Perioperative and Maintenance Therapy After First-Line Therapy as Paradigms for Drug Discovery in Urothelial Carcinoma.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hoffman-Censits J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4504799 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Perioperative and Maintenance Therapy After First-Line Therapy as Paradigms for Drug Discovery in Urothelial Carcinoma.
Hoffman-Censits Jean J Wong Yu-Ning YN
Clinical genitourinary cancer 20150326 4
Perioperative chemotherapy provided to increase the chance of cure for localized disease and maintenance therapy for metastatic disease represent 2 distinct aspects of the urothelial cancer disease treatment spectrum. The ability to access both pre- and postchemotherapy tissue in the neoadjuvant setting provides important opportunities for translational research to test novel therapies and identify predictors of response to therapy. The maintenance setting may be more complex, and study design a ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Urothelial cancer of the bladder is the 4th most common malignancy in American men and the 9th most common in women. Although it is a chemosensitive disease, advanced bladder cancer seems to have reached a plateau with regard to median survival of patients. Standard first-line therapy remains gemcitabine plus cisplatin (gc) or methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (mvac). In patients deemed unfit to receive cisplatin, gemcitabine plus carboplatin or gemcitabine plus paclitaxel can be considered. To date, no standard therapy has been established for patients who recur or are refractory to first-line therapy. Second-line vinflunine, by way of superiority over best supportive care, has shown promise in a phase iii trial. Cisplatin-based therapy (mvac or gc) can also be offered to patients previously treated with cisplatin, especially if they responded previously and are considered platinum-sensitive. Novel targeted therapies are sorely needed to further improve the delivery and efficacy of chemotherapy.
| S-EPMC3031362 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11291421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a frequently diagnosed tumor and an important cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Until a few years ago, despite the unquestioned role of platinum-based chemotherapy, therapeutic choices beyond the first line were limited and related to unsatisfactory outcomes. Metastatic UC has always been associated with a poor prognosis, with overall survival only slightly above a year. In the recent past, huge progress has been made in our understanding of the molecular and genomic disease characteristics, to enable stratification of patients in terms of prognosis and treatment responses. Unfortunately, we still do not have the perfect combination of clinical biomarkers to tailor the optimal treatment for each patient, despite making several efforts in this direction. The therapeutic arsenal has been augmented by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), which nowadays represent the backbone of the second-line setting. Equally revolutionary was the FDA's approval of erdafitinib, a potent fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor, the use of which is reserved for patients whose tumor harbors specific FGF pathway alterations. Recently, the therapeutic landscape of metastatic UC has been enhanced by the introduction of novel compounds, consisting of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). Enfortumab vedotin is an antibody targeting nectin-4, a cell adhesion molecule highly expressed in UC, conjugated to monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE), a microtubule-disrupting agent. Sacituzumab govitecan is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting Trop-2, a transmembrane glycoprotein, conjugated to the active metabolite of irinotecan. These two compounds have received accelerated approval by the FDA in patients pretreated with platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Several ongoing trials are investigating the role of ICIs combined with chemotherapy, antiangiogenic drugs, or other ICIs, as well as the efficacy of PARP inhibitors and target therapies, hoping to provide information for some important unmet needs. In this review, we aim to evaluate the current potential treatment options after first-line chemotherapy.
