Avelumab Maintenance Research Articles

Clinical outcomes and treatment patterns of maintenance avelumab in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a multicenter collaborative study.

The JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) with maintenance avelumab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma UC (la/mUC) who achieved disease control following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (1L-PBC). However, real-world data on eligibility, utilization, and outcomes of maintenance avelumab therapy remain limited. This retrospective study included patients with la/mUC who received 1L-PBC. Eligibility for maintenance avelumab therapy was determined based on the best overall response to 1L-PBC, with patients who achieved stable disease or a partial or complete response considered eligible. Survival outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify prognostic factors among patients with la/mUC who received maintenance avelumab. Of 161 prospective patients, 67.1% were eligible for maintenance avelumab therapy, and 46.3% of eligible patients received the treatment. The median progression-free survival (PFS) following avelumab initiation was 10.2months, whereas the median OS was not reached. Prognostic factors associated with PFS included the presence of liver metastases, elevated C-reactive protein (> 1.0g/dL), and administration of more than five cycles of 1L-PBC. Adverse events occurred in 60% of patients treated with avelumab, with 16% experiencing grade 3-4 adverse events. We emphasize the real-world applicability of maintenance avelumab for Japanese patients with la/mUC. Maintenance avelumab demonstrated favorable survival outcomes, consistent with clinical trial data. Identifying prognostic factors and optimizing treatment sequencing are essential strategies for improving outcomes in this patient population.

Avelumab maintenance treatment for advanced urothelial cancer: plain language summary of long-term results from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 study.

Avelumab maintenance treatment for advanced urothelial cancer: plain language summary of long-term results from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 study.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma by Eligibility for Maintenance Avelumab

IntroductionFirst-line (1L) platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) has historically been recommended for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (Ia/mUC). Maintenance avelumab is recommended for patients without disease progression following 1L PBC. Real-world data on the proportion of patients eligible for maintenance avelumab are limited, and outcomes among patients ineligible for maintenance avelumab are uncertain. This study assessed the proportion of patients with la/mUC initiating 1L PBC who were maintenance-avelumab eligible and real-world outcomes following 1L PBC by maintenance-avelumab eligibility. MethodsA retrospective, observational study was conducted using a longitudinal electronic health record–derived database comprising de-identified patient-level structured and unstructured data including adults with Ia/mUC who received ≥1 dose of 1L PBC (April 2020-January 2022). The proportion of patients eligible for maintenance avelumab (real-world stable disease, partial response, or complete response following 1L PBC) was estimated and median overall survival (mOS) assessed for maintenance avelumab–eligible and –ineligible patients. ResultsOf 336 patients with Ia/mUC treated with 1L PBC (55.4% received cisplatin-based treatment 44.6% carboplatin-based treatment); 181 (54%) were maintenance-avelumab eligible; and 138 (41%) maintenance-avelumab ineligible (17 [5%] were nonevaluable). Of 181 maintenance-avelumab–eligible patients, 67 (37.0%; 19.9% of all 1L PBC–treated patients) received maintenance avelumab. mOS (95% CI) among all 1L PBC–treated patients was 15.0 (12.2-19.6) months and among maintenance-avelumab–ineligible patients was 8.0 (6.7-10.3) months; whereas among maintenance-avelumab–eligible patients (including 37% who received maintenance avelumab), mOS was 27.6 (23.4-not reached) months. ConclusionsIn this study, approximately half of 1L PBC–treated patients were maintenance-avelumab eligible, and one-fifth received it. Real-world OS remains short for the overall 1L PBC–treated population. These results support the use of treatment-guideline preferred 1L treatment options that demonstrate survival benefit for all patients with la/mUC, and are available to patients irrespective of their eligibility for cisplatin, or response to PBC.

Outcomes by Retrospective Eligibility for Maintenance Therapy of Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Posthoc Analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-361 Trial

