Bladder Cancer, Version 3.2024.

Bladder cancer, the sixth most common cancer in the United States, is most commonly of the urothelial carcinoma histologic subtype. The clinical spectrum of bladder cancer is divided into 3 categories that differ in prognosis, management, and therapeutic aims: (1) non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC); (2) muscle invasive, nonmetastatic disease; and (3) metastatic bladder cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer, including changes in the fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours: Urinary and Male Genital Tumours and how the NCCN Guidelines aligned with these updates; new and emerging treatment options for bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-unresponsive NMIBC; and updates to systemic therapy recommendations for advanced or metastatic disease.

Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder-A clinicopathological and molecular analysis of 52 cases.

Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a rare histologic subtype of bladder cancer that is associated with an aggressive clinical behavior. We analyzed the clinicopathologic and molecular features of plasmacytoid UC in 52 patients from a single institute. The patients included 44 men and 8 women, with a mean age of 64 years (range, 41-91 years). All bladder cancers were high-grade UC, and plasmacytoid component accounted for a mean of 47% of bladder tumors (range, 5-100%). Distinct gene mutations were found in most plasmacytoid UCs (n = 49); the most common mutations were TP53 (n = 30), followed by TERT (n = 20), and CDH1 (n = 18). Copy number analysis was performed in 34 patients, and 13 of them showed copy number variations. Expression of HER2 was analyzed in 18 patients by immunohistochemistry, and 3 of them showed HER2 overexpression, which was confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis. Thirty-two patients died of disease in a median of 15 months (range, 1-45 months). No individual gene mutations were significantly associated with clinical outcome, but mutations in the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway, including PICK3CA and PIK3R1 mutations, were associated with a significantly shorter survival duration (p < 0.05). Plasmacytoid UC is an aggressive histologic subtype that demonstrates frequent somatic gene mutations and CNVs, which may underlie its oncogenesis and progression. Gene mutations of the mTOR pathway are associated with poor outcome in a subset of patients with plasmacytoid UC.

Derazantinib alone and with atezolizumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma with activating FGFR aberrations.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b/2 study assessed the efficacy in terms of objective response rate (ORR) of the FGFR1/2/3 kinase inhibitor derazantinib as monotherapy or in combination with atezolizumab in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) and FGFR1-3 genetic aberrations (FGFR1-3GA). METHODS: This multicenter, open-label study comprised 5 substudies. In Substudies 1 and 5, patients with mUC with FGFR1-3GA received derazantinib monotherapy (300 mg QD in Substudy 1, 200 mg BID in Substudy 5). In Substudy 2, patients with any solid tumor received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks plus derazantinib 200 or 300 mg QD. In Substudy 3, patients with mUC harboring FGFR1-3GA received derazantinib 200 mg BID plus atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks. In Substudy 4, patients with FGFR inhibitor-resistant mUC harboring FGFR1-3GA received derazantinib 300 mg QD monotherapy or derazantinib 300 mg QD plus atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks. RESULTS: The ORR for Substudies 1 and 5 combined was 4/49 (8.2%, 95% confidence interval = 2.3% to 19.6%), which was based on 4 partial responses. The ORR in Substudy 4 was 1/7 (14.3%, 95% confidence interval = 0.4% to 57.9%; 1 partial response for derazantinib 300 mg monotherapy, zero for derazantinib 300 mg plus atezolizumab 1200 mg). In Substudy 2, derazantinib 300 mg plus atezolizumab 1200 mg was identified as a recommended dose for Phase 2. Only 2 patients entered Substudy 3. CONCLUSIONS: Derazantinib as monotherapy or in combination with atezolizumab was well-tolerated but did not show sufficient efficacy to warrant further development in mUC. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04045613, EudraCT 2019-000359-15.

