Comparative effectiveness of cisplatin-based and carboplatin-based chemotherapy for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma

How Immunotherapy Has Redefined the Treatment Paradigm of Metastatic or Locally Advanced Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma

In the past decade, the therapeutic arsenal for metastatic bladder cancer has expanded considerably, with the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody-drug conjugates such as enfortumab vedotin, and anti-fibroblast growth factor receptor agents. Clinical trials evaluating ICIs as neoadjuvants, adjuvants, or first- or second-line treatments have produced conflicting results. However, first-line therapeutic strategies have been redefined by the recent publication of results from two clinical trials: CheckMate-901, which demonstrated the superiority of combined treatment with nivolumab and chemotherapy in extending overall survival, and EV-302, which demonstrated that combined treatment with pembrolizumab and enfortumab vedotin reduced the risk of death by 53%. In this review, we discuss the role of ICIs, alone or in combination, in bladder cancer management in the metastatic and adjuvant settings in 2024, considering the latest published trials. The potential role of ICIs as neoadjuvants is also discussed.

The evolving treatment landscape of metastatic urothelial cancer

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is currently the first-line standard of care for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC); however, up to 50% of patients are ineligible for cisplatin, necessitating alternative treatment options. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been shown to be effective in cisplatin-ineligible patients. However, despite advances in the first-line setting, the prognosis remains poor, and challenges persist in selecting optimal therapies, treatment sequences and combination regimens. Maintenance therapy with avelumab revealed improved overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with best supportive care alone in patients with platinum-responsive mUC. Antibody-drug conjugates and targeted therapy with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors have shown promise in selected patients, particularly in patients with metastatic disease that has progressed despite platinum-based chemotherapy. At the European Society of Medical Oncology Congress in 2023, groundbreaking results were presented from two phase III trials, EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39 and CheckMate 901, focusing on previously untreated mUC. In the former, the combination of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab showed significant improvements in OS, PFS and overall response rate compared with chemotherapy alone; the combination of nivolumab with gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy demonstrated a significant extension in median OS, PFS and overall response rate compared with chemotherapy alone. In addition, erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer OS than chemotherapy among patients with mUC and FGFR alterations after previous treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. This comprehensive summary of the current treatment landscape for mUC incorporates clinical trial evidence and discussion of agents that are currently under investigation to provide support for clinical decision making and understanding of future therapeutic approaches.

Improved Disease-Free Survival With Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Cancer: Final Results of the POUT Trial

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.POUT was a phase III, randomized, open-label trial, including 261 patients with muscle-invasive or lymph node-positive, nonmetastatic upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC) randomly assigned after radical nephroureterectomy to platinum-based chemotherapy (132) or surveillance (129). Primary outcome analysis demonstrated that chemotherapy improved disease-free survival (DFS). At that time, the planned secondary outcome analysis of overall survival (OS) was immature. By February 2022, 50 and 67 DFS events had occurred in the chemotherapy and surveillance groups, respectively, at a median follow-up of 65 months. The 5-year DFS was 62% versus 45%, univariable hazard ratio (HR), 0.55 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.80, P = .001). The restricted mean survival time (RMST) was 18 months longer (95% CI, 6 to 30) in the chemotherapy arm. There were 46 and 60 deaths in the chemotherapy and control arms, respectively. The 5-year OS was 66% versus 57%, with univariable HR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.46 to 1.00, P = .049) and RMST difference 11 months (95% CI, 1 to 21). Treatment effects were consistent across chemotherapy regimens (carboplatin or cisplatin) and disease stage. Toxicities were similar to those previously reported, and there were no clinically relevant differences in quality of life between arms. In summary, although OS was not the primary outcome measure, the updated results add further support for the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with UTUC, suggesting long-term benefits.

Treatment Patterns and Attrition With Lines of Therapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in the US

Importance

The treatment paradigm for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) has undergone substantial transformation due to the introduction of effective, novel therapeutic agents. However, outcomes remain poor, and little is known about current treatment approaches and attrition rates for patients with aUC.

Objectives

To delineate evolving treatment patterns and attrition rates in patients with aUC using a US-based patient-level sample.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used patient-level data from the nationwide deidentified electronic health record database Flatiron Health, originating from approximately 280 oncology clinics across the US. Patients included in the analysis received treatment for metastatic or local aUC at a participating site from January 1, 2011, to January 31, 2023. Patients receiving treatment for 2 or more different types of cancer or participating in clinical trials were excluded from the analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Frequencies and percentages were used to summarize the (1) treatment received in each line (cisplatin-based regimens, carboplatin-based regimens, programmed cell death 1 and/or programmed cell death ligand 1 [PD-1/PD-L1] inhibitors, single-agent nonplatinum chemotherapy, enfortumab vedotin, erdafitinib, sacituzumab govitecan, or others) and (2) attrition of patients with each line of therapy, defined as the percentage of patients not progressing to the next line.

Results

Of the 12 157 patients within the dataset, 7260 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis (5364 [73.9%] men; median age at the start of first-line treatment, 73 [IQR, 66-80] years). All patients commenced first-line treatment; of these, only 2714 (37.4%) progressed to receive second-line treatment, and 857 (11.8%) advanced to third-line treatment. The primary regimens used as first-line treatment contained carboplatin (2241 [30.9%]), followed by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (2174 [29.9%]). The PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors emerged as the predominant choice in the second- and third-line (1412 of 2714 [52.0%] and 258 of 857 [30.1%], respectively) treatments. From 2019 onward, novel therapeutic agents were increasingly used in second- and third-line treatments, including enfortumab vedotin (219 of 2714 [8.1%] and 159 of 857 [18.6%], respectively), erdafitinib (39 of 2714 [1.4%] and 28 of 857 [3.3%], respectively), and sacituzumab govitecan (14 of 2714 [0.5%] and 34 of 857 [4.0%], respectively).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest that approximately two-thirds of patients with aUC did not receive second-line treatment. Most first-line treatments do not include cisplatin-based regimens and instead incorporate carboplatin- or PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-based therapies. These data warrant the provision of more effective and tolerable first-line treatments for patients with aUC.

Establishment and validation of a nomogram for predicting overall survival of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma with bone metastasis: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Bone metastasis (BM) carries a poor prognosis for patients with upper-tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). This study aims to identify survival predictors and develop a prognostic nomogram for overall survival (OS) in UTUC patients with BM.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was used to select patients with UTUC between 2010 and 2019. The chi-square test was used to assess the baseline differences between the groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was employed to assess OS. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify prognostic factors for nomogram establishment. An independent cohort was used for external validation of the nomogram. The discrimination and calibration of the nomogram were evaluated using concordance index (C-index), area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA). All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 23.0 and R software 4.2.2.

RESULTS

The mean OS for UTUC patients with BM was 10 months (95% CI: 8.17 to 11.84), with 6-month OS, 1-year OS, and 3-year OS rates of 41%, 21%, and 3%, respectively. Multi-organ metastases (HR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.66 to 2.95, P < 0.001), surgery (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.91, P = 0.007), and chemotherapy (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.3 to 0.46, P < 0.001) were identified as independent prognostic factors. The C-index was 0.725 for the training cohort and 0.854 for the validation cohort, and all AUC values were > 0.679. The calibration curve and DCA curve showed the accuracy and practicality of the nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

The OS of UTUC patients with BM was poor. Multi-organ metastases was a risk factor for OS, while surgery and chemotherapy were protective factors. Our nomogram was developed and validated to assist clinicians in evaluating the OS of UTUC patients with BM.

