Advances in Diagnosis and Therapy for Bladder Cancer

Simple Summary

The clinical management of bladder cancer has been developing in the past decade, including diagnostic tools and treatment options. Both monotherapy and combination therapy have been undoubtedly upgraded. Multiple diagnostic techniques and therapeutic strategies have been developed to meet the urgent clinical needs, resulting in the emergence of various explorations for cancer diagnosis and therapy. In this review, we mainly focus on the advances in the diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer.

Abstract

Bladder cancer (BCa) is one of the most common and expensive urinary system malignancies for its high recurrence and progression rate. In recent years, immense amounts of studies have been carried out to bring a more comprehensive cognition and numerous promising clinic approaches for BCa therapy. The development of innovative enhanced cystoscopy techniques (optical techniques, imaging systems) and tumor biomarkers-based non-invasive urine screening (DNA methylation-based urine test) would dramatically improve the accuracy of tumor detection, reducing the risk of recurrence and progression of BCa. Moreover, intravesical instillation and systemic therapeutic strategies (cocktail therapy, immunotherapy, vaccine therapy, targeted therapy) also provide plentiful measures to break the predicament of BCa. Several exploratory clinical studies, including novel surgical approaches, pharmaceutical compositions, and bladder preservation techniques, emerged continually, which are supposed to be promising candidates for BCa clinical treatment. Here, recent advances and prospects of diagnosis, intravesical or systemic treatment, and novel drug delivery systems for BCa therapy are reviewed in this paper.

A Single-arm Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Cabazitaxel and Cisplatin Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Transitional Cell Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy improves survival in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. However, response rates and survival remain suboptimal. We evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cisplatin plus cabazitaxel.

METHODS

A phase II single-arm trial was designed to recruit at least 26 evaluable patients. This would give 80% power to detect the primary endpoint, an objective response rate defined as a pathologic complete response plus partial response (pathologic downstaging), measured by pathologic staging at cystectomy (p₀ = 0.35 and p₁ = 0.60, α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Objective response was seen in 15 of 26 evaluable patients (57.7%) and more than one- third of patients achieved a pathologic complete response (9/26; 34.6%). Seventy-eight percent of the patients (21/27) completed all cycles of treatment, with only 6.7% of the reported adverse events being graded 3 or 4. There were 6 treatment-related serious adverse event reported, but no suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions. In the patients who achieved an objective response, the median progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached (median follow-up of 41.5 months). In contrast, the median progression-free survival (7.2 months) and overall survival (16.9 months) were significantly worse (P = .001, log-rank) in patients who did not achieve an objective response.

CONCLUSION

Cabazitaxel plus cisplatin for neoadjuvant treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer can be considered a well-tolerated and effective regimen before definitive therapy with higher rates (57.7%) of objective response, comparing favorably to that with of cisplatin/gemcitabine (23%-26%). These results warrant further evaluation in a phase III study.

Systemic treatment for advanced urothelial cancer: an update on recent clinical trials and current treatment options

After cisplatin-based chemotherapy became the standard treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), very little progress has been made in the treatment landscape of this condition until recently. With increased knowledge about the molecular biology of mUC and advances in the field of cancer immunobiology, there has been an explosion in the number of clinical trials for mUC, and systemic treatment of mUC is rapidly changing. Despite the availability of several novel therapeutic agents, cisplatin-based cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the standard, first-line treatment option. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including programmed death-1 and programmed death ligand-1 inhibitors, are preferred second-line treatment options that are also used in first-line cisplatin-ineligible settings. For patients with actionable fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) or FGFR3 genomic alterations, erdafitinib can be considered after platinum-based treatment. Enfortumab vedotin, a monoclonal antibody targeting nectin-4 conjugated to monomethyl auristatin E, has been approved for patients who do not respond to both cytotoxic chemotherapy and ICIs. In this review, we address the clinical trial data that have established the current standard treatments and ongoing clinical trials of various agents with different mechanisms as well as provide a brief overview of current practice guidelines and recommendations in patients with mUC.

Second-line treatment strategy for urothelial cancer patients who progress or are unfit for cisplatin therapy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Second-line treatment for urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients is used if progression or failure after platinum-based chemotherapy occurs or if patients are cisplatin-unfit. However, there is still no widely accepted treatment strategy. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness and safety of second-line treatment strategies for UC patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included UC patients who were cisplatin-ineligible or unfit up to April 19, 2019. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Thirteen trials that assessed 3502 UC patients were included. This study divided the network comparisons into three parts. The first part contained studies comparing taxanes and other interventions; the second part assessed investigator's choice chemotherapy (ICC)-related comparisons; and the third part assessed best support care (BSC). In the OS results of the first part, pembrolizumab (87.5%), ramucirumab plus docetaxel (74.6%), and atezolizumab (71.1%) had a relative advantage. Pembrolizumab also had advantages in ORR and severe adverse effect (SAE) results. Vinflunine and ramucirumab plus docetaxel had a relatively high surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) rank by exploratory cluster analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concluded that atezolizumab and pembrolizumab are superior to other treatments, mainly in OS results, but no treatment confers a significant advantage in PFS. Pembrolizumab still has relative advantages in ORR and SAE results compared to ICC. Due to limitations, more studies are necessary to confirm the conclusions.

