To improve the prognosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), clinicians have used neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) before or after radical nephroureterectomy ...(RNU). Despite some new data, the evidence remains mixed on their efficacy.
To update the current evidence on the role of NAC and AC for UTUC.
We searched for all studies investigating NAC or AC for UTUC in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings up to February 2020. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.
For NAC, the pooled pathologic complete response rate (≤ypT0N0M0) was 11% (n = 811) and pathologic partial response rate (≤ypT1N0M0) was 43% (n = 869), both across 14 studies. Across six studies, the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.44 (95% confidence interval CI: 0.32–0.59, p < 0.001) for overall survival (OS) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.24–0.61, p < 0.001) for cancer-specific survival (CSS) in favor of NAC. The evidence for NAC is at best level 2. As for AC, there was a benefit in OS (pooled HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64–0.92, p = 0.004 across 14 studies and 7983 patients), CSS (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69–0.91, p = 0.001 across 18 studies and 5659 patients), and disease-free survival (DFS; pooled HR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38–0.70 across four studies and 602 patients). While most studies were retrospective (level 2 evidence), there were two prospective randomized trials providing level 1 evidence. There are currently four phase 2 trials on neoadjuvant immunotherapy and three phase 2 trials on adjuvant immunotherapy for UTUC.
NAC for UTUC confers a favorable pathologic response and tumor downstaging rate, and an OS and CSS benefit compared with RNU alone. AC confers an OS, CSS, and DFS benefit compared with RNU alone. Currently, the evidence for AC appears stronger (with positive level 1 evidence) than that for NAC (at best level 2 evidence). Limited data are available for chemoimmunotherapy approaches, but preliminary data support an active research investment.
After a comprehensive search of the latest studies examining the role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial cancer, the pooled evidence shows that perioperative chemotherapy was beneficial for prolonging survival; however, the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy was stronger than that for neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma found to confer survival benefit over radical nephroureterectomy alone. Evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy appears stronger, while that for immunotherapy is promising.
Platinum-based chemotherapy is standard-of-care first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma. However, progression-free survival and overall survival are limited by chemotherapy resistance.
...In a phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer who did not have disease progression with first-line chemotherapy (four to six cycles of gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin) to receive best supportive care with or without maintenance avelumab. The primary end point was overall survival, assessed among all patients who underwent randomization (overall population) and among those with tumors positive for programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1). Secondary end points included progression-free survival and safety.
Among all 700 patients who underwent randomization, the addition of maintenance avelumab to best supportive care significantly prolonged overall survival as compared with best supportive care alone (control). Overall survival at 1 year was 71.3% in the avelumab group and 58.4% in the control group (median overall survival, 21.4 months vs. 14.3 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.69; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.56 to 0.86; P = 0.001). Avelumab also significantly prolonged overall survival in the PD-L1-positive population; overall survival at 1 year was 79.1% in the avelumab group and 60.4% in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.79; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 3.7 months in the avelumab group and 2.0 months in the control group in the overall population (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.75) and 5.7 months and 2.1 months, respectively, in the PD-L1-positive population (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.73). The incidence of adverse events from any cause was 98.0% in the avelumab group and 77.7% in the control group; the incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher was 47.4% and 25.2%, respectively.
Maintenance avelumab plus best supportive care significantly prolonged overall survival, as compared with best supportive care alone, among patients with urothelial cancer who had disease that had not progressed with first-line chemotherapy. (Funded by Pfizer and Merck Darmstadt, Germany; JAVELIN Bladder 100 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02603432.).
Despite recent advances, advanced-stage urothelial carcinoma (aUC) remains incurable, with 5-year survival rates of approximately 10%. Platinum-based chemotherapy has a major role as first-line ...therapy for most patients with aUC. The approval of the anti-PD-L1 antibody avelumab as maintenance therapy for patients without initial disease progression on platinum-based chemotherapy is an important development that has improved the survival outcomes of patients with this disease. Otherwise, the use of first-line immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-1 or PD-L1 has been restricted to patients who are ineligible for platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens. Other important developments include the FDA-accelerated approval of first-line enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab for patients ineligible to receive cisplatin and the availability of FGFR inhibitors, enfortumab vedotin and sacituzumab govitecan for subsequent lines of therapy. Several research questions remain unaddressed including the lack of adequate biomarkers, how to assign priority to the different treatment options for individual patients and which agents can be effective as monotherapies. The future is promising with the emergence of modalities such as antibody-drug conjugate-like drugs, next-generation ICIs, bispecific antibodies and cellular therapies. In this Review, we summarize the evolution of systemic therapy for patients with aUC and provide insights into the unmet needs.
