptive and should be considered exploratory due to the study's statistical design.

METHODS

In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) who had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab alone (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo in group A and group C; atezolizumab monotherapy in group B was open label. For groups B and C, atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy involved 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and day 8 of each cycle) plus the investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under the curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area), administered intravenously. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in group A versus group C, and overall survival in group B versus group C, tested hierarchically, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and then the populations with high PD-L1 tumour expression (immune cell [IC] expression score of IC2/3) if the results from group A versus group C were significant. Here, we report the co-primary endpoint of overall survival for group B versus group C in the ITT and IC2/3 populations. The ITT population for this analysis comprised concurrently enrolled patients in groups B and C who were randomly assigned to treatment. For the safety analysis, all patients enrolled in group B and group C who received any study treatment were included. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting.

FINDINGS

Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 362 patients were assigned to group B and 400 to group C, of whom 360 and 359, respectively, were enrolled concurrently (ITT population). 543 (76%) of 719 patients were male, 176 (24%) were female, and 534 (74%) were White. As of data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow-up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·1-17·7; 271 deaths) in group B and 13·3 months (11·9-15·6; 275 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·82-1·16]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (two [1%] in patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy vs 133 [34%] in those who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (one [<1%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (0 vs 95 [24%]), and decreased platelet count (one [<1%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 163 (46%) patients versus 196 (50%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (1%; n=1 each, pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, large intestinal obstruction) patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy and four (1%; n=1 each, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, unexplained death, toxic hepatitis) who received placebo plus chemotherapy.

INTERPRETATION

The final analysis from IMvigor130 did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with first-line atezolizumab monotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. The safety profile of atezolizumab monotherapy remained acceptable after extended follow-up, with no new safety signals.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

The Genomic Landscape of Urothelial Carcinoma with High and Low ERBB2 Expression

BACKGROUND

Recent data suggests that HER2-targeted treatment is efficacious in urothelial carcinoma (UC). We investigated the genomic, transcriptomic, and immune landscapes and clinical outcomes in UC segmented by ERBB2 expression.

METHODS

NextGen DNA/RNA sequencing was performed for 4743 UC tumors. A total of 3% (124/4125) of tumors had HER2 IHC and whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS) data. ERRB2-high and -low tumors were defined by ≥75th and <25th percentiles of ERBB2 expression, respectively. PD-L1 (SP142) positive staining was defined as ≥2+ and ≥5%. HER2 (4B5) positive staining was defined as ≥3+ and >10% or 2+ and >10% with positive HER2 in situ hybridization (ISH).

RESULTS

Of the patients who were ERBB2-high, 79% (61/77) were HER2 positive via IHC. Tumors from lower tract UC had higher ERBB2 expression compared to upper tract UC (50 v 40 median TPM (mTPM), p < 0.001). ERBB2 expression was similar between primary and metastatic tumors (47 v 47 mTPM, p = 0.95). ERBB2-high tumors had a higher prevalence of pathogenic mutations in pTERT, ERBB2, and ELF3 versus ERBB2-low tumors, p < 0.001. ERBB2-high tumors had higher expressions of ADC target genes NECTIN4 (12 v 8 mTPM) and TACSTD2 (366 v 74 mTPM) versus ERBB2-low (p < 0.001), as well as better overall survival from time of tissue sampling than ERBB2-low (HR 1.71, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated a high concordance between HER2 expression by IHC and ERBB2 gene expression by WTS in UC. Differences in ADC target expression between ERBB2-high vs. ERBB2-low UC may provide a rationale for combination treatment strategies with HER2-ADC. The association between high ERBB2 expression and survival advantage warrants further investigation.

Overall Survival by Response to First-line Induction Treatment with Atezolizumab plus Platinum-based Chemotherapy or Placebo plus Platinum-based Chemotherapy for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Standard-of-care first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is platinum-based chemotherapy (CTx). Maintenance immunotherapy is a treatment option for patients without progressive disease (PD) after induction CTx. IMvigor130 was a randomised, phase 3 study evaluating atezolizumab plus platinum-based CTx (arm A), atezolizumab monotherapy (arm B), or placebo plus platinum-based CTx (arm C) as first-line treatment for mUC. The primary progression-free survival (PFS) analysis showed a statistically significant PFS benefit favouring arm A versus arm C, which did not translate into overall survival (OS) benefit at the final OS analysis. We report exploratory analyses based on response to combination induction treatment (arm A vs arm C) using final OS data. Post-induction OS was analysed for patients without PD during induction (4-6 CTx cycles) who received at least one dose of single-agent atezolizumab/placebo maintenance treatment. Post-progression OS was analysed for patients with PD during induction CTx. Addition of atezolizumab to CTx did not impact OS outcomes, regardless of response to induction CTx, with hazard ratios of 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-1.10) for patients without PD and 0.75 (95% CI 0.54-1.05) for those with PD during induction CTx. Treatment effects appeared to be greatest for patients treated with cisplatin and for those with PD-L1-high tumours.

