Explore the vast range of titles available.

PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors are active in metastatic urothelial carcinoma, but positive randomised data supporting their use as a first-line treatment are lacking. In this study we assessed outcomes with first-line pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma. KEYNOTE-361 is a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial of patients aged at least 18 years, with untreated, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of up to 2. Eligible patients were enrolled from 201 medical centres in 21 countries and randomly allocated (1:1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for a maximum of 35 cycles plus intravenous chemotherapy (gemcitabine [1000 mg/m2] on days 1 and 8 and investigator's choice of cisplatin [70 mg/m2] or carboplatin [area under the curve 5] on day 1 of every 3-week cycle) for a maximum of six cycles, pembrolizumab alone, or chemotherapy alone, stratified by choice of platinum therapy and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to the treatment assignment or CPS. At protocol-specified final analysis, sequential hypothesis testing began with superiority of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the total population (all patients randomly allocated to a treatment) for the dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (p value boundary 0·0019), assessed by masked, independent central review, and overall survival (p value boundary 0·0142), followed by non-inferiority and superiority of overall survival for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in the patient population with CPS of at least 10 and in the total population (also a primary endpoint). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment). This study is completed and is no longer enrolling patients, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02853305. Between Oct 19, 2016 and June 29, 2018, 1010 patients were enrolled and allocated to receive pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (n=351), pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=307), or chemotherapy alone (n=352). Median follow-up was 31·7 months (IQR 27·7–36·0). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy did not significantly improve progression-free survival, with a median progression-free survival of 8·3 months (95% CI 7·5–8·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 7·1 months (6·4–7·9) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·65–0·93; p=0·0033), or overall survival, with a median overall survival of 17·0 months (14·5–19·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·3 months (12·3–16·7) in the chemotherapy group (0·86, 0·72–1·02; p=0·0407). No further formal statistical hypothesis testing was done. In analyses of overall survival with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy (now exploratory based on hierarchical statistical testing), overall survival was similar between these treatment groups, both in the total population (15·6 months [95% CI 12·1–17·9] with pembrolizumab vs 14·3 months [12·3–16·7] with chemotherapy; HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·77–1·11) and the population with CPS of at least 10 (16·1 months [13·6–19·9] with pembrolizumab vs 15·2 months [11·6–23·3] with chemotherapy; 1·01, 0·77–1·32). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event attributed to study treatment was anaemia with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients) or chemotherapy alone (112 [33%] of 342 patients), and diarrhoea, fatigue, and hyponatraemia (each affecting four [1%] of 302 patients) with pembrolizumab alone. Six (1%) of 1010 patients died due to an adverse event attributed to study treatment; two patients in each treatment group. One each occurred due to cardiac arrest and device-related sepsis in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group, one each due to cardiac failure and malignant neoplasm progression in the pembrolizumab group, and one each due to myocardial infarction and ischaemic colitis in the chemotherapy group. The addition of pembrolizumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy did not significantly improve efficacy and should not be widely adopted for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Preoperative immunotherapy with anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4 antibodies has shown remarkable pathological responses in melanoma 1 and colorectal cancer 2 . In NABUCCO (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03387761 ), a single-arm feasibility trial, 24 patients with stage III urothelial cancer (UC) received two doses of ipilimumab and two doses of nivolumab, followed by resection. The primary endpoint was feasibility to resect within 12 weeks from treatment start. All patients were evaluable for the study endpoints and underwent resection, 23 (96%) within 12 weeks. Grade 3–4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 55% of patients and in 41% of patients when excluding clinically insignificant laboratory abnormalities. Eleven patients (46%) had a pathological complete response (pCR), meeting the secondary efficacy endpoint. Fourteen patients (58%) had no remaining invasive disease (pCR or pTisN0/pTaN0). In contrast to studies with anti-PD1/PD-L1 monotherapy, complete response to ipilimumab plus nivolumab was independent of baseline CD8 + presence or T-effector signatures. Induction of tertiary lymphoid structures upon treatment was observed in responding patients. Our data indicate that combined CTLA-4 plus PD-1 blockade might provide an effective preoperative treatment strategy in locoregionally advanced UC, irrespective of pre-existing CD8 + T cell activity. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy combination in the NABUCCO trial elicits high pathological complete response rates in patients with locoregionally advanced (stage III) urothelial cancer and provides molecular biomarkers of treatment efficacy.