IntroductionThe phase 3 KEYNOTE-361 trial of first-line pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) completed enrollment before the approval of postchemotherapy maintenance avelumab for patients without progressive disease. This post hoc analysis evaluated the outcomes of patients who received chemotherapy alone in KEYNOTE-361 by retrospective eligibility for subsequent maintenance therapy. Patients and MethodsPatients in the chemotherapy alone arm were retrospectively categorized as maintenance eligible (received ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy and did not die or experience disease progression within 10 weeks of chemotherapy completion), maintenance ineligible (received <4 cycles of chemotherapy or had progressive disease or died within 0-10 weeks after completion of ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy), and indeterminate eligibility for maintenance therapy (if neither maintenance eligible or ineligible). End points included progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by blinded independent central review and overall survival from randomization (start of chemotherapy). ResultsMedian follow-up was 31.7 months (range, 22.0-42.3). Among 342 patients who received chemotherapy alone, 172 (50.3%) were maintenance eligible, 108 (31.6%) were maintenance ineligible, and 62 (18.1%) had indeterminate eligibility for maintenance therapy. The median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI 8.4-10.4) in maintenance-eligible patients, 5.1 months (4.2-6.0) in maintenance-ineligible patients, and 2.3 months (1.9-3.8) in the indeterminate group; median overall survival was 23.3 months (95% CI 19.4-26.1), 10.2 months (9.1-11.6), and 5.5 months (3.7-8.5), respectively. ConclusionThis post hoc analysis suggests that a majority of patients with untreated la/mUC who initiated chemotherapy in a clinical trial may have been considered eligible for maintenance therapy and had favorable survival outcomes compared with those considered maintenance ineligible.

Longitudinal assessment of health-related quality of life in Japanese patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma receiving immune check point inhibitors

Real-world data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are limited. This study included 42 patients with aUC who received second-line or later pembrolizumab (n = 19), maintenance avelumab followed by first-line chemotherapy (n = 13), or adjuvant nivolumab after radical surgery (n = 10). Time-course changes in the domains and scales related to HRQoL were evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30, FACT-G, and SF-8 questionnaires during ICI therapy. Anchor-based approaches for minimally important differences were determined as ‘improved’, ‘stable’, and ‘deteriorated’. We found significant improvements after the start of pembrolizumab treatment on many scales. Almost none of the scales changed significantly in the avelumab and nivolumab groups. Approximately 80% of the pembrolizumab group had deteriorated social/family well-being in FACT-G. Approximately 60% of the patients in the avelumab group had deteriorated general health and vitality in SF-8. In the nivolumab group, none of the scales deteriorated in > 50% of the patients. Deterioration of physical function in the SF-8 was associated with occurrence of treatment-related adverse events ≥ grade 2 during ICI therapy (P = 0.013). Our findings demonstrated that majority of patients with aUC who received ICI therapy had a stable HRQoL, which was consistent with evidence from clinical trials.

Enfortumab Vedotin Following Platinum Chemotherapy and Avelumab Maintenance in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Retrospective Data from the ARON-2EV Study.

Enfortumab vedotin (EV) has been approved for the treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) who previously received platinum-based chemotherapy followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, the pivotal clinical trials did not include patients previously treated with avelumab maintenance therapy. The aim of the present retrospective analysis was to assess the effectiveness of EV following avelumab in patients with mUC enrolled in the ARON-2EV study. The study included 182 patients with mUC treated with EV following avelumab maintenance. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DoR). Statistical analysis involved Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate/multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models. Median OS and PFS were 12.7 (95% CI 10.2-14.1) and 7.9 (95% CI 6.4-9.9) months, respectively. Complete response (CR) was achieved in 5% and partial response (PR) in 34% of patients, with an ORR of 39%. The DoR in patients who achieved CR/PR was 10.9 months (95% CI 8.1-11.4). The incidence of grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy and skin rash was 9%, followed by 8% of grade ≥ 3 diarrhea and 4% of grade ≥ 3 hyperglycemia. The results of our large international retrospective study confirm the effectiveness of EV and endorse its use in the population of patients with mUC treated with EV following the frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and subsequent maintenance treatment with avelumab.

180P FIRE-6: Longitudinal immune profiling identified disturbed NK cell functionality in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients and during combined treatment with FOLFIRI, cetuximab followed by avelumab maintenance

180P FIRE-6: Longitudinal immune profiling identified disturbed NK cell functionality in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients and during combined treatment with FOLFIRI, cetuximab followed by avelumab maintenance

Induction avelumab followed by chemoimmunotherapy and maintenance versus chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy in cis-ineligible metastatic urothelial carcinoma (INDUCOMAIN): a randomized phase II study