Immunotherapy for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: an abridged Cochrane review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of immunotherapy compared to chemotherapy as first- and second-line treatment of advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

METHODS

Based on a published protocol, we performed a systematic search of multiple databases. Two review authors independently performed the literature selection, identified relevant studies, assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, and extracted data. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and assessed the quality of the evidence on a per-outcome basis according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

We included five randomised controlled trials and also identified seven single-arm studies. When used as first-line therapy, immunotherapy probably has little to no effect on the risk of death from any cause compared to chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.07; moderate-certainty evidence). immunotherapy probably has little to no effect on health-related quality of life (mean difference [MD] 4.10, 95% CI 3.83-4.37; moderate). Immunotherapy probably reduces grade 3-5 adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.29-0.75; moderate). In the second-line setting immunotherapy may reduce the risk of death from any cause (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.63-0.81; low). Immunotherapy may have little to no effect on health-related quality of life when compared to chemotherapy (MD 4.82, 95% CI -3.11 to 12.75; low). Immunotherapy may reduce grade 3-5 adverse events (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.97; low).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to chemotherapy, immunotherapy has little to no effect on the risk of death from any cause in a first-line setting. Nevertheless, it may reduce the risk of death from any cause when used as second-line therapy. The health-related quality of life of participants receiving first- and second-line therapy does not appear to be affected by immunotherapy. Immunotherapy probably reduces or may reduce grade 3-5 adverse events when used as first- and second-line therapy, respectively.

Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors in treating metastatic urothelial cancer

Objectives: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) is an important treatment option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients. A lot of clinical evidence proved the survival benefits of ICI, but cost-effectiveness of the treatment remains unclear. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the ICIs treatment in different sequences among mUC patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed mUC patients who had been treated at our hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. These patients received chemotherapy with or without ICI treatment (Pembrolizumab, Atezolizumab, Nivolumab, Durvalumab, or Avelumab). The patients were divided into three different groups: receiving chemotherapy alone, receiving a combination of first-line ICI and chemotherapy (ICI combination therapy), and receiving chemotherapy as the first-line treatment followed by second-line ICI therapy (Subsequent ICI therapy). The primary endpoint was cost per life day, while lifetime medical costs and overall survival were also evaluated. Results: The 74 enrolled patients had a median age of 67.0 years, with 62.2% being male. Of these patients, 23 had received chemotherapy only, while the remaining patients had received combined therapy with ICI in either first-line or as subsequent agents (37 patients had ever received atezolizumab, 18 pembrolizumab, 1 Durvalumab, 1 Nivolumab, and 1 Avelumab separately.). Fifty-five patients (74.3%, 55/74) received cisplatin amongst all the patients who underwent chemotherapy. Median overall survival was 27.5 months (95% CI, 5.2-49.9) in the first-line ICI combination therapy group, and 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.1-10.8) in the chemotherapy only. Median overall survival for the subsequent ICI therapy group was not reached. The median lifetime cost after metastatic UC diagnosis was USD 31,221. The subsequent ICI therapy group had significantly higher costs when compared with the ICI combination therapy group (155.8 USD per day, [IQR 99.0 to 220.5] v 97.8 USD per day, [IQR 60.8 to 159.19], p = 0.026). Higher insurance reimbursement expenses for the subsequent ICI therapy group were observed when compared with the ICI combination therapy group. Conclusion: Our real-world data suggests that first line use of ICI combined with chemotherapy demonstrates better cost-effectiveness and similar survival outcomes for mUC patients, when compared with subsequent ICI therapy after chemotherapy.

Immunomodulatory effects and improved outcomes with cisplatin- versus carboplatin-based chemotherapy plus atezolizumab in urothelial cancer

In metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), cisplatin versus carboplatin leads to durable disease control in a subset of patients. The IMvigor130 trial reveals more favorable effects with atezolizumab combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) versus gemcitabine and carboplatin (GemCarbo). This study investigates the immunomodulatory effects of cisplatin as a potential explanation for these observations. Our findings indicate that improved outcomes with GemCis versus GemCarbo are primarily observed in patients with pretreatment tumors exhibiting features of restrained adaptive immunity. In addition, GemCis versus GemCarbo ± atezolizumab induces transcriptional changes in circulating immune cells, including upregulation of antigen presentation and T cell activation programs. In vitro experiments demonstrate that cisplatin, compared with carboplatin, exerts direct immunomodulatory effects on cancer cells, promoting dendritic cell activation and antigen-specific T cell killing. These results underscore the key role of immune modulation in cisplatin's efficacy in mUC and highlight the importance of specific chemotherapy backbones in immunotherapy combination regimens.

Predictors of response to neoadjuvant therapy in urothelial cancer

Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NACC) followed by radical cystectomy is the standard treatment for localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Patients who achieve a complete pathological response following NACC have better overall survival than those with residual disease. However, a subset of patients does not derive benefit from NACC while experiencing chemotherapy-related side effects that may delay cystectomy, which can be detrimental. There is a need for predictive and prognostic biomarkers to better stratify patients who will derive benefits from NACC. This review summarizes the currently available literature on various predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Covered predictors include clinical factors, treatment regimens (including chemotherapy and immunotherapy), histological predictors, and molecular predictors such as DNA repair genes, p53, FGFR3, ERBB2, Bcl-2, EMMPRIN, survivin, choline-phosphate cytidylyltransferase-α, epigenetic markers, immunological markers, other molecular predictors and gene expression profiling. Further, we elaborate on the potential role of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and the correlative biomarkers of response.

Phase II trial of afatinib in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with genetic alterations in ERBB1-3 (LUX-Bladder 1)

BACKGROUND

Preclinical and early clinical data suggest that the irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib may be effective in urothelial cancers harbouring ERBB mutations.

METHODS

This open-label, phase II, single-arm trial (LUX-Bladder 1, NCT02780687) assessed the efficacy and safety of second-line afatinib 40 mg/d in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with ERBB1-3 alterations. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6) (cohort A); other endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS, DCR and safety (cohorts A and B). Cohort A was planned to have two stages: stage 2 enrolment was based on observed antitumour activity.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were enroled into cohort A and eight into cohort B. In cohorts A/B, PFS6 was 11.8%/12.5%, ORR was 5.9%/12.5%, DCR was 50.0%/25.0%, median PFS was 9.8/7.8 weeks and median OS was 30.1/29.6 weeks. Three patients (two ERBB2-amplified [cohort A]; one EGFR-amplified [cohort B]) achieved partial responses. Stage 2 for cohort A did not proceed. All patients experienced adverse events (AEs), most commonly (any/grade 3) diarrhoea (76.2%/9.5%). Two patients (4.8%) discontinued due to AEs and one fatal AE was observed (acute coronary syndrome; not considered treatment-related).

CONCLUSIONS

An exploratory biomarker analysis suggested that basal-squamous tumours and ERBB2 amplification were associated with superior response to afatinib.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02780687.

Complete Pathologic Response With Pembrolizumab and Enfortumab Vedotin in Urothelial Carcinoma of the Upper Urinary Tract

Urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract (UTUC) presents a significant clinical challenge, often requiring aggressive surgical intervention for optimal management. We present a case of an 84-year-old woman with recurrent high-grade papillary UTUC of the left renal pelvis, refractory to prior endourologic interventions, who underwent neoadjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab and enfortumab vedotin (Pembro/EV) due to contraindications to cisplatin therapy. Following a favorable response to neoadjuvant therapy, the patient underwent laparoscopic left radical nephroureterectomy, achieving a pathologic complete response. We discuss the utility of Pembro/EV in the perioperative management of patients with UTUC, particularly in those ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy. In addition, we highlight the potential role of somatic mutation testing and the integration of novel therapeutic agents such as olaparib in personalized treatment strategies for UTUC. This case underscores the importance of exploring innovative treatment approaches and optimizing patient selection for kidney preservation strategies in the management of UTUC. Further research and clinical trials are warranted to elucidate the full therapeutic potential of Pembro/EV and other emerging therapies in this setting.