In humans, TGFβ signalling is associated with lack of response to immunotherapy in immune-excluded tumours; in mouse models of this immune phenotype, robust tumour infiltration by T cells and tumour regression are observed only when checkpoint inhibition is combined with inhibition of TGFβ signalling. Predictors of response to immunotherapy Immune checkpoint blockade is showing clinical promise in the treatment of several cancer types, but the determinants of response need to be better established. Sanjeev Mariathasan and colleagues show that specific immune cell phenotypes and a high neoantigen burden are predictors of good responses to therapy with atezolizumab, an anti-PD-L1 agent, in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Lack of response to therapy is associated with increased TGFβ signalling in fibroblasts in the tumour microenvironment. Combining TGFβ blockade with immune checkpoint blockade in mouse models increases the anti-tumour efficacy of the therapy, suggesting that identifying and targeting microenvironmental regulators of anti-tumour immunity may increase the reach of immunotherapy approaches. Therapeutic antibodies that block the programmed death-1 (PD-1)–programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway can induce robust and durable responses in patients with various cancers, including metastatic urothelial cancer 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 . However, these responses only occur in a subset of patients. Elucidating the determinants of response and resistance is key to improving outcomes and developing new treatment strategies. Here we examined tumours from a large cohort of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer who were treated with an anti-PD-L1 agent (atezolizumab) and identified major determinants of clinical outcome. Response to treatment was associated with CD8 + T-effector cell phenotype and, to an even greater extent, high neoantigen or tumour mutation burden. Lack of response was associated with a signature of transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) signalling in fibroblasts. This occurred particularly in patients with tumours, which showed exclusion of CD8 + T cells from the tumour parenchyma that were instead found in the fibroblast- and collagen-rich peritumoural stroma; a common phenotype among patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. Using a mouse model that recapitulates this immune-excluded phenotype, we found that therapeutic co-administration of TGFβ-blocking and anti-PD-L1 antibodies reduced TGFβ signalling in stromal cells, facilitated T-cell penetration into the centre of tumours, and provoked vigorous anti-tumour immunity and tumour regression. Integration of these three independent biological features provides the best basis for understanding patient outcome in this setting and suggests that TGFβ shapes the tumour microenvironment to restrain anti-tumour immunity by restricting T-cell infiltration.

Patients who had had a relapse after receiving platinum-containing chemotherapy and a PD-1 or PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitor were assigned to receive enfortumab vedotin or one of three chemotherapy agents chosen by their doctor. Enfortumab vedotin prolonged progression-free and overall survival.