JCO
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
= .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.
Metastatic papillary renal cancer (PRC) has poor outcomes, and new treatments are required. There is a strong rationale for investigating mesenchymal epithelial transition receptor (MET) and ...programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibition in this disease. In this study, the combination of savolitinib (MET inhibitor) and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) is investigated.
This single-arm phase II trial explored durvalumab (1,500 mg once every four weeks) and savolitinib (600 mg once daily; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02819596). Treatment-naïve or previously treated patients with metastatic PRC were included. A confirmed response rate (cRR) of > 50% was the primary end point. Progression-free survival, tolerability, and overall survival were secondary end points. Biomarkers were explored from archived tissue (MET-driven status).
Forty-one patients treated with advanced PRC were enrolled into this study and received at least one dose of study treatment. The majority of patients had Heng intermediate risk score (n = 26 63%). The cRR was 29% (n = 12; 95% CI, 16 to 46), and the trial therefore missed the primary end point. The cRR increased to 53% (95% CI, 28 to 77) in MET-driven patients (n/N = 9/27) and was 33% (95% CI, 17 to 54) in PD-L1-positive tumors (n/N = 9/27). The median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10.0) in the treated population and 12.0 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 19.4) in MET-driven patients. The median overall survival was 14.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 30.7) in the treated population and 27.4 months (95% CI, 9.3 to not reached NR) in MET-driven patients. Grade 3 and above treatment related adverse events occurred in 17 (41%) patients. There was 1 grade 5 treatment-related adverse event (cerebral infarction).
The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab was tolerable and associated with high cRRs in the exploratory MET-driven subset.
Molecular subtyping of bladder cancer has revealed luminal tumors generally have a more favourable prognosis. However, some aggressive forms of variant histology, including micropapillary, are often ...classified luminal. In previous work, we found long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) expression profiles could identify a subgroup of luminal bladder tumors with less aggressive biology and better outcomes.
In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether lncRNA expression profiles could identify high-grade T1 micropapillary bladder cancer with differential outcome.
LncRNAs were quantified from RNA-seq data from a HGT1 bladder cancer cohort that was enriched for primary micropapillary cases (15/84). Unsupervised consensus clustering of variant lncRNAs identified a three-cluster solution, which was further characterised using a panel of micropapillary-associated biomarkers, molecular subtypes, gene signatures, and survival analysis. A single-sample genomic signature was trained using lasso-penalized logistic regression to classify micropapillary-like gene-expression, as characterised by lncRNA clustering. The genomic classifier (GC) was tested on luminal tumors derived from the TCGA cohort (N = 202).
Patient and tumor characteristics were compared between subgroups by using X
tests and two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Primary endpoints were overall, progression-free and high-grade recurrence-free survival, calculated as the date of high-grade T1 disease at TURBT till date of death from any cause, progression, or recurrence, respectively. Survival rates were estimated using weighted Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves.
Primary micropapillary HGT1 showed decreased FGFR3, SHH, and p53 pathway activity relative to tumors with conventional urothelial carcinoma. Many bladder cancer-associated lncRNAs were downregulated in micropapillary tumors, including UCA1, LINC00152, and MALAT1. Unsupervised consensus clustering resulted in a lncRNA cluster 1 (LC1) with worse prognosis that was enriched for primary micropapillary histology and the Luminal Unstable (LumU) molecular subtype. Interestingly, LC1 appeared to better identify aggressive HGT1 disease, compared to stratifying outcomes using primary histologic characteristics. A signature trained to identify LC1 cases showed good performance in the testing cohort, identifying seven cases with significantly worse survival (p < 0.001). Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and the lack of a validation cohort.
Using the lncRNA transcriptome we identified a subgroup of aggressive HGT1 bladder cancer that was enriched with micropapillary histology. These data suggest that lncRNAs can facilitate the identification of aggressive micropapillary-like tumors, potentially improving patient management.