Prognostic Value of Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Genetic Alterations in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence is limited on whether fibroblast growth factor receptor gene alterations (FGFRalt) impact clinical outcomes in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). This study evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with mUC based on FGFRalt status in the first-line setting (1L). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on mUC patients were retrieved via convenience sampling of oncologists/urologists surveyed between August and September 2020 who treated at least 1 FGFRalt patient between July 2017 and June 2019. The questionnaire included information on patient demographics, FGFR status, treatment, and clinical and radiographic measures of progression. Primary endpoint was time from metastatic diagnosis to disease progression from initial treatment for FGFRalt and FGFRwt (wild-type) mUC. Cox proportional hazards models quantified adjusted risk of FGFR status relating to PFS. RESULTS: A total of 414 patients were analyzed. Mean age was 64.5 years, 73.9% were male, and 52.7% had an FGFRalt. Among FGFRalt, 47.2% received chemotherapy, 27.5% immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), 11.5% chemotherapy+ICI, and 13.8% other treatments in 1L. FGFR status did not influence PFS from time of mUC diagnosis or among 224 stratified patients receiving either chemotherapy or chemotherapy+ICI. However, among 97 patients with an FGFRalt receiving 1L ICI therapy only, adjusted risk of progression was twice that of FGFRwt (HR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.13-4.00). CONCLUSION: Although FGFRalt did not predict outcomes in the overall cohort, for patients treated with 1L ICI, FGFRalt had significantly higher rates of progression than FGFRwt patients. Further validation is needed to determine whether FGFRalt has a decreased benefit from ICI therapy.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes in Patients Diagnosed With Nonmetastatic Plasmacytoid Variant of Bladder Cancer: A 20-Year University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience.

PURPOSE: The treated natural history of nonmetastatic plasmacytoid variant of bladder cancer (PV-BCa) is poorly understood owing to its rarity. We sought to examine the disease recurrence and metastasis patterns in this select group of patients in order to identify opportunities for intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a natural language processing algorithm-augmented retrospective chart review of 56 consecutive patients who were treated with curative intent for nonmetastatic PV-BCa at our institution between 1998 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression methods were used for survival analyses. RESULTS: The stage at presentation was: ≤ cT2N0 in 22 (39.3%), cT3N0 in 15 (26.8%), cT4N0 in 13 (23.2%), and ≥ cN1 in 6 patients (10.7%). Forty-nine patients (87.5%) received chemotherapy, and 42 (75%) were able to undergo the planned surgery. Notably, only 4 patients (7.2%) had pT0 stage, while 22 (52.4%) had pN+ disease at the time of surgery. At 36-month follow-up, 28.4% of patients (95% CI: 22.1%-34.5%) were alive and 22.2% (95% CI: 16.1%-28.5%) were free of metastatic disease. The benefit of surgical extirpation was stage specific: successful completion of surgery was associated with improved metastasis-free survival (at 36 months 32.4% vs 0%, log-rank P < .001) in patients with localized or locally advanced disease (≤cT2N0/cT3N0); however, in patients with regionally advanced disease (cT4N0/≥cN1), consolidative surgery following chemotherapy was not associated with improved metastasis-free survival (12.5% vs 10% at 36 months, log-rank P = .49). The median time to metastasis from primary treatment end was 6.5 months (IQR: 2.9-14.7). The predominant site of recurrence/metastasis was the peritoneum (76.1%), either in isolation or along with extraperitoneal lesions. Salvage immunotherapy in these patients significantly reduced the risk of death (HR = 0.11, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: PV-BCa is a disease with high lethality. Despite multimodal treatment, a vast majority of patients develop atypical intraperitoneal metastasis soon after therapy and rapidly succumb to it. Clinical trials evaluating utility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy may be warranted in this high-risk population.