Latin American Consensus for the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Metastatic/Locally Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Urothelial cancer accounts for approximately 3% of new cancer cases worldwide, with a high burden of disease in countries with medium and low human development indexes where its incidence and mortality are increasing. The purpose of this consensus is to develop statements on the evaluation and treatment of locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma that would further guide the clinical practice in Latin America.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted by an independent team of methodologists. Then, a modified Delphi method was developed with clinical specialists from different Latin American countries.

RESULTS

Forty-two consensus statements, based on evidence, were developed to address the staging, the evaluation (suitability for chemotherapy, risk assessment, and biomarkers), and systemic treatment (first-line and subsequent therapies) of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The statements made in this consensus are suggested practice recommendations in the Latin American context; however, the importance of a complete and individualized patient evaluation as a guide for therapeutic selection is highlighted. The availability and affordability of support tools for the evaluation of the disease, as well as specific therapies, may limit the application of the best practices suggested.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Therapeutic decisions need to be tailored to the context-specific clinical setting and availability of resources. Local research is promoted to improve outcomes for patients with this challenging cancer in Latin America.

Atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

The primary analysis of IMvigor130 showed a significant progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, this finding did not translate into significant overall survival benefit for group A versus group C at the final analysis, precluding formal statistical testing of outcomes with atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) versus group C. Here we report the final overall survival results for group B versus group C; this report is descriptive and should be considered exploratory due to the study's statistical design.

METHODS

In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) who had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab alone (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo in group A and group C; atezolizumab monotherapy in group B was open label. For groups B and C, atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy involved 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and day 8 of each cycle) plus the investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under the curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area), administered intravenously. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in group A versus group C, and overall survival in group B versus group C, tested hierarchically, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and then the populations with high PD-L1 tumour expression (immune cell [IC] expression score of IC2/3) if the results from group A versus group C were significant. Here, we report the co-primary endpoint of overall survival for group B versus group C in the ITT and IC2/3 populations. The ITT population for this analysis comprised concurrently enrolled patients in groups B and C who were randomly assigned to treatment. For the safety analysis, all patients enrolled in group B and group C who received any study treatment were included. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting.

FINDINGS

Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 362 patients were assigned to group B and 400 to group C, of whom 360 and 359, respectively, were enrolled concurrently (ITT population). 543 (76%) of 719 patients were male, 176 (24%) were female, and 534 (74%) were White. As of data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow-up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·1-17·7; 271 deaths) in group B and 13·3 months (11·9-15·6; 275 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·82-1·16]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (two [1%] in patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy vs 133 [34%] in those who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (one [<1%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (0 vs 95 [24%]), and decreased platelet count (one [<1%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 163 (46%) patients versus 196 (50%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (1%; n=1 each, pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, large intestinal obstruction) patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy and four (1%; n=1 each, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, unexplained death, toxic hepatitis) who received placebo plus chemotherapy.

INTERPRETATION

The final analysis from IMvigor130 did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with first-line atezolizumab monotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. The safety profile of atezolizumab monotherapy remained acceptable after extended follow-up, with no new safety signals.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis results from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

IMvigor130 demonstrated statistically significant investigator-assessed progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Overall survival was not improved in interim analyses. Here we report the final overall analysis for group A versus group C.

METHODS

In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), with a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin risk factor score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo (ie, group A and group C) and atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) was open label. For groups A and C, all patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously; day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle), plus investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min; intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 intravenously), plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle. Co-primary endpoints of the study were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival for group A versus group C in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all randomised patients), and overall survival for group B versus group C, tested hierarchically. Final overall survival and updated safety outcomes (safety population; all patients who received any amount of any study treatment component) for group A versus group C are reported here. The final prespecified boundary for significance of the overall survival analysis was one-sided p=0·021. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting.

FINDINGS

Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 851 were assigned to group A (n=451) and group C (n=400). 338 (75%) patients in group A and 298 (75%) in group C were male, 113 (25%) in group A and 102 (25%) in group C were female, and 346 (77%) in group A and 304 (76%) in group C were White. At data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 16·1 months (95% CI 14·2-18·8; 336 deaths) in group A versus 13·4 months (12·0-15·3; 310 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·73-1·00]; one-sided p=0·023). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (168 [37%] of 454 patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy vs 133 [34%] of 389 who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (167 [37%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (98 [22%] vs 95 [24%]), thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] vs 70 [18%]), and decreased platelet count (92 [20%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 243 (54%) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and 196 (50%) patients who received placebo plus chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in nine (2%; acute kidney injury, dyspnoea, hepatic failure, hepatitis, neutropenia, pneumonitis, respiratory failure, sepsis, and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and four (1%; unexplained death, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, and toxic hepatitis [n=1 each]) who received placebo plus chemotherapy.

INTERPRETATION

Progression-free survival benefit with first-line combination of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy did not translate into a significant improvement in overall survival in the ITT population of IMvigor130. Further research is needed to understand which patients might benefit from first-line combination treatment. No new safety signals were observed.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Progress in systemic therapy for advanced-stage urothelial carcinoma

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.

Treatment Patterns and Real-World Outcomes for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer in the Era of Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There are limited data on real-world outcomes for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) since immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) became available. Our objective was to analyze outcomes for patients with mUC since ICIs became available.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 131 patients with mUC attending the outpatient clinic of a single tertiary care center who received systemic therapy between June 2017 and July 2021 with follow-up up to December 2022. Summary and descriptive statistics were calculated for categorical and continuous variables. The Kaplan-Meier method was applied to calculate survival, and a Cox proportional-hazards model was used to explore associations between clinical variables and outcomes.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

The median patient age was 68 yr (range 35-90). The first systemic therapy administered was platinum-based in 79% of cases and ICI-based in 21%. Some 61% of the cohort received a second systemic treatment, with 75% of these an ICI. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 24 mo (interquartile range 9-35). Patients on ICI therapy for ≥6 mo had median overall survival of 59 mo (95% confidence interval 39 mo-not reached). Metastatic sites on initiation of ICI therapy and C-reactive protein kinetics were prognostic in patients receiving ICIs. Limitations include the retrospective design and inherent selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

More than 60% of patients with mUC received second-line treatment, and 75% of these received an ICI. Patients staying on immunotherapy for more than 6 mo have substantially better outcomes in comparison to patients with less time on immunotherapy and historical cohorts.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at the lines of therapy and outcomes for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer of the urinary tract, starting from when immunotherapy drugs called immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) became available. We found that 60% of patients have received second-line therapy, which is a double the rate in comparison to historical groups of patients. Patients with long-term ICI therapy (>6 months) had significantly better outcomes, with a median survival of more than 3 years.

Systemic treatment of advanced and metastatic urothelial cancer: The landscape in Australia

The 5-year survival rate of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is estimated to be as low as 5%. Currently, systemic platinum-based chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance therapy is the only first-line treatment for mUC that has an overall survival benefit. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy (usually in combination with gemcitabine) is the preferred treatment but carboplatin is substituted where contraindications to cisplatin exist. Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and kinase inhibitors has not yet demonstrated superiority to chemotherapy as first-line therapy and remains investigational in this setting. A recent media release indicates that chemotherapy plus nivolumab gives an OS advantage as first-line treatment but results of this study have not yet been made public. Pembrolizumab remains an option in those having primary progression on first-line chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The antibody-drug conjugate, enfortumab vedotin has TGA approval for patients whose cancer has progressed following chemotherapy and immunotherapy and has just received a positive Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme recommendation. The use of molecular screens for somatic genetic mutations, gene amplifications, and protein expression is expanding as drugs that target such abnormalities show promise. However, despite these advances, a substantial proportion of patients with mUC have significant barriers to receiving any treatment, including advancing age, frailty, and comorbidities, and less toxic, effective therapies are needed.

Impact of pathological response on oncological outcomes in patients with upper tract urothelial cancer receiving neo-adjuvant chemotherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the rates of pathological complete response (ypT0N0/X) and pathological response (ypT1N0/X or less) in patients with upper tract urothelial cancer who were treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and to examine their impact on oncological outcomes.

