From Clinical Trials to the Front Line: Vinflunine for Treatment of Urothelial Cell Carcinoma at the National Cancer Institute of Naples

Monoinstitutional real world experience in management of Vinflunine as second line therapy for transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium

Vinflunine is the only cytotoxic agent tested as a second line therapy in transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium in a phase III trial. It is not largely employed in clinical practice because of the high incidence of grade 3-4 toxicity. We evaluated efficacy and safety of Vinflunine at the dose of 280 mg/m2 every 3 weeks associated with primary prophylaxis with granulocyte growth factors and laxatives for patients progressed after platinum + Gemcitabine. Overall survival was 8.5 months, progression-free survival 4.33 months and response rate 25%, with disease control rate 57.2%. Grade III-IV neutropenia occurred in 10.7% of the patients, grade III-IV anemia and grade III thrombocytopenia in 10.7% and 7.2%, respectively. Among non haematological toxicity, grade I-II constipation was reported in 14.2% of the patients, without grade III-IV adverse events. No discontinuation for toxicity was observed. This study underlines that Vinfluinine at a dose of 280 mg/m2 associated with primary prophylaxis for neutropenia and constipation is effective and with a favorable toxicity profile.

Vinflunine for the treatment of advanced or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract: an evidence-based review of safety, efficacy, and place in therapy

Background

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of systemic vinflunine (VIN) in the treatment of urothelial carcinoma (UC) was performed to evaluate its efficacy based on current available clinical data.

Methods

This review was prospectively registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO (registration CRD42016049294). Electronic databases including MEDLINE^®, Embase^®, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were searched through December 2016. We performed a meta-analysis of the published data. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Numerous secondary clinical outcomes were analyzed including response and toxicity data.

Results

We identified 382 publications, of which 35 met inclusion criteria for this review representing 29 unique studies. A total of 2,255 patients received VIN for the treatment of UC in the included studies. OS and PFS were analyzed in a pooled Kaplan–Meier analysis. Response data were available for 1,416 VIN-treated patients with random effects proportion of complete response in 1%, partial response in 18%, and overall response rate of 21%. Toxicity analysis revealed fatigue (40.1%), nausea (33.9%), constipation (34.1%), and alopecia (26.0%) as the most prevalent overall non-hematologic adverse events (AEs). Most prevalent grade 3–4 AEs were fatigue (10.2%), abdominal pain (8.2%), myalgias (2.5%), and nausea (2.3%). Most common hematologic AEs of all grades were anemia (56.6%), neutropenia (46.0%), thrombocytopenia (25.5%), and febrile neutropenia (6.6%). Grade 3–4 hematologic AEs had the following pooled rates: neutropenia, 24.6%; anemia, 10.2%; febrile neutropenia, 5.4%; and thrombocytopenia, 3.0%.

Conclusion

VIN has been explored as a combination first-line treatment as well as a single-agent second-line, third-line, and maintenance therapy for advanced and metastatic UC. In first-line treatment of UC, either as a maintenance agent after cisplatin or as a primary combination therapy, VIN may be a promising alternative to current treatments. Further studies are needed to compare first-line combination VIN regimens to the current standard of care in order to assess long-term survival outcomes. Second- and third-line VIN monotherapy does provide a proven, although limited, survival benefit in platinum-refractory patients.

Real-life clinical practice results with vinflunine in patients with relapsed platinum-treated metastatic urothelial carcinoma: an Italian multicenter study (MOVIE-GOIRC 01-2014)

Background

Vinflunine is the only chemotherapeutic agent shown to improve survival in platinum-refractory patients with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium (TCCU) in a phase III clinical trial, which led to product registration for this indication in Europe. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of vinflunine and to evaluate the prognostic significance of risk factors in a large, unselected cohort of patients with metastatic TCCU treated according to routine clinical practice.

Methods

This was a retrospective multicenter study. Italian cancer centers were selected if, according to the Registry of the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA), at least four patients had been treated with vinflunine between February 2011 and June 2014, after first- or second-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary objective was to test whether the efficacy measured by overall survival (OS) in the registration study could be confirmed in routine clinical practice. Multivariate analysis was carried out using Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

A total of 217 patients were treated in 28 Italian centers. Median age was 69 years (IQR 62–76) and 84% were male; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) was ≥ 1 in 53% of patients. The median number of cycles was 4 (IQR 2–6); 29%, 35%, and 36% received an initial dose of 320 mg/m², 280 mg/m² or a lower dose, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and OS for the entire population was 3.2 months (2.6–3.7) and 8.1 months (6.3–8.9). A complete response was observed in six patients, partial response in 21, stable disease in 60, progressive disease in 108, with a disease control rate of 40%. Multivariate analysis showed that ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites and liver involvement were unfavorable prognostic factors for OS. Toxicity was mild, and grade 3–4 adverse effects were mainly: neutropenia (9%), anemia (6%), asthenia/fatigue (7%) and constipation (5%).

Conclusions

In routine clinical practice the results obtained with VFL seem to be better than the results of the registration trial and reinforce evidence supporting its use after failure of a platinum-based chemotherapy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3466-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.