| S-EPMC9205436 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Upper tract urothelial carcinoma comprises 5-10% of all urothelial carcinoma cases. This disease tends to have a more aggressive course than its lower urinary tract counterpart, with 60% of patients presenting with invasive disease and 30% of patients presenting with metastatic disease at diagnosis. The diagnostic workup of UTUC involves imaging with CT urogram, urine cytology, and direct visualization and biopsy of suspected lesions via ureteroscopy. Standard treatment of high-grade UTUC involves radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) and excision of the ipsilateral bladder cuff. Both the NCCN and EAU Guidelines include neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a treatment option for select patients with UTUC; however, there are no strict guidelines. Much of the rationale for neoadjuvant chemotherapy is based on extrapolation from data from muscle-invasive bladder cancer, which has demonstrated a 5-year OS benefit of 5-8%. Retrospective studies evaluating the use of NACT in urothelial carcinoma have yielded pathologic objective response rates of 48% in UTUC cohorts. The randomized Phase III POUT study noted a DFS advantage with adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy, compared with surveillance in UTUC, of 70% vs. 51% at 2 years. Though not the standard of care, multiple studies have explored the use of perioperative immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy in the management of invasive urothelial carcinoma. The PURE-02 study explored the use of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with high-risk UTUC. A small study of 10 patients, it showed no significant signals of activity with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab. Another Phase II study of neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab in cisplatin-ineligible UTUC yielded more promising findings, with 3/9 patients attaining a pathologic CR and the remaining six pathologically downstaged. The ABACUS trial found a 31% pathologic complete response rate amongst cisplatin-ineligible MIBC patients treated with neoadjuvant atezolizumab. The use of adjuvant immunotherapy has been explored over three phase III trials. The CheckMate-274 trial found a DFS benefit with the addition of one year of adjuvant nivolumab in patients with high-risk urothelial carcinoma. The IMvigor-010 study of adjuvant atezolizumab was a negative study. The AMBASSADOR trial of adjuvant pembrolizumab is pending results. With the FDA approval of erdafitinib in metastatic urothelial carcinoma, similar targets have been explored for use in perioperative use in invasive urothelial carcinoma, as with adjuvant infigratinib in the PROOF-302 trial. As the treatment paradigm for urothelial carcinoma evolves, further prospective studies are needed to expand the perioperative treatment landscape of UTUC.
| S-EPMC10571968 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with advanced urothelial carcinoma that progresses after platinum-based chemotherapy have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options.MethodsIn this open-label, international, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 542 patients with advanced urothelial cancer that recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy to receive pembrolizumab (a highly selective, humanized monoclonal IgG4κ isotype antibody against programmed death 1 [PD-1]) at a dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy with paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine. The coprimary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, which were assessed among all patients and among patients who had a tumor PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) combined positive score (the percentage of PD-L1-expressing tumor and infiltrating immune cells relative to the total number of tumor cells) of 10% or more.ResultsThe median overall survival in the total population was 10.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0 to 11.8) in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 7.4 months (95% CI, 6.1 to 8.3) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.91; P=0.002). The median overall survival among patients who had a tumor PD-L1 combined positive score of 10% or more was 8.0 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 12.3) in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 7.4) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.88; P=0.005). There was no significant between-group difference in the duration of progression-free survival in the total population (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.19; P=0.42) or among patients who had a tumor PD-L1 combined positive score of 10% or more (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.28; P=0.24). Fewer treatment-related adverse events of any grade were reported in the pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (60.9% vs. 90.2%); there were also fewer events of grade 3, 4, or 5 severity reported in the pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (15.0% vs. 49.4%).ConclusionsPembrolizumab was associated with significantly longer overall survival (by approximately 3 months) and with a lower rate of treatment-related adverse events than chemotherapy as second-line therapy for platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma. (Funded by Merck; KEYNOTE-045 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02256436 .).
| S-EPMC5635424 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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 coprimary 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.Initial results from the phase III JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02603432) showed that avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance plus best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who were progression-free after 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy. Avelumab 1L maintenance treatment is now a standard of care for aUC. Here, we report updated data with ≥ 2 years of follow-up in all patients, including OS (primary end point), PFS, safety, and additional novel analyses. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive avelumab plus BSC (n = 350) or BSC alone (n = 350). At data cutoff (June 4, 2021), median follow-up was 38.0 months and 39.6 months, respectively; 67 patients (19.5%) had received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment. OS remained longer with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone in all patients (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.91]; 2-sided P = .0036). Investigator-assessed PFS analyses also favored avelumab. Longer-term safety was consistent with previous analyses; no new safety signals were identified with longer treatment duration. In conclusion, longer-term follow-up continues to show clinically meaningful efficacy benefits with avelumab 1L maintenance plus BSC versus BSC alone in patients with aUC. An interactive visualization of data reported in this article is available.