Platinum-based chemotherapy (ChT) has been the standard first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of induction avelumab followed by avelumab in combination with carboplatin-gemcitabine (carbo/gem) followed by avelumab maintenance. We tested the hypothesis that induction immunotherapy (IO) could enhance the response to ChT and prevent its detrimental effect on immune cells. INDUCOMAIN is a multicenter, randomized, investigator-initiated, open-label phase II study evaluating the safety and efficacy of induction avelumab before carboplatin-gemcitabine-avelumab, followed by avelumab maintenance (arm A), compared to carbo/gem (arm B). Eligibility criteria included patients with mUC, no prior systemic therapy, and ineligibility for cisplatin by Galsky criteria. Patients were stratified by the presence/absence of visceral metastasis and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 versus 2. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Eighty-five patients were included and randomized to arm A (n= 42) and arm B (n= 43), respectively. ORR was similar between treatment arms: 59.5% in arm A and 53.5% in arm B (P= 0.57). Fourteen patients (33%) in arm A early progressed/died before or at first response assessment, compared to three patients (7%) in arm B. Median OS was 11.1 months in arm A and 13.2 months in arm B [hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.46, P= 0.69]. Median PFS was 6.9 months in arm A versus 7.4 months in arm B (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.61-1.60, P= 0.95). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 occurred in 70.7% of patients in arm A and in 72.1% in arm B. No predictive role of programmed death-ligand 1 expression was found. The hypothesis that induction avelumab could enhance the efficacy of subsequent ChT was not proven. Administering IO alone as induction before ChT is not an adequate strategy.

Comparative Efficacy of Avelumab Maintenance Therapy Versus Continued Chemotherapy Followed by Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma With No Progression After 4 Cycles of Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Study Using Propensity Score Matching

IntroductionIn cases of metastatic and unresectable urothelial carcinoma with no disease progression after 4 cycles of chemotherapy, including platinum agents, treatment options include continuation of chemotherapy or switching to maintenance therapy with avelumab. This study compared the treatment outcomes of avelumab maintenance therapy with those of pembrolizumab in urothelial carcinoma using propensity score matching. Patients and MethodsBetween January 2017 and December 2022, 243 patients with metastatic and unresectable urothelial carcinoma were treated with either avelumab or pembrolizumab at the Yamaguchi University Hospital and its affiliated institutions. We retrospectively compared the oncological outcomes and adverse events by aligning patient characteristics and treatment backgrounds using propensity score matching. ResultsThe analysis compared 36 cases receiving avelumab maintenance therapy after chemotherapy to 49 cases where patients, after receiving 4 courses of chemotherapy including platinum-based agents without disease progression, were subsequently administered pembrolizumab as a second-line treatment following disease progression. Using propensity score matching, 27 cases from each group were selected for comparison. From the initiation of prechemotherapy to disease progression on immune checkpoint inhibitors, the median progression-free survival was 20.7 and 23.3 months in the avelumab and pembrolizumab groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference observed (P = .358). However, avelumab tended to have a lower rate of high-dose glucocorticoid treatment compared to pembrolizumab. ConclusionProgression-free survival was similar for avelumab maintenance therapy and the sequence of continued chemotherapy followed by pembrolizumab after no disease progression at four chemotherapy courses. Avelumab may require less high-dose glucocorticoid treatment, potentially enhancing safety.

Reevaluating the role of platinum-based chemotherapy in the evolving treatment landscape for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Platinum-based chemotherapy has been the standard first-line (1L) treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) for decades, based on the proven efficacy and established safety profiles of cisplatin- and carboplatin-based regimens. With the emergence of novel regimens, it is important to reevaluate and contextualize the role of 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. Platinum-based chemotherapy followed by avelumab 1L maintenance in patients without disease progression following platinum-based chemotherapy was established as a standard 1L regimen based on the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase III trial. More recently, the EV-302 phase III trial showed the superiority of 1L enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab versus platinum-based chemotherapy, and the Checkmate 901 phase III trial showed the superiority of 1L nivolumab + cisplatin/gemcitabine versus cisplatin/gemcitabine alone. These 2 regimens have now been included as standard 1L options in treatment guidelines for advanced UC. EV + pembrolizumab is now the preferred 1L treatment, and in locations where EV + pembrolizumab is not available or individual patients are not considered suitable, recommended options are platinum-based chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance or nivolumab + cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In this review, we discuss current treatment options for advanced UC recommended in guidelines, practical considerations with platinum-based chemotherapy, the role of avelumab 1L maintenance, recent phase III trials of EV + pembrolizumab and nivolumab + cisplatin/gemcitabine, safety profiles of recommended 1L treatments, and second-line treatment options.