METHODS

This study is a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with high-risk upper tract urothelial cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical nephroureterectomy between 2002 and 2021. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate all clinical parameters for response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cox proportional hazard models were performed to assess the effect of the response on the oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients with UTUC who received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy were identified. Among them, 44 (52.4%) patients received cisplatin-based chemotherapy, and 22 (26.2%) patients had a carboplatin-based regimen. The pathological complete response rate was 11.6% (n = 10), and the pathological response rate was 42.9% (n = 36). Multifocal tumors or tumors larger than 3 cm significantly reduced the odds of pathological response. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazard model, pathological response was independently associated with better overall survival (HR 0.38, p = 0.024), cancer-specific survival (HR 0.24, p = 0.033), and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.17, p = 0.001), but it was not associated with bladder recurrence-free survival (HR 0.84, p = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

Pathological response after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radical nephroureterectomy is strongly associated with patient survival and recurrence, and it might be a good surrogate for evaluating the efficacy of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in the future.

Gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel vs gemcitabine/carboplatin for advanced urothelial carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To compare in a phase III trial the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound (nab)-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (GA) with that of carboplatin plus gemcitabine (GCb) as a first-line treatment for patients with cisplatin-ineligible metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment-naive, cisplatin-ineligible patients with mUC were assigned randomly to either the GA (both nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or GCb group (carboplatin area under the free carboplatin plasma concentration versus time curve of 4.5 on Day 1, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8, every 21 days). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

The trial was terminated early because of slow accrual after 54 patients were enrolled: 26 in in the GA group and 28 in the GCb groups. The median PFS was 6.7 vs 5.9 months for the GA and GCb groups, respectively (P = 0.248). The median OS time was 12.1 vs 10.7 months for the GA and GCb groups, respectively (P = 0.837). The ORR and DCR were 40% vs 46.4% (P = 0.637) and 72% vs 68% (P = 0.188) in the GA and GCb groups, respectively. Patients treated with GA showed significantly lower incidence of Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and does reduction and delay. Although peripheral sensory neuropathy was higher in the GA arm, no Grade 3 neuropathy occurred. There was no difference in the PROs between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

While not powered for comparison, first-line GA showed similar efficacy and better tolerability and might be considered a rational alternative to GCb.

Screening for a practical method to monitor the status of patients with metastatic bladder cancer at the circulating cell-gene level

Identifying a novel method to monitor metastatic bladder cancer status at the cell-gene level could lead to earlier appropriate therapeutic intervention and better outcomes. In this study, we evaluated a practical method to monitor the cancer status at the circulating cell-gene level before and after treatment in fourteen patients with metastatic bladder cancer who were indicated for systemic drug therapy. Patients were assessed via imaging before and after drug treatment, and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis was performed to detect three parameters: cfDNA level, ERRB2 gene copy numbers, and telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) gene mutations. We hypothesized that decreased cfDNA levels, a normal copy number of ERB-B2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2), and the absence of the TERT C228T mutation indicate cancer suppression. We found that a > 1.8-fold increase in cfDNA levels, increased copy number of ERBB2, or the existence of the TERT C228T mutation indicated disease progression. Stable cfDNA levels, normal ERBB2 copy number, and the absence of TERT C228T mutations indicate a stable cancer status. Collectively, our results show that the combination of cfDNA concentration, TERT mutation, and ERBB2 copy number may be useful for determining the efficacy of drug therapy in patients with metastatic bladder cancer.

Lymph Node Dissection in Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: Current Status and Future Perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review aims to evaluate the role of lymph node dissection (LND) in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and its implications for staging and management outcomes, as well as future perspectives.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple studies have demonstrated the limitations of conventional imaging techniques in accurately localizing lymph node metastasis (LNM) in UTUC. While 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography (18FDG-PET/CT) shows promise for preoperative LNM detection, its specificity is low. Alternative methods such as choline PET/CT and sentinel lymph node detection are under consideration but require further investigation. Additionally, various preoperative factors associated with LNM hold potential for predicting nodal involvement, thereby improving nodal staging and oncologic outcomes of LND. Several surgical approaches, including segmental ureterectomy and robot-assisted nephroureterectomy, provide a possibility for LND, while minimizing morbidity. LND remains the primary nodal staging tool for UTUC, but its therapeutic benefit is still uncertain. Advances in imaging techniques and preoperative risk assessment show promise in improving LNM detection. Further research and multi-center studies are needed to comprehensively assess the advantages and limitations of LND in UTUC, as well as the long-term outcomes of alternative staging and treatment strategies.

Avelumab as First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

This work provides a summary of guideline recommendations and an expert position on the use of maintenance avelumab therapy based on a review of current international clinical practice guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). A PubMed literature search was conducted in March 2022 (updated in July 2023) to identify guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic UC. An expert panel (four oncologists and one urologist) reviewed the guidelines and clinical evidence, and discussed practical questions regarding the use of avelumab maintenance therapy in this clinical setting. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology and European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines recommend first-line cisplatin-containing chemotherapy for cisplatin-eligible patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine for cisplatin-ineligible patients who are fit for carboplatin, or immunotherapy with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors (e.g. atezolizumab) in platinum-ineligible patients. Maintenance avelumab is recommended in patients with response/stable disease following chemotherapy (regardless of PD-L1 status). In patients who relapse after/during chemotherapy, options include immunotherapy, erdafitinib [in those with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) mutations], enfortumab vedotin or further chemotherapy. The expert panel provided the following practical guidance: (1) consider maintenance avelumab in all eligible patients; (2) continue avelumab until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity; (3) ideally, administer six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy prior to maintenance avelumab; (4) perform radiological evaluation after four chemotherapy cycles and prior to maintenance avelumab; (5) carboplatin-gemcitabine followed by maintenance avelumab is preferred in cisplatin-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 expression), but consider first-line immunotherapy in PD-L1-positive patients and platinum-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 status); and (6) for patients who relapse on avelumab, second-line options include enfortumab vedotin, FGFR inhibitors (in those with FGFR mutations) or clinical trial inclusion. In conclusion, avelumab maintenance therapy is recommended following platinum-based chemotherapy in all eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC, continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

Real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: the ARON-2 study

BACKGROUND

The advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors has challenged previous treatment paradigms for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in the post-platinum setting as well as in the first-line setting for cisplatin-ineligible patients. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of pembrolizumab as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible UC.

METHODS

Data from patients aged ≥ 18 years with cisplatin-ineligible UC and receiving first-line pembrolizumab from January 1st 2017 to September 1st 2022 were collected. Cisplatin ineligibility was defined according to the Galsky criteria. Thirty-three Institutions from 18 countries were involved in the ARON-2 study.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 162 patients. The median follow-up time was 18.9 months (95%CI 15.3-76.9). In the overall study population, the median OS was 15.8 months (95%CI 11.3-32.4). The median OS was significantly longer in males versus females while no statistically significant differences were observed between patients aged < 65y versus ≥ 65y and between smokers and non-smokers. According to Recist 1.1 criteria, 26 patients (16%) experienced CR, 32 (20%) PR, 39 (24%) SD and 55 (34%) PD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm the role of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for cisplatin-unfit patients. Further studies investigating the biological and immunological characteristics of UC patients are warranted in order to optimize the outcome of patients receiving immunotherapy in this setting.

Kidney and Cancer Outcomes with Standard Versus Alternative Chemotherapy Regimens for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Key Points

Many patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma are deemed cisplatin-ineligible because of reduced kidney function. Options include split-dose cisplatin or carboplatin. There was no significant association between regimen type and AKI. Alternative regimens were associated with higher risk of progressive disease. There is a need to revisit cisplatin eligibility criteria and develop strategies to optimize cancer treatment for patients with CKD.

