Treatment Sequencing Patterns in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Treated in the Community Practice Setting in the United States: SPEAR-Bladder (Study informing treatment Pathway dEcision in bladder cAnceR)

Use of inpatient systemic chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and related predictive factors, healthcare resource utilization, and direct hospitalization costs for metastatic urothelial cancer: findings from a real-world retrospective observational study derived from the national hospital discharge claims database in Italy

BACKGROUND

Recent real-world studies revealed high proportions of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) do not receive any systemic therapy. This study describes the demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment rate and related predictive factors, healthcare resource utilization, and direct medical costs of patients with mUC receiving systemic therapy (or not) in the inpatient setting in Italy.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used the national hospital discharge database (Scheda di Dimissione Ospedaliera) to describe incident adult (≥ 18 years) patients with a first hospitalization for mUC (index) from 2017-2018, identified by a combination of ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification), medical procedure, and diagnosis-related group codes. A model was fitted to identify factors associated with receiving inpatient chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Of 3674 patients with mUC identified, 1014 (27.6%) were treated with inpatient chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and 2660 (72.4%) were not treated. The median age at index was 71 and 78 years for treated and untreated patients, and the mean (SD) Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was 0.3 (0.8) and 0.6 (1.1), respectively. Primary tumor location was the bladder in 87.2% of patients. Cardiovascular disease and renal function impairment were more prevalent in untreated (22.6% and 13.2%) vs treated (16.7% and 7.8%) patients. Older age (odds ratio [p-value]) (0.94 [< 0.001]), female sex (0.82 [0.035]), and higher CCI score (0.82 [< 0.001]) were all associated with a lower likelihood of receiving inpatient systemic treatment. The first year was the costliest: estimated national projected costs during the 36-month follow-up from first hospitalization for mUC were €34.3 million (95% CI, €30.3-€60.0 million) and €31.8 million (95% CI, €28.1-€56.0 million) when estimated after 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate a low rate of inpatient systemic therapy for patients with mUC in Italy (driven by older age, female sex, and high comorbidity burden), with a large economic burden despite a high nontreatment rate. Although this study provides a partial capture of the treatment pathway in Italy, the results are consistent with other European studies with similar designs and highlight the need to better identify the reasons for not administering inpatient systemic chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

Enfortumab vedotin following platinum-based chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced urothelial carcinoma: response, survival and safety analysis from a multicentre real-world Japanese cohort

OBJECTIVE

Real-world evidence regarding enfortumab vedotin for unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma is scarce, particularly in Japan. We investigated real-world data focusing on patient background, previous treatments, response, survival and adverse events in patients receiving enfortumab vedotin.

METHODS

A multicentre database was used to register 556 patients diagnosed with metastatic urothelial carcinoma from 2008 to 2023; 34 patients (6.1%) treated with enfortumab vedotin were included. Best radiographic objective responses were evaluated using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (v1.1) during treatments. Overall survival and progression-free survival were estimated (Kaplan-Meier method). Toxicities were reported according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0. The relative dose intensity, which could impact oncological outcomes, was calculated.

RESULTS

The median number of enfortumab vedotin therapy cycles was 5. The best objective response to enfortumab vedotin was partial response, stable disease and progressive disease in 19 (56%), 5 (15%) and 10 (29%) patients, respectively. The median overall survival and progression-free survival after the first enfortumab vedotin dose were 16 and 9 months, respectively. No significant relationship was observed between survival outcomes after enfortumab vedotin initiation and the enfortumab vedotin relative dose intensity. The median overall survival from first-line platinum-based chemotherapy initiation was 42 months. Twenty-six (76%) patients experienced any grade of enfortumab vedotin-related toxicities; eight (24%) experienced Grades 3-4 toxicities, the most common being skin toxicity (any grade, 47%; Grades 3-4, 12%).

CONCLUSIONS

Here, we report real-world evidence for enfortumab vedotin therapy in Japan. Tumour responses and safety profiles were comparable with those of clinical trials on this novel treatment.

Switch-maintenance avelumab immunotherapy following first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: the first Japanese real-world evidence from a multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To develop the first Japanese real-world evidence of switch-maintenance avelumab in advanced, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (aUC).

METHODS

A multicenter-derived database registered 505 patients diagnosed with aUC between 2008 and 2021. Of these, 204 patients (40%) were selected and stratified according to the type of therapy used: maintenance avelumab group (27 [5.3%]), second-line (2 L) pembrolizumab group (103 [20%]) and 2 L cytotoxic chemotherapy group (74 [15%]). The progression-free survival and overall survival from the initiation of following therapy were compared. Tumor response was evaluated based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors guideline v1.1 during the treatment period. A detailed analysis was performed in the maintenance avelumab group to investigate possible factors associated with response to avelumab therapy.

RESULTS

The maintenance avelumab group had a longer overall survival, not progression-free survival, compared with the other two treatment groups. The median treatment-free interval between the last dose of first-line (1 L) chemotherapy and the initiation of avelumab therapy was 6 weeks (range, 3-22). Disease control rate of maintenance avelumab therapy in patients with a treatment-free interval of ≤6 weeks was higher than that in patients with a treatment-free interval of >6 weeks (77 vs 40%, P = 0.029). The patients showing objective response to 1 L chemotherapy were less likely to experience tumor relapse (4 of 19) after the initiation of avelumab therapy compared with those showing stable disease (7 of 8).

