Pembrolizumab and Enzalutamide in Patients with Abiraterone Acetate-Pretreated Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Cohort C of the Phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 Study

BACKGROUND

Limited responses have been observed in patients treated with enzalutamide after disease progression on abiraterone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), but androgen receptor signaling impacts T-cell function.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus enzalutamide in mCRPC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients in cohort C of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study, who received ≥4 wk of treatment with abiraterone acetate in the prechemotherapy mCRPC state and experienced treatment failure or became drug-intolerant, were included.

INTERVENTION

Pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus enzalutamide 160 mg orally once daily.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoints were safety, the confirmed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 on blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) on BICR and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 102 patients received pembrolizumab plus enzalutamide. Median follow-up was 51 mo (interquartile range 37-56). The confirmed PSA response rate was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI] 16-33%). The confirmed ORR was 11% (95% CI 2.9-25%; 4/38 patients; two complete responses). Median rPFS was 6.0 mo (95% CI 4.1-6.3). Median OS was 20 mo (95% CI 17-24). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 94 patients (92%); grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 44 patients (43%). The incidence of treatment-related rash was higher with combination therapy than expected from the safety profile of each drug. One patient (1.0%) died of a TRAE (cause unknown). Study limitations include the single-arm design.

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab plus enzalutamide had limited antitumor activity in patients who received prior abiraterone treatment without previous chemotherapy for mCRPC, with a safety profile consistent with the individual profiles of each agent.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Pembrolizumab plus enzalutamide showed limited antitumor activity and manageable safety in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The KEYNOTE-365 trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02861573.

[Sequential therapy of advanced bladder cancer after prior perioperative systemic treatment : Recommendations from the Interdisciplinary Bladder Carcinoma Working Group (IABC) of the DKG e. V.]

Guidelines can only give treatment recommendations for defined patient groups if high quality and meaningful evidence is available. However, patients included in clinical trials for the treatment of metastatic and/or locally advanced bladder cancer (mUC) are generally not representative for the spectrum of patients encountered in daily clinical practice. In particular, patients with different systemic pretreatments, variable prestudy responses or variable time to tumor progression are not sufficiently considered in trials and guideline recommendations. Accordingly, recommendations for the treatment of mUC patients with previous perioperative systemic therapy are lacking. To provide some guidance for daily uro-oncological practice despite the limited evidence, we sought to develop expert opinion-based treatment recommendations. These recommendations focus on palliative first-line therapy of mUC. Both perioperative pretreatment with classical cisplatin-based systemic therapy and/or immunotherapy, as well as the time to tumor recurrence have been considered.

Pembrolizumab Plus Olaparib for Patients With Previously Treated and Biomarker-Unselected Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III KEYLYNK-010 Trial

PURPOSE

There is an unmet need for therapeutic options that prolong survival for patients with heavily pretreated, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The phase III, open-label KEYLYNK-010 study evaluated pembrolizumab plus olaparib versus a next-generation hormonal agent (NHA) for biomarker-unselected, previously treated mCRPC.

METHODS

Eligible participants had mCRPC that progressed on or after abiraterone or enzalutamide (but not both) and docetaxel. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to pembrolizumab plus olaparib or NHA (abiraterone or enzalutamide). The dual primary end points were radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by blinded independent central review per Prostate Cancer Working Group-modified RECIST 1.1 and overall survival (OS). Time to first subsequent therapy (TFST) was a key secondary end point. Safety and objective response rate (ORR) were secondary end points.

RESULTS

Between May 30, 2019, and July 16, 2021, 529 participants were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus olaparib and 264 to NHA. At final rPFS analysis, median rPFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.2 to 6.0) with pembrolizumab plus olaparib and 4.2 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 6.1) with NHA (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.25]; P = .55). At final OS analysis, median OS was 15.8 months (95% CI, 14.6 to 17.0) and 14.6 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 17.3), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]; P = .26). At final TFST analysis, median TFST was 7.2 months (95% CI, 6.7 to 8.1) versus 5.7 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 7.1), respectively (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.03]). ORR was higher with pembrolizumab plus olaparib versus NHA (16.8% v 5.9%). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34.6% and 9.0% of participants, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pembrolizumab plus olaparib did not significantly improve rPFS or OS versus NHA in participants with biomarker-unselected, heavily pretreated mCRPC. The study was stopped for futility. No new safety signals occurred.

Safety and Efficacy of [177Lu]-PSMA-I&T Radioligand Therapy in Octogenarians with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Report on 80 Patients over the Age of 80 Years

¹⁷⁷Lu-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioligand therapy (RLT) is a new treatment option for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Its low toxicity profile favors use in elderly patients or in patients with critical comorbidities. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of [¹⁷⁷Lu]-PSMA RLT in mCRPC patients at least 80 y old. Methods: Eighty mCRPC patients at least 80 y old underwent [¹⁷⁷Lu]-PSMA-I&T RLT and were retrospectively selected. The patients were previously treated by androgen receptor-directed therapy, received taxane-based chemotherapy, or were chemotherapy-ineligible. The best prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response was calculated, as well as clinical progression-free survival (cPFS) and overall survival (OS). Toxicity data were acquired until 6 mo after the last treatment cycle. Results: Of 80 patients, 49 (61.3%) were chemotherapy-naïve and 16 (20%) had visceral metastases. The median number of previous mCRPC treatment regimens was 2. In total, 324 cycles (median, 4 cycles; range, 1-12) with a median cumulative activity of 23.8 GBq (interquartile range, 14.8-42.2) were applied. A PSA decline of 50% was achieved in 37 (46.3%) patients. Chemotherapy-naïve patients showed higher 50% PSA response rates than chemotherapy-pretreated patients (51.0% vs. 38.7%, respectively). Overall, median cPFS and OS were 8.7 and 16.1 mo, respectively. The median cPFS and OS of chemotherapy-naïve patients were significantly longer than those of chemotherapy-pretreated patients (10.5 vs. 6.5 mo and 20.7 vs. 11.8 mo, respectively, P < 0.05). A lower hemoglobin level and higher lactate dehydrogenase level at baseline were independent predictors of shorter cPFS and OS. Treatment-emergent grade 3 toxicities were anemia in 4 patients (5%), thrombocytopenia in 3 patients (3.8%), and renal impairment in 4 patients (5%). No nonhematologic grade 3 and no grade 4 toxicities were observed. The most frequent clinical side effects were grade 1-2 xerostomia, fatigue, and inappetence. Conclusion: [¹⁷⁷Lu]-PSMA-I&T RLT in mCRPC patients at least 80 y old is safe and effective, comparable to previously published data on non-age-selected cohorts with a low rate of high-grade toxicities. Chemotherapy-naïve patients showed a better and longer response to therapy than taxane-pretreated patients. [¹⁷⁷Lu]-PSMA RLT seems to be a meaningful treatment option for older patients.

Adjuvant vs. progression-triggered treatment with gemcitabine in platinum-ineligible high-risk bladder cancer patients: Long-term follow-up of a randomized phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy (ChT) is the preferred perioperative treatment in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder (UCUB). Nevertheless, a certain number of patients are ineligible for platinum-based ChT. This trial compared immediate adjuvant vs. delayed gemcitabine ChT at progression in platinum-ineligible patients with high-risk UCUB.