Molecular and histopathology directed therapy for advanced bladder cancer

Bladder cancer is a heterogeneous group of tumours with at least 40 histological subgroups. Patients with localized disease can be cured with surgical resection or radiotherapy, but such curative options are limited in the setting of recurrent disease or distant spread, in which case systemic therapy is used to control disease and palliate symptoms. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has been the mainstay of treatment for advanced bladder cancer, but high-quality evidence is lacking to inform the management of rare subgroups that are often excluded from studies. Advances in molecular pathology, the development of targeted therapies and the resurgence of immunotherapy have led to the reclassification of bladder cancer subgroups and rigorous efforts to define predictive biomarkers for cancer therapies. In this Review, we present the current evidence for the management of conventional, variant and divergent urothelial cancer subtypes, as well as non-urothelial bladder cancers, and discuss how the integration of genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic characterization of bladder cancer could guide future therapies.

Vinflunine in the treatment of relapsed metastatic urothelial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world series

BACKGROUND

Vinflunine (VFL) is approved in Europe as second-line treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer after failure of platinum-containing therapy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world data (RWD) to assess utilization, efficacy and safety of VFL.

METHODS

We performed a MEDLINE search for the period of 1/1/2000-31/8/2017. Full-length articles providing post-marketing RWD on VFL in patients failing previous chemotherapy were eligible. Interventional clinical trials were excluded.

RESULTS

Ten studies with 797 patients were identified. According to pooled REs analysis, overall response rate was 19%, most frequent, all-grade toxicities were fatigue (41%), constipation (39%), nausea/vomiting (25%), and most prevalent Grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (13%), anaemia (9%), fatigue (8%). Median OS was comparable to results reported in recent randomized studies.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm the efficacy and safety of VFL in an unselected population and support the use of VFL in the changing treatment paradigm of relapsed mUC.

[Care of advanced or metastatic bladder cancer in second line: A specific place for vinflunine]

Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder are rare but aggressive tumors with a high metastatic potential. The prognosis of these tumors has not drastically changed over the past 30 years, with an overall survival of less than two years in advanced or metastatic situations. Even though immune checkpoints inhibitors have changed this picture, it is beneficial for less than 30% of patients and there is no reliable biomarkers to identify this specific population of responders. Vinflunine is a vinca-alkaloid that was specifically developed as second line treatment post-platinum. As of today, it is the sole anticancer agent for which clinical trials have been pushed to phase III and that was approved for patients in good conditions. Unfortunately, it has been withdrawn from the list of reimbursed drugs, which impairs its prescription. Based on the results of phase III clinical trials with immunotherapies, this review provides the reader with argumentations in favor of patients' and clinicians' request to reimburse vinflunine for the treatment of advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.

Second-line therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Defining the best treatment option among immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and antiangiogenic targeted therapies. A systematic review and meta-analysis

There is no second-line standard of care universally accepted for platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Immunotherapy and anti-VEGF(R) targeted therapies are 2 emerging strategies with promising though inconclusive results. We perform a systematic meta-analysis to assess the available options. We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and American society of clinical oncology (ASCO) Meeting abstracts to identify prospective studies. Data extraction was conduced according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The measured outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Seven randomized controlled trials were selected for final analysis, with a total of 2,451 evaluable patients. Chemotherapy with vinflunine did not reduce the risk of progression (HR = 1.11; 95%CI 0.78-1.57; P = .56) or death (HR = 0.97; 95%CI 0.70-1.34; P = .87) compared to taxanes. Immunotherapy with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAb improved OS over chemotherapy (HR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.71-0.92; P<.0009). The OS benefit of immunotherapy was retained when compared to taxanes, but not compared to vinflunine, although without a significant difference between the 2 subgroups (P = .30). A lack of PFS (HR = 0.73; P = .08) and OS (HR = 1.0; P = .99) benefit was observed with an anti-VEGF(R) plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone. No PFS (P = .14) or OS (P = .13) differences were detected when comparing anti-VEGF(R) ± chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Immunotherapy significantly improved OS compared to chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma unselected for PD-L1 status. The addition of anti-VEGF(R) to chemotherapy did not provide any statistically significant benefit in terms of PFS or OS. Single agent taxanes or vinflunine can be considered given their similar efficacy but different toxicity profiles.