The approval of anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-programmed death 1 agents has expanded treatment options for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Avelumab, a human monoclonal anti-PD-L1 antibody, has shown promising antitumour activity and safety in this disease. We aimed to assess the safety profile in patients (both post-platinum therapy and cisplatin-naive) treated with avelumab and to assess antitumour activity of this drug in post-platinum patients. In this pooled analysis of two cohorts from the phase 1 dose-expansion JAVELIN Solid Tumor study, patients aged 18 years and older with histologically or cytologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that had progressed after at least one previous platinum-based chemotherapy were enrolled from 80 cancer treatment centres or hospitals in the USA, Europe, and Asia. Eligible patients had adequate end-organ function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, life expectancy of at least 3 months, and at least one measurable lesion. Cisplatin-ineligible patients who might have been previously treated in the perioperative setting, including platinum-naive patients, were also eligible. Patients unselected for PD-L1 expression received avelumab (10 mg/kg, 1 h intravenous infusion) every 2 weeks until confirmed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other criterion for withdrawal. The primary endpoint for this efficacy expansion cohort was confirmed best overall response (according to RECIST version 1.1), adjudicated by independent review. Safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of avelumab. Antitumour activity was assessed in post-platinum patients who received at least one dose of avelumab. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01772004; enrolment in this cohort of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma is closed and the trial is ongoing. Between Sept 3, 2014, and March 15, 2016, 329 patients with advanced metastatic urothelial carcinoma were screened for enrolment into this study; 249 patients were eligible and received treatment with avelumab for a median of 12 weeks (IQR 6·0–19·7) and followed up for a median of 9·9 months (4·3–12·1). Safety and antitumour activity were evaluated at data cutoff on June 9, 2016. In 161 post-platinum patients with at least 6 months of follow-up, a best overall response of complete or partial response was recorded in 27 patients (17%; 95% CI 11–24), including nine (6%) complete responses and 18 (11%) partial responses. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (any grade in ≥10% patients) were infusion-related reaction (73 [29%]; all grade 1–2) and fatigue (40 [16%]). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21 (8%) of 249 patients, the most common of which were fatigue (four [2%]), and asthenia, elevated lipase, hypophosphataemia, and pneumonitis in two (1%) patients each. 19 (8%) of 249 patients had a serious adverse event related to treatment with avelumab, and one treatment-related death occurred (pneumonitis). Avelumab showed antitumour activity in the treatment of patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma; a manageable safety profile was reported in all avelumab-treated patients. These data provide the rationale for therapeutic use of avelumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma and it has received accelerated US FDA approval in this setting on this basis. Merck KGaA, and Pfizer Inc.

Key Points Bladder cancer is the fifth most common cancer in men in Western countries (male:female ratio is 3:1), and tobacco smoking is a major risk factor. There are two major groups of patients with distinct prognosis and molecular features. Although local disease recurrence is a major problem for those with low-grade non-muscle-invasive tumours, life expectancy is long and development of invasive disease is infrequent. For those who present with muscle-invasive disease, development of metastatic disease is common, prognosis is dismal and no advances in therapy have been made for decades. Major unmet clinical needs include non-invasive methods for disease surveillance and novel approaches to eliminate both tumour and widespread intraepithelial preneoplasia in patients with non-muscle-invasive disease. New systemic therapeutic approaches are urgently needed for those with muscle-invasive disease. Recent studies reveal important biological features of urothelial metastasis and the epithelial–mesenchymal transition that may contribute to metastatic initiation. A key role for inflammatory processes is evident in the development of metastasis. Heterogeneity in outcome within the two major groups indicates a need for subclassification for more accurate prognostication, prediction of response to current therapies and development of novel therapies. Recent molecular analyses now provide such subclassification with definition of multiple subgroups that are independent of conventional histopathological definitions. This presents major opportunities for personalized patient care. This Review discusses recent advances in the molecular characterization of bladder cancer, which has provided insights into pathogenesis and subgroups of bladder cancers with different prognosis. Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder comprises two long-recognized disease entities with distinct molecular features and clinical outcome. Low-grade non-muscle-invasive tumours recur frequently but rarely progress to muscle invasion, whereas muscle-invasive tumours are usually diagnosed de novo and frequently metastasize. Recent genome-wide expression and sequencing studies identify genes and pathways that are key drivers of urothelial cancer and reveal a more complex picture with multiple molecular subclasses that traverse conventional grade and stage groupings. This improved understanding of molecular features, disease pathogenesis and heterogeneity provides new opportunities for prognostic application, disease monitoring and personalized therapy.