Pembrolizumab with or Without Lenvatinib as First-line Therapy for Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma (LEAP-011): A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib has shown antitumor activity and acceptable safety in patients with platinum-refractory urothelial carcinoma (UC). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pembrolizumab plus either lenvatinib or placebo as first-line therapy for advanced UC in the phase 3 LEAP-011 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with advanced UC who were ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy or any platinum-based chemotherapy were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus either lenvatinib 20 mg or placebo orally once daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An external data monitoring committee (DMC) regularly reviewed safety and efficacy data every 3 mo. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between June 25, 2019 and July 21, 2021, 487 patients were allocated to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n = 245) or placebo plus pembrolizumab (n = 242). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff date (July 26, 2021) was 12.8 mo (interquartile range, 6.9-19.3). The median PFS was 4.5 mo in the combination arm and 4.0 mo in the pembrolizumab arm (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.72-1.14]). The median OS was 11.8 mo for the combination arm and 12.9 mo for the pembrolizumab arm (HR 1.14 [95% CI 0.87-1.48]). Grade 3-5 adverse events attributed to trial treatment occurred in 123 of 241 patients (51%) treated with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab and in 66 of 242 patients (27%) treated with placebo plus pembrolizumab. This trial was terminated earlier than initially planned based on recommendation from the DMC. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit-to-risk ratio for first-line lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was not considered favorable versus pembrolizumab plus placebo as first-line therapy in patients with advanced UC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was not more effective than pembrolizumab plus placebo in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Plain language summary of erdafitinib in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a phase 2 study with long-term follow-up.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of two articles describing the results from a study called BLC2001. The study examined the effect of a medication called erdafitinib on participants with a type of cancer known as urothelial carcinoma that had either spread beyond the bladder or urinary tract into surrounding organs and/or nearby muscles (locally advanced) and was not removable by surgery (unresectable) or had spread to other parts of the body (metastatic). In this study, researchers wanted to learn if erdafitinib was safe and effective at stopping or reducing tumor growth in participants with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with certain genetic alterations (changes in DNA sequence) in two related genes called fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) and 3 (FGFR3). Treatment options for people with this disease are very limited; some may not have responded to other therapies, or their tumors continued to grow after they received other treatments. 212 participants took part in the study. 111 participants were treated with oral (by mouth) erdafitinib at different doses to find a recommended dose regimen. 101 additional participants then received the recommended starting dose of erdafitinib at 8 mg daily with possible increase to 9 mg daily, these participants make up the 8 mg regimen group. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE BLC2001 STUDY IN THE 8 MG REGIMEN GROUP?: Researchers found that tumors decreased in size or completely disappeared in 40% of participants. With approximately 1 year of follow-up, an estimated 55% of participants were still alive, and after 2 years, an estimated 31% of participants were still alive. Common side effects of erdafitinib included high phosphate levels in the blood (hyperphosphatemia), an inflamed and sore mouth, diarrhea, and dry mouth. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Participants had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with certain FGFR gene alterations that had been treated with erdafitinib after previous chemotherapy and/or a type of medicine that uses the immune system to help the body fight cancer (immunotherapy). The BLC2001 study found that some participants treated with 8 mg erdafitinib had the benefit of a longer period without their cancer growing or spreading to other parts of the body. About 80% of participants achieved some level of disease control where their tumor shrank or remained stable.

