In a prospective, randomized trial involving patients with urothelial carcinoma who had undergone radical surgery, adjuvant nivolumab was compared with placebo. The median disease-free survival was ...20.8 months with nivolumab and 10.8 months with placebo. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were noted in 17.9% of patients in the nivolumab group.
PURPOSE
To provide recommendations for the management of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).
METHODS
An Expert Panel conducted a systematic literature review to obtain ...evidence to guide treatment recommendations.
RESULTS
The panel considered peer-reviewed reports published in English.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The diagnosis of metastatic ccRCC should be made using tissue biopsy of the primary tumor or a metastatic site with the inclusion of markers and/or stains to support the diagnosis. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk criteria should be used to inform treatment. Cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to select patients with kidney-in-place and favorable- or intermediate-risk disease. For those who have already had a nephrectomy, an initial period of active surveillance may be offered if they are asymptomatic with a low burden of disease. Patients with favorable-risk disease who need systemic therapy may be offered an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in combination with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI); patients with intermediate or poor risk should be offered a doublet regimen (no recommendation was provided between ICIs or an ICI in combination with a VEGFR TKI). For select patients, monotherapy with either an ICI or a VEGFR TKI may be offered on the basis of comorbidities. Interleukin-2 remains an option, although selection criteria could not be identified. Recommendations are also provided for second- and subsequent-line therapy as well as the treatment of bone metastases, brain metastases, or the presence of sarcomatoid features. Participation in clinical trials is highly encouraged for patients with metastatic ccRCC. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines
Introduction
Cisplatin, a platinum‐based antineoplastic agent, is the cornerstone for the treatment of many malignancies. Nephrotoxicity is the primary dose‐limiting toxicity, and various hydration ...regimens and supplementation strategies are used to prevent cisplatin‐induced kidney injury. However, evidence‐based recommendations on specific hydration regimens are limited. A systematic review was performed to evaluate clinical studies that have examined hydration and supplementation strategies to prevent cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity.
Materials and Methods
PubMed and Excerpta Medica databases were searched from 1966 through October 2015 for clinical trials and other studies focused on hydration regimens to prevent nephrotoxicity in cancer patients treated with cisplatin. The University of Oxford Centre for Evidence‐Based Medicine criteria were used to grade level of evidence.
Results
Among the 1,407 identified studies, 24 were included in this systematic review. All studies differed on type, volume, and duration of hydration. Among the 24 studies, 5 evaluated short‐duration hydration, 4 evaluated low‐volume hydration, 4 investigated magnesium supplementation, and 7 reviewed forced diuresis with hydration. Short‐duration and lower‐volume hydration regimens are effective in preventing cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity. Magnesium supplementation may have a role as a nephroprotectant, and forced diuresis may be appropriate in some patients receiving cisplatin.
Conclusion
Hydration is essential for all patients to prevent cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity. Specifically, short‐duration, low‐volume, outpatient hydration with magnesium supplementation and mannitol forced diuresis (in select patients) represent best practice principles for the safe use of cisplatin.
Implications for Practice
The findings contained within this systematic review show that (a) hydration is essential for all patients to prevent cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity, (b) short‐duration, low‐volume, outpatient hydration regimens appear to be safe and feasible, even in patients receiving intermediate‐ to high‐dose cisplatin, (c) magnesium supplementation (8–16 milliequivalents) may limit cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity, and (d) mannitol may be considered for high‐dose cisplatin and/or patients with preexisting hypertension. These findings have broad implications for clinical practice and represent best practice principles for the prevention of cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity.
Various hydration regimens and supplementation strategies are used to prevent cisplatin‐induced kidney injury; however, evidence‐based recommendations on specific hydration regimens are limited. This systematic review of the literature evaluates clinical studies that have examined hydration and supplementation strategies to prevent cisplatin‐induced nephrotoxicity.
Patients with treatment-naïve metastatic urothelial carcinoma are grouped according to platinum eligibility based on clear definitions. In general, first-line treatment consists of platinum-based ...chemotherapy in which cisplatin is to be preferred to carboplatin. Patients who are cisplatin ineligible but carboplatin eligible should receive carboplatin-gemcitabine combination chemotherapy. In case of positive programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (atezolizumab or pembrolizumab) could be an alternative option.
Patients unfit for both cisplatin and carboplatin (platinum unfit) can be considered for immunotherapy (U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved irrespective of PD-L1 status and European Medicines Agency approved only for PD-L1 positive) or can receive best supportive care.
Treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma is currently undergoing a rapid evolution.