Despite standard curative-intent treatment with neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by radical surgery in eligible patients, muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma has a high recurrence rate and no level 1 evidence for adjuvant therapy. We aimed to evaluate atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. In the IMvigor010 study, a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 192 hospitals, academic centres, and community oncology practices across 24 countries or regions, patients aged 18 years and older with histologically confirmed muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2 were enrolled within 14 weeks after radical cystectomy or nephroureterectomy with lymph node dissection. Patients had ypT2–4a or ypN+ tumours following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or pT3–4a or pN+ tumours if no neoadjuvant chemotherapy was received. Patients not treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy must have been ineligible for or declined cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy. No post-surgical radiotherapy or previous adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a permuted block (block size of four) method and interactive voice-web response system to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab given intravenously every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or up to 1 year, whichever occurred first, or to observation. Randomisation was stratified by previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, number of lymph nodes resected, pathological nodal status, tumour stage, and PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who either received at least one dose of atezolizumab or had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02450331, and is ongoing but not recruiting patients. Between Oct 5, 2015, and July 30, 2018, we enrolled 809 patients, of whom 406 were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 403 were assigned to the observation group. Median follow-up was 21·9 months (IQR 13·2–29·8). Median disease-free survival was 19·4 months (95% CI 15·9–24·8) with atezolizumab and 16·6 months (11·2–24·8) with observation (stratified hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74–1·08]; p=0·24). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were urinary tract infection (31 [8%] of 390 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 20 [5%] of 397 patients in the observation group), pyelonephritis (12 [3%]) vs 14 [4%]), and anaemia (eight [2%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 122 (31%) patients who received atezolizumab and 71 (18%) who underwent observation. 63 (16%) patients who received atezolizumab had a treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse event. One treatment-related death, due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, occurred in the atezolizumab group. To our knowledge, IMvigor010 is the largest, first-completed phase 3 adjuvant study to evaluate the role of a checkpoint inhibitor in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improved disease-free survival in the atezolizumab group over observation. Atezolizumab was generally tolerable, with no new safety signals; however, higher frequencies of adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported than in metastatic urothelial carcinoma studies. These data do not support the use of adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor therapy in the setting evaluated in IMvigor010 at this time. F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Immune checkpoint therapy is being tested in the neoadjuvant setting for patients with localized urothelial carcinoma 1 , 2 , with one study reporting data in cisplatin-ineligible patients who received anti-PD-L1 monotherapy 2 . The study reported that patients with bulky tumors, a known high-risk feature defined as greater than clinical T2 disease, had fewer responses, with pathological complete response rate of 17% 2 . Here we report on the first pilot combination neoadjuvant trial ( NCT02812420 ) with anti-PD-L1 (durvalumab) plus anti-CTLA-4 (tremelimumab) in cisplatin-ineligible patients, with all tumors identified as having high-risk features ( n  = 28). High-risk features were defined by bulky tumors, variant histology, lymphovascular invasion, hydronephrosis and/or high-grade upper tract disease 3 – 5 . The primary endpoint was safety and we observed 6 of 28 patients (21%) with grade ≥3 immune-related adverse events, consisting of asymptomatic laboratory abnormalities ( n  = 4), hepatitis and colitis ( n  = 2). We also observed pathological complete response of 37.5% and downstaging to pT1 or less in 58% of patients who completed surgery ( n  = 24). In summary, we provide initial safety, efficacy and biomarker data with neoadjuvant combination anti-PD-L1 plus anti-CTLA-4, which warrants further development for patients with localized urothelial carcinoma, especially cisplatin-ineligible patients with high-risk features who do not currently have an established standard-of-care neoadjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant combination of immune checkpoint therapy in patients with cisplatin-ineligible bladder cancer achieves clinical efficacy and uncovers immune features as potential predictive biomarkers of treatment response.