Background

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens remain the optimal first-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, many patients are deemed cisplatin-ineligible, predominantly because of reduced kidney function. Other treatment options include split-dose cisplatin, carboplatin, and non–platinum-based regimens. We compared the incidence of AKI and cancer outcomes within three chemotherapy regimens.

Methods

We conducted a single-center retrospective study of patients with mUC who received first-line chemotherapy from 2005 to 2019. We compared standard gemcitabine–cisplatin (gem-cis) with two alternative regimens: (1 ) gem-cis split-dose regimen (split) with cisplatin divided over days 1 and 8 and (2 ) combination of gemcitabine–carboplatin or single-agent gemcitabine (gem/gem-carbo). The primary outcome was Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes–defined AKI. Secondary outcomes included overall survival and progression-free survival.

Results

We identified 183 patients (98 gem-cis, 32 split, and 53 gem/gem-carbo). Median baseline eGFR in the gem/cis group was 78 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (interquartile range, 66–91), in the split group 64 (48–77), and in the gem/gem-carbo 45 (33–57). There was no significant association between regimen type and incidence of AKI when adjusted for age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, baseline eGFR, hypertension, diabetes, and visceral disease. The adjusted hazard ratios were 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 2.78; P = 0.49) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.46 to 2.07; P = 0.95) for split and gem/gem-carbo groups, respectively, versus gem-cis. Split and gem/gem-carbo regimens were associated with higher mortality and progressive disease relative to gem-cis with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.54 (95% CI, 1.02 to 2.33; P = 0.04) and 1.96 (95% CI, 1.31 to 2.95; P < 0.01), respectively. Median progression free survival was 8.1 (interquartile range, 4.6–14.8), 6.1 (4.1–9.3), and 4.4 (2.3–8.6) months in the gem-cis, split, and gem/gem-carbo groups.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in the incidence of AKI between the three regimens studied. However, standard gem-cis was associated with improved cancer outcomes. Novel regimens and kidney protective strategies are needed for patients with mUC with kidney disease.

Real-world outcomes of first-line chemotherapy for unresectable stage III and IV bladder cancer

PURPOSE

For many malignancies, considerable divergence between the efficacy found in clinical trials and effectiveness in routine practice have been reported (efficacy-effectiveness gap). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy-effectiveness gap in palliative first-line (1L) chemotherapy treatment (CTx) for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.

METHODS

From seven Dutch teaching hospitals, all patients diagnosed with unresectable stage III (cT2-4aN1-3M0) and IV (cT4b and/or cM1) disease, who received 1L-CTx (for both primary as recurrent disease after radical cystectomy) between 2008 and 2016, were captured. Results were compared with data from seven randomised trials that investigated 1L gemcitabine + cisplatin (GemCis) and/or gemcitabine + carboplatin (GemCarbo).

RESULTS

Of the 835 included patients, 191 received 1L-CTx. Median overall survival (mOS) of GemCis patients (N = 88) was 10.4 months [95% CI 7.9-13.0], which was shorter compared to clinical trial findings (range mOS: 12.7-14.3 months) despite comparable clinical characteristics. The mOS of GemCarbo patients (N = 92) was 9.3 months [95% CI 7.5-11.1]. Patients who received GemCarbo had worse prognostic characteristics (higher age, impaired renal function and worse performance status (all P-values < 0.001)) compared to GemCis patients, but were equal in occurrence of dose reductions (24.4% vs. 29.5%, P-value = 0.453), early termination (55.7% vs. 54.1%, P-value = 0.839), clinical best response (P-value = 0.733), and toxicity (68.1% vs. 63.3%, P-value = 0.743). In multivariable regression, GemCis was not superior to GemCarbo (HR 0.90 [95% CI 0.55-1.47], P-value = 0.674).

CONCLUSION

There seems to be an efficacy-effectiveness gap in 1L GemCis treatment, despite patients having similar baseline characteristics. Early termination of treatment occurred more often and dose reduction less often compared to clinical trials, hinting towards abandonment of treatment in case of adverse events. Patients treated with 1L GemCis did not have superior survival compared to GemCarbo patients, even though GemCarbo patients had worse baseline characteristics.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Challenges of Urothelial Cancer Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Single Academic Center in Romania

The COVID-19 pandemic caused major changes in the healthcare sector due to adaptations required to hospitalize and treat an impressive number of patients. This retrospective study intended to collect reliable information on urothelial cancer patients in Romania. The primary objective was to compare the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods to observe the differences that occurred in the management of patients with urothelial carcinoma. The secondary objective was to determine the risk factors for urothelial cancer progression in the study cohort correlated with the COVID-19 pandemic. All patients that were diagnosed and treated at our clinic with a diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma (transitional cell carcinoma) during 2019–2021 were included in the current study. A total of 1122 eligible unique cases were identified during the study period. The number of patients who underwent intervention in the pre-pandemic year was 421, followed by a 22.6% decrease in 2020 to 326 cases and a 13.1% increase in 2021 to 375 cases. The proportion of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) cases was significantly higher during the pandemic years, from 30.5% MIBC cases in 2019 to 37.4% in 2020 and 39.4% in 2021, suggesting a delay in presentations during the pandemic. Stage III and IV (TNM) cases were significantly more frequent, even though approximately 40% of all patients were operated on in stage I. The number of cystectomies increased significantly, from 5.2% in 2019 and 4.3% in 2020 to 10.1% in 2021, while the number of elective surgeries decreased, although no significant difference was observed regarding the in-hospital mortality and disease progression at six months. Patients with stage III and IV at presentation had the highest likelihood of disease progression at six months (HR = 5.61). Distant invasion was the second highest risk factor (HR = 5.13), followed by MIBC type (HR = 2.49). Nevertheless, the duration of hospitalization and year of diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic were not significant risk factors for cancer progression at six months. It can be concluded that there was a significant delay in patient presentations in 2020, and we advocate for increased public health awareness for urothelial cancer and increased attention toward the screening and management of these patients in the following years.

Emerging monoclonal antibody therapies in the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

The treatment landscape for advanced-stage, unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has shifted dramatically over a short period of time, with new therapeutic agents available for clinical use. However, despite these recent advances in the field, mUC continues to be a disease with significant morbidity and mortality and remains generally incurable. While platinum-based therapy remains the backbone of therapy, many patients are ineligible for chemotherapy or have failed initial chemotherapy treatment. In post-platinum treated patients, immunotherapy and antibody drug conjugates have provided incremental advances, but agents with better therapeutic index guided by precision medicine are needed.

AREAS COVERED

This article covers the available monoclonal antibody therapies in mUC excluding immunotherapy and antibody drug conjugates. Included are a review of data utilizing monoclonal antibodies targeting VEG-F, HER-2, FGFR, and KIR-2 in the setting of mUC. A literature search from 6/2022- 9/2022 was performed utilizing PubMed with key terms including urothelial carcinoma, monoclonal antibody, VEG-F, HER-2, FGFR.

EXPERT OPINION

Often used in combination with immunotherapy or other therapeutic agents, monoclonal antibody therapies have exhibited efficacy in mUC in early trials. Upcoming clinical trials will further explore their full clinical utility in treating mUC patients.

Geriatric assessment in the older adult with genitourinary cancer: A narrative review

Genitourinary (GU) cancers including bladder, prostate, and kidney cancers affect older adults with a higher prevalence compared to younger adults. GU cancer treatment is associated with poorer outcomes in older adults compared to their younger counterparts. To better identify and support older adults receiving cancer care, oncologic societies recommend the use of a geriatric assessment (GA) to guide management. However, little is known about the implementation and usefulness of the GA in older adults with GU cancers. We performed a narrative review to investigate the utility of the GA in older adults with GU cancers and propose strategies to optimize the real-world use of the GA. Here, we describe a framework to incorporate GA into the routine cancer care of older adults with GU cancers and provide several implications for future research.