Association of Tumor Mutational Burden and Microsatellite Instability With Response and Outcomes in Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor

BackgroundMicrosatellite Instability (MSI) and Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) are associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy. We examined the association between TMB and MSI status with survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC) treated with ICI. MethodsPatients from 15 institutions were treated with ICI monotherapy. Primary endpoint was overall survival and secondary endpoints included observed response rate (ORR), and progression-free (PFS) calculated from ICI initiation. TMB was analyzed as dichotomous (≥10 vs. <10 mut/Mb) and continuous variable. ResultsWe identified 411 patients: 203 were treated with ICI 1L/upfront; 104 with 2 + L. For the 1L/upfront: median [m] OS was numerically longer in patients with TMB ≥10 versus TMB <10: mOS 35 versus 26 months (HR = 0.6) and with MSI-H and MSI-S (mOS NR vs. 22 months), though neither association was statistically significant. A statistically significant association was found between TMB (continuous variable) and OS (HR = 0.96, P = .01). For 2 + L: mOS was numerically longer in patients with TMB ≥10 versus TMB <10: (20 vs. 12 months; HR = 0.9); mOS was 12 and 17 months for patients with MSI-H and MSI-S, respectively. Eighty-nine patients received maintenance avelumab (mAV): mOS was longer in patients with TMB ≥10 versus TMB <10: 61 versus 17 months; (HR = 0.2, P = .02) and with MSI-H and MSI-S (NR vs. 24 months). ConclusionsAlthough not reaching statistical significance in several subsets, patients with high TMB and MSI-H had numerically longer OS with ICI, especially with mAV. Further validation is needed.

Efficacy of avelumab maintenance therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma with histologic subtype and divergent differentiation: a multicenter retrospective study conducted by the Uro-Oncology Group in Kyushu.

The subtype of urothelial carcinoma (SUC) has been known to possess morphological diversity for histologic subtype or divergent differentiation. However, the efficacy of avelumab against SUC remains unclear. Therefore, the effect of the treatment as well as the survival results of avelumab monotherapy were evaluated as a first-line therapeutic maintenance in patients with advanced SUC. A retrospective analysis was conducted on consecutive patients from the Uro-Oncology Group in Kyushu study population with advanced lower and upper urinary tract cancer who underwent avelumab maintenance therapy without progression after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients with pure urothelial carcinoma (PUC) and SUC were comparatively analyzed based on objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Out of 49 recorded patients, 38 and 11 had PUC and SUC, respectively. The most common subtype element was glandular differentiation (n=5), followed by squamous differentiation (n=3), micropapillary (n=1), and plasmacytoid subtypes (n=1). The SUC and PUC groups had comparable ORR (0% vs. 2.6%, P>0.99) and disease control rates (54.5% vs. 44.7%, P=0.73). These patient groups also showed no significant difference in PFS (median 3.9 vs. 3.1 months, P=0.33) or OS (median 16.7 vs. 22.1 months, P=0.47). The response of SUC and PUC to avelumab was comparable in patients with advanced lower and upper urinary tract cancer, indicating that avelumab maintenance therapy is also effective for SUC.

Clinical Outcomes of Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma With Prior Avelumab Versus Pembrolizumab Therapy.

This study retrospectively evaluated whether enfortumab vedotin (EV) monotherapy is effective as a late-line treatment according to prior treatment type in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). We assessed consecutive patients from the Uro-Oncology Group in the Kyushu study population with lower and upper urinary tract cancer treated with EV monotherapy after platinum-based chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy failure between December 2021 and March 2024. In particular, patients receiving avelumab maintenance or pembrolizumab therapy before EV for advanced UC were analyzed and compared according to the response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Of the 80 enrolled patients, 31 and 49 received avelumab and pembrolizumab before EV therapy, respectively. The avelumab and pembrolizumab groups had comparable objective response rates (48.4% vs. 44.9%, p=0.820) and disease control rates (77.4% vs. 67.3%, p=0.448). These two groups showed no significant difference in PFS from the initiation of EV (median: 6.4 months vs. 4.2 months, p=0.184); meanwhile, the avelumab group had better OS from the initiation of EV than the pembrolizumab group (median: 16.0 months vs. 10.2 months, p=0.019). Moreover, the median OS after first-line chemotherapy initiation was longer in the avelumab group than in the pembrolizumab group (40.3 months vs. 24.7 months, p=0.054). On multivariate analysis, avelumab maintenance therapy before EV reduced the mortality risk by 47% (95% confidence interval=0.27-1.03; p=0.059). EV monotherapy after avelumab maintenance therapy provides favorable survival outcomes in patients with advanced UC.

A Podcast on Practical Considerations in Patients with Advanced Urothelial Cancer Receiving First-Line Cisplatin- or Carboplatin-Based Chemotherapy Followed by Avelumab Maintenance in a Changing Therapeutic Landscape.