A Phase 2 Study of Sitravatinib in Combination with Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Checkpoint inhibitor therapy (CPI) has demonstrated survival benefits in urothelial carcinoma (UC); however, not all patients benefit from CPI due to resistance. Combining sitravatinib, a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor of TYRO3, AXL, and MERTK (TAM) receptors and VEGFR2, with CPI may improve antitumor responses. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of sitravatinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/metastatic UC. METHODS: The 516-003 trial (NCT03606174) is an open-label, multicohort phase 2 study evaluating sitravatinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/metastatic UC enrolled in eight cohorts depending on prior treatment with CPI, platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), or antibody-drug conjugate (ADC). Overall, 244 patients were enrolled and treated with sitravatinib plus nivolumab (median follow-up 14.1-38.2 mo). Sitravatinib (free-base capsules 120 mg once daily [QD] or malate capsule 100 mg QD) plus nivolumab (240 mg every 2 wk/480 mg every 4 wk intravenously). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1). The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. The Predictive probability design and confidence interval methods were used. Among patients previously treated with PBC, ORR, and median PFS were 32.1% and 3.9 mo in CPI-naïve patients (n = 53), 14.9% and 3.9 mo in CPI-refractory patients (n = 67), and 5.4% and 3.7 mo in CPI- and ADC-refractory patients (n = 56), respectively. Across all cohorts, grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 51.2% patients and grade 4 in 3.3%, with one treatment-related death (cardiac failure). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 50.4% patients. TRAEs led to sitravatinib/nivolumab discontinuation in 6.1% patients. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Sitravatinib plus nivolumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile but did not result in clinically meaningful ORRs in patients with advanced/metastatic UC in the eight cohorts studied. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, the combination of two anticancer drugs, sitravatinib and nivolumab, resulted in manageable side effects but no meaningful responses in patients with bladder cancer.

Erdafitinib or Chemotherapy in Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who have progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The effects of erdafitinib in patients with FGFR-altered metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progression during or after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1] or anti-programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] agents) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global phase 3 trial of erdafitinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who had progression after one or two previous treatments that included an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive erdafitinib or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel or vinflunine). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients underwent randomization: 136 to the erdafitinib group and 130 to the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 15.9 months. The median overall survival was significantly longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.88; P = 0.005). The median progression-free survival was also longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78; P<0.001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (45.9% in the erdafitinib group and 46.4% in the chemotherapy group). Treatment-related adverse events that led to death were less common with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (in 0.7% vs. 5.4% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alterations after previous anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; THOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03390504.).

Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Treatment Strategies for Surgically Resectable Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Urinary Tract.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCTX) has been recommended as the optimal strategy in surgically resectable neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) of the urinary tract (NEC-URO). OBJECTIVE: To determine the systemic therapy regimen and timing, which are most active against NEC-URO. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used our institutional historical clinical and pathological database to study 203 patients (cT2, 74%; cT3/4a, 22%; and cTx, 4%) with surgically resectable NEC-URO between November 1985 and May 2020. A total of 141 patients received neoCTX and 62 underwent initial radical surgery, 24 of whom received adjuvant CTX (adjCTX). INTERVENTION: Neoadjuvant CTX with etoposide/cisplatin (EP), an alternating doublet of ifosfamide/doxorubicin (IA) and EP, dose-dense methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/cisplatin (MVAC), gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC), or others. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS), downstaging rate, and pathological complete response using a multivariable model adjusting for tumor- and patient-related factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Downstaging rate was significantly improved with neoCTX versus initial surgery (49.6% vs 14.5%, p < 0.0001), stage cT2N0 versus cT3/4N0 (44% vs 25%, p = 0.01), or presence of carcinoma in situ (47% vs 28%, p = 0.01). Downstaging was greatest with IA/EP (65%) versus EP (39%), MVAC/GC (27%), or others (36%, p = 0.04). After adjusting for age and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, IA/EP was still associated with improved downstaging (odds ratio = 3.7 [1.3-10.2], p = 0.01). At a median follow-up of 59.7 mo, 5-yr OS rates for neoCTX followed by surgery, surgery alone, and surgery followed by adjCTX were 57%, 22%, and 30%, respectively. An NEC regimen (IA/EP or EP) versus a urothelial regimen (MVAC/GC or others) was associated with improved survival (145.4 vs 42.5 mo, hazard ratio = 0.49, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant CTX remains the standard-of-care treatment for NEC-URO with an advantage for NEC regimens over traditional urothelial regimens. IA/EP improves pathological downstaging at the time of surgery compared with EP, but is reserved for younger and higher function patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the outcomes from invasive neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary tract in a large US population. We found that the outcomes varied with treatment strategy. We conclude that the best outcomes are seen in patients treated with chemotherapy prior to surgery and regimens tailored to histology and tolerance.