Perspectives on the future of urothelial carcinoma therapy: chemotherapy and beyond

INTRODUCTION

Despite recent developments in the landscape of urothelial carcinoma (UC) treatment, platinum combination chemotherapy still remains a milestone. Recently immunotherapeutic agents have gained ever-growing attractivity, particularly in the metastatic setting. Novel chemotherapeutic strategies and agents, such as antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and powerful combination regimens have been developed to overcome the resistance of most UC to current therapies.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, we review the current standard-of-care chemotherapy, the development of ADCs, the rationale for combining therapy regimens with chemotherapy in current trials, and future directions in UC management.

EXPERT OPINION

Immunotherapy has prompted a revolution in the treatment paradigm of UC. However, only a few patients experience a long-term response when treated with single-agent immunotherapies. Combination treatments are necessary to bypass resistance mechanisms and broaden the clinical utility of current options. Current evidence supports the intensification of standard-of-care chemotherapy with maintenance immunotherapy. However, the optimal sequence, combination, and duration must be determined to achieve individual longevity with acceptable health-related quality of life. In that regard, ADCs appear as a promising alternative for single and combination strategies in UC, as they specifically target the tumor cells, thereby, theoretically improving treatment efficacy and avoiding extensive off-target toxicities.

Tumor microenvironment and epithelial-mesenchymal transition in bladder cancer: Cytokines in the game?

Bladder cancer (BlCa) is a highly immunogenic cancer. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the standard treatment for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients and, recently, second-line immunotherapies have arisen to treat metastatic BlCa patients. Understanding the interactions between tumor cells, immune cells and soluble factors in bladder tumor microenvironment (TME) is crucial. Cytokines and chemokines released in the TME have a dual role, since they can exhibit both a pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory potential, driving infiltration and inflammation, and also promoting evasion of immune system and pro-tumoral effects. In BlCa disease, 70-80% are non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, while 20-30% are muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) at the time of diagnosis. However, during the follow up, about half of treated NMIBC patients recur once or more, with 5-25% progressing to muscle-invasive bladder cancer, which represents a significant concern to the clinic. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is one biological process associated with tumor progression. Specific cytokines present in bladder TME have been related with signaling pathways activation and EMT-related molecules regulation. In this review, we summarized the immune landscape in BlCa TME, along with the most relevant cytokines and their putative role in driving EMT processes, tumor progression, invasion, migration and metastasis formation.

The efficacy and safety of first-line treatment in cisplatin-ineligible advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients: a comparison of PD-1 inhibitor and carboplatin plus gemcitabine chemotherapy

Although several programmed cell death (PD)-1 inhibitors are approved for the first-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma, their efficacy remains unknown in cisplatin-ineligible patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) compared with gemcitabine plus carboplatin. Data for patients with UTUC were retrospectively retrieved from the electronic medical records of nine institutions between 2018 and 2021. Patients considered ineligible for cisplatin who received either PD-1 inhibitors (n = 70) or gemcitabine plus carboplatin (n = 53) were included. Efficacy was assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The objective response rate (ORR) was comparable between the PD-1 inhibitor and carboplatin–gemcitabine groups (38.6% versus 41.5%). Median PFS was 5.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0–8.0) in the PD-1 inhibitor group, versus 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.8–8.2) in the carboplatin–gemcitabine group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.741, 95% CI: 0.485–1.132, p = .166). Median OS was 18 months (95% CI: 4.1–31.9) in the PD-1 inhibitor group, compared with 14 months (95% CI: 12.1–15.9) in the carboplatin–gemcitabine group (HR = 0.731, 95% CI: 0.426–1.256, p = .257). The duration of response was significantly longer in the PD-1 inhibitor group than in the carboplatin–gemcitabine group (not reached vs. 9 months, p < .001). Treatment-related adverse events were less frequent in the PD-1 inhibitor group than in the carboplatin–gemcitabine group (57.1% vs. 77.3%). In conclusion, PD-1 inhibitors displayed promising efficacy with less toxicity and longer DOR in the first-line treatment of UTUC in patients ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Management of metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Current approach, emerging agents, and future perspectives

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is a lethal disease for which platinum-based chemotherapy represents the standard of care; however, long-term survival is achieved only in a minority of patients. Recently, along with important advances in the comprehension of the biology of this disease, the treatment paradigm of mUC has undergone a rapid expansion with the approval of several immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted agents in both first- and second-line settings. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy remains the backbone of first-therapy for mUC; nevertheless, for those patients who do not progress after the full course of first-line chemotherapy, maintenance treatment with the anti-PD-L1 avelumab showed to prolong overall survival compared observation alone. Moreover, the disappointing results of chemotherapy in pre-treated patients have led to the investigation and the subsequent approval of the anti-PD-1 pembrolizumab, which showed an unprecedented survival benefit when compared to second-line chemotherapy. Recently, target therapy with the antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) enfortumab vedotin, directed against Nectin-4, showed outstanding results in patients treated with both chemotherapy and immunotherapy. The FGFR inhibitor erdafitinib and sacituzumab govitecan, an ADC targeting Trop-2, demonstrated encouraging activity in phase II studies and are currently under investigation in randomized phase III trials. ICIs and targeted therapies also demonstrated promising results as first-line treatment of cisplatin-ineligible patients; randomized trials of ICIs alone or in combination with targeted agents are ongoing and may broaden the therapeutic armamentarium for this category of patients. In this review, we describe the current state of art for the treatment of mUC; in addition, we present the latest evidences from the most recent literature and congress presentations. Finally, we illustrate the key ongoing clinical trials, focusing on ICIs and target therapies.

Anticancer maintenance chemotherapy prolonged prognosis of metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients: A single institute retrospective study using propensity score matching

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of anticancer maintenance chemotherapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared the clinical outcomes of 74 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had been treated with or without anticancer maintenance chemotherapy between 2006 and 2020 at Osaka University Hospital. Progression-free survival and cancer-specific survival periods were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method starting from the end date of induction chemotherapy. The backgrounds of patients who had treated with or without anticancer maintenance chemotherapy were adjusted using the propensity score matching method.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients had undergone anticancer maintenance chemotherapy, whereas 45 patients had not. The median progression-free survival periods were 18.7 and 5.6 months (p = 0.0209), and the median cancer-specific survival periods were 25.1 and 15.2 months (p = 0.1299), in patients with or without anticancer maintenance chemotherapy respectively. In multivariate analysis, anticancer maintenance chemotherapy significantly prolonged both progression-free survival (hazard ratio 3.65, 95% confidence interval 1.96-6.78, p < 0.0001) and cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio 3.05, 95% confidence interval 1.62-5.76, p = 0.0006) in patients with partial response or stable disease after induction chemotherapy. Also, anticancer maintenance chemotherapy significantly prolonged both progression-free survival (13.1 months vs. 4.9 months, p = 0.0027) and cancer-specific survival (35.1 months vs. 11.8 months, p = 0.0044) in propensity score matched patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticancer maintenance chemotherapy may be considered the treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients after induction chemotherapy.

Multicenter evaluation of neoadjuvant and induction gemcitabine-carboplatin versus gemcitabine-cisplatin followed by radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

PURPOSE

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy (RC) is recommended in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, up to 50% of patients are cisplatin ineligible. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes after ≥ 3 cycles of preoperative gemcitabine-carboplatin (gem-carbo) versus gemcitabine-cisplatin (gem-cis).

METHODS

We identified 1865 patients treated at 19 centers between 2000 and 2013. Patients were included if they had received ≥ 3 cycles of neoadjuvant (cT2-4aN0M0) or induction (cTanyN + M0) gem-carbo or gem-cis followed by RC.