Platinum-based chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma for decades, based on its proven efficacy and well-characterized safety profile. Although enfortumab vedotin (EV) plus pembrolizumab showed superior efficacy versus platinum-based chemotherapy in the EV-302 phase 3 trial, common and potentially cumulative toxicities associated with EV plus pembrolizumab may make this combination less suitable for some patients, such as those with pre-existing neuropathy, hyperglycemia, or hepatic impairment, or patients likely to have favorable outcomes with platinum-based chemotherapy. The availability of EV plus pembrolizumab in various countries may also be limited by financial considerations. Thus, platinum-based chemotherapy is likely to remain a valuable option for advanced urothelial carcinoma. Eligibility for cisplatin- or carboplatin-based regimens can be determined by assessing renal function, performance status, and specific comorbidities. In cisplatin-eligible and -ineligible patients without disease progression following platinum-based chemotherapy, avelumab first-line maintenance is standard of care based on findings from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial, which showed that avelumab first-line maintenance plus best supportive care prolonged overall survival and progression-free survival compared with best supportive care alone across clinically relevant subgroups. Adverse events associated with avelumab were generally consistent with those observed with other immune checkpoint inhibitors, and long-term follow-up showed no new safety concerns with prolonged treatment. Efficacy benefits and safety profiles were similar in patients who received avelumab first-line maintenance after cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy. The effectiveness and safety of avelumab first-line maintenance have been confirmed in several real-world studies. Overall, these data support the use of avelumab first-line maintenance for all platinum-treated patients without disease progression. In this podcast, we discuss the evolving role of platinum-based chemotherapy in this disease setting in the context of EV-302 trial results and describe practical considerations in patients receiving first-line cisplatin- or carboplatin-based chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance therapy.

Difference of oncological efficacy between two immune checkpoint inhibitors following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with unresectable, metastatic, advanced urothelial carcinoma: a multicenter real-world Japanese cohort.

Maintenance avelumab is currently recommended for patients with unresectable and/or metastatic (mUC) achieving at least stable disease (SD) on first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (1L-CT). Pembrolizumab is an alternative therapeutic avenue for this patient cohort in clinical practice. We investigated real-world data, focusing on the correlation between response to 1L-CT and oncological efficacy of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy with avelumab or pembrolizumab. A multicenter database registered 626 patients with mUC diagnosed from 2008-2023; among these, 175 receiving 2-6 cycles of 1L-CT followed by ICI therapy. Patients were categorized based on response to 1L-CT using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (v1.1). Objective response rateonICI, progression to ICI-free survival (ICI-PFS), and overall survival from start of 1L-CT were compared between avelumab-treated and pembrolizumab-treated patients in each response subgroup. ICI-PFS was significantly longer in patients achieving partial response on 1L-CT and subsequently receiving pembrolizumab compared to those receiving avelumab. Notably, patients achieving SD on 1L-CT and subsequently receiving pembrolizumab manifested significantly higher objective response rate (14% and 41%, respectively) and prolonged ICI-PFS relative to those receiving avelumab. In contrast, overall survival did not delineate difference between patients treated with avelumab versus pembrolizumab. Similar findings were discerned in the subanalysis of patients having favorable SD (tumor shrinkage, from -29 to 0%) and unfavorable SD (tumor enlargement, from + 1 to + 19%) on 1L-CT. Our study provides real-world evidence regarding difference of oncological efficacy between maintenanceavelumab and subsequentpembrolizumab in patients with mUC who achieved partial response or SD on 1L-CT.

Treatment trends for metastatic urothelial carcinoma across eight Mexican centers: A global oncology perspective.