METHODS

High-risk platinum-ineligible UCUB patients (n = 115) were randomized 1:1 to adjuvant gemcitabine (n = 59) or gemcitabine at progression (n = 56). Overall survival was analyzed. Additionally, we analyzed progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity and quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 3.0 years (inter quartile range [IQR]: 1.3-11.6), adjuvant ChT did not significantly prolong overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.57-1.24; P = 0.375), with 5-year OS of 44.1% (95% CI: 31.2-56.2) and 30.4% (95% CI: 19.0-42.5), respectively. We noted no significant difference in PFS (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.49-1.18; P = 0.218), with 5-year PFS of 36.2% (95% CI: 22.8-49.7) in the adjuvant group and 22.2% (95% CI: 11.5%-35.1%) when treated at progression. Patients with adjuvant treatment showed a significantly worse QoL. The trial was prematurely closed after recruitment of 115 of the planned 178 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistically significant difference in terms of OS and PFS for patients with platinum-ineligible high-risk UCUB receiving adjuvant gemcitabine compared to patients treated at progression. These findings underline the importance of implementing and developing new perioperative treatments for platinum-ineligible UCUB patients.

[Value of immunotherapy in the perioperative treatment of localized muscle invasive bladder cancer]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are standard of care in the treatment of metastatic and locally advanced urothelial cancer. Their use in perioperative treatment is currently under investigation as monotherapy as well as in combination with chemotherapy or radiation regimens. This article provides an overview of recent trials, current data as well as an outlook on future developments in the perioperative management of urothelial cancer.

["Surgery only" is not enough: potential of multimodal therapy in urothelial bladder carcinoma]

Radical cystectomy is the standard treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer. Using perioperative cisplatin-based chemotherapy, 5‑year overall survival rates are 5% higher with neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to local therapy alone. New multimodal concepts have been developed to improve oncologic efficacy and to reduce treatment-related morbidity. Perioperative use of checkpoint inhibitors aims at improving efficacy, while bladder-preserving concepts try to avoid cystectomy in good responders. This article reviews new developments in radioimmunotherapy and perioperative combination therapies as well as bladder-preserving concepts like trimodal bladder therapy.

Nivolumab plus rucaparib for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from the phase 2 CheckMate 9KD trial

BACKGROUND

CheckMate 9KD (NCT03338790) is a non-randomized, multicohort, phase 2 trial of nivolumab plus other anticancer treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We report results from cohorts A1 and A2 of CheckMate 9KD, specifically evaluating nivolumab plus rucaparib.

METHODS

CheckMate 9KD enrolled adult patients with histologically confirmed mCRPC, ongoing androgen deprivation therapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Cohort A1 included patients with postchemotherapy mCRPC (1-2 prior taxane-based regimens) and ≤2 prior novel hormonal therapies (eg, abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide); cohort A2 included patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC and prior novel hormonal therapy. Patients received nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks plus rucaparib 600 mg two times per day (nivolumab dosing ≤2 years). Coprimary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) per Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 and prostate-specific antigen response rate (PSA₅₀-RR; ≥50% PSA reduction) in all-treated patients and patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumors, determined before enrollment. Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Outcomes (95% CI) among all-treated, HRD-positive, and BRCA1/2-positive populations for cohort A1 were confirmed ORR: 10.3% (3.9-21.2) (n=58), 17.2% (5.8-35.8) (n=29), and 33.3% (7.5-70.1) (n=9); confirmed PSA₅₀-RR: 11.9% (5.9-20.8) (n=84), 18.2% (8.2-32.7) (n=44), and 41.7% (15.2-72.3) (n=12); median rPFS: 4.9 (3.7-5.7) (n=88), 5.8 (3.7-8.4) (n=45), and 5.6 (2.8-15.7) (n=12) months; and median OS: 13.9 (10.4-15.8) (n=88), 15.4 (11.4-18.2) (n=45), and 15.2 (3.0-not estimable) (n=12) months. For cohort A2 they were confirmed ORR: 15.4% (5.9-30.5) (n=39), 25.0% (8.7-49.1) (n=20), and 33.3% (7.5-70.1) (n=9); confirmed PSA₅₀-RR: 27.3% (17.0-39.6) (n=66), 41.9 (24.5-60.9) (n=31), and 84.6% (54.6-98.1) (n=13); median rPFS: 8.1 (5.6-10.9) (n=71), 10.9 (6.7-12.0) (n=34), and 10.9 (5.6-12.0) (n=15) months; and median OS: 20.2 (14.1-22.8) (n=71), 22.7 (14.1-not estimable) (n=34), and 20.2 (11.1-not estimable) (n=15) months. In cohorts A1 and A2, respectively, the most common any-grade and grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were nausea (40.9% and 40.8%) and anemia (20.5% and 14.1%). Discontinuation rates due to TRAEs were 27.3% and 23.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Nivolumab plus rucaparib is active in patients with HRD-positive postchemotherapy or chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC, particularly those harboring BRCA1/2 mutations. Safety was as expected, with no new signals identified. Whether the addition of nivolumab incrementally improves outcomes versus rucaparib alone cannot be determined from this trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03338790.

Pembrolizumab Plus Docetaxel and Prednisone in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Long-term Results from the Phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 Cohort B Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) frequently receive docetaxel after they develop resistance to abiraterone or enzalutamide and need more efficacious treatments.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone in patients with mCRPC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The trial included patients with mCRPC in the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 cohort B study who were chemotherapy naïve and who experienced failure of or were intolerant to ≥4 wk of abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC with progressive disease within 6 mo of screening.

INTERVENTION

Pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously (IV) every 3 wk (Q3W), docetaxel 75 mg/m² IV Q3W, and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoints were safety, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression; the disease control rate (DCR) and duration of response (DOR) according to RECIST v1.1 by BICR; ORR, DCR, DOR, and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) according to Prostate Cancer Working Group 3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Among 104 treated patients, 52 had measurable disease. The median time from allocation to data cutoff (July 9, 2020) was 32.4 mo, during which 101 patients discontinued treatment, 81 (78%) for disease progression. The confirmed PSA response rate was 34% and the confirmed ORR (RECIST v1.1) was 23%. Median rPFS and OS were 8.5 mo and 20.2 mo, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 100 patients (96%). Grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 46 patients (44%). Seven AE-related deaths (6.7%) occurred (2 due to treatment-related pneumonitis). Limitations of the study include the single-arm design and small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC. Safety was consistent with profiles for the individual agents. Further investigation is warranted.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab combined with the chemotherapy drug docetaxel and the steroid prednisone for patients with metastatic prostate cancer resistant to androgen deprivation therapy , and who never received chemotherapy. The combination showed antitumor activity and manageable safety in this patient population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02861573.

