The Quickly Evolving Treatment Landscape of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A New Standard of Care in First-Line Systemic Therapy

Introduction

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma is associated with a poor prognosis, with an estimated 17,000 deaths annually in the United States from this disease.1 Platinum-based chemotherapy had long been considered the standard of care first line treatment for platinum-eligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Written by: Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc Associate Professor of Urology Urologic Oncologist Medical College of Georgia, Georgia Cancer Center Augusta, GA and Rashid Sayyid, MD, MSc Urologic Oncology Fellow University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada
References:
  1. American Cancer Society. Key Statistics for Bladder Cancer. Accessed on February 26, 2024.
  2. von der Maase H, Hansen SW, Roberts JT, et al. Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18: 3068-3077.
  3. Sternberg CN, de Mulder PH, Schornagel JH, et al. Randomized phase III trial of high-dose-intensity methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) chemotherapy and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus classic MVAC in advanced urothelial tract tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Protocol no. 30924. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19: 2638-2646.
  4. Powles T, Csoszi T, Ozguroglu M, et al. Pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (KEYNOTE-361): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(7): 931-945.
  5. Galsky MD, Arija JAA, Bamias A, et al. Atezolizumab with or without chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial cancer (IMvigor130): a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;395(10236): 1547-1557.
  6. Powles TB, Perez Calderrama B, Gupta S, et al. LBA6 EV-302/KEYNOTE-A39: Open-label, randomized phase III study of enfortumab vedotin in combination with pembrolizumab (EV+P) vs chemotherapy (Chemo) in previously untreated locally advanced metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC). Annal Oncol. 2023;34(Suppl 2): S1340.
  7. van der Heijden MS, Sonpavde G, Powles T, et al. Nivolumab plus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(19): 1778-1779.
  8. FDA approves enfortumab vedotin-ejfv with pembrolizumab for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer.  Accessed on February 26, 2024.
  9. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Accepts for Priority Review Bristol Myers Squibb’s Application for Opdivo (nivolumab) in Combination with Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy for the First-Line Treatment of Adult Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. Accessed on February 26, 2024.U.S. Food and Drug Administration Accepts for Priority Review Bristol Myers Squibb’s Application for Opdivo (nivolumab) in Combination with Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy for the First-Line Treatment of Adult Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. Accessed on February 26, 2024.
  10. Klumper N, Ralser DJ, Ellinger J, et al. Membranous NECTIN-4 Expression Frequently Decreases during Metastatic Spread of Urothelial Carcinoma and Is Associated with Enfortumab Vedotin Resistance. Clin Cancer Res. 2023;29(8): 1496-1505.
  11. Powles T, Rosenberg JE, Sonpavde GP, et al. Enfortumab Vedotin in Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2021;384: 1125-35.
  12. Bellmunt J, de Wit R, Vaughn DJ, et al. Pembrolizumab as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(11): 1015-1026.
  13. Galsky MD, Hahn NM, Rosenberg J, et al. Treatment of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer "unfit" for Cisplatin-based chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29: 2432-2438.
  14. Sternberg CN, Yagoda A, Scher HI, et al. Preliminary results of M-VAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin) for transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium. J Urol. 1985;133: 403-407.
  15. Sternberg CN, Yagoda A, Scher HI, et al. Methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin for advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium. Efficacy and patterns of response and relapse. Cancer. 1989;64: 2448-2458.
  16. Bajorin DF, Dodd PM, Mazumdar M, et al. Long-term survival in metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma and prognostic factors predicting outcome of therapy. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17: 3173-3181.
  17. Sternberg CN, de Mulder P, Schornagel JH, et al. Seven year update of an EORTC phase III trial of high-dose intensity M-VAC chemotherapy and G-CSF versus classic M-VAC in advanced urothelial tract tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42: 50-54.
  18. Lee YS, Ha MS, Tae JH, et al. Gemcitabine-cisplatin versus MVAC chemotherapy for urothelial carcinoma: a nationwide cohort study. Sci Rep. 2023;13: 3682.
  19. Powles T, Park SH, Voog E, et al. Avelumab Maintenance Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2020;383: 1218-1230.
  20. Powles T, Park SH, Caserta C, et al. Avelumab First-Line Maintenance for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results From the JAVELIN Bladder 100 Trial After ≥2 Years of Follow-Up. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41: 3486-3492.
  21. Powles T, Sridhar SS, Loriot Y, et al. Avelumab maintenance in advanced urothelial carcinoma: biomarker analysis of the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial. Nat Med. 2021;27: 2200-2211

The Current Landscape of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy Agent Combinations in Patients with Clinically Localized, Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Introduction

Bladder cancer is currently the 10th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide. It is estimated that approximately 110,500 men and 70,000 women are annually diagnosed with bladder cancer worldwide.1 While the majority of patients are diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease (i.e. carcinoma in situ, Ta, and T1), approximately 25 to 33% of patients are initially diagnosed with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and a meaningful proportion of patients initially diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease will subsequently progress to MIBC.1

Written by: Rashid K. Sayyid, MD, MSc, and Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc
References:
  1. Burger M, Catto JWF, Dalbagni G, et al. Epidemiology and Risk Factors of Urothelial Bladder Cancer. Eur Urol 2013;63(2):234-41.
  2. Flaig TW, Speiss PE, Abern M, et al. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022;20(8):866-878.
  3. EAU Guidelines: Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  4. ASCO Cancer.Net: Bladder Cancer – Statistics. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  5. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: update of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data advanced bladder cancer (ABC) meta-analysis collaboration. Eur Urol 2005;48(2):202-5.
  6. Galsky MD, Hahn NM, Rosenberg J, et al. A consensus definition of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who are unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Lancet Oncol 2011;12: 211–4.
  7. Rhea LP, Mendez-Marti S, Kim D, Aragon-Chin JB. Role of immunotherapy in bladder cancer. Cancer Treat Res Commun 2021;26:100296.
  8. Pfister C, Gravis G, Flechon A, et al. Dose-Dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin or Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients With Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of the GETUG-AFU V05 VESPER Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(18):2013-22.
  9. Van Dijk N, Gil-Jimenez A, Silina K, et al. Preoperative ipilimumab plus nivolumab in locoregionally advanced urothelial cancer: the NABUCCO trial. Nat Med 2020;26(12):1839-44.
  10. Danaher P, Warren S, Lu R, et al. Pan-cancer adaptive immune resistance as defined by the Tumor Inflammation Signature (TIS): results from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA).J Immunother Cancer 2018;6(1):63.a
  11. Gao J, Navai N, Alhalabi O, et al. Neoadjuvant PD-L1 plus CTLA-4 blockade in patients with cisplatin-ineligible operable high-risk urothelial carcinoma. Nat Med 2020;26(12):1845-51.
  12. Li R, Steinberg GD, Uchio EM, et al. CORE1: Phase 2, single-arm study of CG0070 combined with pembrolizumab in patients with nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) unresponsive to bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG). J Clin Oncol 2022; 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting I.

The Treatment Landscape of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Second-Line Systemic Therapy

Introduction


For patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma, first line therapy for cisplatin eligible patients remains platinum-based chemotherapy1 (followed by maintenance avelumab2), whereas those that are cisplatin ineligible may receive gemcitabine + carboplatin3 (followed by maintenance avelumab2), pembrolizumab,4 or pembrolizumab + enfortumab vedotin.5 Unfortunately, ~50% of patients will eventually have disease progression following first line therapy, which has historically been associated with a dismal prognosis.
Written by: Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc Associate Professor of Urology Urologic Oncologist Medical College of Georgia, Georgia Cancer Center Augusta, GA and Rashid Sayyid, MD, MSc Urologic Oncology Fellow University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada
References:
  1. von der Maase H, Hansen SW, Roberts JT, et al. Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18: 3068-3077.
  2. Powles T, Park SH, Voog E, et al. Avelumab Maintenance Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2020;383: 1218-1230.
  3. De Santis M, Bellmunt J, Mead G, et al. Randomized phase II/III trial assessing gemcitabine/carboplatin and methotrexate/carboplatin/vinblastine in patients with advanced urothelial cancer who are unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy: EORTC study 30986. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30: 191-199.
  4. Powles T, Csoszi T, Ozguroglu M, et al. Pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (KEYNOTE-361): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22: 931-945.
  5. Hoimes CJ, Flaig TW, Milowsky MI, et al. Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Previously Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41: 22-31.
  6. Vaughn DJ, Broome CM, Hussain M, Gutheil JC, Markowitz AB. Phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20: 937-940.
  7. Galsky MD, Mironov S, Iasonos A, Scattergood J, Boyle MG, Bajorin DF. Phase II trial of pemetrexed as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Invest New Drugs. 2007;25: 265-270.
  8. McCaffrey JA, Hilton S, Mazumdar M, et al. Phase II trial of docetaxel in patients with advanced or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15: 1853-1857.
  9. Bellmunt J, Theodore C, Demkov T, et al. Phase III trial of vinflunine plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone after a platinum-containing regimen in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27: 4454-4461.
  10. Bellmunt J, de Wit R, Vaughn DJ, et al. Pembrolizumab as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376: 1015-1026.
  11. Sharma P, Retz M, Siefker-Radtke A, et al. Nivolumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum therapy (CheckMate 275): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18: 312-322.
  12. Apolo AB, Infante JR, Balmanoukian A, et al. Avelumab, an Anti-Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Antibody, In Patients With Refractory Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Results From a Multicenter, Phase Ib Study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35: 2117-2124.
  13. Loriot Y, Necchi A, Park SH, et al. Erdafitinib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2019;381: 338-348.
  14. Knowles MA, Hurst CD. Molecular biology of bladder cancer: new insights into pathogenesis and clinical diversity. Nat Rev Cancer. 2015;15: 25-41.
  15. Sideris S, Aoun F, Zanaty M, et al. Efficacy of weekly paclitaxel treatment as a single agent chemotherapy following first-line cisplatin treatment in urothelial bladder cancer. Mol Clin Oncol. 2016;4: 1063-1067.
  16. Sternberg CN, de Mulder PH, Schornagel JH, et al. Randomized phase III trial of high-dose-intensity methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) chemotherapy and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus classic MVAC in advanced urothelial tract tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Protocol no. 30924. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19: 2638-2646.
  17. Yu EY, Petrylak DP, O'Donnell PH, et al. Enfortumab vedotin after PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (EV‑201): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22: 872-882.

