Atezolizumab has good showing as first-line therapy in urothelial cancer

CHICAGO – The immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab is efficacious when used as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The study – cohort 1 of the IMvigor210 trial – was conducted among 119 cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic or locally advanced disease. All were treated with the antibody atezolizumab, which targets PD-L1 (programmed death–ligand 1), a negative regulator of the immune system, and thereby promotes the antitumor immune response.

Nearly a quarter of patients had a tumor response to atezolizumab, and median overall survival approached 15 months, first author Dr. Arjun V. Balar of the New York University Langone Medical Center and director of genitourinary medical oncology at the NYU Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, reported in a session and press briefing.

“Overall, this therapy was efficacious and also very well tolerated,” he commented. “These data make a compelling argument for atezolizumab to be a potential new standard of care in patients with cisplatin-ineligible metastatic urothelial cancer. However, moreover, they could represent the beginning of a seismic shift in our treatment approach to all patients with metastatic disease, irrespective of their eligibility for cisplatin.”

Positive findings from the trial’s cohort 2, patients who had already received platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced disease, recently led to the agent’s approval by the Food and Drug Administration for use in that population.

Cohort 1 was initially set up as an exploratory study but was expanded, Dr. Balar explained. “I do think that there is a benefit there, but until we have comparative data, it’s going to be really hard to hold that against immunotherapy necessarily,” he acknowledged. “That being said, do I envision a future where there is PD-L1 and PD-1 targeted therapy as a front-line therapy? Yes, absolutely, I think we are headed in that direction. We just need the trials to show it.”

ASCO expert Dr. Charles Ryan, professor of clinical medicine and urology program leader, genitourinary medical oncology, at the University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, concurred, saying, “I think it is safe at this point to envision a future where PD-L1 therapy could be used in the front line, but we do need to do those confirmatory studies.

“I would just underscore that in this study, the importance is that this is cisplatin ineligible as opposed to carboplatin treated,” Dr. Ryan added. “Cisplatin is the only platinum in bladder cancer that is associated with a survival benefit, so this is a very significant point to make. A very substantial part of the bladder cancer population, many patients out there, are cisplatin ineligible due to a variety of reasons, because organ dysfunction is quite common in advanced urothelial cancer.”

Patients were entered into IMVigor210’s cohort 1 if they had impaired kidney function, peripheral neuropathy, moderate to severe hearing loss, or poor performance status, precluding the use of cisplatin.

All were treated with atezolizumab (Tecentriq) every 3 weeks until investigator-defined progression. To evaluate a potential biomarker for benefit, the investigators assessed PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating immune cells by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue.

Study results showed that with a median follow-up of 14.4 months, the centrally confirmed overall response rate, the study’s primary endpoint, was 24% (7% of patients had a complete response and 17% had a partial response), Dr. Balar reported.

Complete responses were seen in all subgroups of patients stratified by PD-L1 expression. Fully 75% of all responses were still ongoing at the time of data cutoff, and the median duration of response has not yet been reached in any of the subgroups.

The median duration of overall survival was 14.8 months, and the 1-year rate of overall survival was 57%, although data for that endpoint are still immature. Survival also appeared to be similar regardless of PD-L1 expression.

Taken together, these efficacy findings compare favorably with those seen historically in similar patients treated with other agents in trials and in real-world settings, according to Dr. Balar.

Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with only 6% of patients experiencing an adverse event leading to trial discontinuation. Most events seen were of grade 1 or 2 severity; a single patient had a grade 5 event (sepsis).

About 15% of patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events, about the same as the rate seen in cohort 2. The most common were fatigue and an increase in liver enzymes.

Overall, 14% of patients had an immune-mediated adverse event requiring corticosteroid treatment. “Notably, no patients required any other immunosuppression beyond steroids for the management of an immune-related adverse event,” he reported

The PD-L1 analyses in the trial had some limitations, Dr. Balar said. “PD-L1 testing continues to be the most hotly contested issue,” he said. “Obviously, the immune system is very dynamic, and we were testing something in archival specimens, in a static environment, so there are obviously all the caveats there.”

Some data have suggested that mutational burden may help identify the patient subset who will benefit. However, “to be able to make your decision in the clinic, those types of readouts need to be timely …, and I think that’s the gap,” he commented. “So in the future, is the right biomarker PD-1 or PD-L1? My hunch is no, that is probably not the right biomarker, there are probably better ones, and those are being worked on.”

Dr. Balar disclosed that he has a consulting or advisory role with Cerulean Pharma, Dendreon, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech. The trial was sponsored by Hoffmann-La Roche. Ventana Medical Systems assisted with PD-L1 testing.

