Search

Advanced bladder cancer patients have historically failed to achieve prolonged duration of response to conventional chemotherapy and needed better first-line treatment regimens. The approval of nivolumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin and pembrolizumab with antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin has revolutionized the first-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer in many countries. In this review, we summarize the intricate differences between the two landmark clinical trials that led to their incorporation into the current standard of care for advanced bladder cancer. We further discuss newer novel treatment options in the second and subsequent lines of treatment on progression, like immunotherapy in combination with other agents, including fibroblast growth factors receptor inhibitors, human epidermal growth factor inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and novel antibodies. Finally, we discuss the integration of these novel therapies into current clinical practice amidst the rapidly evolving landscape of advanced bladder cancer treatment, aiming to enhance patient outcomes.

Background: Since there is no clear consensus on optimal treatment duration of PD-(L)1 targeting checkpoint inhibitors in the setting of urothelial cancer (UC) patients, even patients with durable responses are often treated up to 2 years. It is questionable whether this is necessary and whether quality of life improves when treatment is discontinued earlier and restarted when necessary., Methods: We collected available data from locally advanced or metastatic UC patients within the Netherlands between September 2017 and December 2019 treated with first or second-line pembrolizumab, to evaluate treatment duration, reasons for discontinuation, subsequent treatments and survival outcomes., Results: Data were available from 74 patients: 85% (63/74) of patients had a treatment duration of 12 months or shorter, and in seven out of them, treatment was discontinued for another reason than progressive disease. Two patients (3%) had a treatment duration between 12 and 24 months, and eight patients (11%) completed 24 months of treatment. Survival at data cut-off (1 July 2020) with a median follow-up of 35 months was 100% in patients with partial or complete response (6/7 patients) and treatment duration ≤ 12 months, and 100% in patients treated for 24 months. In total, three patients were re-treated with pembrolizumab upon progressive disease during follow-up., Conclusions: In patients who reach partial or complete response during treatment with a PD-(L)1 targeting checkpoint inhibitor, early discontinuation of treatment with pembrolizumab and restart if necessary seems to be reasonable with preserved favorable outcomes. This article should drive further efforts to optimize the treatment duration for patients who respond to treatment with pembrolizumab.

Background: In the PROSELICA phase III trial (NCT01308580), cabazitaxel 20 mg/m 2 (CABA20) was non-inferior to cabazitaxel 25 mg/m 2 (CABA25) in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel (DOC). The present post hoc analysis evaluates how the type of progression at randomization affected outcomes., Methods: Progression type at randomization was defined as follows: PSA progression only (PSA-p; no radiological progression (RADIO-p), no pain), RADIO-p (±PSA-p, no pain), or pain progression (PAIN-p, ±PSA-p, ±RADIO-p). Relationships between progression type and overall survival (OS), radiological progression-free survival (rPFS), and PSA response (confirmed PSA decrease ≥ 50%) were analyzed., Results: All randomized patients ( n = 1200) had received prior DOC, and 25.7% had received prior abiraterone or enzalutamide. Progression type at randomization was evaluable in 1075 patients (PSA-p = 24.4%, RADIO-p = 20.8%, PAIN-p = 54.8%). Pain progression was associated with clinical and biological features of aggressive disease. Median OS from CABA initiation or date of mCRPC diagnosis, all arms combined, was shorter in the PAIN-p group than in the RADIO-p or the PSA-p groups (12.0 versus 16.8 and 18.4 months, respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, all arms combined, PAIN-p was an independent predictor of poor OS (HR = 1.44, p < 0.001). PSA response, rPFS, and OS were numerically higher with CABA25 versus CABA20 in patients with PAIN-p., Conclusions: This post hoc analysis of the PROSELICA phase III study shows that pain progression at initiation of CABA in mCRPC patients previously treated with DOC is associated with a poor prognosis. Disease progression should be carefully monitored, even in the absence of PSA rise.