Search

The standard-of-care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer is radical surgery with neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Despite curative intent from these interventions, relapse rates post-surgery remain high, with approximately 50% of patients developing local or distant recurrence within 2 years of surgery and a 5-year survival of only 50–60%. Identifying patients who are high risk for relapse post-surgery is a priority. Monitoring patients for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a minimally invasive approach that appears attractive for selecting patients potentially suitable for adjuvant treatment with checkpoint inhibitors. IMvigor011 (NCT04660344) is a global, double-blind, randomized phase III study assessing the efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) versus placebo in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive bladder cancer who are ctDNA positive post-cystectomy. The primary end point is disease-free survival in participants who are ctDNA positive within 20 weeks of cystectomy.

Simple Summary Early reports during the pandemic stated that cancer patients were at increased risk of severe COVID-19 infection and mortality than non-cancer patients. However, delaying cancer treatment can cause worsening symptoms and shorten life expectancy. This study aimed to assess the outcome of cancer patients at our centre to help inform the optimal way to deliver cancer treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study of over 4000 patients found that the delivery of cancer treatment in the first wave of the pandemic did not have a significantly negative effect on mortality. There were low COVID-19 infection (2%) and death rates (6%). As expected, there was a reduction in cancer treatments mainly in later lines of palliative treatments. This likely reflects patient and clinician choice around those more vulnerable patients. This data can be used to re-assure the continuation of cancer treatment during the pandemic. Abstract Background: This study aimed to assess the outcome of cancer patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer treatment (SACT) at our centre to help inform future clinical decision-making around SACT during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Patients receiving at least one episode of SACT for solid tumours at Guy’s Cancer Centre between 1 March and 31 May 2020 and the same period in 2019 were included in the study. Data were collected on demographics, tumour type/stage, treatment type (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological-targeted) and SARS-CoV2 infection. Results: A total of 2120 patients received SACT in 2020, compared to 2449 in 2019 (13% decrease). From 2019 to 2020, there was an increase in stage IV disease (62% vs. 72%), decrease in chemotherapy (42% vs. 34%), increase in immunotherapy (6% vs. 10%), but similar rates of biologically targeted treatments (37% vs. 38%). There was a significant increase in 1st and 2nd line treatments in 2020 (68% vs. 81%; p < 0.0001) and reduction in 3rd and subsequent lines (26% vs. 15%; p = 0.004) compared to 2019. Of the 2020 cohort, 2% patients developed SARS-CoV2 infections. Conclusions: These real-world data from a tertiary Cancer Centre suggest that despite the challenges faced due to the COVID-19 pandemic, SACT was able to be continued without any significant effects on the mortality of solid-tumour patients. There was a low rate (2%) of SARS-CoV-2 infection which is comparable to the 1.4%-point prevalence in our total cancer population.

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute kidney injury (ICPi-AKI) has emerged as an important toxicity among patients with cancer.MethodsWe collected data on 429 patients with ICPi-AKI and 429 control patients who received ICPis contemporaneously but who did not develop ICPi-AKI from 30 sites in 10 countries. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ICPi-AKI and its recovery. A multivariable Cox model was used to estimate the effect of ICPi rechallenge versus no rechallenge on survival following ICPi-AKI.ResultsICPi-AKI occurred at a median of 16 weeks (IQR 8–32) following ICPi initiation. Lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and extrarenal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were each associated with a higher risk of ICPi-AKI. Acute tubulointerstitial nephritis was the most common lesion on kidney biopsy (125/151 biopsied patients [82.7%]). Renal recovery occurred in 276 patients (64.3%) at a median of 7 weeks (IQR 3–10) following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids within 14 days following ICPi-AKI diagnosis was associated with higher odds of renal recovery (adjusted OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.58 to 4.41). Among patients treated with corticosteroids, early initiation of corticosteroids (within 3 days of ICPi-AKI) was associated with a higher odds of renal recovery compared with later initiation (more than 3 days following ICPi-AKI) (adjusted OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.16 to 3.79). Of 121 patients rechallenged, 20 (16.5%) developed recurrent ICPi-AKI. There was no difference in survival among patients rechallenged versus those not rechallenged following ICPi-AKI.ConclusionsPatients who developed ICPi-AKI were more likely to have impaired renal function at baseline, use a PPI, and have extrarenal irAEs. Two-thirds of patients had renal recovery following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids was associated with improved renal recovery.

The approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has changed the treatment landscape in many aspects of urothelial cancer (UC), in both non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive bladder cancer and has introduced the concept of long-term remission for some patients in the metastatic setting. Front-line chemotherapy remains superior at achieving initial control of disease compared to front-line immune therapy. However, long-term durable responses are limited by chemotherapy resistance. The maintenance approach, sequencing chemotherapy with ICIs, could be considered a best of both worlds approach, achieving initial control with chemotherapy, which is maintained in some individuals with avelumab. However, outcomes for patients with metastatic UC remain poor. There are three steps to improving outcomes for these patients; the first is to develop better drugs and combinations of therapies, the second is the development of novel biomarkers and techniques to better select patients for treatment, and the third area of development is to give the drugs in the most optimal setting.