Patient summary

The IMvigor130 trial showed that addition of atezolizumab to chemotherapy (CTx) did not improve survival over CTx alone in patients with bladder cancer. Overall, patients whose cancer did not progress during initial treatment tended to live longer than patients whose cancer did progress, but addition of atezolizumab to CTx did not help either group live longer in comparison to CTx alone. However, the results suggest that patients who received a certain CTx drug (cisplatin) or who had high levels of a marker called PD-L1 in their tumour may get the most improvement from addition of atezolizumab to CTx.The IMvigor130 trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02807636.

Nationwide Study of Real-World Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in Hungary

INTRODUCTION

Data describing real-world treatment patterns in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in Central-Eastern Europe are scarce, and data from Hungary have not been published. This retrospective, nationwide, real-world study investigated patient characteristics, treatment patterns, comorbidities, and clinical outcomes in patients with mUC in Hungary.

METHODS

Adults diagnosed with mUC from January 2016 through June 2021 were identified using the National Health Insurance Fund Administration database. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

In total, 2523 patients with mUC were identified. Median follow-up was 7.1 months. Overall, 50% of patients received an identified systemic anticancer treatment; within this subgroup, first-line treatment was platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) in 86%, non-PBC in 8%, and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in 6%. The proportion of patients receiving treatment increased from 41% in 2016 to 59% in 2020, driven by increased use of first-line PBC or first-line ICI treatment. Comorbidities were more common in patients receiving first-line ICI treatment vs PBC or non-PBC and in patients receiving carboplatin + gemcitabine vs cisplatin + gemcitabine. Overall, only 24% received a second-line treatment. Unadjusted median OS from the start of first-line treatment in the PBC, non-PBC, and ICI subgroups was 12.8, 7.5, and 6.3 months, respectively. Median OS from date of diagnosis in untreated patients was 7.8 months. OS comparisons adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics between subgroups could not be performed.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess treatment patterns in patients with mUC in clinical practice in Hungary, using the national health insurance database. Rates of first- and second-line treatment were consistent with those observed in other countries. Avelumab first-line maintenance treatment became available for reimbursement in Hungary in late 2022, after the study period. Given the evolving landscape of reimbursed treatments in Hungary, further analyses are warranted.

Avelumab as First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

This work provides a summary of guideline recommendations and an expert position on the use of maintenance avelumab therapy based on a review of current international clinical practice guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). A PubMed literature search was conducted in March 2022 (updated in July 2023) to identify guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic UC. An expert panel (four oncologists and one urologist) reviewed the guidelines and clinical evidence, and discussed practical questions regarding the use of avelumab maintenance therapy in this clinical setting. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology and European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines recommend first-line cisplatin-containing chemotherapy for cisplatin-eligible patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine for cisplatin-ineligible patients who are fit for carboplatin, or immunotherapy with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors (e.g. atezolizumab) in platinum-ineligible patients. Maintenance avelumab is recommended in patients with response/stable disease following chemotherapy (regardless of PD-L1 status). In patients who relapse after/during chemotherapy, options include immunotherapy, erdafitinib [in those with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) mutations], enfortumab vedotin or further chemotherapy. The expert panel provided the following practical guidance: (1) consider maintenance avelumab in all eligible patients; (2) continue avelumab until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity; (3) ideally, administer six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy prior to maintenance avelumab; (4) perform radiological evaluation after four chemotherapy cycles and prior to maintenance avelumab; (5) carboplatin-gemcitabine followed by maintenance avelumab is preferred in cisplatin-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 expression), but consider first-line immunotherapy in PD-L1-positive patients and platinum-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 status); and (6) for patients who relapse on avelumab, second-line options include enfortumab vedotin, FGFR inhibitors (in those with FGFR mutations) or clinical trial inclusion. In conclusion, avelumab maintenance therapy is recommended following platinum-based chemotherapy in all eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC, continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

Avelumab First-Line Maintenance for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results From the JAVELIN Bladder 100 Trial After ≥2 Years of Follow-Up

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Initial results from the phase III JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02603432) showed that avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance plus best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who were progression-free after 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy. Avelumab 1L maintenance treatment is now a standard of care for aUC. Here, we report updated data with ≥ 2 years of follow-up in all patients, including OS (primary end point), PFS, safety, and additional novel analyses. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive avelumab plus BSC (n = 350) or BSC alone (n = 350). At data cutoff (June 4, 2021), median follow-up was 38.0 months and 39.6 months, respectively; 67 patients (19.5%) had received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment. OS remained longer with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone in all patients (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.91]; 2-sided P = .0036). Investigator-assessed PFS analyses also favored avelumab. Longer-term safety was consistent with previous analyses; no new safety signals were identified with longer treatment duration. In conclusion, longer-term follow-up continues to show clinically meaningful efficacy benefits with avelumab 1L maintenance plus BSC versus BSC alone in patients with aUC. An interactive visualization of data reported in this article is available.