11171 Background: Urothelial carcinoma represents 3% of new cancer cases globally. Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) poses a notable challenge to healthcare systems, given its treatment complexity and high mortality. These challenges are magnified in resource-constrained settings. We aim to describe treatment trends for mUC across public and private Mexican centers. Methods: Retrospective study across 8 referral centers. Adults with mUC from 01/2001-12/2021 were included. We assessed clinical records, demographics and comorbidities. We recorded subject eligibility for first line platinum therapy, treatment lines received, and access to novel drugs. Descriptive statistics were used for demographics, treatment details and outcomes. Survival analysis was performed, including Kaplan Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model. Results: We found 342 cases of mUC, 76% were male, with a median age of 67 years. Median follow-up was 8.4 months. Among those that received a first line (n=223, 65%), regimens used were cisplatin-based chemotherapy (n=100, 45%), carboplatin-based chemotherapy (n=87, 39%), gemcitabine (n=5, 2.2%), immunotherapy (n=4, 1.8%) or unspecified (n=27, 12%). Most causes of cisplatin ineligibility were ECOG ≥2 (41%) and glomerular filtration rate &lt;60 ml/min (33%). Of those who received upfront platinum therapy (n=187), 65% received &gt;3 cycles (n=121), 20% received 2 or 3 cycles (n=38) and 15% received 1 cycle (n=28). Progression as best response was found in 47% (n=88). Avelumab maintenance was only used in 14/99 eligible patients (14.1%). The proportion of individuals receiving a second, third or more lines was 24.6%, 8.8% and 3.5%, respectively. The most common second line treatment was chemotherapy (64.4%) followed by immunotherapy (28.6%). Median overall survival (mOS) was 11.8 months. Treatment notably impacted mOS, favoring those who received a first line(16.7 vs. 4.6 months, p&lt;0.0001). Stratified analysis showed worse mOS for those with visceral disease (17.1 vs 10.3 months, p=0.0065) and ECOG ≥2 (17.6 vs 5.8 months, p&lt;0.001).These features correlated with higher mortality, while first line treatment was associated with lower mortality. Conclusions: These data represent the first effort to delineate treatment trends of mUC in Mexico. First line treatment rates were higher than those described worldwide (35-60%1). Further, cisplatin-eligibility was higher compared to reports of high-income countries. Considerable rates of progression to platinum therapy were found, likely due to aggressive disease. This study highlights the limited access to novel treatments, showed by the infrequent use of avelumab maintenance, immunotherapy or targeted agents. [Table: see text]

A phase 2/3 study of Bicycle toxin conjugate BT8009 targeting nectin-4 in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC): Duravelo-2.

TPS4619 Background: BT8009 is a Bicycle toxin conjugate (BTC), comprising a highly selective bicyclic peptide targeting nectin-4 linked to the cytotoxin monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) via a cleavable linker. Nectin-4 is an adhesion molecule commonly expressed in many tumor types, including urothelial cancer (UC), and is a validated therapeutic target (Hoffman-Censits 2021). BT8009 has a low molecular weight and short plasma half-life, with potential to rapidly penetrate solid tumors and reduce toxicity by minimizing exposure to normal tissue (Rigby 2022). Results from the ongoing phase 1/2 clinical trial of BT8009 (NCT04561362) indicate preliminary antitumor activity and a tolerable safety profile in patients (pts) with advanced malignancies including UC (Baldini 2023). This global, open label, phase 2/3 multicenter adaptive study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BT8009 as monotherapy, or combined with pembrolizumab (pembro), vs chemotherapy in pts with locally advanced or metastatic UC (la/mUC) (NCT06225596/BT8009-230; Duravelo-2). Methods: The trial will enroll up to 956 adult pts in 2 cohorts. Cohort 1 will include n≤641 previously untreated pts eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. Cohort 2 will include n≤315 pts with ≥1 prior systemic therapy, excluding enfortumab vedotin or other MMAE-based therapy. Pts must have la/mUC of the renal pelvis, ureter, bladder, or urethra, ECOG performance status ≤2 (Cohort 1) or ≤1 (Cohort 2), and adequate organ function. Cohort 1 will be randomized 1:1:1 to receive: 1) BT8009 5 mg/m2 on days (D)1, 8, and 15 + pembro 200 mg on D1; 2) BT8009 6 mg/m2 on D1 and 8 + pembro 200 mg on D1; or 3) chemotherapy (gemcitabine + cisplatin / carboplatin, followed by avelumab maintenance). Cohort 2 will be randomized 1:1 to receive: 1) BT8009 5 mg/m2 on D1, 8, and 15 or 2) BT8009 6 mg/m2 on D1 and 8. Cycle lengths will be 21D (28D for avelumab). After 30 pts in each dose arm have 9 weeks follow-up, an interim analysis will determine the optimal dose of BT8009 + pembro (Cohort 1) or BT8009 monotherapy (Cohort 2) to be used for the rest of the study. An additional Cohort 2 arm, optimal dose of BT8009 + pembro, will open after completion of the interim analysis. Discontinuation criteria include planned completion of therapy, progressive disease, and intolerable toxicity. Primary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS; Cohort 1) and objective response rate (ORR; Cohort 2) assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary endpoints are ORR (Cohort 1), PFS (Cohort 2), and overall survival, duration of response, disease control rate, safety/tolerability, and health-related quality of life (Cohorts 1 and 2). Pharmacokinetics, incidence/titers of antidrug antibodies, and tumor/peripheral biomarkers are exploratory endpoints. Efficacy endpoints will be assessed per RECIST v1.1. This study is actively recruiting. Clinical trial information: NCT06225596 .