MHC I Expression Predicts Response to Checkpoint Inhibitors in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma but Lacks Prognostic Value in Localized Disease

BACKGROUND: Loss of MHC I expression is a tumoral escape mechanism, part of the process of immunoediting. MHC expression patterns and their prognostic and predictive value have not been studied in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UC) so far. OBJECTIVE: To correlate the expression of MHC I and MHC II with prognosis after curative treatment, response to chemotherapy and checkpoint inhibition. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed different patient cohorts for their expression of MHC I(HLA-A/B/C) and II (HLA-DR/DP/DQ) and examined potential correlations with prognosis and response to cisplatin-based chemotherapy or PD-1/PD-L1 directed immunotherapy. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, MHC expression was analyzed in 246 patients, and complete MHC I loss was seen in 29.7% of patients. In 35% of patients aberrant tumoral expression of MHC II was observed. In a homogeneous cohort of 149 patients with cystectomy with curative intent there were no significant differences in survival between the MHC expression groups. MHC I+ and MHC II+ patients had higher infiltration densities with CD8+ T effector cells. An analysis of 77 additional patients (cohort II) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy revealed no associations of MHC status with response defined as <  pT2 pN0 in the cystectomy specimen. Lastly, we analyzed 26 patients with metastatic disease treated with PD-1/PD-L1 directed immunotherapy (cohort III, best response: 11 PD, 5 SD, 10 OR) and observed responses exclusively in MHC I+ patients (10/19 patients, 52.6). All four MHC I+ /MHC II+ /PD-L1+ patients had a progression-free interval of at least 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Tumoral MHC I expression is frequently lost in UC. We found no association with prognosis or response to cisplatin-based chemotherapy but response to checkpoint inhibitors was limited to MHC I+ patients.

[Metastatic urothelial carcinoma-guideline-based therapy and new options]

Due to the approval of immuno-oncological therapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors, the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma has become more complex in all lines of therapy. Thus, in first-line treatment, immunotherapy alone or immune maintenance therapy following platinum-based chemotherapy can be applied in addition to treatment with platinum-based combination therapies alone. In addition to the approval status and guideline recommendation, patient-specific factors such as comorbidities as well as patient preference must always be considered when choosing a therapy. In the following, we summarize the current data on treatment options in the first-line therapy of metastatic urothelial carcinoma and illustrate their practical application using a patient example.

Efficacy and safety of erdafitinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was shown to be clinically active and tolerable in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations in the primary analysis of the BLC2001 study at median 11 months of follow-up. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the selected regimen of erdafitinib determined in the initial part of the study.

METHODS

The open-label, non-comparator, phase 2, BLC2001 study was done at 126 medical centres in 14 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, at least one prespecified FGFR alteration, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease after receiving at least one systemic chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or were ineligible for cisplatin. The selected regimen determined in the initial part of the study was continuous once daily 8 mg/day oral erdafitinib in 28-day cycles, with provision for pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg/day (8 mg/day UpT). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of erdafitinib. This is the final analysis of this study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02365597.

FINDINGS

Between May 25, 2015, and Aug 9, 2018, 2328 patients were screened, of whom 212 were enrolled and 101 were treated with the selected erdafitinib 8 mg/day UpT regimen. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Aug 9, 2019. Median efficacy follow-up was 24·0 months (IQR 22·7-26·6). The investigator-assessed objective response rate for patients treated with the selected erdafitinib regimen was 40 (40%; 95% CI 30-49) of 101 patients. The safety profile remained similar to that in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals reported with longer follow-up. Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any causality occurred in 72 (71%) of 101 patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any cause were stomatitis (in 14 [14%] of 101 patients) and hyponatraemia (in 11 [11%]). There were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

With longer follow-up, treatment with the selected regimen of erdafitinib showed consistent activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations.

FUNDING

Janssen Research & Development.

Analysis by region of outcomes for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with cabozantinib or everolimus: a sub-analysis of the METEOR study

Introduction:

METEOR was a phase 3 trial (NCT01865747) of cabozantinib versus everolimus in adults with advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC previously treated with VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This post hoc analysis of METEOR compared outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries.

Material and methods:

Adults with advanced/metastatic clear cell RCC who had received ≥ 1 prior VEGFR-TKI treatment were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or everolimus. Patients were categorized by recruitment region: Europe or outside of Europe (rest of world [RoW]). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) were compared between regional subgroups.

Results:

In total, there were 320 eligible patients from Europe (cabozantinib, 167; everolimus, 153) and 338 from RoW (North America, 240 patients; Asia-Pacific, 86; Latin America, 12; randomized as cabozantinib, 163; everolimus, 175). PFS and OS were longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus and similar for the Europe and RoW subgroups. For PFS, the hazard ratio (HR) for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 0.54 for the Europe subgroup (p < .001) and 0.50 for the RoW subgroup (p < .001). For OS, the HR was 0.75 for the Europe subgroup (p = .034) and 0.69 for the RoW subgroup (p = .006). ORR in the Europe subgroup was 15% for cabozantinib and 3.9% for everolimus (p < .001). For the RoW subgroup, ORR was 20% for cabozantinib and 2.9% for everolimus (p < .001). Incidence of grade 3/4 AEs were similar for the Europe (cabozantinib, 74%; everolimus, 58%) and RoW subgroups (cabozantinib, 69%; everolimus, 64%).

Conclusion:

In the METEOR trial, efficacy outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries favored cabozantinib over everolimus. The efficacy and safety results for the regional subgroups were consistent with those of the overall METEOR population.

347 KEYNOTE-365 cohort C: pembrolizumab + enzalutamide in patients with abiraterone acetate–pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)—data after minimum of 22 months of follow-up

Background

Previous data from cohort C of phase 1b/2 study KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) showed that PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab + enzalutamide was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity in patients with abiraterone acetate–pretreated mCRPC. Updated data after a minimum of 22 months of follow-up are presented.

Methods

Patients in the prechemotherapy mCRPC state who were intolerant to ≥4 weeks‘ treatment with abiraterone acetate or for whom this treatment failed, had progressive disease ≤6 months before screening, and had ECOG PS 0-2 were enrolled. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg IV Q3W + enzalutamide 160 mg orally QD. Primary end points were PSA response rate (decrease ≥50% from baseline), confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR), and safety. Secondary end points were time to PSA progression; DCR (CR or PR of any duration + SD or non-CR/non-PD ≥6 months) and DOR per RECIST v1.1 by BICR; rPFS per PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and OS.

Results

Of 103 enrolled patients, 102 were treated. Median age was 70.0 years (range, 43–87); 29.4% of patients were PD-L1+; 37.3% had RECIST-measurable disease. Median follow-up (time from enrollment to data cutoff) was 40.2 months (range, 22.3–49.9). Confirmed PSA response rate in patients with baseline PSA measurement (N = 101) was 23.8%. Median time to PSA progression was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.5–4.4). In 38 patients with measurable disease, ORR was 10.5% (2 CR; 2 PR). Median DOR was 11.8 months (4.3 to 38.3+ months); 1 patient had a response ≥12 months. DCR for the total population was 33.3%. Median (95% CI) rPFS was 6.0 months (4.1–6.3); rPFS at 12 months was 30.1%. Median (95% CI) OS was 20.1 months (16.9–25.2); OS at 12 months was 76.2%. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 92.2% of patients; most common (≥20%) were fatigue (39.2%), nausea (21.6%), and rash (21.6%). Grade 3–5 TRAEs occurred in 42.2%, most commonly rash (7.8%) and fatigue (5.9%). Four patients died of AEs: 1 death was treatment-related (unknown cause).