Evaluating the cost-utility of intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin versus radical cystectomy in patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the UK

AIMS

Approximately 75% of bladder cancer (BC) cases present as non-muscle-invasive BC (NMIBC). In patients with high-risk NMIBC, the mainstay treatment is intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), with immediate radical cystectomy (RC) as an alternative treatment option. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-utility of BCG versus RC in patients with high-risk NMIBC from the UK healthcare payer perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A six-state Markov model was developed that covered controlled disease, recurrence, progression to muscle-invasive BC, metastatic disease, and death. The model included adverse events of BCG and RC and monitoring and palliative care. Drug costs were obtained from the British National Formulary. Intravesical delivery, RC, and monitoring costs were sourced from the National Tariff Payment System and the literature. Utility data were obtained from the literature. Analyses were run over a 30-year time horizon, with future costs and effects discounted at 3.5% per annum. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The base case analysis comparing BCG with RC showed that BCG would increase life expectancy by 0.88 years versus RC, from 7.74 to 8.62 years. BCG resulted in an increase of 0.76 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus RC, from 5.63 to 6.39 QALYs. Patients incurred lower lifetime costs if treated with BCG (£47,753) than with RC (£64,264). Cost savings were mainly driven by the lower cost of BCG versus RC, and palliative care costs. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were robust to assumptions.

LIMITATIONS

The evidence base informing efficacy estimates of BCG is heterogeneous as different BCG administration schedules were reported in the literature, while incidence and cost data on some BCG-associated adverse events were sparse.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravesical BCG led to increased QALYs and reduced costs versus RC for patients with high-risk NMIBC from the UK healthcare payer perspective.

Understanding Treatment Patterns and Outcomes among Patients with De Novo Unresectable Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer: A Population-Level Retrospective Analysis from Alberta, Canada

Despite a high disease burden, real-world data on treatment patterns in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) in Canada are limited. This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study describes treatment patterns and survival in a population of patients with de novo unresectable la/mUC from Alberta, Canada, diagnosed between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019, followed until mid-2020. The outcomes of interest were systemic therapy treatment patterns and overall survival (OS). Of 206 patients, most (65.0%, n = 134) did not receive any systemic therapies. Of 72 patients (35.0%) who received first-line systemic therapy, the median duration of treatment was 2.8 months (IQR 3.3). Thirty-five patients (48.6% of those who received first-line therapy) received subsequent second-line therapy, for a median of 3.0 months (IQR 3.3). In all patients (n = 206), the median OS from diagnosis was 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.5-7.0). In patients who received treatment, the median OS from the initiation of first-line and second-line systemic therapy was 9.1 (6.4-11.6) and 4.6 months (3.9-19.2), respectively. The majority of patients did not receive first-line systemic therapy, and, in those who did, survival outcomes were poor. This study highlights the significant unmet need for safe and efficacious therapies for patients with la/mUC in Canada.

Avelumab First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Advanced Bladder Cancer: Practical Implementation Steps for Infusion Nurses

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, and avelumab, are used to treat patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Based on data from the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial, avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance is now considered the standard-of-care treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who responded or experienced disease stabilization after 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy, and it is the only category 1 preferred checkpoint inhibitor maintenance option in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for patients with cisplatin-eligible and cisplatin-ineligible locally advanced or metastatic UC. This article reviews key considerations related to avelumab 1L maintenance therapy that infusion nurses should be familiar with, including dosing, administration, and immune-related adverse event recognition and management, to ensure safe and appropriate use of this important and impactful therapy.

Clinical evidence and insights supporting the use of avelumab first-line maintenance treatment in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma in the Asia-Pacific region

Until recently, international and Asia-specific guidelines for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) recommended first-line (1L) platinum-based chemotherapy, followed by second-line (2L) anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy where possible, or 1L ICI therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients with PD-L1+ tumors. However, long-term outcomes remain poor and only a minority of patients receive 2L therapy. The JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial-which assessed avelumab (anti-PD-L1 antibody) as 1L maintenance therapy plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced UC that had not progressed with 1L platinum-based chemotherapy-is the only phase 3 trial of ICI-based treatment in the 1L setting to show significantly improved overall survival, and this treatment approach is now recommended in updated treatment guidelines. Available data from the trial suggest that efficacy and safety in patients enrolled in the Asia-Pacific region were similar to findings in the overall population. In this review, we discuss the treatment of advanced UC, with a specific focus on studies in the Asia-Pacific region, and summarize key findings supporting the use of avelumab 1L maintenance as a standard of care in this setting both in cisplatin-eligible and cisplatin-ineligible patients and irrespective of PD-L1 status.