The Current Landscape of Neoadjuvant Single Agent Therapy in Patients with Cisplatin Ineligible Clinically Localized, Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Introduction

Bladder cancer is currently the 10th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide. It is estimated that approximately 110,500 men and 70,000 women are annually diagnosed with bladder cancer globally.1 While the majority of patients are diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease (i.e. carcinoma in situ, Ta, and T1), approximately 25 to 33% of patients are initially diagnosed with muscle invasive bladder cancer and a meaningful proportion of patients initially diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease will subsequently progress to MIBC.1

Written by: Rashid K. Sayyid, MD, MSc, and Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc
References:
  1. Burger M, Catto JWF, Dalbagni G, et al. Epidemiology and Risk Factors of Urothelial Bladder Cancer. Eur Urol 2013;63(2):234-41.
  2. Flaig TW, Speiss PE, Abern M, et al. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022;20(8):866-878.
  3. EAU Guidelines: Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  4. ASCO Cancer.Net: Bladder Cancer – Statistics. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  5. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: update of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data advanced bladder cancer (ABC) meta-analysis collaboration. Eur Urol 2005;48(2):202-5.
  6. Galsky MD, Hahn NM, Rosenberg J, et al. A consensus definition of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who are unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Lancet Oncol 2011;12: 211–4.
  7. Rhea LP, Mendez-Marti S, Kim D, Aragon-Chin JB. Role of immunotherapy in bladder cancer. Cancer Treat Res Commun 2021;26:100296.
  8. Necchi A, Anichini A, Raggi D, et al. Pembrolizumab as Neoadjuvant Therapy Before Radical Cystectomy in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma (PURE-01): An Open-Label, Single-Arm, Phase II Study. J Clin Oncol 2018;36(34):3353-60.
  9. Basile G, Banidin M, Gibb EA, et al. Neoadjuvant Pembrolizumab and Radical Cystectomy in Patients with Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Bladder Cancer: 3-Year Median Follow-Up Update of PURE-01 Trial. Clin Cancer Res 2022;28(23):5107-14.
  10. Powles T, Kockx M, Rodriguez-Vida, et al. Clinical efficacy and biomarker analysis of neoadjuvant atezolizumab in operable urothelial carcinoma in the ABACUS trial. Nat Med 2019; 25(11):1706-14.
  11. Pfister C, Gravis G, Flechon A, et al. Dose-Dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin or Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients With Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of the GETUG-AFU V05 VESPER Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(18):2013-22.
  12. Yu EY, Petrylak DP, O’Donnell PH, et al. Enfortumab vedotin after PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (EV-201): A multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021 May 12;S1470-2045(21)00094-2.
  13. Powles T, Rosenberg JE, Sonpavde GP, et al. Enfortumab Vedotin in Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2021 Mar 25;384(12):1125-35.

The Treatment Landscape of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: First-Line Systemic Therapy in Cisplatin Eligible Patients

Introduction


Metastatic urothelial carcinoma is associated with a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of less than two years. To date, combination platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard of care first line treatment for these patients who are suitable for chemotherapy. This Center of Excellence article will assess criteria for determining cisplatin chemotherapy eligibility, review the landmark trials that established cisplatin-based chemotherapy as the standard of care for first-line treatment, and review recent data for avelumab maintenance therapy among patients that did not progress on first-line chemotherapy.
Written by: Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc Associate Professor of Urology Urologic Oncologist Medical College of Georgia, Georgia Cancer Center Augusta, GA and Rashid Sayyid, MD, MSc Urologic Oncology Fellow University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada
References:
  1. Galsky MD, Hahn NM, Rosenberg J, et al. Treatment of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer "unfit" for Cisplatin-based chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29: 2432-2438.
  2. Sternberg CN, Yagoda A, Scher HI, et al. Preliminary results of M-VAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin) for transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium. J Urol. 1985;133: 403-407.
  3. Sternberg CN, Yagoda A, Scher HI, et al. Methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin for advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium. Efficacy and patterns of response and relapse. Cancer. 1989;64: 2448-2458.
  4. Bajorin DF, Dodd PM, Mazumdar M, et al. Long-term survival in metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma and prognostic factors predicting outcome of therapy. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17: 3173-3181.
  5. von der Maase H, Hansen SW, Roberts JT, et al. Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18: 3068-3077.
  6. Sternberg CN, de Mulder PH, Schornagel JH, et al. Randomized phase III trial of high-dose-intensity methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) chemotherapy and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus classic MVAC in advanced urothelial tract tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Protocol no. 30924. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19: 2638-2646.
  7. Sternberg CN, de Mulder P, Schornagel JH, et al. Seven year update of an EORTC phase III trial of high-dose intensity M-VAC chemotherapy and G-CSF versus classic M-VAC in advanced urothelial tract tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42: 50-54.
  8. Lee YS, Ha MS, Tae JH, et al. Gemcitabine-cisplatin versus MVAC chemotherapy for urothelial carcinoma: a nationwide cohort study. Sci Rep. 2023;13: 3682.
  9. Powles T, Park SH, Voog E, et al. Avelumab Maintenance Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2020;383: 1218-1230.
  10. Powles T, Park SH, Caserta C, et al. Avelumab First-Line Maintenance for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results From the JAVELIN Bladder 100 Trial After >/=2 Years of Follow-Up. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41: 3486-3492.
  11. Powles T, Sridhar SS, Loriot Y, et al. Avelumab maintenance in advanced urothelial carcinoma: biomarker analysis of the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial. Nat Med. 2021;27: 2200-2211.

Erdafitinib PI

HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESCRIBING INFORMATION


These highlights do not include all the information needed to use BALVERSATM safely and effectively. See full prescribing information for BALVERSA.

BALVERSA (erdafitinib) tablets, for oral use Initial U.S. Approval: 2019

---------------------------------INDICATIONS AND USAGE--------------------------------

BALVERSA is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma that has

  • susceptible FGFR3 or FGFR2 genetic alterations and
  • progressed during or following at least one line of prior platinum-containing chemotherapy including within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant platinum-containing chemotherapy.
Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for BALVERSA. (1, 2.1)

This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on tumor response rate. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. (1, 14)

-----------------------------DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION-----------------------------

  • Confirm the presence of FGFR genetic alterations in tumor specimens prior to initiation of treatment with BALVERSA. (2.1)
  • Recommended initial dosage: 8 mg orally once daily with a dose increase to 9 mg daily if criteria are met. (2.2)
  • Swallow whole with or without food. (2.2)
----------------------------DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS---------------------------

Tablets: 3 mg, 4 mg, and 5 mg. (3)

-----------------------------------CONTRAINDICATIONS------------------------------------

None. (4)

-----------------------------WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS-----------------------------

  • Ocular disorders: BALVERSA can cause central serous retinopathy/retinal pigment epithelial detachment (CSR/RPED). Perform monthly ophthalmological examinations during the first four months of treatment, every 3 months afterwards, and at any time for visual symptoms. Withhold BALVERSA when CSR/RPED occurs and permanently discontinue if it does not resolve within 4 weeks or if Grade 4 in severity. (2.3, 5.1)
  • Hyperphosphatemia: Increases in phosphate levels are a pharmacodynamic effect of BALVERSA. Monitor for hyperphosphatemia and manage with dose modifications when required. (2.3, 5.2)
  • Embryo-fetal toxicity: Can cause fetal harm. Advise patients of the potential risk to the fetus and to use effective contraception (5.3, 8.1, 8.3).

BALVERSATM (erdafitinib) tablets

-----------------------------------ADVERSE REACTIONS------------------------------------

The most common adverse reactions including laboratory abnormalities (≥20%) were phosphate increased, stomatitis, fatigue, creatinine increased, diarrhea, dry mouth, onycholysis, alanine aminotransferase increased, alkaline phosphatase increased, sodium decreased, decreased appetite, albumin decreased, dysgeusia, hemoglobin decreased, dry skin, aspartate aminotransferase increased, magnesium decreased, dry eye, alopecia, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, constipation, phosphate decreased, abdominal pain, calcium increased, nausea, and musculoskeletal pain. (6.1)

To report SUSPECTED ADVERSE REACTIONS, contact Janssen Products, LP. at 1-800-526-7736 (1-800-JANSSEN and www.BALVERSA.com) or FDA at

1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch.

------------------------------------DRUG INTERACTIONS-----------------------------------

  • Strong CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 inhibitors: Consider alternative agents or monitor closely for adverse reactions. (7.1)
  • Strong CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 inducers: Avoid concomitant use with BALVERSA. (7.1)
  • Moderate CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 inducers: Increase BALVERSA dose up to 9 mg. (7.1)
  • Serum phosphate level-altering agents: Avoid concomitant use with agents that can alter serum phosphate levels before the initial dose modification period. (2.3, 7.1)
  • CYP3A4 substrates: Avoid concomitant use with sensitive CYP3A4 substrates with narrow therapeutic indices. (7.2)
  • OCT2 substrates: Consider alternative agents or consider reducing the dose of OCT2 substrates based on tolerability. (7.2)
  • P-gp substrates: Separate BALVERSA administration by at least 6 hours before or after administration of P-gp substrates with narrow therapeutic indices. (7.2)
------------------------------USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS-----------------------------

  • Lactation: Advise not to breastfeed. (8.2)
See 17 for PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION and FDA-approved patient labeling.

Revised: 04/2019

FULL PRESCRIBING INFORMATION: CONTENTS*

  1. INDICATIONS AND USAGE
  2. DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION
    1. Patient Selection
    2. Recommended Dosage and Schedule
    3. Dose Modifications for Adverse Reactions
  3. DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS
  4. CONTRAINDICATIONS
  5. WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS
    1. Ocular Disorders
    2. Hyperphosphatemia
    3. Embryo-Fetal Toxicity
  6. ADVERSE REACTIONS
    1. Clinical Trials Experience
  7. DRUG INTERACTIONS
    1. Effect of Other Drugs on BALVERSA
    2. Effect of BALVERSA on Other Drugs
  8. USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS
    1. Pregnancy
    2. Lactation
    3. Females and Males of Reproductive Potential
    4. Pediatric Use
    5. Geriatric Use
    6. CYP2C9 Poor Metabolizers
  9. DESCRIPTION
  10. CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
    1. 12.1.Mechanism of Action
    2. 12.2.Pharmacodynamics
    3. 12.3.Pharmacokinetics
    4. 12.5 Pharmacogenomics
  11. NONCLINICAL TOXICOLOGY
    1. 13.1.Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, and Impairment of Fertility
  12. CLINICAL STUDIES
    1. 14.1.Urothelial Carcinoma with Susceptible FGFR Genetic Alterations
  13. HOW SUPPLIED/STORAGE AND HANDLING
  14. PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION
*Sections or subsections omitted from the full prescribing information are not listed.

FULL PRESCRIBING INFORMATION

  1. INDICATIONS AND USAGE
BALVERSATM is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), that has:

  • susceptible FGFR3 or FGFR2 genetic alterations, and
  • progressed during or following at least one line of prior platinum-containing chemotherapy, including within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant platinum- containing chemotherapy.
Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for BALVERSA [see Dosage and Administration (2.1) and Clinical Studies (14)].

This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on tumor response rate. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials [see Clinical Studies (14)].

  1. DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION
    1. 2.1.Patient Selection
Select patients for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with BALVERSA based on the presence of susceptible FGFR genetic alterations in tumor specimens as detected by an FDA-approved companion diagnostic [see Clinical Studies (14.1)].

Information on FDA-approved tests for the detection of FGFR genetic alterations in urothelial cancer is available at: http://www.fda.gov/CompanionDiagnostics.

  1. 2.2.Recommended Dosage and Schedule
The recommended starting dose of BALVERSA is 8 mg (two 4 mg tablets) orally once daily, with a dose increase to 9 mg (three 3 mg tablets) once daily based on serum phosphate (PO4) levels and tolerability at 14 to 21 days [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].

Swallow tablets whole with or without food. If vomiting occurs any time after taking BALVERSA, the next dose should be taken the next day. Treatment should continue until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurs.

If a dose of BALVERSA is missed, it can be taken as soon as possible on the same day. Resume the regular daily dose schedule for BALVERSA the next day. Extra tablets should not be taken to make up for the missed dose.