CHICAGO – The immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab is efficacious when used as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The study – cohort 1 of the IMvigor210 trial – was conducted among 119 cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic or locally advanced disease. All were treated with the antibody atezolizumab, which targets PD-L1 (programmed death–ligand 1), a negative regulator of the immune system, and thereby promotes the antitumor immune response.

Nearly a quarter of patients had a tumor response to atezolizumab, and median overall survival approached 15 months, first author Dr. Arjun V. Balar of the New York University Langone Medical Center and director of genitourinary medical oncology at the NYU Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, reported in a session and press briefing.

“Overall, this therapy was efficacious and also very well tolerated,” he commented. “These data make a compelling argument for atezolizumab to be a potential new standard of care in patients with cisplatin-ineligible metastatic urothelial cancer. However, moreover, they could represent the beginning of a seismic shift in our treatment approach to all patients with metastatic disease, irrespective of their eligibility for cisplatin.”

Positive findings from the trial’s cohort 2, patients who had already received platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced disease, recently led to the agent’s approval by the Food and Drug Administration for use in that population.

Cohort 1 was initially set up as an exploratory study but was expanded, Dr. Balar explained. “I do think that there is a benefit there, but until we have comparative data, it’s going to be really hard to hold that against immunotherapy necessarily,” he acknowledged. “That being said, do I envision a future where there is PD-L1 and PD-1 targeted therapy as a front-line therapy? Yes, absolutely, I think we are headed in that direction. We just need the trials to show it.”

ASCO expert Dr. Charles Ryan, professor of clinical medicine and urology program leader, genitourinary medical oncology, at the University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, concurred, saying, “I think it is safe at this point to envision a future where PD-L1 therapy could be used in the front line, but we do need to do those confirmatory studies.

“I would just underscore that in this study, the importance is that this is cisplatin ineligible as opposed to carboplatin treated,” Dr. Ryan added. “Cisplatin is the only platinum in bladder cancer that is associated with a survival benefit, so this is a very significant point to make. A very substantial part of the bladder cancer population, many patients out there, are cisplatin ineligible due to a variety of reasons, because organ dysfunction is quite common in advanced urothelial cancer.”

Patients were entered into IMVigor210’s cohort 1 if they had impaired kidney function, peripheral neuropathy, moderate to severe hearing loss, or poor performance status, precluding the use of cisplatin.

All were treated with atezolizumab (Tecentriq) every 3 weeks until investigator-defined progression. To evaluate a potential biomarker for benefit, the investigators assessed PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating immune cells by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue.

Study results showed that with a median follow-up of 14.4 months, the centrally confirmed overall response rate, the study’s primary endpoint, was 24% (7% of patients had a complete response and 17% had a partial response), Dr. Balar reported.

Complete responses were seen in all subgroups of patients stratified by PD-L1 expression. Fully 75% of all responses were still ongoing at the time of data cutoff, and the median duration of response has not yet been reached in any of the subgroups.

The median duration of overall survival was 14.8 months, and the 1-year rate of overall survival was 57%, although data for that endpoint are still immature. Survival also appeared to be similar regardless of PD-L1 expression.

Taken together, these efficacy findings compare favorably with those seen historically in similar patients treated with other agents in trials and in real-world settings, according to Dr. Balar.

Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with only 6% of patients experiencing an adverse event leading to trial discontinuation. Most events seen were of grade 1 or 2 severity; a single patient had a grade 5 event (sepsis).

About 15% of patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events, about the same as the rate seen in cohort 2. The most common were fatigue and an increase in liver enzymes.

Overall, 14% of patients had an immune-mediated adverse event requiring corticosteroid treatment. “Notably, no patients required any other immunosuppression beyond steroids for the management of an immune-related adverse event,” he reported

The PD-L1 analyses in the trial had some limitations, Dr. Balar said. “PD-L1 testing continues to be the most hotly contested issue,” he said. “Obviously, the immune system is very dynamic, and we were testing something in archival specimens, in a static environment, so there are obviously all the caveats there.”

Some data have suggested that mutational burden may help identify the patient subset who will benefit. However, “to be able to make your decision in the clinic, those types of readouts need to be timely …, and I think that’s the gap,” he commented. “So in the future, is the right biomarker PD-1 or PD-L1? My hunch is no, that is probably not the right biomarker, there are probably better ones, and those are being worked on.”

Dr. Balar disclosed that he has a consulting or advisory role with Cerulean Pharma, Dendreon, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech. The trial was sponsored by Hoffmann-La Roche. Ventana Medical Systems assisted with PD-L1 testing.