Enfortumab vedotin (EV) with pembrolizumab (P) versus chemotherapy (chemo) in previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC): Analysis of cisplatin (cis)-eligible population from EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39.

4562 Background: EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39 (NCT04223856) is a phase 3, randomized, open-label, global study comparing EV+P with platinum-based chemo (PBC) for first-line (1L) treatment (tx) of patients (pts) with la/mUC regardless of cis eligibility. In EV-302, EV+P demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefit compared with PBC for the dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.45; P&lt;0.00001) and overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.47; P&lt;0.00001) in the overall pt population (Powles ESMO 2023), reducing the risk of progression and/or death by more than 50%. EV+P was FDA-approved in Dec 2023 for tx of adults with la/mUC. As cis eligibility status has long defined 1L tx, here we present results for pts who were eligible for cis at randomization. Methods: Pts with previously untreated la/mUC were randomized 1:1 to receive 3-week cycles of EV (1.25 mg/kg IV; Days 1 and 8) and P (200 mg IV; Day 1) or PBC (gemcitabine with cis or carboplatin). Select secondary endpoints included confirmed objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and safety. Pts were deemed eligible/ineligible for cis by protocol-defined criteria and were stratified accordingly. Results: 478 pts (EV+P: 244, PBC: 234) were cis-eligible at randomization. 220 (94.0%) pts in the PBC arm received cis at Cycle 1. mPFS was 14.6 mo for EV+P; 6.5 mo for PBC (HR: 0.48, 95% CI, 0.38, 0.62). mOS was 31.5 mo for EV+P; 18.4 mo for PBC (HR: 0.53, 95% CI, 0.39, 0.72). ORR for EV+P was 70.8% with 32.5% complete response (CR) rate; mDOR (95% CI) was not reached (18.2 mo, NR). ORR for PBC was 53.0% with 15.5% CR rate; mDOR (95% CI) was 8.3 mo (5.9, 10.9). In EV+P arm, 82 pts (33.6%) remained on tx at data cutoff (DCO). 85 pts (34.8%) received subsequent therapy. 72 pts (29.5%) received any platinum-based therapy as first subsequent therapy; 43 pts (17.6%) received cis. In PBC arm, all pts were off study tx at DCO. 146 pts (62.4%) received any PD-1/L1 therapy following PBC. 83 pts received maintenance avelumab; 59 pts received PD-1/L1 therapy as 2L tx. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 53.9% of pts with EV+P and 62.7% of pts with PBC. Most common grade ≥3 TRAEs of special interest for EV were skin reactions (14.8%), hyperglycemia (7.8%), and peripheral neuropathy (5.8%). Most common grade ≥3 tx-emergent AEs of special interest for P were severe skin reactions (9.5%), pneumonitis (4.9%), and colitis (2.9%). Conclusions: EV+P improved clinical outcomes in pts who were eligible for cis with previously untreated la/mUC, reducing the risk of death by 47% compared with PBC. Results were consistent with the overall population. The AE profile of EV+P was generally manageable with no new safety signals. The results of EV-302 support EV+P as a new SOC for la/mUC, including pts who are eligible for cis. Clinical trial information: NCT04223856 .

Enfortumab vedotin (EV) with pembrolizumab (P) versus chemotherapy (chemo) in previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC): Analysis of the cisplatin (cis)-ineligible population from EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39.