RESULTS

We included 747 patients treated with gem-carbo (n = 147) or gem-cis (n = 600). Patients treated with gem-carbo had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.016) and more clinically node-positive disease (32% versus 20%; p = 0.013). The complete pathological response (pCR; ypT0N0) rate did not significantly differ between gem-carbo and gem-cis (20.7% versus 22.1%; p = 0.73). Chemotherapeutic regimen was not significantly associated with pCR (OR 0.99 [95%CI 0.61-1.59]; p = 0.96), overall survival (OS) (HR 1.20 [95%CI 0.85-1.67]; p = 0.31), or cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR 1.35 [95%CI 0.93-1.96]; p = 0.11). Median OS of patients treated with gem-carbo and gem-cis was 28.6 months (95%CI 18.1-39.1) and 45.1 months (95%CI 32.7-57.6) (p = 0.18), respectively. Median CSS of patients treated with gem-carbo and gem-cis was 28.8 months (95%CI 9.8-47.8) and 71.0 months (95%CI median not reached) (p = 0.02), respectively. Subanalyses of the neoadjuvant and induction setting did not show significant survival differences.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that a subset of cisplatin-ineligible patients with MIBC achieve pCR on gem-carbo and that survival outcomes seem comparable to gem-cis provided patients are able to receive ≥ 3 cycles and undergo RC.

Reassessment of the Efficacy of Carboplatin for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in the Era of Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Platinum-based combination chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (AMUC). However, data comparing the efficacy of different platinum agents are limited.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to assess the efficacy of carboplatin as a first-line treatment for AMUC using phase 3 randomized trial data.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Multiple databases were searched for articles published until August 2021. Studies that compared overall survival (OS), complete response (CR), and objective response rates (ORRs) in chemotherapy-eligible patients with AMUC were deemed eligible.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Four studies were included. Compared with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy, neither cisplatin- nor carboplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with significant OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85-1.11, p = 0.64 and HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.78-1.04, p = 0.16, respectively) and CR (odds ratio [OR]: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.70-1.92, p = 0.57 and OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.52-1.53, p = 0.67, respectively benefits, while both were associated with a favorable ORR (OR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.40-0.74, p < 0.001 and OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.42-0.80, p < 0.001, respectively). A network meta-analysis (NMA)-based indirect comparison between carboplatin and cisplatin revealed that while cisplatin was slightly better than carboplatin in terms of OS, CR, and ORR, no significant difference was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Cisplatin- and carboplatin-based chemotherapies offer similar OS/CR benefits to ICI monotherapy and elicit a greater ORR than ICI monotherapy. Moreover, our NMA demonstrated that both cisplatin- and carboplatin-based chemotherapy have a similar efficacy in terms of OS, CR, and ORR. Given that carboplatin-based chemotherapy is shown to be more effective in contemporary series than in historical controls, it is strongly recommended that carboplatin be re-examined for its value in the era of ICIs and beyond.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Cisplatin- as well as carboplatin-based chemotherapy is as effective as immune checkpoint inhibitors in terms of survival and eliciting a positive response. It is currently believed that cisplatin provides greater benefits than carboplatin; this requires re-evaluation.

French AFU Cancer Committee Guidelines - Update 2022-2024: Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC)

OBJECTIVE

To update the CCAFU recommendations for the management of muscle invasive bladder carcinoma (MIBC).

METHODS

A systematic review (Medline) of the literature from 2020 to 2022 was performed taking account of the diagnosis, treatment options and surveillance of NMIBC and MIBC, while evaluating the references with their levels of evidence.

RESULTS

MIBC is diagnosed after the most complete tumour resection possible. MIBC grading is based on CTU along with chest CT. Multiparametric pelvic MRI could be an alternative. Cystectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy is the gold standard treatment for non-metastatic MIBC. It should be preceded by platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients in good general health with satisfactory renal function. Enterocystoplasty is proposed in men and women in the absence of contraindications and when the urethral resection is negative on extemporaneous examination. Otherwise, transileal cutaneous ureterostomy is the recommended method of urinary diversion. Inclusion of all patients in an ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) protocol is recommended. For metastatic MIBC, first line treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy (GC or MVAC) is recommended, if general health (PS>1) and renal function (clearance>60mL/min) so allow (only 50% of the cases). Pembrolizumab immunotherapy has demonstrated an overall survival benefit in second-line treatment.

CONCLUSION

Updating the ccAFU recommendations should contribute to improving patient management, as well as the diagnosis and decision-making concerning MIBC treatment.

Advanced Bladder Cancer: Changing the Treatment Landscape

Bladder cancer is the 10th most common cancer type in the world. There were more than 573,000 new cases of bladder cancer in 2020. It is the 13th most common cause of cancer death with an estimated more than 212,000 deaths worldwide. Low-grade non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is usually successfully managed with transurethral resection (TUR) and overall survival for NMIBC reaches 90% according to some reports. However, long-term survival for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer remains low. Treatment options for bladder cancer have undergone a rapid change in recent years. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), targeted therapies, and antibody-drug conjugates are available now. As bladder cancer is genetically heterogeneous, the optimization of patient selection to identify those most likely to benefit from a specific therapy is an urgent issue in the treatment of patients with bladder cancer.

Activation of cGAS-STING Signal to Inhibit the Proliferation of Bladder Cancer: The Immune Effect of Cisplatin

Cisplatin is commonly used in neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and systemic therapy for advanced bladder cancer, but its immune-related mechanism is still unclear. Exploration of the immune effects of cisplatin in bladder cancer would complement the comprehensive mechanism of cisplatin and provide the basis for combination therapy of cisplatin and immunotherapy in bladder cancer. We confirmed the immune effects of cisplatin on T24 and TCCSUP bladder cancer cell lines in vitro and explored the important function of these immune effects in the bladder cancer microenvironment in a mice tumor model. We found cisplatin induced immune response in bladder cancer by RNA sequencing and validated that cGAS-STING signal was deeply involved in this response. Cisplatin induced cGAS-STING signal inhibited the proliferation of bladder cancer and increased the infiltration percentages of CD8+ T cells and dendritic cells in a transplantation mice tumor model. Accumulation of dsDNA and the release of chromatin bound cGAS are important to activate downstream STING. Our findings indicated a cisplatin-related immune effect in bladder cancer, and cisplatin combined with immunotherapy might have a synergistic effect for bladder cancer therapy.

Atezolizumab with chemotherapy in first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). Materials & methods: A Markov model was established for the analysis. Parametric survival models were used to fit to progression-free survival and overall survival data in the IMvigor130 study. A series of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone were US$475,633.17 and $207,488.17 per quality-adjusted life-year in the USA and China, respectively. Utility for the progression-free survival and progressive disease states, the cost of atezolizumab had the most significant impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Conclusion: Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy is not a cost-effective treatment option as a first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer.

The prognostic impact of bone metastasis in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy

Background:

In metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), bone metastasis (BM) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, yet their role as an independent prognostic variable remains unclear. We aimed to determine the impact of BM on overall survival (OS) in patients with mUC treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC).

Methods:

mUC patients receiving PBC at the Princess Margaret Cancer Center, Tom Baker Cancer Center, or Cross Cancer Institute from January 2005 to January 2018 were identified retrospectively using central pharmacy database records. Patient disease, treatment, and response characteristics were collected. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Variables reaching significance (p < 0.05) in univariable analysis (UVA) of survival (OS) were included in multivariable analysis (MVA) (Cox).

Results:

Overall, 376 patients with a median follow-up of 16.8 (range: 2.2–218.3) months were included. Median age was 67 (range: 28–91) years, 76% were male, 63% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0–1, and 41% had BM. All patients received first-line PBC. Patients with BM had inferior median PFS (4.9 months (95% CI 3.6–6.2) versus 6.5 months (95% CI 5.4–7.6), p = 0.03) and median OS (8.8 months (95% CI 7.8–9.7) versus 10.8 months (95% CI 9.1–12.5), p = 0.002). In UVA, ECOG PS 2–3 (p < 0.001), presence of BM (p = 0.002), and WBC count ⩾ 11,000 cells/mm³ (p = 0.001) were associated with inferior survival. Prior cystectomy (p < 0.001) and lack of progression (stable disease, partial or complete response) on treatment was associated with improved OS (p < 0.001). These variables maintained significance in MVA.

