Characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the real world.

Authors

null

Patrick Squires

Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ

Patrick Squires , Jeanna Wallenta Law , Vladimir Turzhitsky , Haojie Li , Monika A. Izano , Ritesh S. Kataria , Mehmet Burcu , Arielle Marks-Anglin , Jae Min , Yu-Han Kao , Connor Sweetnam , Kaitlyn Kane , Anna B. Berry , Sheetal Walters , Sima P. Porten

Organizations

Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, Syapse, San Francisco, CA, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA

Research Funding

This work was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.

Background: Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is characterized by an overall poor prognosis with a 5-year overall survival (OS) of ~50%. Radical cystectomy (RC) with cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has demonstrated improved survival in eligible patients and is the current guideline-recommended treatment; however, NAC is underutilized in the real world. The characterization of NAC-treated patients as well as their clinical outcomes in routine practice warrants continued investigation. The objective of this study is to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics, neoadjuvant treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes of patients with MIBC undergoing RC with NAC. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among adult patients (≥18 years) with MIBC (T2–T4aN0M0, T1–T4aN1M0) diagnosed between 1/1/2016 and 12/31/2021, who received NAC followed by RC, selected from the Syapse Learning Health Network. Patients with another primary tumor ≤3 years prior to MIBC diagnosis, prior partial cystectomy, or prior neoadjuvant radiation were excluded. Patients were followed from NAC initiation (index date) until end of the study period (12/31/2022) or death, whichever occurred first. The analyses included descriptive statistics of demographic and clinical characteristics, NAC treatment pattern, and pathologic complete response (pCR), defined as pT0N0 per pathology reports. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to describe OS. Results: A total of 140 patients with MIBC met the eligibility criteria of this study (median age 67; 73% male; 90% white; 82% current or former smokers), with a median follow-up of 34 months. Almost all (98%) patients had de novo MIBC and 99% had urothelial histology. At diagnosis, most patients (83%) were staged with T2N0M0 disease; the remaining patients had T1–T4aN1M0 (9.3%) or T3/4N0M0 (7.9%) disease. Median time from MIBC diagnosis to RC was 5 months and median (IQR) NAC treatment duration was 68 days (44-74). The most commonly used NAC regimen was cisplatin + gemcitabine (62.9%), followed by cisplatin + doxorubicin + methotrexate + vinblastine (30.0%). Among patients with pCR data (n=136), 29% achieved pCR. During follow-up, 21% of patients died, and median OS was not reached. Survival rates (95% CI) at 2 and 3 years were 83.8% (77.8–90.2%) and 79.7% (73–87.1%), respectively. Conclusions: Cisplatin-based NAC was widely utilized, with cisplatin + gemcitabine being the most commonly administered regimen. Approximately a third of patients in this neoadjuvant treated RC cohort achieved pCR. Future studies should investigate intermediate or surrogate outcomes in MIBC such as disease-free, event-free, or metastatic-free survival when mature follow-up data is unavailable. Longer follow-up is required to monitor long-term outcomes such as median overall survival.

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

2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B: Urothelial Carcinoma

Track

Urothelial Carcinoma

Sub Track

Quality of Care/Quality Improvement and Real-World Evidence

Citation

J Clin Oncol 42, 2024 (suppl 4; abstr 552)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2024.42.4_suppl.552

Abstract #

552

Poster Bd #

E1

Abstract Disclosures