The continuing role of chemotherapy in the management of advanced urothelial cancer

Despite intense drug development in the last decade in metastatic urothelial carcinoma and the incorporation of novel compounds to the treatment armamentarium, chemotherapy remains a key treatment strategy for this disease. Platinum-based combinations are still the backbone of first-line therapy in most cases. The role of chemotherapy in the second line has been more ill-defined due to the complexity of this setting, where patient selection remains critical. Nevertheless, two regimens, one in monotherapy (i.e. vinflunine) and one in combination with antiangiogenics (i.e. docetaxel + ramucirumab) have shown efficacy. Immunotherapy through checkpoint inhibition has revealed remarkably durable benefit in a small proportion of patients in the first and second line and is currently the preferred partner for combinations with chemotherapy. Difficult populations such as patients with liver metastases or those progressing to checkpoint inhibition represent a medical challenge and selective ways of delivering cytotoxics, like the antibody-drug conjugates, might represent a valid alternative. This article reviews the current role of chemotherapy in the management of advanced urothelial carcinoma and the ongoing and coming studies involving this treatment strategy.

Evolution of randomized controlled trials and surrogacy of progression-free survival in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer have been difficult to perform. We review the current characteristics of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and evaluate whether PFS could be a potential surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer.

METHODS

We identified trials by a systematic review of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to April 2017. We included RCTs of patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer that involved systemic therapy as an intervention, and those with reported hazards ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for both OS and PFS, or provided Kaplan-Meier curves from which HRs and 95% CI could be calculated. The correlation coefficient between log of HRs for OS and PFS was calculated using linear regression weighted by sample size.

RESULTS

Forty eight trials that enrolled 7019 patients were included in the review and 24 RCTs were included in the surrogacy analysis. 27(56.3%) of identified 48 RCTs were phase II trials, and the median sample size was 107(range, 30-626) for all RCTs. The correlation coefficient between log HR for PFS and log HR for OS was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.58-0.91). The correlation coefficient increased to 0.87 (95% CI, 0.72-0.94) after excluding the only trial with immune checkpoint inhibitor. Multiple sensitivity analyses did not change the results..aph."/> CONCLUSIONS: PFS is strongly correlated with OS in trials of advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer assessing the treatment benefit of new drugs And PFS warrants further exploration as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trial datasets.

Nivolumab and its use in the second-line treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer

Nivolumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody blocking PD-1 with demonstrated effectiveness against metastatic urothelial carcinoma. In this review, we describe the pharmacological properties of nivolumab and the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma with this checkpoint inhibitor after the failure of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Cancer immunotherapy by checkpoint inhibition offers potential to prolong patient survival with well manageable toxicity although serious immune-related adverse events may occur. The overall response rate to nivolumab after first-line chemotherapy is about 20%. Patients unfit for cisplatin may benefit from first-line cancer immunotherapy. It remains unclear which patient will respond and PD-1/PD-L1 expression alone is not a sufficiently reliable predictive biomarker.

Safety and efficacy of temsirolimus as second line treatment for patients with recurrent bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Bladder cancer is the 7th cause of death from cancer in men and 10th in women. Metastatic patients have a poor prognosis with a median overall survival of 14 months. Until recently, vinflunine was the only second-line chemotherapy available for patients who relapse. Deregulation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway was observed in more than 40% of bladder tumors and suggested the use of mTOR as a target for the treatment of urothelial cancers.

METHODS

This trial assessed the efficacy of temsirolimus in a homogenous cohort of patients with recurrent or metastatic bladder cancer following first-line chemotherapy. Efficacy was measured in terms of non-progression at two months according to the RECIST v1.1 criteria. Based on a two-stage optimal Simon's design, 15 non-progressions out of 51 evaluable patients were required to claim efficacy. Patients were treated at a weekly dose of 25 mg IV until progression, unacceptable toxicities or withdrawal.

RESULTS

Among the 54 patients enrolled in the study between November 2009 and July 2014, 45 were assessable for the primary efficacy endpoint. A total of 22 (48.9%) non-progressions were observed at 2 months with 3 partial responses and 19 stable diseases. Remarkably, 4 patients were treated for more than 30 weeks. Fifty patients experienced at least a related grade1/2 (94%) and twenty-eight patients (52.8%) a related grade 3/4 adverse event. Eleven patients had to stop treatment for toxicity. This led to recruitment being halted by an independent data monitoring committee with regard to the risk-benefit balance and the fact that the primary objective was already met.

CONCLUSIONS

While the positivity of this trial indicates a potential benefit of temsirolimus for a subset of bladder cancer patients who are refractory to first line platinum-based chemotherapy, the risk of adverse events associated with the use of this mTOR inhibitor would need to be considered when such an option is envisaged in this frail population of patients. It also remains to identify patients who will benefit the most from this targeted therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01827943 (trial registration date: October 29, 2012); Retrospectively registered.