Search

Background: 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., Objective: The aim of the present retrospective analysis was to assess the effectiveness of EV following avelumab in patients with mUC enrolled in the ARON-2 EV study., Patients and Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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., Competing Interests: Declarations Funding No external funding was used in the preparation of this manuscript. Conflicts of Interest Ondřej Fiala received honoraria from Roche, Janssen, GSK, and Pfizer for consultations and lectures unrelated to this project. Francesco Massari has received research support and/or honoraria from Advanced Accelerator Applications, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. Umberto Basso received honoraria for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Astra Zeneca; research funding from Ipsen; and travel grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Astellas Pharma, MSD Oncology, Merck/Pfizer, and Bayer, all unrelated to this project. Sebastiano Buti received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, Merck, Gentili, and Astellas, all unrelated to the present paper. Yüksel Ürün has served on advisory board for Abdi-İbrahim, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Deva, Eczacıbaşı, Gen ilaç, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche and received travel grants, honoraria, or consultation fees from Abdi-İbrahim, Astellas, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Deva, Eczacıbaşı, Gen İlaç, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, all unrelated to the present paper. Maria T. Bourlon is a consultant of Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, MSD, Gilead, Astellas, and Asofarma and a speaker for Janssen Pharmaceuticasl, MSD, Merck, and Astellas, all unrelated to the present paper. Mimma Rizzo has received honoraria as a speaker/consultant by MSD, Merck Serono, Astrazeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, and Gilead, all unrelated to the present paper. Linda Cerbone has received honoraria for advisory boards, speaker engagements, and scientific consultancy for educational purposes from AstraZeneca, EISAI, MSD, Ipsen, BMS, and A.A.A.; and is a past MSD employee in Medical Affairs. Javier Molina-Cerrillo reports research funding from Roche, Ipsen, Pfizer, and Janssen; travel support from Pfizer, Janssen, Ipsen, and BMS; and a consulting or advisory role with Ipsen, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, Sanofi, Janssen, Astellas, Eisai, Adium, and MSD, all unrelated to the present paper. Álvaro Pinto is a member of advisory boards of Pfizer, Novartis, Ipsen, BMS, Janssen, Astellas, Sanofi, Bayer, Clovis, Roche, MSD, Pierre Fabre, and Merck; has received research support from Pfizer and BMS; clinical trial payments from Pfizer, Bayer, Janssen, MSD, Clovis, Pharmacyclics, BMS, Sanofi, Astra Zeneca, Roche, Eisai, and Aveo; and travel arrangements from Janssen, Roche, Pfizer, BMS, and Ipsen, all unrelated to the present paper. Andrey Soares reports honoraria from Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Merck Serono, Sanofi, Ipsen, and Adium; consulting or advisory role from Astellas Pharma, Janssen, Roche, Bayer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Adium, Ipsen, Pfizer, and Novartis; research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Astellas (Inst), and AstraZeneca (Inst); travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bayer, Janssen, Ipsen, Adium, MSD, and Merck Serono; and ownership in BIO, Brazilian Information Oncology; all unrelated to this study. Alexandr Poprach has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, Ipsen, Roche, Astellas, Merck, Eisai, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, unrelated to this project. Gian Paolo Spinelli has received payment or honoraria for advidory boards from Novartis, Roche, and Bayer, unrelated to this project. Martin Angel received honoraria from Roche, Johnson & Johnson, Raffo, and Pfizer for consultations and lectures unrelated to this project. Fernando Sabino M. Monteiro reports research support provided by Merck Sharp Dome; honoraria from Janssen, Ipsen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharp Dome; and ownership in BIO, Brazilian Information Oncology, all unrelated to this study. Camillo Porta acted as a remunerated consultant and/or speaker for Angelini Pharma, AstraZeneca, BMC, Eisai, Exilixis, Genenta, Ipsen, Merck Serono, and MSD; as a protocol steering committee member for Eisai and MSD; and as an Independent Review Board member for Genenta. Shilpa Gupta is a consultant for Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer, Gilead, Bayer, and Seattle Genetics; is a speaker for Bristol Myers Squibb; and has institutional research funding from Seatte Genetics, Pfizer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, and Tyra Biosciences. Matteo Santoni has received research support and honoraria from Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, MSD, Astellas, and Bayer, all unrelated to the present paper. Patrizia Giannatempo, Enrique Grande, Zin W. Myint, Ugo De Giorgi, Renate Pichler, Francesco Grillone, Fabio Calabrò, Luca Galli, Ravindran Kanesvaran, Giandomenico Roviello, Jakub Kucharz, Se Hoon Park, Emmanuel Seront, Carlo Messina, Daniele Santini, Akihiro Yano, Lorena Incorvaia, Martina Catalano, Luigi Formisano, Gaetano Facchini, Giuseppe Fornarini, Sara Elena Rebuzzi, Cecilia Nasso, Marco Stellato, Deniz Tural, Gaetano Aurilio, Ilana Epstein, Francesco Carrozza, Giovanni Benedetti, Tomáš Büchler, Cinzia Ortega, Roubini Zakopoulou, Nicola Battelli, and Joaquin Bellmunt declare that they have no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. Tomáš Büchler and Camillo Porta are Editorial Board members of Targeted Oncology. Tomáš Büchler and Camillo Porta were not involved in the selection of peer reviewers for the manuscript nor any of the subsequent editorial decisions. Ethics Approval The study protocol was approved on 28 September 2023, by the Ethical Committee of the coordinating center (Marche Region – Italy – no. 2022 39/7875, Study Protocol “ARON 2 Study” NCT05290038) and by the Institutional Review Boards of participating centers. Consent to Participate Informed consent with subsequent analysis of the follow-up data was obtained from all participants. Consent for Publication Not applicable. Availability of Data and Material The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to patient data security but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Code Availability Not applicable. Author Contributions Study concept and design: all authors; acquisition of data: all authors; analysis and interpretation of data: all authors; drafting of the manuscript: Fiala, Massari, Gupta, and Santoni; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: all authors; statistical analysis: Santoni; obtaining funding: none; administrative, technical, or material support: none; and supervision: Gupta and Santoni., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) accounts for the 5-10% of all urothelial carcinomas (UCs). In this analysis, we reported the real-world data from the ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) on the efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients with UTUC who recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. Medical records of patients with metastatic UTUC treated with pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were reviewed from 34 institutions in 14 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to explore the association of variables of interest with OS and PFS. 235 patients were included in our analysis. Median OS was 8.6 months (95% CI 6.6-12.1), the 1 year OS rate was 43% while the 2 years OS rate 29%. The median PFS was 5.1 months (95% CI 3.9-6.9); 46% of patients were alive at 6 months, 34% at 12 months and 25% at 24 months. According to RECIST 1.1, 18 patients (8%) experienced complete response (CR), 57 (24%) partial response (PR), 44 (19%) stable disease (SD), and 116 (49%) progressive disease (PD), with an ORR of 32%. Our study confirms the effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients pretreated with a platinum-based combination, irrespective of their sensitivity to the first-line treatment and of their histology. In addition, we emphasized the limited benefit of the treatment with pembrolizumab in patients with hepatic metastases and poor ECOG performance status., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Medical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors., Results: In total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1-2 or 3-4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)