CHICAGO – The immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab is efficacious when used as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma, according to a study reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The study – cohort 1 of the IMvigor210 trial – was conducted among 119 cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic or locally advanced disease. All were treated with the antibody atezolizumab, which targets PD-L1 (programmed death–ligand 1), a negative regulator of the immune system, and thereby promotes the antitumor immune response.

Nearly a quarter of patients had a tumor response to atezolizumab, and median overall survival approached 15 months, first author Dr. Arjun V. Balar of the New York University Langone Medical Center and director of genitourinary medical oncology at the NYU Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, reported in a session and press briefing.

“Overall, this therapy was efficacious and also very well tolerated,” he commented. “These data make a compelling argument for atezolizumab to be a potential new standard of care in patients with cisplatin-ineligible metastatic urothelial cancer. However, moreover, they could represent the beginning of a seismic shift in our treatment approach to all patients with metastatic disease, irrespective of their eligibility for cisplatin.”

Positive findings from the trial’s cohort 2, patients who had already received platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced disease, recently led to the agent’s approval by the Food and Drug Administration for use in that population.

Cohort 1 was initially set up as an exploratory study but was expanded, Dr. Balar explained. “I do think that there is a benefit there, but until we have comparative data, it’s going to be really hard to hold that against immunotherapy necessarily,” he acknowledged. “That being said, do I envision a future where there is PD-L1 and PD-1 targeted therapy as a front-line therapy? Yes, absolutely, I think we are headed in that direction. We just need the trials to show it.”

ASCO expert Dr. Charles Ryan, professor of clinical medicine and urology program leader, genitourinary medical oncology, at the University of California, San Francisco, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, concurred, saying, “I think it is safe at this point to envision a future where PD-L1 therapy could be used in the front line, but we do need to do those confirmatory studies.

“I would just underscore that in this study, the importance is that this is cisplatin ineligible as opposed to carboplatin treated,” Dr. Ryan added. “Cisplatin is the only platinum in bladder cancer that is associated with a survival benefit, so this is a very significant point to make. A very substantial part of the bladder cancer population, many patients out there, are cisplatin ineligible due to a variety of reasons, because organ dysfunction is quite common in advanced urothelial cancer.”

Patients were entered into IMVigor210’s cohort 1 if they had impaired kidney function, peripheral neuropathy, moderate to severe hearing loss, or poor performance status, precluding the use of cisplatin.

All were treated with atezolizumab (Tecentriq) every 3 weeks until investigator-defined progression. To evaluate a potential biomarker for benefit, the investigators assessed PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating immune cells by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue.

Study results showed that with a median follow-up of 14.4 months, the centrally confirmed overall response rate, the study’s primary endpoint, was 24% (7% of patients had a complete response and 17% had a partial response), Dr. Balar reported.

Complete responses were seen in all subgroups of patients stratified by PD-L1 expression. Fully 75% of all responses were still ongoing at the time of data cutoff, and the median duration of response has not yet been reached in any of the subgroups.

The median duration of overall survival was 14.8 months, and the 1-year rate of overall survival was 57%, although data for that endpoint are still immature. Survival also appeared to be similar regardless of PD-L1 expression.

Taken together, these efficacy findings compare favorably with those seen historically in similar patients treated with other agents in trials and in real-world settings, according to Dr. Balar.

Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with only 6% of patients experiencing an adverse event leading to trial discontinuation. Most events seen were of grade 1 or 2 severity; a single patient had a grade 5 event (sepsis).

About 15% of patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events, about the same as the rate seen in cohort 2. The most common were fatigue and an increase in liver enzymes.

Overall, 14% of patients had an immune-mediated adverse event requiring corticosteroid treatment. “Notably, no patients required any other immunosuppression beyond steroids for the management of an immune-related adverse event,” he reported

The PD-L1 analyses in the trial had some limitations, Dr. Balar said. “PD-L1 testing continues to be the most hotly contested issue,” he said. “Obviously, the immune system is very dynamic, and we were testing something in archival specimens, in a static environment, so there are obviously all the caveats there.”

Some data have suggested that mutational burden may help identify the patient subset who will benefit. However, “to be able to make your decision in the clinic, those types of readouts need to be timely …, and I think that’s the gap,” he commented. “So in the future, is the right biomarker PD-1 or PD-L1? My hunch is no, that is probably not the right biomarker, there are probably better ones, and those are being worked on.”

Dr. Balar disclosed that he has a consulting or advisory role with Cerulean Pharma, Dendreon, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech. The trial was sponsored by Hoffmann-La Roche. Ventana Medical Systems assisted with PD-L1 testing.