ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been established as a routine treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). However, there has been no standard of care after progression on ICIs. We investigated real-world treatment patterns and efficacy of chemotherapy (CHT) after pembrolizumab, in the era before introduction of maintenance avelumab and antibody-drug conjugates (ADC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational, retrospective study was conducted at twelve Nordic centers. Patients with mUC were treated according to investigator´s choice of CHT after pembrolizumab. Primary endpoint was overall response (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR); secondary endpoints were progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 102 patients were included whereof 23 patients received CHT after pembrolizumab as second line treatment (subcohort A) and 79 patients in third line (subcohort B). Platinum-gemcitabine combinations were the most common regimens in subcohort A, and vinflunine in subcohort B. The ORR and DCR were 36% and 47%, respectively. Presence of liver metastases was independently associated with lower ORR and DCR. The PFS and OS were 3.3 months and 7.7 months, respectively. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) and number of previous cycles of pembrolizumab were found to be independent prognostic factors associated with OS. CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, CHT showed clinically meaningful response rates and survival in mUC patients after progression with pembrolizumab. Clinical benefit may primarily be achieved in patients with favorable ECOG PS, in patients treated with > 6 cycles pembrolizumab as well as in patients without presence of liver metastases.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell , Immunoconjugates , Liver Neoplasms , Urologic Neoplasms , Humans , Immunoconjugates/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Urologic Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Multiple therapies exist for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, their improvement on progression-free survival (PFS) remains modest, potentially explained by tumor molecular heterogeneity. Several prognostic molecular biomarkers have been identified for mCRPC that may have predictive potential to guide treatment selection and prolong PFS. We designed a platform trial to test this hypothesis. METHODS: The Prostate-Biomarker (ProBio) study is a multi-center, outcome-adaptive, multi-arm, biomarker-driven platform trial for tailoring treatment decisions for men with mCRPC. Treatment decisions in the experimental arms are based on biomarker signatures defined as mutations in certain genes/pathways suggested in the scientific literature to be important for treatment response in mCRPC. The biomarker signatures are determined by targeted sequencing of circulating tumor and germline DNA using a panel specifically designed for mCRPC. DISCUSSION: Patients are stratified based on the sequencing results and randomized to either current clinical practice (control), where the treating physician decides treatment, or to molecularly driven treatment selection based on the biomarker profile. Outcome-adaptive randomization is implemented to early identify promising treatments for a biomarker signature. Biomarker signature-treatment combinations graduate from the platform when they demonstrate 85% probability of improving PFS compared to the control arm. Graduated combinations are further evaluated in a seamless confirmatory trial with fixed randomization. The platform design allows for new drugs and biomarkers to be introduced in the study. CONCLUSIONS: The ProBio design allows promising treatment-biomarker combinations to quickly graduate from the platform and be confirmed for rapid implementation in clinical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03903835. Date of registration: April 4, 2019. Status: Recruiting.