Dose Increase based on Serum Phosphate Levels

Assess serum phosphate levels 14 to 21 days after initiating treatment. Increase the dose of BALVERSA to 9 mg once daily if serum phosphate level is < 5.5 mg/dL and there are no ocular disorders or Grade 2 or greater adverse reactions. Monitor phosphate levels monthly for hyperphosphatemia [see Pharmacodynamics (12.2)].

  1. 2.3.Dose Modifications for Adverse Reactions
The recommended dose modifications for adverse reactions are listed in Table 1.

Table 1: BALVERSA Dose Reduction Schedule




Dose

1st dose reduction

2nd dose reduction

3rd dose reduction

4th dose reduction

5th dose reduction

9 mg

(three 3 mg tablets)

8 mg

(two 4 mg tablets)

6 mg

(two 3 mg tablets)

5 mg

(one 5 mg tablet)

4 mg

(one 4 mg tablet)




Stop




8 mg

(two 4 mg tablets)

6 mg

(two 3 mg tablets)

5 mg

(one 5 mg tablet)

4 mg

(one 4 mg tablet)




Stop







Table 2 summarizes recommendations for dose interruption, reduction, or discontinuation of BALVERSA in the management of specific adverse reactions.

Table 2: Dose Modifications for Adverse Reactions




Adverse Reaction

BALVERSA Dose Modification

Hyperphosphatemia

In all patients, restrict phosphate intake to 600-800 mg daily. If serum phosphate is above 7.0 mg/dL, consider adding an oral phosphate binder until serum phosphate level returns to < 5.5 mg/dL.

5.6-6.9 mg/dL (1.8-2.3 mmol/L)

Continue BALVERSA at current dose.

7.0-9.0 mg/dL (2.3-2.9 mmol/L)

Withhold BALVERSA with weekly reassessments until level returns to < 5.5 mg/dL (or baseline). Then restart BALVERSA at the same dose level. A dose reduction may be implemented for hyperphosphatemia lasting

> 1 week.

> 9.0 mg/dL (> 2.9 mmol/L)

Withhold BALVERSA with weekly reassessments until level returns to < 5.5 mg/dL (or baseline). Then may restart BALVERSA at 1 dose level lower.

> 10.0 mg/dL (> 3.2 mmol/L) or significant alteration in baseline renal function or Grade 3 hypercalcemia

Withhold BALVERSA with weekly reassessments until level returns to < 5.5 mg/dL (or baseline). Then may restart BALVERSA at 2 dose levels lower.

Central Serous Retinopathy/Retinal Pigment Epithelial Detachment (CSR/RPED)

Grade 1: Asymptomatic; clinical or diagnostic observations only

Withhold until resolution. If resolves within

4 weeks, resume at the next lower dose level. Then, if no recurrence for a month, consider re-escalation. If stable for 2 consecutive eye exams but not resolved, resume at the next lower dose level.

Grade 2: Visual acuity 20/40 or better or ≤ 3 lines of decreased vision from baseline

Withhold until resolution. If resolves within 4 weeks, may resume at the next lower dose level.

Grade 3: Visual acuity worse than 20/40 or > 3 lines of decreased vision from baseline

Withhold until resolution. If resolves within 4 weeks, may resume two dose levels lower.

If recurs, consider permanent discontinuation.

Grade 4: Visual acuity 20/200 or worse in affected eye

Permanently discontinue.

Other Adverse Reactionsa

Grade 3

Withhold BALVERSA until resolves to Grade 1 or baseline, then may resume dose level lower.

Grade 4

Permanently discontinue.

a Dose adjustment graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAEv4.03).

  1. DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS
Tablets:

  • 3 mg: Yellow, round biconvex, film-coated, debossed with “3” on one side; and “EF” on the other side.
  • 4 mg: Orange, round biconvex, film-coated, debossed with “4” on one side; and “EF” on the other side.
  • 5 mg: Brown, round biconvex, film-coated, debossed with “5” on one side; and “EF” on the other side.
  1. CONTRAINDICATIONS
None.

  1. WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS
    1. 5.1.Ocular Disorders
BALVERSA can cause ocular disorders, including central serous retinopathy/ retinal pigment epithelial detachment (CSR/RPED) resulting in visual field defect.

CSR/RPED was reported in 25% of patients treated with BALVERSA, with a median time to first onset of 50 days. Grade 3 CSR/RPED, involving central field of vision, was reported in 3% of patients. CSR/RPED resolved in 13% of patients and was ongoing in 13% of patients at the study cutoff. CSR/RPED led to dose interruptions and reductions in 9% and 14% of patients, respectively and 3% of patients discontinued BALVERSA.

Dry eye symptoms occurred in 28% of patients during treatment with BALVERSA and were Grade 3 in 6% of patients. All patients should receive dry eye prophylaxis with ocular demulcents as needed.

Perform monthly ophthalmological examinations during the first 4 months of treatment and every 3 months afterwards, and urgently at any time for visual symptoms. Ophthalmological examination should include assessment of visual acuity, slit lamp examination, fundoscopy, and optical coherence tomography.

Withhold BALVERSA when CSR occurs and permanently discontinue if it does not resolve within 4 weeks or if Grade 4 in severity. For ocular adverse reactions, follow the dose modification guidelines [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].

    1. 5.2.Hyperphosphatemia
Increases in phosphate levels are a pharmacodynamic effect of BALVERSA [see Pharmacodynamics (12.2)]. Hyperphosphatemia was reported as adverse reaction in 76% of patients treated with BALVERSA. The median onset time for any grade event of hyperphosphatemia was 20 days (range: 8 –116) after initiating BALVERSA. Thirty-two percent of patients received phosphate binders during treatment with BALVERSA.

Monitor for hyperphosphatemia and follow the dose modification guidelines when required [see Dosage and Administration 2.2, 2.3].

    1. 5.3.Embryo-Fetal Toxicity
Based on the mechanism of action and findings in animal reproduction studies, BALVERSA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. In an embryo-fetal toxicity study, oral administration of erdafitinib to pregnant rats during the period of organogenesis caused malformations and embryo-fetal death at maternal exposures that were less than the human exposures at the maximum human recommended dose based on area under the curve (AUC). Advise pregnant women of the potential risk to the fetus. Advise female patients of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment with BALVERSA and for one month after the last dose. Advise male patients with female partners of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment with BALVERSA and for one month after the last dose [see Use in Specific Populations (8.1, 8.3) and Clinical Pharmacology (12.1)].

  1. ADVERSE REACTIONS
The following serious adverse reactions are also described elsewhere in the labeling:

  • Ocular Disorders [see Warning and Precautions (5.1)].
  • Hyperphosphatemia [see Warning and Precautions (5.2)].
    1. 6.1.Clinical Trials Experience
Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates observed in the clinical trials of a drug cannot be directly compared to rates in the clinical trials of another drug and may not reflect the rates observed in practice.

The safety of BALVERSA was evaluated in the BLC2001 study that included 87 patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma which had susceptible FGFR3 or FGFR2 genetic alterations, and which progressed during or following at least one line of prior chemotherapy including within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy [see Clinical Studies (14.1)]. Patients were treated with BALVERSA at 8 mg orally once daily; with a dose increase to 9 mg in patients with phosphate levels <5.5 mg/dL on Day 14 of Cycle 1. Median duration of treatment was 5.3 months (range: 0 to 17 months).

The most common adverse reactions (ARs) including laboratory abnormalities (≥20%) were phosphate increased, stomatitis, fatigue, creatinine increased, diarrhea, dry mouth, onycholysis, alanine aminotransferase increased, alkaline phosphatase increased, sodium decreased, decreased appetite, albumin decreased, dysgeusia, hemoglobin decreased, dry skin, aspartate aminotransferase increased, magnesium decreased, dry eye, alopecia, palmar- plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, constipation, phosphate decreased, abdominal pain, calcium increased, nausea, and musculoskeletal pain. The most common Grade 3 or greater ARs (>1%) were stomatitis, nail dystrophy, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, paronychia, nail disorder, keratitis, onycholysis, and hyperphosphatemia.

An adverse reaction with a fatal outcome in 1% of patients was acute myocardial infarction.

Serious adverse reactions occurred in 41% of patients including eye disorders (10%).

Permanent discontinuation due to an adverse reaction occurred in 13% of patients. The most frequent reasons for permanent discontinuation included eye disorders (6%).

Dosage interruptions occurred in 68% of patients. The most frequent adverse reactions requiring dosage interruption included hyperphosphatemia (24%), stomatitis (17%), eye disorders (17%), and palmar-plantar erythro-dysaesthesia syndrome (8%).

Dose reductions occurred in 53% of patients. The most frequent adverse reactions for dose reductions included eye disorders (23%), stomatitis (15%), hyperphosphatemia (7%), palmar-plantar erythro-dysaesthesia syndrome (7%),

paronychia (7%), and nail dystrophy (6%).







Table 3 presents ARs reported in ≥10% of patients treated with BALVERSA at 8 mg once daily.

Table 3: Adverse Reactions Reported in 10% (Any Grade) or ≥5% (Grade 3-4) of Patients







Adverse Reaction

BALVERSA 8 mg daily (N=87)

All Grades (%)

Grade 3-4 (%)

Any

100

67

Gastrointestinal disorders

92

24

Stomatitis

56

9

Diarrhea

47

2

Dry mouth

45

0

Constipation

28

1

Abdominal paina

23

2

Nausea

21

1

Vomiting

13

2

Metabolism and nutrition disorders

90

16

Decreased appetite

38

0

General disorders and admin. site conditions

69

13

Fatigueb

54

10

Pyrexia

14

1

Skin and subcutaneous disorders

75

16

Onycholysisc

41

10

Dry skind

34

0

Palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia

26

6

Alopecia

26

0

Nail discoloration

11

0

Eye disorders

62

11

Dry eyee

28

6

Vision blurred

17

0

Lacrimation increased

10

0

Nervous system disorders

57

5

Dysgeusia

37

1

Infections and infestations

56

20

Paronychia

17

3

Urinary tract infection

17

6

Conjunctivitis

11

0

Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders

40

7

Oropharyngeal pain

11

1

Dyspneaf

10

2

Renal and urinary tract disorders

38

10

Hematuria

11

2

Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders

31

0

Musculoskeletal paing

20

0

Arthralgia

11

0

Investigations

44

5

Weight decreasedh

16

0

a Includes abdominal pain, abdominal discomfort, abdominal pain upper, and abdominal pain lower

b Includes asthenia, fatigue, lethargy, and malaise

c Includes onycholysis, onychoclasis, nail disorder, nail dystrophy, and nail ridging

d Includes dry skin and xerostomia

e Includes dry eye, xerophthalmia, keratitis, foreign body sensation, and corneal erosion

f Includes dyspnea and dyspnea exertional

g Includes back pain, musculoskeletal discomfort, musculoskeletal pain, musculoskeletal chest pain, neck pain, pain in extremity

h Includes weight decreased and cachexia

Table 4: Laboratory Abnormalities Reported in ≥ 10% (All Grade) or ≥ 5% (Grade 3-4) of Patients




Laboratory Abnormality

BALVERSA 8 mg daily (N=86a)

All Grades (%)

Grade 3-4 (%)

Hematology

Hemoglobin decreased

35

3

Platelets decreased

19

1

Leukocytes decreased

17

0

Neutrophils decreased

10

2

Chemistry

Phosphate increased

76

1

Creatinine increased

52

5

Sodium decreased

40

16

Alanine aminotransferase increased

41

1

Alkaline phosphatase increased

41

1

Albumin decreased

37

0

Aspartate aminotransferase increased

30

0

Magnesium decreased

30

1

Phosphate decreased

24

9

Calcium increased

22

3

Potassium increased

16

0

Fasting glucose increased

10

0

a One of the 87 patients had no laboratory tests.