Conclusions

After a minimum follow-up of 22 months, pembrolizumab + enzalutamide continued to show antitumor activity in abiraterone acetate–pretreated mCRPC. The safety profile of pembrolizumab + enzalutamide was generally consistent with individual profiles of each agent. There was a higher incidence than typically reported for the individual agents of all-grade (21.6%) and grade 3 (7.8%) rash, which resolved with standard-of-care treatment. The combination is being further evaluated in the phase 3 study KEYNOTE-641.

Acknowledgements

Medical writing and/or editorial assistance was provided by Matthew Grzywacz, PhD, of ApotheCom (Yardley, PA, USA). This assistance was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Funding for this research was provided by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials

gov, identifier: NCT02861573

Ethics Approval

The study and the protocol were approved by the Institutional Review Board or ethics committee at each site.

[Muscle-invasive bladder cancer]

Bladder cancer, which is a complex disease, can be treated with a variety of stage-oriented treatment options. In this article, the treatment recommendations of the German S3 guideline "Early detection, diagnosis, treatment and aftercare of bladder cancer" are applied in a fictitious case study. In a patient with invasive transitional cell carcinoma, the treatment options-ranging from bladder preservation to radical cystectomy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy-are discussed on the basis of the current literature.

Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (N+C) versus sunitinib (S) for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Outcomes by baseline disease characteristics in the phase 3 CheckMate 9ER trial

4553

Background: First-line N+C significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs S in aRCC patients (pts) in the phase 3 CheckMate 9ER trial, leading to FDA approval of N+C in this setting. A deeper understanding of how baseline disease characteristics may impact clinical outcomes with N+C vs S may inform clinical decision making. Methods: Pts with clear cell aRCC were randomized to N 240 mg IV Q2W + C 40 mg PO QD vs S 50 mg PO QD (4 weeks of 6-week cycles). In this post hoc exploratory analysis, PFS, OS, and ORR were evaluated across pt subgroups defined by baseline IMDC risk status, organ sites of metastases (mets), number of organs with any lesions, or target lesion size. Consistent with primary/secondary efficacy endpoints in ITT pts, PFS and ORR were evaluated per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review in subgroups. Results: Median follow-up in ITT pts was 23.5 months. PFS, OS, and ORR (including complete response [CR]) outcomes are summarized in the table across subgroups: IMDC risk (favorable [FAV], intermediate [I], poor [P]); number of organs with ≥ 1 target/nontarget lesion (T/NT; 1 and ≥ 2); sum of diameters of target lesions (sDTL; < and ≥ median [72.1 mm]), and in pts with liver, bone, or lung mets. The PFS HR favored N+C vs S and median (m) PFS was longer with N+C vs S across all subgroups. The OS HR also favored N+C vs S across most subgroups. ORR ranged from 38%–66% (N+C) vs 10%–44% (S) across subgroups, and CR benefits were seen with N+C in most subgroups. Additional outcomes including landmark OS and response details in subgroups will be reported. Conclusions: Consistent with outcomes in ITT pts, efficacy benefits with N+C vs S were observed regardless of IMDC risk status, organ site of mets, or extent of tumor burden at baseline. These results support N+C as a new first-line treatment option for pts with aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03141177. [Table: see text]

CheckMate 9KD cohort A1 final analysis: Nivolumab (NIVO) + rucaparib for post-chemotherapy (CT) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

5044

Background: CheckMate 9KD is a phase 2 trial of NIVO (anti-PD-1) combined with either rucaparib, docetaxel, or enzalutamide for mCRPC. PARP inhibitors, like rucaparib, increase cellular DNA damage, particularly in tumors with DNA repair defects, leading to genomic instability and cell death. This DNA damage promotes immune priming and adaptive PD-L1 upregulation. Consequently, dual PD-(L)1 and PARP inhibition is a plausible therapeutic strategy for mCRPC. We report final results for cohort A1 (NIVO + rucaparib for post-CT mCRPC) of CheckMate 9KD. Methods: Cohort A1 enrolled patients (pts) with post-CT mCRPC (1–2 prior taxane regimens), ongoing ADT, ≤ 2 prior novel hormonal therapies (abiraterone, enzalutamide, etc) for mCRPC, and no prior PARP inhibitor treatment. Pts received NIVO 480 mg Q4W + rucaparib 600 mg BID until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity (NIVO dosing limited to 2 yrs). Coprimary endpoints: objective response rate (ORR) per PCWG3 criteria and prostate-specific antigen response rate (PSA-RR; ≥ 50% PSA reduction) in all treated pts and pts with homologous recombination deficiency positive (HRD+) tumors, determined before enrollment. Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Of 88 treated pts, median age 66 yrs (range, 46–85), 34.1% had visceral metastases and 65.9% had measurable disease. Median follow-up was 11.9 mo. Pts had a median of 4.5 NIVO doses and 3.8 mo of rucaparib. The table summarizes primary and key secondary efficacy results, and shows better outcomes for HRD+ vs HRD–/not evaluable (NE) tumors. In pts with BRCA2 mutations, confirmed ORR was 37.5% (3/8 pts) and confirmed PSA-RR was 45.5% (5/11 pts). Any-grade treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 93.2% of pts, most commonly nausea (40.9%) and fatigue (33.0%). Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurred in 54.5% of pts, most commonly anemia (20.5%) and neutropenia (10.2%). TRAEs led to discontinuation in 27.3% of pts. One pt had a stroke, considered related to rucaparib by the investigator, after 28 days on rucaparib and 2 NIVO doses and died 2 months later due to post-thrombolysis hematoma. Conclusions: NIVO + rucaparib is active in pts with HRD+ post-CT mCRPC, although the trial design and short follow-up limit assessment of benefits of the combination vs individual components. Pts with HRD– tumors did not appear to benefit from either drug. No new safety signals were observed with NIVO + rucaparib. Additional biomarker analyses are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03338790. [Table: see text]

Atezolizumab Versus Chemotherapy in Patients with Platinum-treated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Long-term Overall Survival and Safety Update from the Phase 3 IMvigor211 Clinical Trial

Atezolizumab is an anti-PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitor recommended for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) after prior platinum-containing chemotherapy, regardless of PD-L1 status, among other treatment settings. We conducted a long-term follow-up to the exploratory analysis of overall survival (OS) and safety for the IMvigor211 intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Patients with mUC and disease progression during or following platinum-based chemotherapy were randomised 1:1 to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg or chemotherapy (vinflunine 320 mg/m², paclitaxel 175 mg/m², or docetaxel 75 mg/m² according to investigator choice) intravenously every 3 wk. Although the primary analysis did not demonstrate statistically significant longer OS for patients receiving atezolizumab versus chemotherapy, updated OS showed long-term durable remission. With a median of 33 mo of follow-up, the 24-mo OS rate was 23% with atezolizumab and 13% with chemotherapy. Safety findings were consistent with the primary analysis, with no new signals detected. Chemotherapy-treated patients experienced more grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs; 43% vs 22%) and more AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (18% vs 9%). Atezolizumab-treated patients experienced more AEs of special interest (35% vs 20%), which tended to be grade 1-2. Our findings support the use of atezolizumab in platinum-treated patients with mUC regardless of PD-L1 status. PATIENT SUMMARY: We report follow-up results from a study of an immunotherapy treatment, atezolizumab, in patients with bladder cancer who had already received platinum-containing chemotherapy. This analysis compared the effectiveness of atezolizumab with chemotherapy over 2.5 years after starting treatment. The results show that patients who received atezolizumab lived longer and had manageable side effects compared with patients who received chemotherapy. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02302807.

Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy after chemohormonal therapy in patients with primary metastatic prostate cancer

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

KEYNOTE-365 cohort B: Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus docetaxel and prednisone in abiraterone (abi) or enzalutamide (enza)–pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)—New data after an additional 1 year of follow-up

10

Background: For men with mCRPC, systemic therapies such as docetaxel and cabazitaxel improve survival, but more effective treatments are needed. KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) is a phase 1b/2 study to examine the safety and efficacy of pembro in combination with 4 different study medications (cohorts A, B, C, D) in mCRPC. Previous data from cohort B with a median of 20 months of follow-up showed that pembro + docetaxel and prednisone was well tolerated and had antitumor activity in patients (pts) with mCRPC previously treated with abi or enza. New efficacy and safety data after an additional year of follow-up are presented. Methods: Cohort B enrolled pts who did not respond to or were intolerant to ≥4 weeks of abi or enza in the prechemotherapy mCRPC state and whose disease progressed within 6 months of screening (determined by PSA progression or radiologic bone/soft tissue progression). Pts received pembro 200 mg IV every 3 weeks (Q3W), docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV Q3W, and oral prednisone 5 mg twice daily. Primary end points were safety, PSA response rate (PSA decrease >50% from baseline), and ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review. Efficacy and safety were assessed in all pts as treated. Results: Of the 104 treated pts, median age was 68.0 years (range, 50-86), 23.1% had PD-L1–positive tumors (combined positive score ≥1), 25.0% had visceral disease, and 50.0% had measurable disease. Median time from enrollment to data cutoff was 32.4 months (range 13.9-40.3); 101 pts discontinued, primarily because of disease progression (77.9%). Efficacy outcomes are reported in the table below. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 100 pts (96.2%); the most frequent (≥30%) were diarrhea (41.3%), fatigue (41.3%), and alopecia (40.4%). Grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 46 pts (44.2%). Five pts (4.8%) died of AEs; 2 were treatment-related pneumonitis. Conclusions: After another year of follow-up, pembro + docetaxel and prednisone showed improved ORR and PSA response rates compared to the prior dataset in pts with mCRPC previously treated with abi or enza. Safety was consistent with known profiles of each agent and will be further evaluated in a phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-921). Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

CheckMate 9KD Arm B final analysis: Efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus docetaxel for chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

12

Background: CheckMate 9KD (NCT03338790) is a phase 2 trial of nivolumab (NIVO; anti-PD-1) in combination with rucaparib, docetaxel (DOCE), or enzalutamide for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). DOCE is a standard-of-care chemotherapy for mCRPC that may potentiate antitumor immune responses, thus supporting its use in combination with NIVO, which has shown limited antitumor activity in mCRPC as monotherapy. We report final analysis results for Arm B (NIVO + DOCE) of CheckMate 9KD. Methods: Arm B enrolled patients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC with ongoing androgen deprivation therapy and ≤ 2 prior novel antiandrogen therapies (NATs; i.e., abiraterone, enzalutamide, etc.). Patients received NIVO 360 mg + DOCE 75 mg/m2 Q3W + prednisone 5 mg BID for ≤ 10 cycles, followed by NIVO 480 mg Q4W until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity (up to 2 years). Coprimary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and prostate-specific antigen response rate (PSA-RR; defined as a ≥ 50% PSA reduction). Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Of 84 treated patients with a median age of 71 years (range: 53-88), 27% had visceral disease and 54% had measurable disease. The median number of docetaxel cycles was 8; the median number of nivolumab doses was 11. Median follow up was 15.2 months. The table displays the efficacy outcomes, which appear to show comparable ORR in patients receiving versus not receiving prior NAT. There was 1 (2.2%) complete objective response and 17 (37.8%) partial responses in 45 patients with measurable disease. Any-grade treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 95.2% of patients, most commonly fatigue (39.3%), diarrhea (35.7%), and alopecia (34.5%). Grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 47.6% of patients, most commonly neutropenia (16.7%). TRAEs led to discontinuation in 29.8% of patients. The most common immune-related AEs were GI (35.7%) or skin-related (26.2%). There were 3 treatment-related deaths (1 pneumonitis related to NIVO; 2 pneumonias related to DOCE). Conclusions: NIVO + DOCE has encouraging clinical activity in patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC, regardless of prior NAT, with a safety profile consistent with those of the individual agents. These outcomes support the ongoing phase 3 CheckMate 7DX trial of NIVO + DOCE vs placebo + DOCE for mCRPC (NCT04100018). Clinical trial information: NCT03338790. [Table: see text]

Consensus paper: current state of first- and second-line therapy in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma

The therapy of advanced (clear-cell) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has recently experienced tremendous changes. Several new treatments have been developed, with PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibition being the backbone of therapy. Diverse immunotherapy combinations change current first-line standards. These changes also require new approaches in subsequent lines of therapy. In an expert panel, we discussed the new treatment options and how they change clinical practice. While first-line immunotherapies introduce a new level of response rates, data on second-line therapies remains poor. This scenario poses a challenge for clinicians as guideline recommendations are based on historical patient cohorts and agents may lack the appropriate label for their in guidelines recommended use. Here, we summarize relevant clinical data and consider appropriate treatment strategies.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Using the AGREE II Instrument

CONTEXT

Numerous health care organizations have established guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer. However, the lack of a standardized guideline development approach results in considerable differences of the guidelines' methodological quality.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the methodological quality of all relevant clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for urinary bladder cancer and provide a reference for clinicians in choosing guidelines of high methodological quality.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline via PubMed, 4 CPG databases, and 7 databases of interdisciplinary organizations. CPGs for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) with the topics screening, pathology, diagnosis, treatment, and aftercare published in English language between 2012 and 2018 were included. The CPG quality was analyzed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 16 CPGs were included for the quality appraisal. Because of predefined criteria, 5 CPGs were "strongly recommended" (American Urological Association NMIBC, European Association of Urology [EAU] NMIBC, EAU MIBC, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network), 4 CPGs were "weakly recommended" and 7 CPGs were "not recommended."

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of bladder cancer guidelines is diverse. Considering the rapid development of new therapies (e.g., immune checkpoint inhibitors), "living guidelines" of high methodological quality, such as the EAU NMIBC or MIBC guideline, will become more relevant in the future guideline's landscape.

Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus olaparib in patients (pts) with docetaxel-pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): KEYNOTE-365 cohort A efficacy, safety, and biomarker results

5544

Background: Pembro + olaparib has shown antitumor activity and acceptable safety in docetaxel-pretreated pts with mCRPC enrolled in cohort A of the phase I/II KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573). Updated results with new biomarker data are reported. Methods: Pts with docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC who progressed within 6 mo of screening received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + olaparib 400-mg capsule or 300-mg tablet PO BID. Pts might have received 1 other chemotherapy and ≤2 second-generation androgen-receptor targeted therapies. Primary end points: PSA response rate (decrease ≥50% from baseline, confirmed by a second value ≥3 wks later), ORR per RECIST v1.1, and safety. Key secondary end points: DCR, DOR, rPFS, and OS. Biospecimens (eg, blood, tissue) were collected for biomarker analysis (tissue PD-L1 expression, androgen receptor variant 7 [AR-v7] expression in circulating tumor cells [CTCs], and a T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile [GEP]). ctDNA was analyzed by Guardant Health 360 (GH360) and Omni (GH Omni) assays. FFPE tissue was analyzed by FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) assay. Results: 84 of 87 enrolled pts were treated; 48/84 (57.1%) had measurable disease. Median (range) time from enrollment to data cutoff was 3.6 mo (0.0-29.2) for all pts and 26.7 mo (21.2-29.2) for 41 pts with ≥27 wks’ follow-up. Confirmed PSA response rate was 9% (95% CI, 3.5-16.8) in 82 pts with a baseline PSA assessment. Median time to PSA progression: 3.8 mo (95% CI, 2.9-4.4). In 24 pts with measurable disease and ≥27 wks’ follow-up, ORR was 8.3% (95% CI, 1.0-27.0; 2 PRs) and DCR ≥6 mo was 20.8% (95% CI, 7.1-42.2). Median (range) DOR was NR (12.0+ to 21.4+ mo); 2 pts had DOR ≥12 mo. In all pts, median rPFS was 4.3 mo (95% CI, 3.4-7.7) and median OS was 14.4 mo (95% CI, 8.1-18.5). Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 29 pts (35%); 2 pts died of TRAEs (1 myocardial infarction, 1 unknown). Overall, 26% had PD-L1+ tumors (combined positive score ≥1). Of 31 pts with CTC data, 12.9% were AR-v7+. No BRCA1/2 mutation was detected by GH360 (n=42). Of 57 pts analyzed by GH Omni, 2 had BRCA2 mutations, 1 had a BRCA1 mutation, 4 had ATM mutations, 1 had a CHEK1 mutation, and 6 had CDK12 mutations. Of 49 pts analyzed by F1CDx, 4 had BRCA mutations; 1 pt had a copy number loss mutation not detected by ctDNA analysis. GEP was not associated with ORR or PSA response. Conclusions: Pembro + olaparib continued to show activity and acceptable safety in pts with docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC. A phase III study of this combination is ongoing (KEYLYNK-010, NCT03834519). Clinical trial information: NCT02861573 .

Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus enzalutamide (enza) in patients (pts) with abiraterone acetate (abi)-pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): KEYNOTE-365 cohort C efficacy, safety, and biomarker results

5545

Background: Pembro + enza (cohort C) has shown antitumor activity and acceptable safety in abi-pretreated pts with mCRPC in the phase I/II KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573). Updated results with new biomarker data from cohort C are reported. Methods: Pts who became intolerant to or for whom ≥4 weeks of abi failed in the prechemotherapy mCRPC state and who progressed within 6 mo of screening were enrolled. Pts received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + enza 160 mg/day orally. Primary end points were PSA response rate (PSA decrease ≥50%; confirmed by a second value ≥3 weeks later), ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review, and safety. Key secondary end points were DCR per RECIST v1.1 (CR+PR+SD or non-CR/non-PD ≥6 mo), DOR per RECIST v1.1, radiographic PFS (rPFS) per PCWG-modified RECIST v1.1, and OS. Biospecimens (eg, blood, tissue) were collected at baseline and during the study for biomarker analysis, including tissue PD-L1 expression, androgen receptor variant 7 (AR-v7) expression in circulating tumor cells (CTCs), and a T-cell-inflamed gene expression profile (GEP). Results: Of 103 enrolled pts, 102 were treated; 39% of treated pts had measurable disease. Median (range) time from enrollment to data cutoff was 19.1 mo (1.1-28.8) for all pts and 21.4 mo (15.1-28.8) for pts with ≥27 wks’ follow-up (n=69). Confirmed PSA response rate was 22% in 101 pts with a baseline PSA assessment. Median time to PSA progression was 3.5 mo (95% CI, 2.9-4.0). In pts with measurable disease and ≥27 wks’ follow-up (n=25), confirmed ORR was 12% (2 CRs, 1 PR) and DCR was 32%. Median DOR was not reached (range, 0.0+ to 24.4+ mo); 2 pts had a response for ≥6 mo. In all pts, median (95% CI) rPFS was 6.1 mo (4.4-6.5) and median OS was 20.4 mo (15.5-NR). At 6 mo, rPFS rate was 55.1% and OS rate was 88.2%. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 92 pts (90%); most frequent (≥20%) were fatigue (38%), nausea (22%), and rash (20%). Grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 40 pts (39%). Three pts died of AEs (1 AE was treatment related [cause unknown]). Of all pts, 29% had PD-L1+ tumors (combined positive score ≥1). Of 51 pts with AR-v7 data, 13.7% were AR-v7+ and 86.3% were AR-v7−. GEP was not significantly associated with ORR or PSA response. Conclusions: Pembro + enza continued to show activity in pts with abi-pretreated mCRPC. Safety of the combination was consistent with the known profiles of pembro and enza. A phase III study of this combination is ongoing (KEYNOTE-641, NCT03834493). Clinical trial information: NCT02861573 .

Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus docetaxel and prednisone in patients (pts) with abiraterone acetate (abi) or enzalutamide (enza)-pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): KEYNOTE-365 cohort B efficacy, safety and, biomarker results

5550

Background: Pembro + docetaxel and prednisone (cohort B) has shown antitumor activity in pts with mCRPC in the phase I/II KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573). Updated efficacy and safety and new biomarker data from cohort B are reported. Methods: Pts who received at least 4 wk of abi or enza in the prechemotherapy mCRPC setting and whose disease progressed within 6 mo of screening were eligible. Pts received pembro 200 mg IV + docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV Q3W and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. Primary end points were PSA response rate (PSA decrease ≥50%; confirmed by a second value ≥3 weeks later), ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review, and safety. Key secondary end points were DCR per RECIST v1.1 (CR+PR+SD or non-CR/non-PD ≥6 mo), DOR per RECIST v1.1, radiographic PFS (rPFS) per PCWG-modified RECIST, and OS. Biospecimens (blood, tissue) were collected for biomarker analysis, including tissue PD-L1 expression, androgen receptor variant 7 (AR-v7) expression in circulating tumor cells, and a T-cell-inflamed gene expression profile (GEP). Results: Of 105 enrolled pts, 104 were treated, and 50% had measurable disease. Median (range) time from enrollment to data cutoff was 19.9 mo (1.4-27.8) for all pts and 21.8 mo (17.9-27.8) for pts with ≥27 wks follow-up (n=72). Confirmed PSA response rate was 28% in 103 pts with a baseline PSA assessment. Median time to PSA progression was 6.2 mo (95% CI, 3.7-7.4). In pts with measurable disease and ≥27 wks follow-up (n=39), ORR was 18% (7/39, all PRs) and DCR was 51%. Median DOR was 6.7 mo (range, 3.4-9.0+ [+ indicates ongoing responder]); 5 pts had a response for ≥6 mo. In all pts, median rPFS was 8.3 mo (95% CI, 7.6-10.1) and OS was 20.4 mo (16.9-NR). At 6 mo, the rPFS rate was 72.8% and OS rate was 95.3%. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 96% of all pts; most frequent were alopecia (39%), diarrhea (38%), and fatigue (38%). Grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 40% of pts; 2 pts died of TRAEs (pneumonitis). Overall, 24% of pts were PD-L1+ (combined positive score ≥1). Of 57 pts with AR-v7 data, 17.5% were AR-v7+, 77% were AR-v7−, and 5% were undetermined. GEP was not significantly associated with ORR or PSA response. Conclusions: Pembro + docetaxel and prednisone showed activity in pts with abi or enza-pretreated mCRPC. Safety of the combination was consistent with the known profiles of the individual agents. A phase 3 study of this combination is ongoing (KEYNOTE-921, NCT03834506). Clinical trial information: NCT02861573 .