Emerging biomarkers in metastatic urothelial carcinoma: tumour mutational burden, PD-L1 expression and APOBEC polypeptide-like signature in a patient with complete response to anti-programmed cell death protein-1 inhibitor

Immunotherapy has recently been incorporated into the treatment guidelines for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Nevertheless, the role of prognostic and predictive biomarkers in this setting is not completely defined. To date, PD-L1 expression and a high tumour mutational burden (TMB) seem to predict better responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors, but patients without these biomarkers may still respond to immunotherapy. There are some caveats regarding these biomarkers, such as lack of standardisation of techniques, tumour heterogeneity and other factors influencing the tumour microenvironment. Genomic signatures are other promising emerging strategies. We hereby discuss the management of a 70-year-old man with a metastatic recurrence of urothelial carcinoma within 1 year after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical cystectomy. Tumour next-generation sequencing showed a high TMB and a CD274 (PD-L1) amplification. The patient was treated with pembrolizumab and achieved a complete response.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of urothelial cancer

A number of immunotherapies have been developed and adopted for the treatment of urothelial cancer (encompassing cancers arising from the bladder, urethra, or renal pelvis). For these immunotherapies to positively impact patient outcomes, optimal selection of agents and treatment scheduling, especially in conjunction with existing treatment paradigms, is paramount. Immunotherapies also warrant specific and unique considerations regarding patient management, emphasizing both the prompt identification and treatment of potential toxicities. In order to address these issues, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts in the field of immunotherapy for urothelial cancer. The expert panel developed this clinical practice guideline (CPG) to inform healthcare professionals on important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for urothelial cancer, including diagnostic testing, treatment planning, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and patient quality of life (QOL) considerations. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to give guidance to cancer care providers treating patients with urothelial cancer.

Adverse events of the second-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: network meta-analysis

Aim: We aimed to compare the mortality rates related to adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity as well as all AEs of currently used regimens of second-line treatment strategies for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Methods: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for articles according to the PRISMA extension statement for network meta-analysis. Results: Five trials comprising 2205 patients met our eligibility criteria. It is highly likely that immunotherapy, as single regimen, has the lowest rates of motor and sensory neuropathies, constipation, abdominal pain, alopecia, decreased appetite, vomiting and febrile neutropenia. Immunotherapy, in combination regimen, has the lowest rates of anemia and fatigue. Conclusion: Immunotherapy, especially as single regimen, demonstrated the highest favorable tolerability to most AEs.

Sequential therapies for advanced urothelial cancer: Hope meets new challenges

A dramatic change in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinomas (UC) occurred in the last 3 years, initially with the development of several check-point inhibitors, for second and first-line therapy. More recently, the approval of anti-FGFR (Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor) and anti-nectin-4 inhibitors based on phase 2 studies in refractory disease, and the preliminary results of 3 randomized phase 3 trials combining chemotherapy and immunotherapy in first-line as well as using maintenance immunotherapy after chemotherapy induction, created a new paradigm in the treatment of metastatic disease. In this review, we will explore the new classes of agents and how they could be incorporated in the clinical practice as well as the results of recently presented randomized studies, guiding oncologists on the possible sequences for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Practice change in the management of metastatic urothelial carcinoma after ASCO 2020

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is an incurable and aggressive disease. In the past decades there have been few effective treatment options that have impacted the prognosis of mUC patients. However, in the last few years, several drugs have emerged as new treatment choices that are changing the therapeutic landscape of mUC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted agents are useful treatment strategies that have been incorporated into our clinical practice. Nevertheless, cisplatin-based chemotherapy is still the standard of care in the first-line of metastatic disease. The results of the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial were presented at ASCO 2020, this trial evaluated the role of avelumab, an ICI, as maintenance therapy in patients who had not progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The trial met its primary endpoint demonstrating an overall survival benefit with avelumab maintenance. In addition, new drugs and combinations are being evaluated to improve the outcomes of second and subsequent lines. Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors and immunotherapy combinations were some of the strategies presented at ASCO 2020 that have shown promising results. Finally, the development of predictive biomarkers that help us in the decision-making process will be one of the most important challenges in the next years.