This overview presents the updated European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
A comprehensive scoping exercise covering the topic of metastatic urothelial carcinoma is performed annually by the Guidelines Panel. Databases covered by the search included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries, resulting in yearly guideline updates.
Platinum-based chemotherapy is the recommended first-line standard therapy for all patients fit to receive either cisplatin or carboplatin. Patients positive for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and ineligible for cisplatin may receive immunotherapy (atezolizumab or pembrolizumab). In case of nonprogressive disease on platinum-based chemotherapy, subsequent maintenance immunotherapy (avelumab) is recommended. For patients without maintenance therapy, the recommended second-line regimen is immunotherapy (pembrolizumab). Later-line treatment has undergone recent advances: the antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin demonstrated improved overall survival and the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor erdafitinib appears active in case of FGFR3 alterations.
This 2021 update of the EAU guideline provides detailed and contemporary information on the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma for incorporation into clinical practice.
In recent years, several new treatment options have been introduced for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (including bladder cancer and cancer of the upper urinary tract and urethra). These include immunotherapy and targeted treatments. This updated guideline informs clinicians and patients about optimal tailoring of treatment of affected patients.
Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC); however, toxicity is substantial, responses are rarely durable, ...and many patients with la/mUC are ineligible. Each enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab have shown a survival benefit versus chemotherapy in UC, are not restricted by cisplatin eligibility, and warrant investigation as a first-line (1L) combination therapy in patients ineligible for cisplatin.
In this ongoing phase Ib/II, multicenter, open-label study, 1L cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC received enfortumab vedotin 1.25 mg/kg once daily on days 1 and 8 and pembrolizumab 200 mg (day 1) intravenously once daily in 3-week cycles. The primary end point was safety. Key secondary end points included confirmed objective response rate, duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS).
Forty-five patients received enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (55.6%), fatigue (51.1%), and alopecia (48.9%). Twenty-nine patients (64.4%) had grade 3 or higher TRAEs; the most common were increased lipase (17.8%), maculopapular rash (11.1%), and fatigue (11.1%). One death (2.2%) was classified as a TRAE. The confirmed objective response rate after a median of nine cycles was 73.3% with a complete response rate of 15.6%. The median DOR and median OS were 25.6 months and 26.1 months, respectively.
Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab showed a manageable safety profile. Most patients experienced tumor shrinkage. The median DOR and median OS exceeding 2 years in a cisplatin-ineligible patient population make this a promising combination currently under investigation in a phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04223856).
To endorse the European Association of Urology guideline on muscle-invasive (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures ...for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations.
The guideline on MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. The ASCO Endorsement Panel then reviewed the content and recommendations.
The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the European Association of Urology guideline on MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer, published online in March 2015, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorses the guideline on MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer and has added qualifying statements, including highlighting the use of chemoradiotherapy for select patients with MIBC and recommending a preference for clinical trials in the treatment of metastatic disease in the second-line setting.
Multidisciplinary care for patients with MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer is critical. The standard treatment of MIBC (cT2-T4a N0M0) is neoadjuvant cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy. In cisplatin-ineligible patients, radical cystectomy alone is recommended. Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy may be offered to high-risk patients who have not received neoadjuvant therapy. Chemoradiotherapy may be offered as an alternative to cystectomy in appropriately selected patients with MIBC and in some patients for whom cystectomy is not an option. Metastatic disease should be treated with cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy or with carboplatin combination chemotherapy or single agents in patients ineligible for cisplatin.Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/endorsements/MIBC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.
Health-related quality of life (QOL) has not been well-studied in survivors of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). The present study compared long-term QOL in MIBC patients treated with radical ...cystectomy (RC) versus bladder-sparing trimodality therapy (TMT).
This cross-sectional bi-institutional study identified 226 patients with nonmetastatic cT2-cT4 MIBC, diagnosed in 1990 to 2011, who were eligible for RC and were disease free for ≥2 years. Six validated QOL instruments were administered: EuroQOL EQ-5D, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Core Questionnaire and EORTC MIBC module, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite bowel scale, Cancer Treatment and Perception Scale, and Impact of Cancer, version 2. Multivariable analyses of the mean QOL scores were conducted using propensity score matching.
