Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Previously Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer

Author(s): Christopher J. Hoimes, DO1,2;Thomas W. Flaig, MD3;Matthew I. Milowsky, MD4;Terence W. Friedlander, MD5;Mehmet Asim Bilen, MD6;Shilpa Gupta, MD7;Sandy Srinivas, MD8;Jaime R. Merchan, MD9;Rana R. McKay, MD10;Daniel P. Petrylak, MD11;Carolyn Sasse 12;Blanca Homet Moreno, MD, PhD13;Yao Yu, PhD14;Anne-Sophie Carret, MD14;Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD15
Source: DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.01643 Journal of Clinical Oncology

Impressive response rates and complete response in this setting, with moderate toxicities. Randomized trial is necessary to document survival, PFS differences. Cost will be very considerable in the setting value-based strategies. The clinical benefit must be quite superior in a randomized setting.

BACKGROUND

Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC); however, toxicity is substantial, responses are rarely durable, and many la/mUC patients are ineligible. Enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab have each shown a survival benefit versus chemotherapy in UC, are not restricted by cisplatin eligibility, and warrant investigation as a first-line (1L) combination therapy in patients ineligible for cisplatin.

METHODS

In this ongoing Phase 1b/2, multicenter, open-label study, 1L cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC received enfortumab vedotin 1.25 mg/kg (Days 1 and 8) and pembrolizumab 200 mg (Day 1) intravenously in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint was safety. Key secondary endpoints included confirmed objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Forty-five patients received enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (55.6%), fatigue (51.1%), and alopecia (48.9%). Twenty-nine patients (64.4%) had grade 3 or higher TRAEs; the most common were increased lipase (17.8%), maculopapular rash (11.1%), and fatigue (11.1%). One death (2.2%) was classified as a TRAE. Confirmed ORR after a median of 9 cycles was 73.3% with a 15.6% complete response rate. Median DOR and median OS were 25.6 months and 26.1 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab showed a manageable safety profile. Most patients experienced tumor shrinkage. The median DOR and median OS exceeding 2 years in a cisplatin-ineligible patient population make this a promising combination currently under investigation in a Phase 3 study (NCT04223856).

Author Affiliations

Christopher J. Hoimes, DO1,2;Thomas W. Flaig, MD3;Matthew I. Milowsky, MD4;Terence W. Friedlander, MD5;Mehmet Asim Bilen, MD6;Shilpa Gupta, MD7;Sandy Srinivas, MD8;Jaime R. Merchan, MD9;Rana R. McKay, MD10;Daniel P. Petrylak, MD11;Carolyn Sasse 12;Blanca Homet Moreno, MD, PhD13;Yao Yu, PhD14;Anne-Sophie Carret, MD14;Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD15

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

TROPHY-U-01 Cohort 2: A Phase II Study of Sacituzumab Govitecan in Cisplatin-Ineligible Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Progressing After Previous Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy

Small testing size, but still with high overall response rate (32%) with progression-free survival of 5.6 months. Now, this is not randomized and is after failure of check point inhibitors. Of note this medication will not be marketed for second line therapy since it did not show overall survival advantage.

Read More »

Sacituzumab Govitecan in Combination With Pembrolizumab for Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer That Progressed After Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: TROPHY-U-01 Cohort 3

Both medications are approved as a single agent in second-filine therapy, and now the combination seems to be promising with manageable toxicity. Overall Response Rate (ORR): 41% I think we need phase 3 data to show superiority over single agent therapy. And now with pembrolizumab used in first-line therapy, this regimen may disappear.

Read More »

Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis results from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study

This is a negative study looking at atezolizumab + chemo vs. chemo alone in metastatic urothelial carcinoma. In the same issue, there is a negative study on atezolizumab vs. chemo alone, as well. It does seem that atezolizumab has limited disease activity versus some comparable agents.

Read More »