  1. DRUG INTERACTIONS
    1. 7.1.Effect of Other Drugs on BALVERSA
Table 5 summarizes drug interactions that affect the exposure of BALVERSA or serum phosphate level and their clinical management.




Strong CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 Inhibitors







Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with strong inhibitors of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 increased erdafitinib plasma concentrations [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].
  • Increased erdafitinib plasma concentrations may lead to increased drug-related toxicity [see Warnings and Precautions (5)].









Clinical Management

  • Consider alternative therapies that are not strong inhibitors of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 during treatment with BALVERSA.
  • If co-administration of a strong inhibitor of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 is unavoidable, monitor closely for adverse reactions and consider dose modifications accordingly [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)]. If the strong inhibitor is discontinued, the BALVERSA dose may be
increased in the absence of drug-related toxicity.

Strong CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 Inducers




Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with strong inducers of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 may decrease erdafitinib plasma concentrations significantly [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].
  • Decreased erdafitinib plasma concentrations may lead to decreased activity.
Clinical Management

  • Avoid co-administration of strong inducers of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 with BALVERSA.
Moderate CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 Inducers




Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with moderate inducers of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 may decrease erdafitinib plasma concentrations [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].
  • Decreased erdafitinib plasma concentrations may lead to decreased activity.












Clinical Management

  • If a moderate CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 inducer must be co-administered at the start of BALVERSA treatment, administer BALVERSA dose as recommended (8 mg once daily with potential to increase to 9 mg once daily based on serum phosphate levels on Days 14 to 21 and tolerability).
  • If a moderate CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 inducer must be co-administered after the initial dose increase period based on serum phosphate levels and tolerability, increase BALVERSA dose up to 9 mg.
  • When a moderate inducer of CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 is discontinued, continue BALVERSA at the same dose, in the absence of drug-related toxicity.
Table 5: Drug Interactions that Affect BALVERSA

Table 5: Drug Interactions that Affect BALVERSA (continued)

Serum Phosphate Level-Altering Agents










Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with other serum phosphate level-altering agents may increase or decrease serum phosphate levels [see Pharmacodynamics (12.2)].
  • Changes in serum phosphate levels due to serum phosphate level-altering agents (other than erdafitinib) may interfere with serum phosphate levels needed for the determination of initial dose increased based on serum phosphate levels [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].



Clinical Management

  • Avoid co-administration of serum phosphate level-altering agents with BALVERSA before initial dose increase period based on serum phosphate levels (Days 14 to 21) [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].
    1. 7.2 Effect of BALVERSA on Other Drugs
Table 6 summarizes the effect of BALVERSA on other drugs and their clinical management.

Table 6: BALVERSA Drug Interactions that Affect Other Drugs

CYP3A4 Substrates







Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with CYP3A4 substrates may alter the plasma concentrations of CYP3A4 substrates [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].
  • Altered plasma concentrations of CYP3A4 substrates may lead to loss of activity or increased toxicity of the CYP3A4 substrates.
Clinical Management

  • Avoid co-administration of BALVERSA with sensitive substrates of CYP3A4 with narrow therapeutic indices.
OCT2 Substrates







Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with OCT2 substrates may increase the plasma
concentrations of OCT2 substrates [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].

  • Increased plasma concentrations of OCT2 substrates may lead to increased toxicity of the OCT2 substrates.
Clinical Management

  • Consider alternative therapies that are not OCT2 substrates or consider reducing the dose of OCT2 substrates (e.g., metformin) based on tolerability.
P-glycoprotein (P-gp) Substrates







Clinical Impact

  • Co-administration of BALVERSA with
P-gp substrates may increase the plasma concentrations of P-gp substrates [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].

  • Increased plasma concentrations of P-gp substrates may lead to increased toxicity of the P-gp substrates.



Clinical Management

  • If co-administration of BALVERSA with P-gp substrates is unavoidable, separate BALVERSA administration by at least 6 hours before or after administration of P-gp substrates with narrow therapeutic index.
  1. USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS
    1. 8.1.Pregnancy
Risk Summary

Based on the mechanism of action and findings in animal reproduction studies, BALVERSA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.1)]. There are no available data on BALVERSA use in pregnant women to inform a drug-associated risk. Oral administration of erdafitinib to pregnant rats during organogenesis caused malformations and embryo-fetal death at maternal exposures that were less than the human exposures at the maximum recommended human dose based on AUC (see Data). Advise pregnant women and females of reproductive potential of the potential risk to the fetus.

The estimated background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage for the indicated population is unknown. All pregnancies have a background risk of birth defect, loss, or other adverse outcomes. In the U.S. general population, the estimated background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage in clinically recognized pregnancies is 2-4% and 15-20%, respectively.

Data

Animal Data

In an embryo-fetal toxicity study, erdafitinib was orally administered to pregnant rats during the period of organogenesis. Doses ≥4mg/kg/day (at total maternal exposures <0.1% of total human exposures at the maximum recommended human dose based on AUC) produced embryo-fetal death, major blood vessel malformations and other vascular anomalies, limb malformations (ectrodactyly, absent or misshapen long bones), an increased incidence of skeletal anomalies in multiple bones (vertebrae, sternebrae, ribs), and decreased fetal weight.

    1. 8.2.Lactation
Risk Summary

There are no data on the presence of erdafitinib in human milk, or the effects of erdafitinib on the breastfed child, or on milk production. Because of the potential for serious adverse reactions from erdafitinib in a breastfed child, advise lactating women not to breastfeed during treatment with BALVERSA and for one month following the last dose.

    1. 8.3.Females and Males of Reproductive Potential
Pregnancy Testing

Pregnancy testing is recommended for females of reproductive potential prior to initiating treatment with BALVERSA.

Contraception

Females

BALVERSA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. Advise females of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment with BALVERSA and for one month after the last dose [see Use in Specific Population (8.1)].

Males

Advise male patients with female partners of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment with BALVERSA and for one month after the last dose [see Use in Specific Populations (8.1)].

Infertility

Females

Based on findings from animal studies, BALVERSA may impair fertility in females of reproductive potential [see Nonclinical Toxicology (13.1)].

    1. 8.4.Pediatric Use
Safety and effectiveness of BALVERSA in pediatric patients have not been established.

In 4 and 13-week repeat-dose toxicology studies in rats and dogs, toxicities in bone and teeth were observed at an exposure less than the human exposure (AUC) at the maximum recommended human dose. Chondroid dysplasia/metaplasia were reported in multiple bones in both species, and tooth abnormalities included abnormal/irregular denting in rats and dogs and discoloration and degeneration of odontoblasts in rats.

    1. 8.5.Geriatric Use
Of the 416 patients treated with BALVERSA in clinical studies, 45% were 65 years of age or older, and 12% were 75 years of age or older. No overall differences in safety or effectiveness were observed between these patients and younger patients [see Clinical Studies (14)].

    1. 8.6.CYP2C9 Poor Metabolizers
CYP2C9*3/*3 Genotype: Erdafitinib plasma concentrations were predicted to be higher in patients with the CYP2C9*3/*3 genotype. Monitor for increased adverse reactions in patients who are known or suspected to have CYP2C9*3/*3 genotype [see Pharmacogenomics (12.5)].

  1. DESCRIPTION
Erdafitinib, the active ingredient in BALVERSA, is a kinase inhibitor. The chemical name is N-(3,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N’-(1-methylethyl)-N-[3-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol- 4-yl)quinoxalin-6-yl]ethane-1,2-diamine. Erdafitinib is a yellow powder. It is practically insoluble, or insoluble to freely soluble in organic solvents, and slightly soluble to practically insoluble, or insoluble in aqueous media over a wide range of pH values. The molecular formula is C 25H30N6O 2 and molecular weight is 446.56. Chemical structure of erdafitinib is as follows:
Erdafitinib PI

BALVERSA (erdafitinib) is supplied as 3 mg, 4 mg or 5 mg film-coated tablets for oral administration and contains the following inactive ingredients:

Tablet Core: Croscarmellose sodium, Magnesium stearate (from vegetable source), Mannitol, Meglumine, and Microcrystalline Cellulose.

Film Coating: (Opadry amb II): Glycerol monocaprylocaprate Type I, Polyvinyl alcohol-partially hydrolyzed, Sodium lauryl sulfate, Talc, Titanium dioxide, Iron oxide yellow, Iron oxide red (for the orange and brown tablets only), Ferrosoferric oxide/iron oxide black (for the brown tablets only).

  1. CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
    1. 12.1.Mechanism of Action
Erdafitinib is a kinase inhibitor that binds to and inhibits enzymatic activity of FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3 and FGFR4 based on in vitro data. Erdafitinib also binds to RET, CSF1R, PDGFRA, PDGFRB, FLT4, KIT, and VEGFR2. Erdafitinib inhibited FGFR phosphorylation and signaling and decreased cell viability in cell lines expressing FGFR genetic alterations, including point mutations, amplifications, and fusions. Erdafitinib demonstrated antitumor activity in FGFR-expressing cell lines and xenograft models derived from tumor types, including bladder cancer.

    1. 12.2.Pharmacodynamics
Cardiac Electrophysiology

Based on evaluation of QTc interval in an open-label, dose escalation and dose expansion study in 187 patients with cancer, erdafitinib had no large effect (i.e.,

> 20 ms) on the QTc interval.

Serum Phosphate

Erdafitinib increased serum phosphate level as a consequence of FGFR inhibition. BALVERSA should be increased to the maximum recommended dose to achieve target serum phosphate levels of 5.5–7.0 mg/dL in early cycles with continuous daily dosing [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].

In erdafitinib clinical trials, the use of drugs which can increase serum phosphate levels, such as potassium phosphate supplements, vitamin D supplements, antacids, phosphate-containing enemas or laxatives, and medications known to have phosphate as an excipient were prohibited unless no alternatives exist. To manage phosphate elevation, phosphate binders were permitted. Avoid concomitant use with agents that can alter serum phosphate levels before the initial dose increase period based on serum phosphate levels [see Drug Interactions (7.1)].

    1. 12.3.Pharmacokinetics
Following administration of 8 mg once daily, the mean (coefficient of variation [CV%]) erdafitinib steady-state maximum observed plasma concentration (C max), area under the curve (AUCtau), and minimum observed plasma concentration (C min) were 1,399 ng/mL (51%), 29,268 ng•h/mL (60%), and 936 ng/mL (65%), respectively.

Following single and repeat once daily dosing, erdafitinib exposure (maximum observed plasma concentration [Cmax] and area under the plasma concentration time curve [AUC]) increased proportionally across the dose range of 0.5 to 12 mg (0.06 to 1.3 times the maximum approved recommended dose). Steady state was achieved after 2 weeks with once daily dosing and the mean accumulation ratio was 4-fold.

Absorption

Median time to achieve peak plasma concentration (t max) was 2.5 hours (range: 2 to 6 hours).