Management of Fibroblast Growth Factor Inhibitor Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Interest in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

Background: Erdafitinib is indicated for the treatment of adults with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations progressing on/after one or more lines of prior platinum-based chemotherapy. Objective: To better understand the frequency and management of select treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) to enable optimal fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitor (FGFRi) treatment. Design setting and participants: Longer-term efficacy and safety results of the BLC2001 (NCT02365597) trial in patients with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma were studied. Intervention: Erdafitinib schedule of 8 mg/d continuous in 28-d cycles, with uptitration to 9 mg/d if serum phosphate level was <5.5 mg/dl and no significant TEAEs occurred. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Adverse events were graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The Kaplan-Meier methodology was used for the cumulative incidence of the first onset of TEAEs by grade. Time to resolution of TEAEs was summarized descriptively. Results and limitations: At data cutoff, the median treatment duration was 5.4 mo among 101 patients receiving erdafitinib. Select TEAEs (total; grade 3) were hyperphosphatemia (78%; 2.0%), stomatitis (59%; 14%), nail events (59%; 15%), non-central serous retinopathy (non-CSR) eye disorders (56%; 5.0%), skin events (55%; 7.9%), diarrhea (55%; 4.0%), and CSR (27%; 4.0%). Select TEAEs were mostly of grade 1 or 2, and were managed effectively with dose modifications, including dose reductions or interruptions, and/or supportive concomitant therapies, resulting in few events leading to treatment discontinuation. Further work is needed to determine whether management is generalizable to the nonprotocol/general population. Conclusions: Identification of select TEAEs and appropriate management with dose modification and/or concomitant therapies resulted in improvement or resolution of most TEAEs in patients, allowing for continuation of FGFRi treatment to ensure maximum benefit. Patient summary: Early identification and proactive management are warranted to mitigate or possibly prevent erdafitinib side effects to allow for maximum drug benefit in patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer.

Outcomes of Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma after Anti-programmed Death-(ligand) 1 Therapy by Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Gene Alteration Status: An Observational Study.

Background: Clinical outcomes of anti-programmed death­(ligand) 1 (anti-PD-[L]1) therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) and fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations (FGFRa+) remain unclear; recent studies have reported either comparable or poorer outcomes versus patients without FGFR alterations (FGFRa-). Objective: To analyze the outcomes of patients with mUC and any FGFRa (mutations or fusions) who received anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Design setting and participants: In this noninterventional, retrospective, multicenter study, clinical practice data were collected from FGFRa+/- patients who received prior immunotherapy between May 2018 and July 2019. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Investigator­determined overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and overall survival (OS) were assessed in multivariate and unadjusted analyses. Results and limitations: Ninety-four patients (66% men; median age, 63 yr) with mUC and known FGFR status were included; 38 (40%) were FGFRa+ and 56 (60%) were FGFRa-. In FGFRa+ versus FGFRa- patients who received any line of anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (n = 92), ORR, DCR, and OS were 16% versus 26%, 29% versus 52% (relative risk: 1.14 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.92-1.40]; p = 0.3), and 8.57 versus 13.2 mo (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.33 [95% CI, 0.77-2.30]; p = 0.3), respectively. A multivariate analysis provided some evidence supporting shorter OS in FGFRa+ versus FGFRa- (any line of anti-PD-L[1] therapy; HR: 1.81 [95% CI, 0.99-3.31]; p = 0.054). Limitations include this study's retrospective nature and a potential selection bias from small sample size. Conclusions: Some evidence of lower response rates and shortened OS following anti-PD-(L)1 therapy was observed in FGFRa+ patients. The phase 3 THOR study (NCT03390504) will prospectively compare FGFRa+ patients with advanced mUC treated with erdafitinib versus pembrolizumab. Patient summary: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations (FGFRa) potentially have worse clinical outcomes when treated with anti-PD-(L)1 therapy than those without FGFRa.

