Systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) of first-line therapies (1L) for locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC).

Authors

null

Lisa Bloudek

Curta Inc., Seattle, WA

Lisa Bloudek , Zsolt Hepp , Caroline McKay , Christina Louise Derleth , Jennifer Susan LIll , Enrique Lenero , Phoebe Wright , Scott David Ramsey , Sean D. Sullivan , Beth Devine

Organizations

Curta Inc., Seattle, WA, Seagen Inc., Bothell, WA, Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc., Northbrook, IL, CHOICE Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Research Funding

Other

Background: Standard of care (SOC) for 1L la/mUC is gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) or carboplatin (GCa), but the landscape is evolving with new therapies emerging. To compare outcomes of other approved/investigational 1L regimens with SOC in the context of recently published data on newer therapies, we updated a previously reported SLR/NMA of phase 2/3 randomized control trials. Methods: The SLR was conducted in line with PRISMA and NICE guidelines (01/2000-05/2020; updated 06/2020-06/2021). Three networks were formed: cisplatin (cis)-eligible/mixed eligibility; cis-ineligible (strict; studies including cis-ineligible patients only); and cis-ineligible (wide; expanded to also include study arms with an investigator’s choice of carboplatin in KEYNOTE-361, IMvigor130, and DANUBE). Comparative efficacy and safety were assessed under a Bayesian framework. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with 1L la/mUC regimens vs SOC (GC/GCa) are reported. Results: Among 2,312 citations identified, 55 unique trials were selected for data extraction. Of these, the NMA included 11 studies in the cis-eligible/mixed, 6 in the cis-ineligible (strict), and 8 in the cis-ineligible (wide) network. The NMA excluded therapies that were not effective or adopted in clinical practice; 6 maintenance trials were excluded due to differences in design precluding comparisons. Median OS in the SOC arms was 13.2 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.4-14.0) for cis-eligible/mixed, 9.7 mo (95% CI 6.7-12.8) for cis-ineligible (strict), and 12.0 mo (95% CI 10.4-13.5) for cis-ineligible (wide); median PFS was 6.6 mo (95% CI 6.3-6.9) for cis-eligible/mixed and 5.6 mo (95% CI 5.0-6.3) for both cis-ineligible strict and wide. OS and PFS were similar to SOC across therapies in each network: hazard ratios (HR) ranged 0.7-1.4 for OS for cis-eligible/mixed, 0.9-1.4 for cis-ineligible (strict), and 0.8-1.4 for cis-ineligible (wide) (Table); HR for PFS ranged 0.5-1.6 for cis-eligible/mixed and 0.8-1.1 for both cis-ineligible strict and wide networks; all credible intervals (CrI) crossed or were close to 1. Conclusions: In this updated SLR/NMA, survival outcomes were similar and remained poor among established and emerging 1L la/mUC therapies, despite inclusion of recent trial data. This further highlights the unmet need in this population.

HR for OS vs SOC (cis-ineligible).

HR (95% CrI)
Cis-ineligible (strict)
Cis-ineligible (wide*)
Durvalumab + Tremelimumab
0.9 (0.7, 1.1)
NA
Durvalumab
0.9 (0.7, 1.2)
NA
Vinflunine + Gemcitabine
1.1 (0.6, 1.9)
1.1 (0.6, 1.9)
Oxaliplatin + Gemcitabine
1.4 (0.9, 2.3)
1.4 (0.9, 2.3)
Pembrolizumab
NA
0.8 (0.7, 1.1)
Pembrolizumab + GCa
NA
0.8 (0.7, 1.1)
Atezolizumab
NA
1.0 (0.8, 1.2)
Atezolizumab + GCa
NA
0.9 (0.7, 1.1)

*Includes KEYNOTE-361, IMvigor130, DANUBE. Results represent all-comers PD-1/L1 expressor status.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2022 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B: Urothelial Carcinoma

Track

Urothelial Carcinoma

Sub Track

Other

Citation

J Clin Oncol 40, 2022 (suppl 6; abstr 570)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2022.40.6_suppl.570

Abstract #

570

Poster Bd #

K11

Abstract Disclosures