Consolidative radiotherapy for metastatic urothelial bladder cancer patients without progression and with no more than three residual metastatic lesions following first line systemic therapy: A prospective randomized comparative phase II trial (BLAD RAD01/GETUG-AFU V07).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4588-TPS4588
Author(s):  
Jonathan Khalifa ◽  
Damien Pouessel ◽  
Mathieu Roumiguie ◽  
Paul Sargos ◽  
Genevieve Loos ◽  
...  

TPS4588 Background: Consolidative local treatment of the primary tumor in the treatment of metastatic malignancies has shown promising results in several types of tumors, mostly relying on the seed-and-soil theory. Furthermore, the local treatment of the residual metastases following systemic treatment is a promising approach, in part due to the high incidence of progression at prior sites of disease in patients who had initially responded to chemotherapy. To date, no prospective data exists on such consolidative approach in metastatic urothelial bladder cancer (mUBC). The phase II trial BLAD-RAD01 GETUG-AFU V07 was designed to investigate the role of local consolidative radiotherapy in patients with limited mUBC and without progression following the initial phase of first-line systemic therapy. Methods: This is a phase II, multicenter, randomized open-label and comparative study. Patients with mUBC (excluding brain and liver metastases), without progression following standard first-line systemic therapy according to RECIST v1.1, and with no more than 3 residual metastatic lesions on 18FDG-PET scanner and/or contrast-enhanced CT-scanner are eligible for the study. After the completion of systemic treatment, an estimated 130 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio between consolidative local treatment (pelvic radiotherapy +/- previous transurethal resection of bladder tumor, associated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to the residual metastases) plus standard of care (arm B) and standard of care only (arm A). Stratification is performed based upon: the center, the ECOG performance status, the administration of immunotherapy or not, the number of residual metastatic lesions and the imaging modality for assessment of the number of residual lesions. To date, standard of care for this population is maintenance treatment with avelumab. Radiotherapy regimens consist in conventionally fractionated (64Gy in 32 fractions) or hypofractionated (55Gy in 20 fractions) irradiation of the bladder, optional pelvic nodes irradiation, and 3 to 5 fractions of 6 to 18 Gy in SBRT for metastases, depending on the location. The main objective is to detect an increase in 20-month overall survival rate following chemotherapy from 50% (based upon the JAVELIN 100 trial) to 66%; this corresponds to a hazard ratio of 0.6. A total of 83 events are necessary for 85% power to detect this difference if it is true using a one-sided logrank test at the 10% of significance. Target difference, type I and II error rates are relaxed and compatibles with recommendations for comparative phase II trials. Key secondary endpoints are progression free survival, safety and quality of life. To date, one patient has been enrolled and eight centers are open for accrual. Clinical trial information: NCT04428554.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 454-454
Author(s):  
Amélie Aboudaram ◽  
Leonor Chaltiel ◽  
Damien Pouessel ◽  
Pierre Graff-Cailleaud ◽  
Nicolas Benziane ◽  
...  

454 Background: Consolidative local treatment of the primary tumor and metastases in the treatment of metastatic malignancies has shown promising results in several types of primary tumors. The aim of this study is to assess consolidative radiotherapy to the bladder and to residual metastases among metastatic urothelial bladder cancer with no progression following first line systemic therapy, hypothesizing an increase in overall survival and in progression free survival. Methods: Between January 2005 and December 2018, patients who received standard first-line chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic urothelial bladder cancer (mUBC) were retrospectively identified through the database of four Comprehensive Cancer Centers in France. Among them, patients with no disease progression following chemotherapy and with no more than 5 residual metastases were analyzed: patients who received subsequent radiotherapy (of EQD2Gy > 50Gy) to the bladder and residual metastases were included in the consolidative group (RT group), and the other patients were included in the observation group (OBS group). PFS and OS were determined from the start of the first-line chemotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier method. To account for the delay from chemotherapy initiation to consolidative radiotherapy, a Cox model with time-dependant covariates, and a 6-month landmark analyses were performed to examine OS and PFS. Results: A total of 91 patients with at least stable disease following chemotherapy and with no more than 5 residual metastases were analyzed: 51 in the RT group and 40 in the OBS group. Metachronous metastatic disease (following definitive treatment of localized UBC) was more frequent in the OBS group (19% vs 5%, p = 0.02); the median number of metastases in the RT group vs in the OBS group was: 2 (1-9) vs 3 (1-5) (p = 0.04) at metastatic presentation, and 1 (0-5) vs 2 (0-5) (p = 0.18) after completion of chemotherapy (residual lesions), respectively. Two grade 3 toxicities (3.9%) and no grade 4 toxicity were reported in the RT group. With a median follow up of 85.9 months (95% IC [36.7; 101.6]), median OS and PFS were 21.7 months (95% IC [17.1; 29.7]) and 11.1 months (95% IC [9.9; 14.1]) for the whole cohort, respectively. In multivariable analysis: consolidative RT in comparison with observation was associated with improved OS in both the standard analysis (HR = 0.47, p = 0.015) and in the 6-month landmark analysis (HR = 0.48, p = 0.026); and with improved PFS only in the standard analysis (HR = 0.49, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Consolidative radiotherapy for mUBC patients who have not progressed after chemotherapy and with limited residual disease seems to confer both OS and PFS advantage. Prospective data in that field with addition of avelumab are needed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4574-TPS4574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Powles ◽  
Matt D. Galsky ◽  
Daniel Castellano ◽  
Michiel Simon Van Der Heijden ◽  
Daniel Peter Petrylak ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e035530
Author(s):  
Hyeong Dong Yuk ◽  
Chang Wook Jeong ◽  
Cheol Kwak ◽  
Hyeon Kim ◽  
Kyung Chul Moon ◽  
...  

IntroductionAtezolizumab is a programmed death ligand-1 inhibitor for urothelial bladder cancer treatment. Atezolizumab has become the standard therapy for patients with urothelial bladder cancer who are not responding to cisplatin-based chemotherapy and is also used as a first-line treatment in cisplatin-ineligible patients. However, the efficacy of atezolizumab as a neoadjuvant chemotherapy for radical cystectomy has not yet been published and is still under study. This trial investigates the effectiveness of basal/squamous-like (BASQ) classification in the selection of an effective target group of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) for neoadjuvant atezolizumab treatment.Methods and analysisThis study is an open-label, two-cohort, phase II trial. It was designed to evaluate the efficacy of neoadjuvant atezolizumab treatment in patients with MIBC (T2–4N0M0) pathological responses after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical cystectomy. According to the molecular subtype characteristics of previous transurethral resection of the bladder specimens, patients are divided into two groups: luminal type (KRT5/6−KRT14−FOXA1+GATA3+) and basal type (KRT5/6+KRT14+FOXA1−GATA3−). Every 3 weeks, atezolizumab is administered at a dose of 1200 mg for three cycles prior to radical cystectomy in patients with MIBC. The primary end point is objective pathological responses in the intention-to-treat patients. The secondary end point is a 1-year progression-free survival difference according to the BASQ classification in patients who underwent neoadjuvant atezolizumab treatment.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea (H 1806-051-950). The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences.Trial registration numberNCT03577132.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document