In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial of avelumab first-line maintenance + best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma, analyses of overall survival ...and progression-free survival in various clinical subgroups were consistent with results for the overall population.
In the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial, avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance + 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 following 1L platinum-based chemotherapy, leading to regulatory approval in various countries.
To analyze clinically relevant subgroups from JAVELIN Bladder 100.
Patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic UC without progression on 1L gemcitabine + cisplatin or carboplatin were randomized to receive avelumab + BSC (n = 350) or BSC alone (n = 350). Median follow-up was >19 mo in both arms (data cutoff October 21, 2019). This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02603432.
OS (primary endpoint) and PFS were analyzed in protocol-specified and post hoc subgroups using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models.
Hazard ratios (HRs) for OS with avelumab + BSC versus BSC alone were <1.0 across all subgroups examined, including patients treated with 1L cisplatin + gemcitabine (HR 0.69, 95% confidence interval CI 0.50–0.93) or carboplatin + gemcitabine (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46–0.90), patients with PD-L1+ tumors treated with carboplatin + gemcitabine (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39–1.14), and patients whose best response to chemotherapy was a complete response (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.46–1.37), partial response (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46–0.84), or stable disease (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46–1.06). Observations were similar for PFS. Limitations include the smaller size and post hoc evaluation without multiplicity adjustment for some subgroups.
Analyses of OS and PFS in clinically relevant subgroups were consistent with results for the overall population, further supporting avelumab 1L maintenance as standard-of-care treatment for patients with aUC who are progression-free following 1L platinum-based chemotherapy.
In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 study, maintenance treatment with avelumab helped many different groups of people with advanced cancer of the urinary tract to live longer.
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.
We analyzed disease-free survival by tumor cell score and combined positive score for PD-L1 expression in CheckMate 274. The results provide insights into the role of adjuvant nivolumab in patients ...with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma who have low PD-L1 expression according to tumor cell score.
The CheckMate 274 trial demonstrated improved disease-free survival (DFS) with adjuvant nivolumab versus placebo in patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after radical surgery in both the intent-to-treat population and the subset with tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥1%.
To analyze DFS by combined positive score (CPS), which is based on PD-L1 expression in both tumor and immune cells.
We randomized a total of 709 patients 1:1 to nivolumab 240 mg or placebo every 2 wk intravenously for ≤1 yr of adjuvant treatment.
Nivolumab 240 mg.
Primary endpoints were DFS in the intent-to-treat population and patients with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥1% using the tumor cell (TC) score. CPS was determined retrospectively from previously stained slides. Tumor samples with both quantifiable CPS and TC were analyzed.
Of 629 patients evaluable for CPS and TC, 557 (89%) had CPS ≥1, 72 (11%) had CPS <1, 249 (40%) had TC ≥1%, and 380 (60%) had TC <1%. Among patients with TC <1%, 81% (n = 309) had CPS ≥1. DFS was improved with nivolumab versus placebo for patients with TC ≥1% (hazard ratio HR 0.50, 95% confidence interval CI 0.35–0.71), those with CPS ≥1 (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49–0.78), and patients with both TC <1% and CPS ≥1 (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54–0.99).
More patients had CPS ≥1 than TC ≥1%, and most patients who had TC <1% had CPS ≥1. In addition, patients with CPS ≥1 experienced improved DFS with nivolumab. These results may, in part, explain the mechanisms underlying a benefit with adjuvant nivolumab even in patients who had both TC <1% and CPS ≥1.
We studied survival time without cancer recurrence (disease-free survival; DFS) for patients treated with nivolumab versus placebo after surgery to remove the bladder or components of the urinary tract for bladder cancer in the CheckMate 274 trial. We assessed the impact of levels of the protein PD-L1 expressed either on tumor cells (tumor cell score; TC) or on both tumor cells and immune cells surrounding the tumor (combined positive score; CPS). DFS was impoved with nivolumab versus placebo for patients with TC ≥1%, CPS ≥1, and for patients with both TC <1% and CPS ≥1. This analysis may help physicians understand which patients would benefit most from treatment with nivolumab.
PDF