Effect of Food

No clinically meaningful differences with erdafitinib pharmacokinetics were observed following administration of a high-fat and high-calorie meal (800 calories to 1,000 calories with approximately 50% of total caloric content of the meal from fat) in healthy subjects.

Distribution

The mean apparent volume of distribution of erdafitinib was 29 L in patients.

Erdafitinib protein binding was 99.8% in patients, primarily to alpha-1-acid glycoprotein.

Elimination

The mean total apparent clearance (CL/F) of erdafitinib was 0.362 L/h in patients. The mean effective half-life of erdafitinib was 59 hours in patients.

Metabolism

Erdafitinib is primarily metabolized by CYP2C9 and CYP3A4. The contribution of CYP2C9 and CYP3A4 in the total clearance of erdafitinib is estimated to be 39% and 20% respectively. Unchanged erdafitinib was the major drug-related moiety in plasma, there were no circulating metabolites.

Excretion

Following a single oral dose of radiolabeled erdafitinib, approximately 69% of the dose was recovered in feces (19% as unchanged) and 19% in urine (13% as unchanged).

Specific Populations

No clinically meaningful trends in the pharmacokinetics of erdafitinib were observed based on age (21-88 years), sex, race, body weight (36-132 kg), mild (eGFR [estimated glomerular filtration rate, using modification of diet in renal disease equation] 60 to 89 mL/min/1.73 m2) or moderate (eGFR 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m2) renal impairment or mild hepatic impairment (total bilirubin ≤ ULN and AST > ULN, or total bilirubin > 1.0–1.5 x ULN and any AST).

The pharmacokinetics of erdafitinib in patients with severe renal impairment, renal impairment requiring dialysis, moderate or severe hepatic impairment is unknown.

Drug Interaction Studies

Clinical Studies and Model-Based Approaches

Strong CYP2C9 Inhibitors:

Erdafitinib mean ratios (90% CI) for Cmax and AUC inf were 121% (99.9, 147) and 148% (120, 182), respectively, when co-administered with fluconazole, a strong CYP2C9 inhibitor and moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor, relative to erdafitinib alone.

Strong CYP3A4 Inhibitors:

Erdafitinib mean ratios (90% CI) for Cmax and AUCinf were 105% (86.7, 127) and 134% (109, 164), respectively, when co-administered with itraconazole (a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor and P-gp inhibitor) relative to erdafitinib alone.

Strong CYP3A4/2C9 Inducers:

Simulations suggested that rifampicin (a strong CYP3A4/2C9 inducer) may significantly decrease erdafitinib Cmax and AUC.

In Vitro Studies

CYP Substrates:

Erdafitinib is a time dependent inhibitor and inducer of CYP3A4. The effect of erdafitinib on a sensitive CYP3A4 substrate is unknown. Erdafitinib is not an inhibitor of other major CYP isozymes at clinically relevant concentrations.

Transporters:

Erdafitinib is a substrate and inhibitor of P-gp. P-gp inhibitors are not expected to affect erdafitinib exposure to a clinically relevant extent. Erdafitinib is an inhibitor of OCT2.

Erdafitinib does not inhibit BCRP, OATP1B, OATP1B3, OAT1, OAT3, OCT1, MATE-1, or MATE-2K at clinically relevant concentrations.

Acid-Lowering Agents:

Erdafitinib has adequate solubility across the pH range of 1 to 7.4. Acid-lowering agents (e.g., antacids, H 2-antagonists, proton pump inhibitors) are not expected to affect the bioavailability of erdafitinib.

12.5 Pharmacogenomics

CYP2C9 activity is reduced in individuals with genetic variants, such as the CYP2C9*2 and CYP2C9*3 polymorphisms. Erdafitinib exposure was similar in subjects with CYP2C9*1/*2 and *1/*3 genotypes relative to subjects with CYP2C9*1/*1 genotype (wild type). No data are available in subjects characterized by other genotypes (e.g., *2/*2, *2/*3, *3/*3). Simulation suggested no clinically meaningful differences in erdafitinib exposure in subjects with CYP2C9*2/*2 and

*2/*3 genotypes. The exposure of erdafitinib is predicted to be 50% higher in subjects with the CYP2C9*3/*3 genotype, estimated to be present in 0.4% to 3% of the population among various ethnic groups.

  1. NONCLINICAL TOXICOLOGY
    1. 13.1.Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, and Impairment of Fertility
Carcinogenicity studies have not been conducted with erdafitinib.

Erdafitinib was not mutagenic in a bacterial reverse mutation (Ames) assay and was not clastogenic in an in vitro micronucleus or an in vivo rat bone marrow micronucleus assay.

Fertility studies in animals have not been conducted with erdafitinib. In the 3-month repeat-dose toxicity study, erdafitinib showed effects on female reproductive organs (necrosis of the ovarian corpora lutea) in rats at an exposure less than the human exposure (AUC) at maximum recommended human dose.

  1. CLINICAL STUDIES
    1. 14.1.Urothelial Carcinoma with Susceptible FGFR Genetic Alterations
Study BLC2001 (NCT02365597) was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BALVERSA in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) mutation status for screening and enrollment of patients was determined by a clinical trial assay (CTA). The efficacy population consists of a cohort of eighty- seven patients who were enrolled in this study with disease that had progressed on or after at least one prior chemotherapy and that had at least 1 of the following genetic alterations: FGFR3 gene mutations (R248C, S249C, G370C, Y373C) or FGFR gene fusions (FGFR3-TACC3, FGFR3-BAIAP2L1, FGFR2-BICC1, FGFR2-CASP7), as

determined by the CTA performed at a central laboratory. Tumor samples from 69 patients were tested retrospectively by the QIAGEN therascreen ® FGFR RGQ RT-PCR Kit, which is the FDA-approved test for selection of patients with mUC for BALVERSA.

Patients received a starting dose of BALVERSA at 8 mg once daily with a dose increase to 9 mg once daily in patients whose serum phosphate levels were below the target of 5.5 mg/dL between days 14 and 17; a dose increase occurred in 41% of patients. BALVERSA was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The major efficacy outcome measures were objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DoR), as determined by blinded independent review committee (BIRC) according to RECIST v1.1.

The median age was 67 years (range: 36 to 87 years), 79% were male, and 74% were Caucasian. Most patients (92%) had a baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Sixty-six percent of patients had visceral metastases. Eighty-four (97%) patients received at least one of cisplatin or carboplatin previously. Fifty-six percent of patients only received prior cisplatin- based regimens, 29% received only prior carboplatin-based regimens, and 10% received both cisplatin and carboplatin-based regimens. Three (3%) patients had disease progression following prior platinum-containing neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy only. Twenty-four percent of patients had been treated with prior anti PD-L1/PD-1 therapy.

Efficacy results are summarized in Table 7 and Table 8. Overall response rate was 32.2%. Responders included patients who had previously not responded to anti PD-L1/PD-1 therapy.

Table 7: Efficacy Results




Endpoint

BIRCa assessment

N=87

ORR (95% CI)

32.2% (22.4, 42.0)

Complete response (CR)

2.3%

Partial response (PR)

29.9%

Median DoR in months (95% CI)

5.4 (4.2, 6.9)

a BIRC: Blinded Independent Review Committee ORR = CR + PR

CI = Confidence Interval

Table 8: Efficacy Results by FGFR Genetic Alteration




BIRCa assessment

FGFR3 Point Mutation

N=64

ORR (95% CI)

40.6% (28.6, 52.7)

FGFR3 Fusion b, c

N=18

ORR (95% CI)

11.1% (0, 25.6)

FGFR2 Fusion c

N=6

ORR

0

a BIRC: Blinded Independent Review Committee

b Both responders had FGFR3-TACC3_V1 fusion

c One patient with a FGFR2-CASP7/FGFR3-TACC3_V3 fusion is reported in both FGFR2 fusion and FGFR3 fusion above

ORR = CR + PR

CI = Confidence Interval

  1. HOW SUPPLIED/STORAGE AND HANDLING
BALVERSA™ (erdafitinib) tablets are available in the strengths and packages listed below:

  • 3 mg tablets: Yellow, round biconvex, film-coated, debossed with “3” on one side and “EF” on the other side.
  • Bottle of 56-tablets with child resistant closure (NDC 59676-030-56).
  • Bottle of 84-tablets with child resistant closure (NDC 59676-030-84).
  • 4 mg tablets: Orange, round biconvex, film-coated, debossed with “4” on one side and “EF” on the other side.
  • Bottle of 28-tablets with child resistant closure (NDC 59676-040-28).
  • Bottle of 56-tablets with child resistant closure (NDC 59676-040-56).
  • 5 mg tablets: Brown, round biconvex, film-coated, debossed with “5” on one side and “EF” on the other side.
  • Bottle of 28-tablets with child resistant closure (NDC 59676-050-28).
Store at 20°C-25°C (68°F-77°F); excursions permitted between 15°C and 30°C (59°F and 86°F) [see USP Controlled Room Temperature].

BALVERSATM (erdafitinib) tablets

  1. PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION
Advise the patient to read the FDA-approved patient labeling (Patient Information).

FGFR genetic alterations: Advise patients that evidence of a susceptible FGFR3 or FGFR2 mutation or gene fusion within the tumor specimen is necessary to identify patients for whom treatment is indicated [see Dosage and Administration (2.1)].

Ocular disorders: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider if they experience any visual changes [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)]. In order to prevent or treat dry eyes, advise patients to use artificial tear substitutes, hydrating or lubricating eye gels or ointments frequently, at least every 2 hours during waking hours [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].

Skin, mucous or nail disorders: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider if they experience progressive or intolerable skin, mucous or nail disorders [see Adverse Reactions (6.1)].

Hyperphosphatemia: Advise patients that their healthcare provider will assess their serum phosphate level between 14 and 21 days of initiating treatment and will adjust the dose if needed [see Warnings and Precautions (5.2)]. During this initial phosphate-assessment period, advise patients to avoid concomitant use with agents that can alter serum phosphate levels. Advise patients that, after the initial phosphate assessment period, monthly phosphate level monitoring for hyperphosphatemia should be performed during treatment with BALVERSA [see Drug Interactions (7.1)].

Drug Interactions: Advise patients to inform their healthcare providers of all concomitant medications, including prescription medicines, over-the-counter drugs, and herbal products [see Drug Interactions (7.1, 7.2)].

Dosing Instructions: Instruct patients to swallow the tablets whole once daily with or without food. If vomiting occurs any time after taking BALVERSA, advise patients to take the next dose the next day. [see Dosage and Administration (2.1)].

Missed dose: If a dose is missed, advise patients to take the missed as soon as possible. Resume the regular daily dose schedule for BALVERSA the next day. Extra tablets should not be taken to make up for the missed dose [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].

Embryo-Fetal Toxicity: Advise pregnant women and females of reproductive potential of the potential risk to the fetus. Advise females to inform their healthcare providers of a known or suspected pregnancy [see Warning and Precautions (5.3) and Use in Specific Population (8.1)].

Advise female patients of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment and for one month after the last dose of BALVERSA. Advise male patients with female partners of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment and for one month after the last dose of BALVERSA [see Use in Specific Populations (8.3)].

Lactation: Advise females not to breastfeed during treatment with BALVERSA and for one month after the last dose [see Use in Specific Populations (8.2)].