Survival outcomes are poor for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who receive standard, first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy. We assessed the overall survival of patients who received durvalumab (a PD-L1 inhibitor), with or without tremelimumab (a CTLA-4 inhibitor), as a first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. DANUBE is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in patients with untreated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, conducted at 224 academic research centres, hospitals, and oncology clinics in 23 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to receive durvalumab monotherapy (1500 mg) administered intravenously every 4 weeks; durvalumab (1500 mg) plus tremelimumab (75 mg) administered intravenously every 4 weeks for up to four doses, followed by durvalumab maintenance (1500 mg) every 4 weeks; or standard-of-care chemotherapy (gemcitabine plus cisplatin or gemcitabine plus carboplatin, depending on cisplatin eligibility) administered intravenously for up to six cycles. Randomisation was done through an interactive voice–web response system, with stratification by cisplatin eligibility, PD-L1 status, and presence or absence of liver metastases, lung metastases, or both. The coprimary endpoints were overall survival compared between the durvalumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy groups in the population of patients with high PD-L1 expression (the high PD-L1 population) and between the durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy groups in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). The study has completed enrolment and the final analysis of overall survival is reported. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02516241, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT number 2015-001633-24. Between Nov 24, 2015, and March 21, 2017, we randomly assigned 1032 patients to receive durvalumab (n=346), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (n=342), or chemotherapy (n=344). At data cutoff (Jan 27, 2020), median follow-up for survival was 41·2 months (IQR 37·9–43·2) for all patients. In the high PD-L1 population, median overall survival was 14·4 months (95% CI 10·4–17·3) in the durvalumab monotherapy group (n=209) versus 12·1 months (10·4–15·0) in the chemotherapy group (n=207; hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·71–1·11; p=0·30). In the intention-to-treat population, median overall survival was 15·1 months (13·1–18·0) in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group versus 12·1 months (10·9–14·0) in the chemotherapy group (0·85, 95% CI 0·72–1·02; p=0·075). In the safety population, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 47 (14%) of 345 patients in the durvalumab group, 93 (27%) of 340 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group, and in 188 (60%) of 313 patients in the chemotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event was increased lipase in the durvalumab group (seven [2%] of 345 patients) and in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group (16 [5%] of 340 patients), and neutropenia in the chemotherapy group (66 [21%] of 313 patients). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 30 (9%) of 345 patients in the durvalumab group, 78 (23%) of 340 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group, and 50 (16%) of 313 patients in the chemotherapy group. Deaths due to study drug toxicity were reported in two (1%) patients in the durvalumab group (acute hepatic failure and hepatitis), two (1%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group (septic shock and pneumonitis), and one (<1%) patient in the chemotherapy group (acute kidney injury). This study did not meet either of its coprimary endpoints. Further research to identify the patients with previously untreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma who benefit from treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, either alone or in combination regimens, is warranted. AstraZeneca.

Antibodies targeting PD-1 or its ligand 1 PD-L1 such as atezolizumab, have great efficacy in a proportion of metastatic urothelial cancers1,2. Biomarkers may facilitate identification of these responding tumors3. Neoadjuvant use of these agents is associated with pathological complete response in a spectrum of tumors, including urothelial cancer4–7. Sequential tissue sampling from these studies allowed for detailed on-treatment biomarker analysis. Here, we present a single-arm phase 2 study, investigating two cycles of atezolizumab before cystectomy in 95 patients with muscle-invasive urothelial cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02662309). Pathological complete response was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints focused on safety, relapse-free survival and biomarker analysis. The pathological complete response rate was 31% (95% confidence interval: 21–41%), achieving the primary efficacy endpoint. Baseline biomarkers showed that the presence of preexisting activated T cells was more prominent than expected and correlated with outcome. Other established biomarkers, such as tumor mutational burden, did not predict outcome, differentiating this from the metastatic setting. Dynamic changes to gene expression signatures and protein biomarkers occurred with therapy, whereas changes in DNA alterations with treatment were uncommon. Responding tumors showed predominant expression of genes related to tissue repair after treatment, making tumor biomarker interpretation challenging in this group. Stromal factors such as transforming growth factor-β and fibroblast activation protein were linked to resistance, as was high expression of cell cycle gene signatures after treatment.A single-arm multicenter phase 2 trial demonstrates clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant PD-L1 blockade in patients with resectable muscle-invasive bladder cancer ineligible for cisplatin and examines biomarkers associated with patient outcome.