A randomized phase II study of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus standard of care in previously untreated and advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (SUNIFORECAST)

TPS5103

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (nccRCC) are a heterogeneous group of tumors accounting for approximately 25% of RCC patients (pts.). Since most clinical trials focus on clear-cell RCC (ccRCC) only, data on treatment strategies for nccRCC are limited. The combination of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab (IO/IO) has recently been approved for treatment in RCC showing a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR), progression free (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in intermediate and high-risk pts. compared to sunitinib in a phase-III trial. Furthermore retrospective analysis in nccRCC patients have shown promising results for IO/IO as well in these entities. Methods: In this prospective randomized phase-II multicenter European trial adults with advanced or metastatic nccRCC without prior systemic therapy are eligible. Other key inclusion criteria include: available tumor tissue, Karnofsky > 70% and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1. All histological diagnoses are reviewed by a central pathologist. The study plans to randomize ~306 pts. stratified for papillary or non-papillary non-clear cell histology and by the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score. Pts. will be randomized 1:1 to either i) Nivolumab 3mg/kg intravenously (IV) plus Ipilimumab 1mg/kg IV every 3 weeks for 4 doses followed by Nivolumab fixed dose 240mg IV every 2 weeks or ii) standard of care therapy according to the approved schedule. Treatment will be discontinued in case of unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of informed consent. Pts may continue treatment beyond progression, if clinical benefit is achieved and treatment is well tolerated. Primary endpoint is the OS rate at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include OS rate at 6 and 18 months, median OS, PFS, ORR and quality of life. The trial is in progress and 122 patients (78 pts with papillary, 37 pts with non-papillary histology) have been enrolled until now. Clinical trial information: NCT03075423 .

Impact of renal impairment on clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic (LA/M) urinary tract carcinoma (UTC) treated with atezolizumab (atezo): Analysis of the international SAUL study

5036

Background: Atezo, which targets PD-L1, is an approved therapy for LA/M urothelial carcinoma based on the IMvigor210 and IMvigor211 trials. The single-arm SAUL study (NCT02928406) showed consistent activity and safety in a broader population, including understudied scenarios, eg pts with renal impairment or other IMvigor211 exclusion criteria. Methods: Pts with LA/M UTC received atezo 1200 mg q3w until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Post hoc analyses explored outcomes in pts classified as: chemotherapy (CT) ineligible (calculated creatine clearance [CrCl] 15– < 30 mL/min); cisplatin ineligible and carboplatin eligible (CrCl 30– < 60 mL/min); or cisplatin eligible (CrCl ≥60 mL/min). Results: Of 1004 enrolled pts, 46 (5%) were classified as CT ineligible and 420 (42%) as cisplatin ineligible. Results are summarized below. Conclusions: These post hoc analyses suggest pts typically considered cisplatin or CT ineligible are candidates for atezo. Pts with renal impairment achieved similar ORR and DCR to pts with CrCl ≥60 mL/min, without increased toxicity. Imbalances in pt characteristics may explain numerical differences in OS. Clinical trial information: NCT02928406 . [Table: see text]

Molecular lymph node staging for bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection

OBJECTIVE

Presence of lymph node (LN) metastasis in bladder cancer (BCa) is a main risk factor for tumor recurrence after radical cystectomy (RC). Molecular analysis facilitates detection of small-volume LN metastases with higher sensitivity than standard histopathology. The aim of the present study was to establish molecular LN analysis in BCa patients undergoing RC with lymph node dissection (LND) and to determine its ability to predict tumor recurrence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Five transcripts with overexpression in BCa (FXYD3, KRT17, KRT20, SPINK1, UPKII) were evaluated for molecular LN analysis. We included 76 BCa patients from the prospective, randomized surgical phase-III trial (LEA AUO AB 25/02, NCT01215071) investigating extended vs. limited LND at RC. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). As control, 136 LNs from 45 patients without BCa were analyzed to determine a threshold for pathologic gene expression.

RESULTS

About 1,319 LNs were investigated with molecular and histopathologic examination. Histopathology detected 39 LN metastases in 17 (22%) patients. Of the tested genes FXYD3 performed best and classified all pN+-patients correctly as node-positive (pN+/molN+). In addition, FXYD3 reclassified 43 histopathologic negative LNs and 7 (9%) pN0-patients as molecular node-positive (pN0/molN+). Molecular and histopathologic LN status (pN0/molN0 vs. pN0/molN+ vs. pN+/molN+) was significantly associated with locally advanced disease (P = 0.006) and poor RFS (P < 0.001). Median RFS was not reached in LN-negative patients (pN0/molN0), 45 months (95%CI 8-83) in exclusively molecular positive patients (pN0/molN+) and 9 months (95%CI 5-13) in patients with histopathologic and molecular positive LNs (pN+/molN+).

CONCLUSIONS

Molecular LN analysis with FXYD3 identified additional LN metastases in histopathologic negative LNs and identified patients with elevated risk of tumor recurrence after RC. Thus, molecular LN analysis improves LN staging and might serve as a tool to guide adjuvant treatment.

Early Prostate-Specific Antigen Changes and Clinical Outcome After 177Lu-PSMA Radionuclide Treatment in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is widely used to monitor treatment response in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, PSA measurements are considered only after 12 wk of treatment. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of early PSA changes after ¹⁷⁷Lu-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA) radionuclide treatment in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. Methods: Men who were treated with ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA under a compassionate-access program at our institution and had available PSA values at baseline and at 6 wk after treatment initiation were included in this retrospective analysis. Patients were assigned to 3 groups on the basis of PSA changes: response (≥30% decline), progression (≥25% increase), and stable (<30% decline and <25% increase). The coprimary endpoints were overall survival and imaging-based progression-free survival. The secondary endpoints were PSA changes at 12 wk and PSA flare-up. Results: We identified 124 eligible patients with PSA values at 6 wk. A greater than or equal to 30% decline in PSA at 6 wk was associated with longer overall survival (median, 16.7 mo; 95% CI, 14.4-19.0) than stable PSA (median, 11.8 mo; 95% CI, 8.6-15.1) (P = 0.007) or PSA progression (median, 6.5 mo; 95% CI, 5.2-7.8) (P < 0.001). Patients with a greater than or equal to 30% decline in PSA at 6 wk also had a lower risk of imaging-based progression than patients with stable PSA (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.94) (P = 0.02), whereas patients with PSA progression had a higher risk of imaging-based progression than patients with stable PSA (hazard ratio, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.95-5.21) (P < 0.001). The percentage changes in PSA at 6 and 12 wk were highly associated (r = 0.90; P < 0.001). Of 31 patients who experienced early PSA progression at 6 wk, 29 (94%) showed biochemical progression at 12 wk. Overall, only 1 (3%) of 36 patients with PSA progression at 6 wk achieved any PSA decline at 12 wk (1% of the entire cohort). The limitations of the study included its retrospective nature and the single-center experience. Conclusion: PSA changes at 6 wk after ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA initiation are an early indicator of long-term clinical outcome. Patients with PSA progression after 6 wk of treatment could benefit from a very early decision to switch treatment. PSA flare-up during ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA treatment is very uncommon. Prospective studies are now warranted to validate our findings and potentially inform clinicians earlier on the effectiveness of ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA.