Product of Switzerland

Manufactured for: Janssen Products, LP Horsham, PA 19044

Under license from Astex Therapeutics Limited.

©2019 Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies

PATIENT INFORMATION

BALVERSA™ (bal-VER-sah) (erdafitinib) tablets

What is BALVERSA?

BALVERSA is a prescription medicine used to treat adults with bladder cancer (urothelial cancer) that has spread or cannot be removed by surgery:

  • which has a certain type of abnormal “FGFR” gene, and
  • who have tried at least one other chemotherapy medicine that contains platinum, and it did not work or is no longer working. Your healthcare provider will test your cancer for certain types of abnormal FGFR genes and make sure that BALVERSA is right for you.
It is not known if BALVERSA is safe and effective in children.

Before taking BALVERSA tell your healthcare provider about all of your medical conditions, including if you:

  • have vision or eye problems.
  • are pregnant or plan to become pregnant. BALVERSA can harm your unborn baby. You should not become pregnant during treatment with BALVERSA.
Females who can become pregnant:

° Your healthcare provider may do a pregnancy test before you start treatment with BALVERSA.

° You should use effective birth control during treatment and for 1 month after the last dose of BALVERSA. Talk to your healthcare provider about birth control methods that may be right for you.

° Tell your healthcare provider right away if you become pregnant or think you may be pregnant.

Males with female partners who can become pregnant:

° You should use effective birth control when sexually active during treatment with BALVERSA and for 1 month after the last dose.

  • are breastfeeding or plan to breastfeed. Do not breastfeed during treatment and for 1 month after the last dose of BALVERSA.
Tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines you take, including prescription and over-the-counter medicines, vitamins, and herbal supplements.

How should I take BALVERSA?

  • Take BALVERSA exactly as your healthcare provider tells you.
  • Take BALVERSA 1 time each day.
  • Swallow BALVERSA tablets whole with or without food.
  • Your healthcare provider may change your dose of BALVERSA, temporarily stop or completely stop treatment if you get certain side effects.
  • If you miss a dose of BALVERSA, take the missed dose as soon as possible on the same day. Take your regular dose of BALVERSA the next day. Do not take more BALVERSA than prescribed to make up for the missed dose.
  • If you vomit after taking BALVERSA, do not take another BALVERSA tablet. Take your regular dose of BALVERSA the next day.
BALVERSATM (erdafitinib) tablets

What are the possible side effects of BALVERSA? BALVERSA may cause serious side effects, including:

  • Eye problems. Eye problems are common with BALVERSA but can also be serious. Eye problems include dry or inflamed eyes, inflamed cornea (front part of the eye) and disorders of the retina, an internal part of the eye. Tell your healthcare provider right away if you develop blurred vision, loss of vision or other visual changes. You should use artificial tear substitutes, hydrating or lubricating eye gels or ointments at least every 2 hours during waking hours to help prevent dry eyes. During treatment with BALVERSA, your healthcare provider will send you to see an eye specialist.
  • High phosphate levels in the blood (hyperphosphatemia). Hyperphosphatemia is common with BALVERSA but can also be serious. Your healthcare provider will check your blood phosphate level between 14 and 21 days after starting treatment with BALVERSA, and then monthly, and may change your dose if needed.
The most common side effects of BALVERSA include:

  • mouth sores • low red blood cells (anemia)
  • feeling tired • dry skin
  • change in kidney function •  dry eyes
  • diarrhea •   hair loss
  • dry mouth • redness, swelling, peeling or tenderness, mainly on the
  • nails separate from the bed or poor formation of the nail hands or feet (‘hand-foot syndrome’)
  • change in liver function • constipation
  • low salt (sodium) levels • stomach (abdominal) pain
  • decreased appetite • nausea
  • change in sense of taste • muscle pain
Tell your healthcare provider right away if you develop any nail or skin problems including nails separating from the nail bed, nail pain, nail bleeding, breaking of the nails, color or texture changes in your nails, infected skin around the nail, an itchy skin rash, dry skin, or cracks in the skin.

BALVERSA may affect fertility in females who are able to become pregnant. Talk to your healthcare provider if this is a concern for you. These are not all possible side effects of BALVERSA. For more information, ask your healthcare provider or pharmacist.

Call your healthcare provider for medical advice about side effects. You may report side effects to FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088.

How should I store BALVERSA?

  • Store BALVERSA tablets at room temperature between 68°F to 77°F (20°C to 25°C).
Keep BALVERSA and all medicines out of the reach of children.

General information about the safe and effective use of BALVERSA.

Medicines are sometimes prescribed for purposes other than those listed in Patient Information leaflets. Do not use BALVERSA for a condition for which it was not prescribed. Do not give BALVERSA to other people, even if they have the same symptoms that you have. It may harm them. If you would like more information, talk with your healthcare provider. You can ask your healthcare provider for information about BALVERSA that is written for healthcare professionals.

What are the ingredients in BALVERSA? Active ingredient: erdafitinib

Inactive ingredients:

Tablet Core: Croscarmellose sodium, Magnesium stearate (from vegetable source), Mannitol, Meglumine, and Microcrystalline Cellulose. Film Coating (Opadry amb II): Glycerol monocaprylocaprate Type I, Polyvinyl alcohol-partially hydrolyzed, Sodium lauryl sulfate, Talc, Titanium dioxide, Iron oxide yellow, Iron oxide red (for the orange and brown tablets only), Ferrosoferric oxide/iron oxide black (for the brown tablets only).

Manufactured by: Janssen-Cilag SpA, Latina, Italy

Manufactured for: Janssen Products, LP, Horsham, PA 19044

© 2019 Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies

For more information call Janssen Products, LP at 1-800-526-7736 (1-800-JANSSEN) or go to www.BALVERSA.com.

This Patient Information has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Issued: April 2019

Published Date: April 16th, 2019

The Current Landscape of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Cisplatin Eligible Patients with Clinically Localized, Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Introduction

Bladder cancer is currently the 10th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide, with an estimated 110,500 men and 70,000 women diagnosed annually.1 While the majority of patients are diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease (i.e. carcinoma in situ, Ta, and T1), approximately 25 to 33% of patients are initially diagnosed with muscle invasive bladder cancer and a meaningful proportion of patients initially diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease will subsequently progress to MIBC.1

Written by: Rashid K. Sayyid, MD, MSc, and Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc
References:
  1. Burger M, Catto JWF, Dalbagni G, et al. Epidemiology and Risk Factors of Urothelial Bladder Cancer. Eur Urol 2013;63(2):234-41.
  2. Flaig TW, Speiss PE, Abern M, et al. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022;20(8):866-878.
  3. EAU Guidelines: Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  4. ASCO Cancer.Net: Bladder Cancer – Statistics. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  5. Martinez-Pineiro JA, Martin MG, Arovena F, et al. Neoadjuvant cisplatin chemotherapy before radical cystectomy in invasive transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a prospective randomized phase III study. J Urol 1995;153(3 Pt 2):964-73.
  6. Rintala E, Hannisdahl E, Fossa SD, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in bladder cancer: a randomized study. Nordic Cystectomy Trial I. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1993;27(3):355-62.
  7. Malmstrom PU, Rintala E, Wahlqvist R, et al. Five-year followup of a prospective trial of radical cystectomy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy: Nordic Cystectomy Trial I. The Nordic Cooperative Bladder Cancer Study Group. J Urol 1996;155(6):1903-6.
  8. Sherif A, Rintala E, Mestad O, et al. Neoadjuvant cisplatin-methotrexate chemotherapy for invasive bladder cancer -- Nordic cystectomy trial 2. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2022;36(6):419-25.
  9. International collaboration of trialists on behalf of the Medical Research Council Advanced Bladder Cancer Working Party, et al. Neoadjuvant cisplatin,methotrexate,and vinblastine chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1999;354(9178):533-40.
  10. International Collaboration of Trialists, et al. International phase III trial assessing neoadjuvant cisplatin, methotrexate, and vinblastine chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: long-term results of the BA06 30894 trial. J Clin Oncol 2011;29(16):2171-7.
  11. Grossman HB, Natale RB, Tangen CM, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus cystectomy compared with cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;349(9):859-66.
  12. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2003;361(9373):1927-34.
  13. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: update of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data advanced bladder cancer (ABC) meta-analysis collaboration. Eur Urol 2005;48(2):202-5.
  14. Kitamura H, Tsukamoto T, Shibata T, et al. Randomised phase III study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with methotrexate, doxorubicin, vinblastine and cisplatin followed by radical cystectomy compared with radical cystectomy alone for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG0209. Ann Oncol 2014;25(6):1192-8.
  15. Dash A, Pettus JA, Herr H, et al. A Role for Neoadjuvant Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder: A Retrospective Experience. Cancer 2008;113(9):2471-7.
  16. Goel S, Sinha EJ, Bhaskar V, et al. Role of gemcitabine and cisplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle invasive bladder cancer: Experience over the last decade. Asian J Urol 2019;6(3):222-9.
  17. Iyer G, Tully CM, Zabor EC, et al. Neoadjuvant Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Plus Radical Cystectomy-Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: A 12-year Experience. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2020;18(5):387-94.
  18. Osman MA, Gabr AM, Elkady MS. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus cystectomy in management of stages II, and III urinary bladder cancer. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2014;86(4):278-83.
  19. Yafi FA, Aprikian AG, Chin JL, et al. Contemporary outcomes of 2287 patients with bladder cancer who were treated with radical cystectomy: a Canadian multicentre experience. BJU Int 2011;108(4):539-45.
  20. Pfister C, Gravis G, Flechon A, et al. Randomized Phase III Trial of Dose-dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin, or Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients with Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer. Analysis of the GETUG/AFU V05 VESPER Trial Secondary Endpoints: Chemotherapy Toxicity and Pathological Responses. Eur Urol 2021;29(2):214-21.
  21. Pfister C, Gravis G, Flechon A, et al. Dose-Dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin or Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients With Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of the GETUG-AFU V05 VESPER Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(18):2013-22.

 

 

 

An Update on Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer and Metastatic Bladder Cancer

Introduction

Bladder cancer was one of the top five leading causes of cancer death in 2015.1 Most of these cases are of urothelial histologic origin. For about 35% of patients, bladder cancer is either muscle-invasive or metastatic at disease presentation. In addition, non-muscle invasive disease can progress to become muscle-invasive bladder cancer later on in the disease course. Preceding chapters discussed the diagnosis and staging of bladder cancer.  This chapter will focus on the management of muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer as well as metastatic bladder cancer.

Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer have the best outcomes when they are treated with a multidisciplinary approach. 

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based regimens improve survival outcomes for patients with invasive bladder cancer.2,3 This has been shown in randomized trials and meta-analyses.4-9 The Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration found a significant disease (9%) and overall survival (5%) benefit with platinum-based chemotherapy regimens.2  A recently updated meta-analysis (2016) with mature data on these randomized clinical trials revealed a 13% improvement in survival.3 Thus, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be offered to all patients with muscle-invasive disease.