Conclusion:

In this retrospective study, mUC patients with BM had worse OS suggesting that BM may be an independent negative prognostic factor and including BM as a stratification factor in future mUC clinical trial designs may be warranted. A greater focus must be placed on novel therapeutic strategies to better manage BM to reduce both morbidity and mortality.

Management of Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in Older and Frail Patients: Have Novel Treatment Approaches Improved Their Care?

Patients with urothelial carcinoma tend to be older and frailer with a large number of chronic medical conditions. This is particularly pronounced in those with unresectable locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Prior to 2016, treatment options in advanced urothelial carcinoma were limited to chemotherapy, and as a result, a large number of patients were not receiving disease-directed management. Over the last 6 years, multiple alternative modalities including immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have been introduced. They are being utilized clinically in older and frail patients, but there are limited studies investigating outcomes in these specific populations. Based upon current evidence, age does not impact the efficacy and tolerance of immune checkpoint inhibitors if patients are fit enough to receive therapy. In frailer patients, immune checkpoint inhibitors appear to be safe, but outcomes from largely retrospective studies demonstrate mixed data regarding their efficacy. Although there are indications from clinical trials that enfortumab vedotin, sacituzumab govitecan, and erdafitinib are also efficacious irrespective of age, there is still not enough evidence to draw definitive conclusions about their use in older and frail patients. Regardless, in all older patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma, it is critical to evaluate for frailty through geriatric screening tools and comprehensive assessments. Combining these evaluations with consideration of an individual patient's goals should be the foundation upon which therapeutic decisions are made in this population of patients.

[Update on systemic treatment of urothelial cancer: therapy in transition]

The systemic treatment of locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma has been changing at a breathtaking pace for a few years. However, platinum-based chemotherapy continues to be the central component of perioperative therapies and first-line treatment in the metastatic stage. Immunotherapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors are now an integral part of therapy algorithms. New targeted forms of chemotherapy are about to be approved. Advances in understanding the molecular genetic analysis of tumour tissue will soon enable personalised therapy options. This article is intended to provide an overview of current systemic therapy options and the underlying database. New developments are identified by presenting ongoing phase III trials. After reading this article, the reader should feel informed about the current status of systemic therapy for urothelial carcinoma.

The Evolution of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

Simple Summary

Urothelial carcinoma is an aggressive cancer with a high risk of metastatic progression. Chemotherapy plays a key role in the management of metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with, however, no possibility of cure. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved the outcomes of patients, delaying progression of disease and improving quality of life. However, many questions remain concerning the optimal use of immunotherapy in urothelial carcinoma: When to start? Which biomarker of sensitivity/resistance to use? Which of the available options will increase the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors? We review the mechanisms of immune checkpoint inhibitors as well as the current management of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the era of immunotherapy.

Abstract

Urothelial carcinoma is an aggressive cancer and development of metastases remains a challenge for clinicians. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are significantly improving the outcomes of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). These agents were first used in monotherapy after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy, but different strategies explored the optimal use of ICIs in a first-line metastatic setting. The “maintenance” strategy consists of the introduction of ICIs in patients who experienced benefit from first-line chemotherapy in a metastatic setting. This allows an earlier use of ICIs, without waiting for disease progression. We review the optimal management of mUC in the era of ICIs, based on the key clinical messages arising from the pivotal trials.

Improving the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the management of advanced urothelial carcinoma, where do we stand?

•

Immune checkpoint inhibitors improve outcome in metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

•

Maintenance strategy involves early use of avelumab after efficient chemotherapy.

•

Patients with no progression on chemotherapy should receive maintenance avelumab.

•

There is no place for PD-L1 testing when considering maintenance strategy.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved the outcome of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). If these agents were first used in monotherapy after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy, new strategies have been evaluated in the last years, including association of ICIs, ICI plus chemotherapy association or maintenance therapy. This maintenance concept allows a better management of mUC, which is particularly interesting in cisplatin-ineligible patients.

This paper aims to review the current knowledge of ICIs in urothelial carcinoma as well as the new indications of these agents in mUC.

MicroRNA Signatures in the Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Scenario: Ready for the Game Changer?

Upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) represents a minor subgroup of malignancies arising in the urothelium of the renal pelvis or ureter. The estimated annual incidence is around 2 cases per 100,000 people, with a mean age at diagnosis of 73 years. UTUC is more frequently diagnosed in an invasive or metastatic stage. However, even though the incidence of UTUC is not high, UTUC tends to be aggressive and rapidly progressing with a poor prognosis in some patients. A significant challenge in UTUC is ensuring accurate and timely diagnosis, which is complicated by the non-specific nature of symptoms seen at the onset of disease. Moreover, there is a lack of biomarkers capable of identifying the early presence of the malignancy and guide-tailored medical treatment. However, the growing understanding of the molecular biology underlying UTUC has led to the discovery of promising new biomarkers. Among these biomarkers, there is a class of small non-coding RNA biomarkers known as microRNAs (miRNAs) that are particularly promising. In this review, we will analyze the main characteristics of UTUC and focus on microRNAs as possible novel tools that could enter clinical practice in order to optimize the current diagnostic and prognostic algorithm.

BRD4 promotes the migration and invasion of bladder cancer cells through the Sonic hedgehog signaling pathway and enhances cisplatin resistance

Platinum-based chemotherapy is a widely used strategy for bladder cancer (BCa) treatment. However, its clinical efficacy is affected by chemotherapy resistance via complex molecular mechanisms. Therefore, there is an urgent need to explore new targets for BCa therapy. Here, we showed that bromodomain-4 protein (BRD4) expression is upregulated in BCa tissues and cells. Inhibition of BRD4 attenuated the migration and invasion of BCa cells, which was rescued by the Sonic hedgehog (SHH) pathway activator recombinant human Sonic hedgehog peptide (rhSHH). We further found that cisplatin (DDP) suppressed the migration and invasion of BCa cells in vitro and inhibited tumor growth in vivo. However, overexpression of BRD4 weakened the pharmacological effects of DDP. In brief, our research revealed that BRD4 promotes migration and invasion by positively regulating the SHH pathway, drives DDP resistance in BCa, and is a novel therapeutic target for the treatment of BCa.

Carboplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy versus observation after radical cystectomy in patients with pN1-3 urothelial bladder cancer

PURPOSE

To test the impact of carboplatin-based ACT on overall survival (OS) in patients with pN1-3 cM0 BCa.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 1057 patients with pTany pN1-3 cM0 urothelial BCa treated with or without carboplatin-based ACT after radical cystectomy and bilateral lymph-node dissection between 2002 and 2018 at 12 European and North-American hospitals. No patient received neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Only patients with negative surgical margins at surgery were included. A 3:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using logistic regression to adjust for baseline characteristics. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to predict the effect of carboplatin-based ACT on OS. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to display OS in the matched cohort.

RESULTS

Of the 1057 patients included in the study, 69 (6.5%) received carboplatin-based ACT. After PSM, 244 total patients were identified in two cohorts that did not differ for baseline characteristics. Death was recorded in 114 (46.7%) patients over a median follow-up of 19 months. In the multivariable Cox regression analyses, increasing age at surgery (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.06, p < 0.001) and increasing number of positive lymph nodes (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, p = 0.02) were independent predictors of worse OS. The delivery of carboplatin-based ACT was not predictive of improved OS (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43-1.04, p = 0.08). The main limitations of this study are its retrospective design and the relatively low number of patients involved.

CONCLUSIONS

Carboplatin-based might not improve OS in patients with pN1-3 cM0 BCa. Our results underline the need for alternative therapies for cisplatin-ineligible patients.