KEYNOTE-365 cohort A updated results: Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus olaparib in docetaxel-pretreated patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

100

Background: KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) is a phase 1b/2 study evaluating pembro + other agents in mCRPC. Updated results from cohort A (pembro + olaparib) are reported. Methods: Docetaxel-pretreated, molecularly unselected pts with mCRPC with progression within 6 mo of screening per PSA or radiologic bone/soft tissue progression enrolled. Pts may have received 1 other chemotherapy and ≤2 2nd-generation hormone therapy (HT). Pts received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + olaparib 400 mg PO BID. Primary end points: safety, PSA response rate (confirmed PSA decline ≥50%), and ORR per blinded independent central review. Results: Of 84 treated pts, 42 discontinued, primarily due to progression (n=29). Median age was 71 y (range, 47-83); 26% were PD-L1+, 26% had visceral disease, and 57% had RECIST-measurable disease. Median follow-up was 3 mo for all pts (n=81) and 14 mo for pts with ≥27 wks’ follow-up (n=41). See Table for efficacy outcomes. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 70 (83%) pts. Most frequent (≥30%) were nausea (33%) and anemia (31%). Grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 29 (35%) pts. Three pts died of AEs (2 treatment related [l myocardial infarction, 1 unknown cause]). Conclusions: With additional follow-up, pembro + olaparib continued to show activity in docetaxel-pretreated, molecularly unselected pts who previously received HT for mCRPC. Safety of the combination was consistent with individual profiles of each agent. Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

KEYNOTE-365 cohort B updated results: Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus docetaxel and prednisone in abiraterone (abi) or enzalutamide (enza)-pretreated patients (pts) with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

103

Background: KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) is a phase 1b/2 study to evaluate pembro in combination with other agents in mCRPC. Here we report updated results from cohort B (pembro + docetaxel and prednisone). Methods: Cohort B enrolled pts who failed or were intolerant to ≥4 wk of abi or enza in the prechemotherapy mCRPC state and whose disease progressed within 6 mo of screening as determined by PSA progression or radiologic bone/soft tissue progression. Pts received pembro 200 mg IV + docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV Q3W and prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. Primary end points were safety, PSA response rate (confirmed PSA decrease >50%), and ORR per blinded independent central review (BICR). Results: Of 104 treated pts, 72 discontinued, primarily due to progression (55%). Median age was 68 y (range 50-86), 24% were PD-L1+, 25% had visceral disease, and 50% had measurable disease. Median follow-up was 13 mo for all pts (n=104) and 19 mo for pts who had ≥27 wk of follow up (n=72). See table for efficacy outcomes. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 100 pts (96%); most frequent (≥30%) were alopecia, diarrhea, and fatigue (39% each). Grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 42 pts (40%). Five pts died of AEs; 2 deaths were from treatment-related AEs (pneumonitis). Conclusions: With additional follow-up, pembro + docetaxel and prednisone continued to show activity in pts with mCRPC who failed previous antihormonal therapy. Safety of the combination was consistent with the known profiles of the individual agents and will be further evaluated in a phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-921). Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

Atezolizumab (atezo) therapy for upper tract (UT) urothelial carcinoma (UC): Subgroup analysis of the single-arm international SAUL study in pretreated locally advanced/metastatic urinary tract carcinoma

488

Background: UTUC is rarer than bladder UC and typically responds poorly to standard chemotherapy. Analysis of 220 biomarker-evaluable atezo-treated patients (pts) in phase II/III trials suggested worse outcomes in UT vs lower tract UC [Galsky, ESMO 2018]. We explored clinical outcomes in pts with UTUC (renal pelvis or ureter) treated with atezo in the SAUL study. Methods: The single-arm SAUL study (NCT02928406) [Sternberg, Eur Urol 2019] enrolled a broader pt population, including pts with poor clinical characteristics and/or immune-mediated conditions, more representative of real-world practice than typically enrolled in randomized phase III immunotherapy trials. Pts with urinary tract carcinoma received atezo 1200 mg q3w until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Baseline characteristics, safety and efficacy were analyzed in subgroups of pts with UTUC (subdivided into renal pelvis or ureter UC) vs bladder UC. Results: Baseline characteristics in the 4 subgroups were generally similar, except for a numerically lower proportion of pts with 0 prior lines of therapy for metastatic disease in the UTUC vs bladder UC subgroup (30% vs 41%). Treatment exposure, safety and efficacy are shown below. Conclusions: These exploratory analyses of SAUL showed very similar efficacy and safety in UT vs bladder UC. This provides reassurance that atezo is active and has an acceptable safety profile in pts with UTUC, who are generally expected to have worse outcomes than bladder UC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02928406 . [Table: see text]

KEYNOTE-365 cohort C updated results: Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus enzalutamide (enza) in abiraterone (abi)-pretreated patients (pts) with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

102

Background: KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) is a phase 1b/2 study evaluating pembro in combination with other agents in mCRPC. An earlier report of cohort C showed activity and acceptable safety with pembro + enza. Updated results from cohort C are reported. Methods: Pts who failed or became intolerant to ≥4 wks of abi in prechemotherapy mCRPC state and whose disease progressed within 6 mo of screening per PSA progression or radiologic bone or soft tissue progression enrolled. Pts received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W with enza 160 mg/day PO. Primary end points: safety, PSA response rate (confirmed PSA decline ≥50%), and objective response rate (ORR) per blinded independent central review. Key secondary end points: disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), time to PSA progression, rPFS, and OS. Results: Of 102 treated pts, 73 discontinued, primarily due to progression (60%). Median age was 70 y (range, 43-87), 29% were PD-L1+, 17% had visceral disease, and 39% had measurable disease. Median follow up was 13 mo for all patients (n=102) and 17 mo for patients with ≥27 wks’ follow-up (n=69). See Table for efficacy outcomes. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 92 pts (90%); most frequent (≥20%) were fatigue (38%), nausea (22%), and rash (20%). Grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 40 pts (39%). Three pts died of AEs (1 AE was treatment related [cause unknown]). Conclusions: With additional follow-up, pembro + enza continued to show activity in pts with abi-pretreated mCRPC. Safety of the combination was consistent with known profiles of pembro and enza. Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer-An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort†: Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees

BACKGROUND

Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.

DESIGN

A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.

SETTING

Online Delphi survey and consensus conference.

PARTICIPANTS

The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), and 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.