| S-EPMC10306435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Epidermal growth factor receptors 1 and 2 (EGFR and HER2) are frequently overexpressed in various malignancies. Lapatinib is a dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits both EGFR and HER2. Although a phase III trial failed to show the survival benefits of lapatinib treatment after first-line chemotherapy in patients with EGFR/HER2-positive metastatic urothelial carcinoma, the efficacy of lapatinib for untreated urothelial carcinoma is not well defined. Here, we describe the therapeutic efficacy of lapatinib as a first-line treatment in a canine model of muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. In this non-randomized clinical trial, we compared 44 dogs with naturally occurring urothelial carcinoma who received lapatinib and piroxicam, with 42 age-, sex-, and tumor stage-matched dogs that received piroxicam alone. Compared to the dogs treated with piroxicam alone, those administered the lapatinib/piroxicam treatment had a greater reduction in the size of the primary tumor and improved survival. Exploratory analyses showed that HER2 overexpression was associated with response and survival in dogs treated with lapatinib. Our study suggests that lapatinib showed encouraging durable response rates, survival, and tolerability, supporting its therapeutic use for untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma in dogs. The use of lapatinib as a first-line treatment may be investigated further in human patients with urothelial carcinoma.
| S-EPMC8758709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial showed significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) with avelumab as first-line (1L) maintenance therapy + best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) that had not progressed with 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy. Efficacy and safety were assessed in patients enrolled in Japan.MethodsPatients with locally advanced or metastatic UC that had not progressed with 4-6 cycles of 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy were randomized to avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) + BSC or BSC alone. The primary endpoint was OS, and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety.ResultsIn Japanese patients (n = 73) randomized to avelumab + BSC (n = 36) or BSC alone (n = 37), median OS was 24.7 months (95% CI, 18.2-not estimable) vs 18.7 months (95% CI, 12.8-33.0), respectively (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.41-1.58]), and median PFS was 5.6 months (95% CI, 1.9-9.4) vs 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.9-3.8), respectively (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.36-1.11]). In the avelumab + BSC and BSC-alone arms, grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 50.0% vs 8.1%, including grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs in 13.9% vs 0%, respectively. Efficacy and safety results in Japanese patients were generally consistent with findings in the overall trial population.ConclusionAvelumab 1L maintenance treatment showed a favorable benefit-risk balance in Japanese patients, supporting avelumab 1L maintenance as a new standard of care in Japanese patients with advanced UC that has not progressed with 1L platinum-containing chemotherapy.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02603432.
| S-EPMC8816770 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10999025 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTreatment options have been historically limited for cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Given the need for alternatives to platinum-based chemotherapy, including non-chemotherapy regimens for patients with both impaired renal function and borderline functional status, in 2010 (prior to the immune checkpoint blockade era in metastatic UC), we initiated a phase II trial to test the activity of everolimus or everolimus plus paclitaxel in the cisplatin-ineligible setting.MethodsThis was an open-label phase II trial conducted within the US-based Hoosier Cancer Research Network (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01215136). Patients who were cisplatin-ineligible with previously untreated advanced UC were enrolled. Patients with both impaired renal function and poor performance status were enrolled into cohort 1; patients with either were enrolled into cohort 2. Patients received everolimus 10 mg daily alone (cohort 1) or with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (cohort 2). The primary outcome was clinical benefit at 4 months. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS), and 1-year overall survival (OS). Exploratory endpoints included genomic correlates of outcomes. The trial was not designed for comparison between cohorts.ResultsA total of 36 patients were enrolled from 2010 to 2018 (cohort 1, N = 7; cohort 2, N = 29); the trial was terminated due to slow accrual. Clinical benefit at 4 months was attained by 0 (0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-41.0%) patients in cohort 1 and 11 patients (37.9%, 95% CI 20.7-57.7%) in cohort 2. Median PFS was 2.33 (95% CI 1.81-Inf) months in cohort 1 and 5.85 (95% CI 2.99-8.61) months in cohort 2. Treatment was discontinued due to adverse events for 2 patients (29%) in cohort 1 and 11 patients (38%) in cohort 2. Molecular alterations in microtubule associated genes may be associated with treatment benefit but this requires further testing.ConclusionEverolimus plus paclitaxel demonstrates clinical activity in cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic UC, although the specific contribution of everolimus cannot be delineated. Patients with both impaired renal function and borderline functional status may be difficult to enroll to prospective trials. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01215136).
| S-EPMC9177111 | biostudies-literature