1
|
Raggi D, Giannatempo P, Marandino L, Pierantoni F, Maruzzo M, Lipari H, Banna GL, De Giorgi U, Casadei C, Naglieri E, Buti S, Bersanelli M, Stellato M, Santini D, Vignani F, Roviello G, Veccia A, Caffo O, Losanno T, Calabrò F, Mucciarini C, Pignata S, Necchi A, Maio MD. Role of Bone Metastases in Patients Receiving Immunotherapy for Pre-Treated Urothelial Carcinoma: The Multicentre, Retrospective Meet-URO-1 Bone Study. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2022; 20:155-164. [PMID: 35000876 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2021.12.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Revised: 12/06/2021] [Accepted: 12/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Considerable numbers of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) develop bone metastases (BoM). Their impact on the efficacy of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is not yet investigated. METHODS Between July 2014 and August 2020 data on pts treated with single-agent ICIs after failure of at least 1 previous line of chemotherapy for advanced disease, were retrospectively collected across 14 Italian centers. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analysis was performed evaluating potential prognostic factors for OS and PFS. Each factor was evaluated in univariable (UVA) and multivariable analysis (MVA). RESULTS A total of 208 evaluable patients treated with ICIs were identified, including 122 (59%) without BoM (BoM-) and 86 (41%) with bone metastases (BoM+). After a median follow-up of 22.3 months, BoM+ patients showed shorter OS (median 3.9 vs 7.8 months, HR 1.59 [95%CI, 1.15-2.20], P = .005) and shorter PFS (median 2.0 vs 2.6 months, HR 1.76 [95%CI, 1.31-2.37], P < .001). Probability of being alive was 62% vs 40% after 6 months, 38% vs 23% after 1 year and 24% vs 13% after 2 years, in BoM- and BoM+ respectively. Within each Bellmunt score, OS and PFS of BoM+ patients were shorter. Both presence of BoM and higher Bellmunt risk score were significantly associated with shorter OS and PFS in UVA and MVA. CONCLUSION Patients treated with single-agent ICIs for BoM+ mUC have a dismal prognosis compared to BoM-. Further research is needed to understand the mechanism behind these outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniele Raggi
- Department of Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
| | - Patrizia Giannatempo
- Department of Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Laura Marandino
- Department of Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Marco Maruzzo
- Department of Oncology, Istituto Oncologico Veneto, Padova, Italy
| | - Helga Lipari
- Department of Oncology, Medical Oncology Cannizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy
| | - Giuseppe L Banna
- Department of Oncology, Medical Oncology Cannizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy
| | - Ugo De Giorgi
- Department of Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST), Meldola, Italy
| | - Chiara Casadei
- Department of Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST), Meldola, Italy
| | - Emanuele Naglieri
- Department of Oncology, Policlinico di Bari Ospedale Giovanni XXIII, Bari, Italy
| | - Sebastiano Buti
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | | | - Marco Stellato
- Department of Oncology, Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy
| | - Daniele Santini
- Department of Oncology, Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Vignani
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, Mauriziano Umberto I Hospital, Turin, Italy
| | | | | | - Orazio Caffo
- Department of Oncology, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy
| | - Tania Losanno
- Department of Oncology, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Calabrò
- Department of Oncology, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Sandro Pignata
- Department of Urology and Gynecology, Oncologia Medica Uro-Ginecologica, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, Napoli, Italy
| | - Andrea Necchi
- Deptartment of Oncology from Vita-Salute University IRCCS San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Massimo Di Maio
- Department of Oncology, University of Turin, Mauriziano Umberto I Hospital, Turin, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stellato M, Santini D, Cursano MC, Foderaro S, Tonini G, Procopio G. Bone metastases from urothelial carcinoma. The dark side of the moon. J Bone Oncol 2021; 31:100405. [PMID: 34934613 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbo.2021.100405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2021] [Revised: 11/01/2021] [Accepted: 11/24/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Bone metastases are common in genitourinary cancers, but they are underreported and not well researched. Synchronous bone metastases occur in 1.39-5.5% of bladder cancer patients, while 30-40% of cases are metachronous. Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) play a key role in regulating proliferation, migration and invasion of tumor cells in bone microenvironment of bone metastases from metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Bone metastases represent a poor prognostic factor due to high morbidity and mortality correlated to skeletal-related events (SREs). The incidence rate of SREs in bladder, renal pelvis, and ureteral cancer varies from 39 to 68%. Radiotherapy is the most frequent treatment for SREs. The early use of bone targeted therapies (BTT), zoledronic acid and denosumab, improves SREs incidence and morbidity and it seems to improve overall survival (OS). To date, several new agents (immunotherapy and targeted drugs) demonstrated efficacy in mUC. However, subgroup analysis for bone metastases is often not available, due to difficulties in analysing bone samples, non-RECIST lesions and delay in systemic treatment due to SREs that limit the enrolment of bone mUC patients in clinical trials. Larger solid tumor studies that included UC patients are the main source of data for the management of mUC patients with bone metastases. For these patients, multidisciplinary approach should be preferred, involving orthopaedics, radiotherapists and rehabilitation to improve outcome and quality of life. New prospective trials should characterize clinical and molecular features of patients with bone metastases and the impact of new drugs on this poor prognostic metastatic site.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco Stellato
- Department of Medical Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Rome, Italy.,Meet-URO: Italian Network For Research In Urologic-Oncology, Italy
| | - Daniele Santini
- Department of Medical Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Rome, Italy.,Meet-URO: Italian Network For Research In Urologic-Oncology, Italy
| | - Maria Concetta Cursano
- Department of Medical Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Rome, Italy.,Meet-URO: Italian Network For Research In Urologic-Oncology, Italy
| | - Simone Foderaro
- Department of Medical Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Rome, Italy.,Meet-URO: Italian Network For Research In Urologic-Oncology, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Tonini
- Department of Medical Oncology, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Rome, Italy.,Meet-URO: Italian Network For Research In Urologic-Oncology, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Procopio
- Medical Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.,Meet-URO: Italian Network For Research In Urologic-Oncology, Italy
| |
Collapse
|