4563 Background: EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39 (NCT04223856) is a phase 3, randomized, open-label, global study comparing EV+P with platinum-based chemo (PBC) for first-line (1L) treatment (tx) of patients (pts) with la/mUC regardless of cis eligibility. In EV-302, EV+P demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefit compared with PBC for the dual primary endpoints of PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.45; P&lt;0.00001) and OS (HR: 0.47; P&lt;0.00001) in the overall pt population (Powles ESMO 2023), reducing the risk of progression and/or death by more than 50%. EV+P was FDA-approved in Dec 2023 for tx of adults with la/mUC. As cis eligibility status has long defined 1L tx, here we present results of an analysis for pts who were ineligible for cis at randomization. Methods: Pts with previously untreated la/mUC were randomized 1:1 to receive 3-week cycles of EV (1.25 mg/kg IV; Days 1 and 8) and P (200 mg IV; Day 1) or PBC (gemcitabine with cis or carboplatin [carbo]). Select secondary endpoints included confirmed objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and safety. Pts were deemed eligible/ineligible for cis following protocol-defined criteria and stratified accordingly. Results: 408 pts (EV+P: 198, PBC: 210) were cis-ineligible at randomization. 205 (97.6%) pts in the PBC arm received carbo at Cyle 1. mPFS was 10.6 months for EV+P; 6.1 months for PBC (HR: 0.43, 95% CI, 0.33, 0.55). mOS was not reached for EV+P and was 12.7 months for PBC (HR: 0.43, 95% CI, 0.31, 0.59). ORR for EV+P was 63.9% with 24.7% complete response (CR) rate; mDOR (95% CI) was not reached (16.3 months, NR). ORR for PBC was 34.9% with 9.1% CR rate; mDOR (95% CI) was 6.6 months (5.6, 10.2). In EV+P arm, 62 pts (31.3%) remained on tx at data cutoff (DCO). 55 pts (27.8%) received subsequent therapy. 10 pts received cis and 27 pts received carbo as first subsequent therapy. In PBC arm, all were off study tx at DCO. 114 pts (54.3%) received any PD-1/L1 therapy following PBC. 52 pts received maintenance avelumab; 58 pts received PD-1/L1 therapy as second-line tx. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 58.4% of pts with EV+P and 77.1% of pts with PBC. Most common grade ≥3 TRAEs of special interest for EV were skin reactions (16.2%), peripheral neuropathy (8.1%), and hyperglycemia (4.1%). Most common grade ≥3 tx-emergent AEs of special interest for P were severe skin reaction (14.7%), hepatitis (2.0%), and pneumonitis (2.0%). Conclusions: In this pt population with historically poor prognosis, EV+P improved clinical outcomes in pts who were ineligible for cis; results were consistent with the overall population. The risk of death was reduced by more than 50%. The AE profile of EV+P was generally manageable with no new safety signals. The results of EV-302 support EV+P as a new SOC for la/mUC, including pts who are ineligible for cis. Clinical trial information: NCT04223856 .

INSIGHT-005: A new stratum of the explorative, open-labeled, phase I INSIGHT study to evaluate the feasibility and safety, as well as preliminary efficacy, of subcutaneous injections with IMP321 (eftilagimod alpha) in combination with PD-L1 inhibitor (avelumab) for metastatic or unresectable locally advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC)—IKF-s614.

TPS4620 Background: UCs are the 6th most common malignancies in the Western world being localized in the upper (5-10%) or the lower (90-95%) urinary tract. Metastatic UC (mUC), which accounts for 5% of all cases, is associated with a dismal prognosis and prompt progression. So far, the 1st line therapy for mUC encompassed platinum-based combination regimens. Recent data indicate beneficial patient treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Thus, avelumab was approved for maintenance therapy after progression-free platinum-based chemotherapy for locally advanced (LA) or mUC. Further immune checkpoint inhibitors (e.g. pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab) achieved approval or showed promising results for treatment of different patient populations. Eftilagimod alpha (efti) is a soluble LAG-3 fusion protein and a MHC class II agonist activating APCs followed by CD8 T-cell activation. The combination of efti with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade is not yet available and is proposed to enhance efficacy. Based on previous results from the INSIGHT trial and change in treatment landscape we hypothesize that combining avelumab and efti will display clinically relevant efficacy in unresectable LA UC or mUC subgroups with acceptable toxicity. Methods: INSIGHT-005 is a new stratum within the investigator-initiated INSIGHT phase I platform trial ongoing at multiple sites (n=9) in Germany. Patients with unresectable LA UC or mUC will receive efti in combination with avelumab. 30 patients will be enrolled in 3 subgroups: I) Previously untreated, eligible for platinum-based therapy, with PD-L1 CPS≥10; II) Previously untreated, not-eligible for platinum-based therapy, irrespective of the PD-L1 status; III) Suffered disease progression after platinum-based chemotherapy for metastatic disease and did not receive avelumab maintenance therapy, irrespective of the PD-L1 status. Enrolled patients will receive avelumab 800 mg i.v. and efti 30 mg s.c. on the same day Q2W for a maximum of 24 cycles. Tumor evaluation will be performed via CT or MRI every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint of this study is to explore feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy of efti when added to avelumab in unresectable LA UC or mUC. Secondary endpoints include safety and efficacy parameters as defined by objective response, time to and duration of response and PFS according to RECIST 1.1, OS and biomarker analyses. First patient was enrolled on 2023-11-29. Currently, recruitment is ongoing. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03252938 Clinical trial information: NCT03252938 .