CONCLUSIONS

Objective response to 1 L chemotherapy and early induction of maintenance avelumab therapy may be associated with increased benefit from maintenance avelumab therapy.

Significant Improvement of Prognosis After the Advent of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced, Unresectable, or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching and Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Analysis on Real-World Data

Purpose

The treatment landscape for advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (aUC) has shifted substantially since the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We investigated the extent to which pembrolizumab therapy is superior to conventional chemotherapy as a second-line treatment.

Patients and Methods

A multicenter-derived database registered 454 patients diagnosed with aUC between 2008 and 2020. Of these, 94 patients (21%) who received second-line pembrolizumab and 75 (17%) who received second-line chemotherapy but never received third-line or later ICI therapy were included. We compared overall survival (OS) from the initial date of first-line chemotherapy between two groups by adjusting for prognostic factors through propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval were estimated using a multivariate Cox regression analysis. To identify patients who were more likely to benefit from second-line pembrolizumab than from chemotherapy, we performed a subgroup analysis for OS with an IPTW-adjusted model.

Results

The PSM-adjusted comparison showed a significant improvement in the prognosis with second-line pembrolizumab use (P = 0.01). The OS benefit with the advent of pembrolizumab was 8 months (18 months vs 26 months). Multivariable analyses using IPTW adjustment demonstrated that lymph node metastasis (P = 0.001), lung metastasis (P = 0.013), and bone metastasis (P = 0.003) were poor independent prognostic factors, and pembrolizumab use (P = 0.021) was a favorable independent prognostic factor. Subgroup analyses revealed that pembrolizumab was associated with survival benefits over chemotherapy in all subgroups, including young patients (age <70 years), those who received radical surgery, and those without visceral metastasis.

Conclusion

We demonstrated a significant improvement in prognosis after the advent of pembrolizumab for patients with aUC. ICIs should not be restricted based on patient characteristics.

Real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma in the United States

INTRODUCTION

This large-scale, US-based study characterized real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (aUC).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort analysis included patients with stage IV or node-positive aUC between January 1, 2011, and August 31, 2020, from an electronic health record-derived, de-identified database (Flatiron Health). Baseline characteristics and treatment patterns were assessed by first-line (1L) systemic treatment received and cisplatin eligibility status. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 8,183 patients included, 5,855 (71.6%) received systemic 1L therapy and 2,328 (28.4%) did not. Median (range) follow-up from aUC diagnosis was 9.7 (0.2-116.6) months. Of patients who received 1L systemic therapy, 30.1% were cisplatin-eligible, 39.2% were cisplatin-ineligible, 10.5% did not receive cisplatin despite qualifying ECOG PS and renal function, and cisplatin eligibility was unknown in 20.2%. Of those treated, 74.8% received 1L chemotherapy and 23.0% received 1L immuno-oncology-based monotherapy. Median OS (95% CI) was 14.5 (14.0-15.2) months in patients who received 1L systemic therapy and 6.8 (6.2-7.3) months in those who did not. Of those treated, cisplatin-ineligible patients had worse OS and PFS outcomes vs. other subgroups. Among cisplatin-ineligible patients, 1L immuno-oncology monotherapy (n = 865) was associated with worse OS and PFS outcomes than 1L chemotherapy (n = 1,369).

CONCLUSIONS

More than 25% of aUC patients did not receive 1L systemic therapy; of patients who were treated, most received chemotherapy, with less than 25% receiving immuno-oncology-based monotherapy. Overall, these results highlight the substantial unmet need in this population, specifically among cisplatin-ineligible patients.

Avelumab first-line maintenance in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Applying clinical trial findings to clinical practice

Although urothelial carcinoma (UC) is considered a chemotherapy-sensitive tumor, progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) are typically short following standard first-line (1L) platinum-containing chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have antitumor activity in UC and favorable safety profiles compared with chemotherapy; however, trials of 1L ICI monotherapy or chemotherapy + ICI combinations have not yet shown improved OS vs chemotherapy alone. In addition to direct cytotoxicity, chemotherapy has potential immunogenic effects, providing a rationale for assessing ICIs as switch-maintenance therapy. In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial, avelumab administered as 1L maintenance with best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged OS vs BSC alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC that had not progressed with 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy (median OS, 21.4 vs 14.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.56-0.86]; P = 0.001). Efficacy benefits were seen across various subgroups, including recipients of 1L cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy, patients with PD-L1+ or PD-L1- tumors, and patients with diverse characteristics. Results from JAVELIN Bladder 100 led to the approval of avelumab as 1L maintenance therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC that has not progressed with platinum-containing chemotherapy. Avelumab 1L maintenance is also included as a standard of care in treatment guidelines for advanced UC with level 1 evidence. This review summarizes the data that supported these developments and discusses practical considerations for administering avelumab maintenance in clinical practice, including patient selection and treatment management.