In patients who are not eligible for cisplatinum-based regimens (eg. creatinine clearance (<60 ml/min), ECOG performance status ≥2, New York Heart Association class ≥III heart failure, grade ≥2 hearing loss, ≥2 neuropathy, proceeding directly to extirpative local therapy or XRT is sometimes appropriate.10 Among the chemotherapy regimens studied, the most effective are MVAC: methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin and GC: Gemcitabine and Cisplatinum (note: there is no role for Carboplatin in this disease). There has been no head to head studies but some meta-analyses have shown a decreased survival benefit for GC when compared to dose-dense MVAC. Dose-dense MVAC is tolerated well and offers the advantage of shortened time for waiting to undergo surgery.11-13  Additional advantages of neoadjuvant chemotherapy include the downstaging with ≤pT1N0 (49%).12 These chemotherapy regimens not only provide an improved overall survival but also are associated with a complete pathologic response in about 25%-30% of patients.12,14 In the future molecular subtypes may play a role in determining which patients would benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy.15,16 For example, Seiler et al found that tumors classified as basal tumors had the most improvement in overall survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.15 These studies remain hypothesis generating at this point;  studies to validate them are needed before they can be used in clinical practice. Until that time we, at MD Anderson, use a risk-adapted approach to avoid chemotherapy in patients who might derive minimal benefit.17 This strategy is shown in Figure 1.17


diagram-muscle-invasive-bladder-cancer@2x.jpg


Culp et al. performed a retrospective study to define in high-risk muscle-invasive bladder cancer (≥cT3b or histologic lymphovascular invasion, micropapillary or neuroendocrine features) patients who underwent chemotherapy and compared outcomes in those who did and did not undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy.18 This study concluded that patients who are most likely to benefit from chemotherapy are those who are high risk due to the worse prognosis compared to low-risk muscle-invasive bladder cancer.18

A few studies have evaluated the role of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. The ABACUS trial showed a downstaging of 39% and a pathologic complete response in 29% of patients 19 The PURE study also showed a pathologic complete response in 40% of patients and downstaging in 51%.20

Radical Cystectomy
Radical cystectomy with urinary diversion is an essential part of the curative strategy for patients with non-metastatic bladder cancer. It is a complex surgery and is often associated with morbidity; however, enhanced recovery (ERAS) programs have helped improve patient’s surgical course outcomes.21,22 ERAS programs focus on the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative continuum of care. Preoperative phases focus on preparation physically and mentally for surgery. Intraoperative phases work to decrease postoperative infection and limit fluid overload. Lastly, postoperative efforts are focused on early self-care and ambulation and feeding allowing for early discharge. An integral medication has been alvimopan (Entereg) in reducing the GI-related toxicity induced by opioid medications in the perioperative setting.23

Radical cystectomy should include a bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection, this should include at a minimum the standard node dissection: internal iliac, external iliac, an obturator with consideration of an extended node template in high-risk patients (to include common iliac, presacral lymph nodes).24 While several retrospective studies have shown the importance of removing more lymph node, we await the results of SWOG trial S1011 to answer whether an extended lymph node dissection is truly needed.25-29

The approach to surgery (whether open or robotic) is less important than the skill of the surgeon.30 The International Radical Cystectomy Consortium has reported that robotic cystectomy and diversions can be performed with similar outcomes to open surgery.31  The recent randomized trial comparing open to robotic cystectomy (RAZOR) showed no difference in intermediate oncologic outcomes.31 While operative time was longer with the robotic approach, there was reduced blood loss and transfusions, and shorter hospital stay.31 To date there no randomized trials comparing intracorporeal urinary diversion to open urinary diversion.

Partial cystectomy is only appropriate in a highly selected patient population such as tumor only in a bladder diverticulum or urachal adenocarcinoma. 24

Urinary Diversion
The choice of urinary diversion is an important, life-altering one for patients undergoing radical surgery.32 Common urinary diversions include the ileal conduit, right-sided colon pouch (Indiana pouch) and orthotopic neobladder. Most studies have found no difference in the quality of life for the different urinary diversions, however, females may have a greater decrease in quality of life compared to men.33-35 There are certain factors which may limit continent urinary diversions such as dexterity, cognition, previous radiation, preexisting incontinence and bladder tumor proximity to the urethra. Patients should have skills to manage their urinary diversion prior to discharge from the hospital after cystectomy.24

Trimodal Therapy
Trimodal therapy (TMT) with chemotherapy, radiation and maximal TURBT offers a curative option to appropriately selected patients with radical cystectomy as a salvage option.36,37 It is also an option in patients with multiple medical comorbidities,  or those unwilling to undergo radical cystectomy.38  Traditional selection criteria for TMT are patients with no variant histology, minimal T2 disease, no tumor associated hydronephrosis and absence of carcinoma-in-situ.38,39  Patients should not always be offered radiation in conjunction with chemotherapy when the goal is curative intent.40 A recent large retrospective study from the NCDB using a propensity-matched analysis found median overall survival 2.7 years (RC) vs 3 years (TMT).41 However, another study using the SEER-Medicare database also using a propensity-matched analysis found that radical cystectomy was less expensive and had better survival compared to TMT with almost 50% worse overall and cancer-specific survival.42

Adjuvant Treatments

Adjuvant Chemotherapy
In patients with high-risk features such as ≥T3 disease and/or ≥N1 may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.43,44 In a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of over 1500 patients from 11 clinical trials.43 There was significant progression-free and overall survival associated with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with radical cystectomy alone with a 35% improvement in progression-free survival and 20% improvement in overall survival.43 An additional retrospective study by Galsky et al also showed a benefit in overall survival.44 Adjuvant chemotherapy regimens have been studied with the addition of adjuvant radiation, this found improved two year outcomes of locoregional recurrence-free survival of 96% compared to those without adjuvant chemotherapy and RT of 69%.45 Patients who are chemotherapy naïve seem to benefit more than patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy.46 The most benefit is again seen with cisplatinum containing regimens.47

Adjuvant Radiotherapy
Adjuvant radiotherapy has had limited success due to toxicity to normal structures (eg bowel), but renewed interest has shown there may be a potential role for adjuvant radiation after radical cystectomy in high-risk patients and this is an ongoing area of study.48-51 Baumann et al and Reddy et al have both published data on the contouring and target volumes of adjuvant radiation in patients after cystectomy to help alleviate some of the previous issues with post-cystectomy anatomical changes. In addition, there are multiple ongoing trials of adjuvant therapy in patients with ≥T3 disease.50

Metastatic Urothelial Cancer

Chemotherapy
Cisplatin-based regimens remain the mainstay of treatment for patients that are eligible for chemotherapy.52 The area of immunotherapy in metastatic urothelial cancer is rapidly expanding.53 In addition, for elderly patients, cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens can be difficult to tolerate and carry a high rate of patient elected discontinuation.54 For these reasons, immunotherapy may provide a treatment option for those who cannot tolerate cisplatin therapy.

Surgery
In select patients who have responded to chemotherapy, surgery may be a reasonable step, however, this is based on retrospective data, thus selection bias must heavily influence the decision on which patients may benefit from salvage surgery.55 Salvage surgery may have a higher likelihood of complications, however, this has not been an area well studied. Surgical consolidation may be reasonable in patients who have a good response to chemotherapy and have small lesions. 56 In addition, metastasectomy has been shown to be effective in solitary pulmonary lesions in retrospective studies.55,57 In a SEER-Medicare study, a select group of patients underwent metastasectomy and over one third were still alive at three years, thus prolonging cancer survival.58 In a meta-analysis, survival was improved by 37% with a metastasectomy.59

Immunotherapy
There has been a recent deluge in the realm of immunotherapy.60 Multiple drugs have been approved with agents available for patients who fail cisplatinum therapy as second-line therapy and in those who are cisplatin-ineligible patients as first-line treatment (Table 1), .61 Combinations of immunotherapy with traditional chemotherapy are currently being investigated.

table-1-muscle-invasive-bladder-cancer@2x.jpg


It is noteworthy that the administration of these immunotherapeutic agents has also been associated with multiple forms of immune-mediated reactions (colitis, pneumonitis, thyroiditis, hypophysitis, etc.) that can be life-threatening.  Patients undergoing immunotherapy have to be watched vigilantly for adverse immune-mediated reactions, if not addressed immediately, these can lead to serious adverse outcomes.