Integrative Clinical and Genomic Characterization of MTAP-deficient Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

Deficiency of MTAP (MTAPdef) mainly occurs because of homozygous loss of chromosome 9p21, which is the most common copy-number loss in metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). We characterized the clinical and genomic features of MTAPdef mUC in 193 patients treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) and 298 patients from the phase 2 IMvigor210 trial, which investigated atezolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible and platinum-refractory disease. In the MDACC cohort, visceral metastases were significantly more common for MTAPdef (n = 48) than for MTAP-proficient (MTAPprof; n = 145) patients (75% vs 55.2%; p = 0.02). MTAPdef was associated with poor prognosis (median overall survival [mOS] 12.3 vs 20.2 mo; p = 0.007) with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.93 (95% confidence interval 1.35-2.98). Similarly, IMvigor210 patients with MTAPlo (n = 29) had a higher incidence of visceral metastases than those with MTAPhi tumors (n = 269; 86.2% vs 72.5%; p = 0.021) and worse prognosis (mOS 8.0 vs 11.3 mo; p = 0.042). Hyperplasia-associated genes were more frequently mutated in MTAPdef tumors (FGFR3: 31% vs 8%; PI3KCA: 31% vs 19%), while alterations in dysplasia-associated genes were less common in MTAPdef tumors (TP53: 41% vs 67%; RB1: 0% vs 16%). Our findings support a distinct biology in MTAPdef mUC that is associated with early visceral disease and worse prognosis. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated the outcomes for patients with the most common gene loss (MTAP gene) in metastatic cancer of the urinary tract. We found that this loss correlates with worse prognosis and a higher risk of metastasis in internal organs. There seems to be distinct tumor biology for urinary tract cancer with MTAP gene loss and this could be a potential target for treatment.

Targeting the FGFR Pathway in Urothelial Carcinoma: the Future Is Now.

OPINION STATEMENT: As we come to better understand cancer genomics, we are increasingly shifting towards precision medicine. FGFR has been elucidated as one of the oncogenic driver pathways in urothelial carcinoma, leading to exciting targeted drug development. Although many agents are being investigated, erdafitinib is the only FGFR inhibitor currently approved by the FDA for treating platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma harboring susceptible FGFR2/3 alterations, with seemingly higher response rates than second-line chemotherapy or immunotherapy. In this review, we summarize the clinical data supporting FGFR inhibition, ways to optimize its use in routine clinical practice including FGFR testing, dosing, and toxicity management. We also highlight ongoing efforts evaluating combination strategies and testing in earlier treatment settings to further expand this targeted therapeutic approach in urothelial carcinoma.

Longitudinal GFR trends after neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Renal function dictates sequencing and eligibility for definitive therapy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. We investigated longitudinal glomerular filtration rate (GFR) changes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and nephroureterectomy (RNU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated with ≥3 cycles of chemotherapy prior to RNU for UTUC from 2000 to 2019 were included. GFR was calculated by CKD-Epi before chemotherapy, before RNU, 1 to 3 months, and 12 months post-RNU. Pathologic stage and overall survival were compared in those with stable GFR (+/-10% of baseline) to the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-two patients received ≥3 cycles of NAC, with 121 (79%) receiving at least 1 cycle of cisplatin. Renal function dropped by mean of 22.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 from the beginning of chemotherapy to 1-year post-surgery. In patients receiving cisplatin, a mean decline of 26.2 ml/min/1.73 m2 was observed vs. 8.8 ml/min/1.73 m2 without cisplatin-based NAC (P < 0.01). GFR after RNU was unchanged between 3 and 12 months postoperatively. At 1 to 3 months after RNU, 19% of patients had GFR<30 ml/min/1.73m2. Improvement in GFR during NAC was associated with invasive final pathologic stage (P = 0.018) and worse overall survival (P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: In patients managed with NAC prior to RNU, renal function stabilizes at 1 to 3 months post-operatively and remains clinically similar for cisplatin or non-cisplatin-based therapy. Improvement in GFR during NAC was associated with higher pathologic stage and poorer survival, especially in those receiving non-cisplatin-based therapy, an observation that requires further investigation.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022.

The NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer and other urinary tract cancers (upper tract tumors, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, primary carcinoma of the urethra). These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines regarding the treatment of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, including how to treat in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage; new roles for immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-muscle invasive, muscle-invasive, and metastatic bladder cancer; and the addition of antibody-drug conjugates for metastatic bladder cancer.

Bempegaldesleukin plus Nivolumab in First-line Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Results from PIVOT-02.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent changes in the treatment landscape, there remains an unmet need for effective, tolerable, chemotherapy-free treatments for patients with advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), especially cisplatin-ineligible patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the immunostimulatory interleukin-2 cytokine prodrug bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/mUC from the phase 2 multicenter PIVOT-02 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, multicohort phase 1/2 study enrolled patients with previously untreated locally advanced/surgically unresectable or mUC (N = 41). INTERVENTION: Patients received BEMPEG 0.006 mg/kg plus nivolumab 360 mg intravenously every 3 wk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary objectives were safety and the objective response rate (ORR) in patients with measurable disease at baseline and at least one postbaseline tumor response assessment (response-evaluable). Secondary objectives were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Exploratory biomarker analyses via univariate logistic regression were performed to test the association between potential biomarkers (CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, tumor mutational burden, and IFN-γ gene expression profile) and response. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The ORR was 35% (13/37 evaluable patients) and the complete response rate was 19% (7/37 patients); the median duration of response was not reached. Median PFS was 4.1 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1-8.7) and median OS was 23.7 mo (95% CI 15.8-not reached). Overall, 40/41 patients (98%) experienced at least one treatment-related adverse event (TRAE); grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 11 patients (27%), most commonly pyrexia (4.9%; 2 patients). Exploratory biomarker analyses showed no association between biomarkers and response. Limitations include the small sample size and single-arm design. CONCLUSIONS: BEMPEG plus nivolumab was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced/mUC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated an immune-stimulating prodrug called bempegaldesleukin plus the antibody nivolumab as the first therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer of the urinary tract. This combination had manageable treatment-related side effects and was effective in a subset of patients. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02983045.

Multimodal kidney-preserving approach in localised and locally advanced high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

Objectives: Multimodal kidney-preserving (MKP) strategies may be an option for patients with localised or locally advanced high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) who have a relative contraindication for nephroureterectomy (NU). Materials and methods: We studied patients with UTUC who were managed with MKP strategies, consisting of systemic anticancer therapy, with or without local/topical strategies after endoscopic control of intraluminal tumours. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Fourteen patients received MKP treatment between August 2013 and April 2020. Median baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 43 mL/min/1.73m2. MKP was mainly pursued to avoid dialysis (10/14, 71%), followed by low performance status and/or comorbidities (2/14, 14%). All patients had received systemic therapy: chemotherapy (64%) and immunotherapy (36%). Endoscopic control and/or laser ablation was feasible in 7 (50%) patients. Calculated overall risk of non-organ confined disease was 35%. Predicted 2-year and 5-year relapse-free probability (RFP) was 74% (24-92%) and 62% (10-85%), respectively. Median follow-up was 31 months (95% CI: 22.6, NE), median OS was 48.1 months (95% CI: 48.1, NE) and 2-year OS probability was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.71, 1). Median metastases-free survival was 48.1 months (95% CI: 26.8, NE), median PFS was 22.4 months (95% CI: 15.6, NE) and 2-year PFS probability was 0.48 (0.26, 0.89). Conclusion: Management of high-risk localised or locally advanced UTUC with MKP strategies was associated with good tolerance, preservation of renal function, and comparable PFS and OS to predicted in vulnerable patients. Prospective studies with more patients are needed to evaluate these possible benefits relative to current standards.