The response rate was 77% (n=173). The median follow-up period was 5.6 years. Of the 173 patients, 64 received TMT and 109, RC. The median interval from diagnosis to questionnaire completion was 9 years after TMT and 7 years after RC (P=.009). No significant differences were found in age, gender, comorbidities, tobacco history, performance status, or tumor stage. On multivariable analysis, patients who received TMT had better general QOL by 9.7 points of 100 compared with those who had received RC (P=.001) and higher physical, role, social, emotional, and cognitive functioning by 6.6 to 9.9 points (P≤.04). TMT was associated with better bowel function by 4.5 points (P=.02) and fewer bowel symptoms by 2.7 to 7.1 points (P≤.05). The urinary symptom scores were similar. TMT was associated with better sexual function by 8.7 to 32.1 points (P≤.02) and body image by 14.8 points (P<.001). The patients who underwent TMT reported greater informed decision-making scores by 13.6 points (P=.01) and less concern about the negative effect of cancer by 6.8 points (P=.006). The study limitations included missing baseline QOL data and different follow-up times.
Both TMT and RC result in good long-term QOL outcomes in MIBC survivors, supporting TMT as a good alternative to RC for selected patients. Whether TMT leads to superior QOL requires prospective validation.
We sought to define whether there are intrinsic molecular subtypes of high-grade bladder cancer. Consensus clustering performed on gene expression data from a meta-dataset of high-grade, ...muscle-invasive bladder tumors identified two intrinsic, molecular subsets of high-grade bladder cancer, termed "luminal" and "basal-like," which have characteristics of different stages of urothelial differentiation, reflect the luminal and basal-like molecular subtypes of breast cancer, and have clinically meaningful differences in outcome. A gene set predictor, bladder cancer analysis of subtypes by gene expression (BASE47) was defined by prediction analysis of microarrays (PAM) and accurately classifies the subtypes. Our data demonstrate that there are at least two molecularly and clinically distinct subtypes of high-grade bladder cancer and validate the BASE47 as a subtype predictor. Future studies exploring the predictive value of the BASE47 subtypes for standard of care bladder cancer therapies, as well as novel subtype-specific therapies, will be of interest.
Standard management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer involves radical cystectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection. However, patients may be ineligible for surgery or may wish to avoid the morbidity ...of cystectomy due to quality of life concerns. Bladder preservation therapies have emerged as alternatives treatment options that can provide comparable oncologic outcomes while maintaining patients' quality of life.
To review bladder preservation therapies, patient selection criteria, and functional and oncologic outcomes for BPT in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
We conducted a comprehensive literature review of bladder preservation therapies in Pubmed and Embase.
The ideal patient for BPT has low-volume T2 disease, absence of CIS, absence of hydronephrosis, and a maximal TURBT with regular surveillance. Technological advancements involving cancer staging, TURBT technique, and chemotherapy and radiation therapy regimens have improved BPT outcomes, with oncologic outcomes now comparable to those of radical cystectomy. Advancements in BPT also includes a heightened focus on improving quality of life for patients undergoing bladder preservation. Preservation strategies with most evidence for use include trimodality therapy and partial cystectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection.
This review highlights the breadth of strategies that aim to preserve a patient's bladder while still optimizing local tumor control and overall survival. Future areas for innovation include the use of predictive biomarkers and implementation of immunotherapy, moving the field towards patient-tailored care.
Provide evidence- and expert-based recommendations for optimal use of imaging in advanced prostate cancer. Due to increases in research and utilization of novel imaging for advanced prostate cancer, ...this guideline is intended to outline techniques available and provide recommendations on appropriate use of imaging for specified patient subgroups.
An Expert Panel was convened with members from ASCO and the Society of Abdominal Radiology, American College of Radiology, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, American Urological Association, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Urologic Oncology to conduct a systematic review of the literature and develop an evidence-based guideline on the optimal use of imaging for advanced prostate cancer. Representative index cases of various prostate cancer disease states are presented, including suspected high-risk disease, newly diagnosed treatment-naïve metastatic disease, suspected recurrent disease after local treatment, and progressive disease while undergoing systemic treatment. A systematic review of the literature from 2013 to August 2018 identified fully published English-language systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses, reports of rigorously conducted phase III randomized controlled trials that compared ≥ 2 imaging modalities, and noncomparative studies that reported on the efficacy of a single imaging modality.
A total of 35 studies met inclusion criteria and form the evidence base, including 17 systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis and 18 primary research articles.
One or more of these imaging modalities should be used for patients with advanced prostate cancer: conventional imaging (defined as computed tomography CT, bone scan, and/or prostate magnetic resonance imaging MRI) and/or next-generation imaging (NGI), positron emission tomography PET, PET/CT, PET/MRI, or whole-body MRI) according to the clinical scenario.
PDF