Published Date: April 16th, 2019

Written by: Janet Baack Kukreja, MD, MPH and Ashish Kamat, MD, MBBS
References:
  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(1):7-30.
  2. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis C. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: update of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data advanced bladder cancer (ABC) meta-analysis collaboration. Eur Urol. 2005;48(2):202-205; discussion 205-206.
  3. Yin M, Joshi M, Meijer RP, et al. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Two-Step Meta-Analysis. Oncologist. 2016;21(6):708-715.
  4. Sternberg CN, de Mulder PH, Schornagel JH, et al. Randomized phase III trial of high-dose-intensity methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) chemotherapy and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus classic MVAC in advanced urothelial tract tumors: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Protocol no. 30924. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(10):2638-2646.
  5. Sternberg CN, de Mulder P, Schornagel JH, et al. Seven year update of an EORTC phase III trial of high-dose intensity M-VAC chemotherapy and G-CSF versus classic M-VAC in advanced urothelial tract tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42(1):50-54.
  6. Sternberg CN, Skoneczna I, Kerst JM, et al. Immediate versus deferred chemotherapy after radical cystectomy in patients with pT3-pT4 or N+ M0 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (EORTC 30994): an intergroup, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(1):76-86.
  7. Choueiri TK, Jacobus S, Bellmunt J, et al. Neoadjuvant dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin with pegfilgrastim support in muscle-invasive urothelial cancer: pathologic, radiologic, and biomarker correlates. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(18):1889-1894.
  8. Moore MJ, Winquist EW, Murray N, et al. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin, an active regimen in advanced urothelial cancer: a phase II trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(9):2876-2881.
  9. Dash A, Pettus JAt, Herr HW, et al. A role for neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus cisplatin in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: a retrospective experience. Cancer. 2008;113(9):2471-2477.
  10. Galsky MD, Hahn NM, Rosenberg J, et al. A consensus definition of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who are unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(3):211-214.
  11. Zargar H, Shah JB, van Rhijn BW, et al. Neoadjuvant Dose Dense MVAC versus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients with cT3-4aN0M0 Bladder Cancer Treated with Radical Cystectomy. J Urol. 2018;199(6):1452-1458.
  12. Zargar H, Shah JB, van de Putte EEF, et al. Dose dense MVAC prior to radical cystectomy: a real-world experience. World J Urol. 2017;35(11):1729-1736.
  13. van de Putte EE, Mertens LS, Meijer RP, et al. Neoadjuvant induction dose-dense MVAC for muscle invasive bladder cancer: efficacy and safety compared with classic MVAC and gemcitabine/cisplatin. World J Urol. 2016;34(2):157-162.
  14. Peyton CC, Tang D, Reich RR, et al. Downstaging and Survival Outcomes Associated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Regimens Among Patients Treated With Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2018.
  15. Seiler R, Ashab HAD, Erho N, et al. Impact of Molecular Subtypes in Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer on Predicting Response and Survival after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Eur Urol. 2017;72(4):544-554.
  16. McConkey DJ, Choi W. Molecular Subtypes of Bladder Cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2018;20(10):77.
  17. Karam JA, Kamat AM. Optimal timing of chemotherapy and cystectomy. F1000 Med Rep. 2010;2.
  18. Culp SH, Dickstein RJ, Grossman HB, et al. Refining patient selection for neoadjuvant chemotherapy before radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2014;191(1):40-47.
  19. Powles T, Rodriguez-Vida A, Duran I, et al. A phase II study investigating the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant atezolizumab in muscle invasive bladder cancer (ABACUS). Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2018;36(15_suppl):4506-4506.
  20. Necchi A, Briganti A, Raggi D, et al. Interim results from PURE-01: A phase 2, open-label study of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab (pembro) before radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive urothelial bladder carcinoma (MIUC). Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2018;36(6_suppl):TPS533-TPS533.
  21. Daneshmand S, Ahmadi H, Schuckman AK, et al. Enhanced recovery protocol after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol. 2014;192(1):50-55.
  22. Baack Kukreja JE, Kiernan M, Schempp B, et al. Quality Improvement in Cystectomy Care with Enhanced Recovery (QUICCER Study). BJU Int. 2016.
  23. Lee CT, Chang SS, Kamat AM, et al. Alvimopan accelerates gastrointestinal recovery after radical cystectomy: a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):265-272.
  24. Chang SS, Bochner BH, Chou R, et al. Treatment of Non-Metastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: AUA/ASCO/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. J Urol. 2017;198(3):552-559.
  25. Kassouf W, Leibovici D, Munsell MF, Dinney CP, Grossman HB, Kamat AM. Evaluation of the relevance of lymph node density in a contemporary series of patients undergoing radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2006;176(1):53-57; discussion 57.
  26. Kassouf W, Agarwal PK, Herr HW, et al. Lymph node density is superior to TNM nodal status in predicting disease-specific survival after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: analysis of pooled data from MDACC and MSKCC. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(1):121-126.
  27. Kassouf W, Agarwal PK, Grossman HB, et al. Outcome of patients with bladder cancer with pN+ disease after preoperative chemotherapy and radical cystectomy. Urology. 2009;73(1):147-152.
  28. Crozier J, Papa N, Perera M, et al. Lymph node yield in node-negative patients predicts cancer specific survival following radical cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma. Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58(6):416-422.
  29. von Landenberg N, Speed JM, Cole AP, et al. Impact of adequate pelvic lymph node dissection on overall survival after radical cystectomy: A stratified analysis by clinical stage and receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Urol Oncol. 2018;36(2):78 e13-78 e19.
  30. Al-Daghmin A, Kauffman EC, Shi Y, et al. Efficacy of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) in advanced bladder cancer: results from the International Radical Cystectomy Consortium (IRCC). BJU Int. 2014;114(1):98-103.
  31. Parekh DJ, Reis IM, Castle EP, et al. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer (RAZOR): an open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10139):2525-2536.
  32. Hautmann RE, Abol-Enein H, Lee CT, et al. Urinary diversion: how experts divert. Urology. 2015;85(1):233-238.
  33. Ziouziou I, Irani J, Wei JT, et al. Ileal conduit vs orthotopic neobladder: Which one offers the best health-related quality of life in patients undergoing radical cystectomy? A systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Prog Urol. 2018;28(5):241-250.
  34. Tyson MD, 2nd, Barocas DA. Quality of Life After Radical Cystectomy. Urol Clin North Am. 2018;45(2):249-256.
  35. Siracusano S, D'Elia C, Cerruto MA, et al. Quality of Life in Patients with Bladder Cancer Undergoing Ileal Conduit: A Comparison of Women Versus Men. In Vivo. 2018;32(1):139-143.
  36. Gofrit ON. Re: Long-Term Outcomes in Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer After Selective Bladder-Preserving Combined-Modality Therapy: A Pooled Analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Protocols 8802, 8903, 9506, 9706, 9906, and 0233. Eur Urol. 2015;68(1):165-166.
  37. Mak RH, Hunt D, Shipley WU, et al. Long-term outcomes in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer after selective bladder-preserving combined-modality therapy: a pooled analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocols 8802, 8903, 9506, 9706, 9906, and 0233. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(34):3801-3809.
  38. Smelser WW, Austenfeld MA, Holzbeierlein JM, Lee EK. Where are we with bladder preservation for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in 2017? Indian J Urol. 2017;33(2):111-117.
  39. Gakis G, Efstathiou J, Lerner SP, et al. ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012: Radical cystectomy and bladder preservation for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol. 2013;63(1):45-57.
  40. Hafeez S, McDonald F, Lalondrelle S, et al. Clinical Outcomes of Image Guided Adaptive Hypofractionated Weekly Radiation Therapy for Bladder Cancer in Patients Unsuitable for Radical Treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98(1):115-122.
  41. Zhong J, Switchenko J, Jegadeesh NK, et al. Comparison of Outcomes in Patients With Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Treated With Radical Cystectomy Versus Bladder Preservation. Am J Clin Oncol. 2018.
  42. Williams SB, Shan Y, Jazzar U, et al. Comparing Survival Outcomes and Costs Associated With Radical Cystectomy and Trimodal Therapy for Older Adults With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(10):881-889.
  43. Kim HS, Jeong CW, Kwak C, Kim HH, Ku JH. Adjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Oncotarget. 2017;8(46):81204-81214.
  44. Galsky MD, Stensland KD, Moshier E, et al. Effectiveness of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Bladder Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(8):825-832.
  45. Zaghloul MS, Christodouleas JP, Smith A, et al. Adjuvant Sandwich Chemotherapy Plus Radiotherapy vs Adjuvant Chemotherapy Alone for Locally Advanced Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(1):e174591.
  46. Sui W, Lim EA, Joel Decastro G, McKiernan JM, Anderson CB. Use of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Advanced Bladder Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Bladder Cancer. 2017;3(3):181-189.
  47. Pouessel D, Bastuji-Garin S, Houede N, et al. Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Radical Cystectomy for Urothelial Bladder Cancer: Outcome and Prognostic Factors for Survival in a French Multicenter, Contemporary Cohort. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017;15(1):e45-e52.
  48. Baumann BC, Bosch WR, Bahl A, et al. Development and Validation of Consensus Contouring Guidelines for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(1):78-86.
  49. Reddy AV, Christodouleas JP, Wu T, Smith ND, Steinberg GD, Liauw SL. External Validation and Optimization of International Consensus Clinical Target Volumes for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy in Bladder Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;97(4):740-746.
  50. Baumann BC, Sargos P, Eapen LJ, et al. The Rationale for Post-Operative Radiation in Localized Bladder Cancer. Bladder Cancer. 2017;3(1):19-30.
  51. Baumann BC, He J, Hwang WT, et al. Validating a Local Failure Risk Stratification for Use in Prospective Studies of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Bladder Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;95(2):703-706.
  52. Bamias A, Tiliakos I, Karali MD, Dimopoulos MA. Systemic chemotherapy in inoperable or metastatic bladder cancer. Ann Oncol. 2006;17(4):553-561.
  53. Galsky MD, Pal SK, Lin SW, et al. Real-World Effectiveness of Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients With Metastatic Bladder Cancer in the United States. Bladder Cancer. 2018;4(2):227-238.
  54. Laurent M, Brureau L, Demery ME, et al. Early chemotherapy discontinuation and mortality in older patients with metastatic bladder cancer: The AGEVIM multicenter cohort study. Urol Oncol. 2017;35(1):34 e39-34 e16.
  55. Li R, Metcalfe M, Kukreja J, Navai N. Role of Radical Cystectomy in Non-Organ Confined Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review. Bladder Cancer. 2018;4(1):31-40.
  56. Abe T, Matsumoto R, Shinohara N. Role of surgical consolidation in metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Curr Opin Urol. 2016;26(6):573-580.
  57. Hasebe K, Naiki T, Oda R, et al. Long-term survival of a patient with pulmonary metastatic urothelial carcinoma following metastasectomy. Urol Case Rep. 2018;21:52-55.
  58. Faltas BM, Gennarelli RL, Elkin E, Nguyen DP, Hu J, Tagawa ST. Metastasectomy in older adults with urothelial carcinoma: Population-based analysis of use and outcomes. Urol Oncol. 2018;36(1):9 e11-19 e17.
  59. Patel V, Collazo Lorduy A, Stern A, et al. Survival after Metastasectomy for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Bladder Cancer. 2017;3(2):121-132.
  60. Del Bene G, Sternberg CN. Systemic chemotherapy in muscle invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: present and future. Urologia. 2017;84(3):130-141.
  61. Alfred Witjes J, Lebret T, Comperat EM, et al. Updated 2016 EAU Guidelines on Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(3):462-475.
  62. Sharma P, Retz M, Siefker-Radtke A, et al. Nivolumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum therapy (CheckMate 275): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(3):312-322.
  63. Powles T, O'Donnell PH, Massard C, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Durvalumab in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Updated Results From a Phase 1/2 Open-label Study. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(9):e172411.
  64. Thoma C. Bladder cancer: Activity and safety of avelumab in JAVELIN. Nat Rev Urol. 2018;15(3):137.
  65. Bellmunt J, de Wit R, Vaughn DJ, et al. Pembrolizumab as Second-Line Therapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(11):1015-1026.
  66. Balar AV, Castellano D, O'Donnell PH, et al. First-line pembrolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial cancer (KEYNOTE-052): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(11):1483-1492.
  67. Rosenberg JE, Hoffman-Censits J, Powles T, et al. Atezolizumab in patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progressed following treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy: a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10031):1909-1920.
  68. Powles T, Duran I, van der Heijden MS, et al. Atezolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor211): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10122):748-757.

The Current Landscape of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy/Immunotherapy Combinations in Patients with Clinically Localized, Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer

Introduction

Bladder cancer is currently the 10th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide. It is estimated that approximately 110,500 men and 70,000 women are annually diagnosed with bladder cancer worldwide.1 While the majority of patients are initially diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease (i.e. carcinoma in situ, Ta, and T1), approximately 25 to 33% of patients are diagnosed with muscle invasive bladder cancer and a meaningful proportion of patients initially diagnosed with non-muscle invasive disease will subsequently progress to MIBC.1

Written by: Rashid K. Sayyid, MD, MSc, and Zachary Klaassen, MD, MSc
References:

References

  1. Burger M, Catto JWF, Dalbagni G, et al. Epidemiology and Risk Factors of Urothelial Bladder Cancer. Eur Urol 2013;63(2):234-41.
  2. Flaig TW, Speiss PE, Abern M, et al. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022;20(8):866-878.
  3. EAU Guidelines: Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer.  Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  4. ASCO Cancer.Net: Bladder Cancer – Statistics. Accessed: December 27, 2022.
  5. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in invasive bladder cancer: update of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data advanced bladder cancer (ABC) meta-analysis collaboration. Eur Urol 2005;48(2):202-5.
  6. Pfister C, Gravis G, Flechon A, et al. Dose-Dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin or Gemcitabine and Cisplatin as Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients With Nonmetastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of the GETUG-AFU V05 VESPER Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(18):2013-22.
  7. Rhea LP, Mendez-Marti S, Kim D, Aragon-Chin JB. Role of immunotherapy in bladder cancer. Cancer Treat Res Commun 2021;26:100296.
  8. Rose TL, Harrison MR, Deal AM, et al. Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Split-Dose Cisplatin Plus Pembrolizumab as Neoadjuvant Therapy Before Radical Cystectomy in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2021;39(28):3140-8.
  9. Funt SA, Lattanzi M, Whiting K, et al. Neoadjuvant Atezolizumab With Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Multicenter, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(12):1312-22.