Download New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer

New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Review Article [1] | June 15, 2016 | Oncology Journal [2], Bladder Cancer [3], Genitourinary Cancers
[4]
By Philippa J. Cheetham, MD [5] and Daniel P. Petrylak, MD [6]
This article will review select novel targets and approaches relevant to urothelial cancer.
Introduction
At diagnosis, 25% to 30% of bladder cancer patients will present with muscle-invasive bladder
cancer (MIBC), with approximately 25% of those patients already harboring occult lymph node
metastases. Approximately 5% will present with distant metastatic urothelial carcinoma (MUC).[1]
Unfortunately, the 5-year survival rate in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease is only
around 15%.[2] Cisplatin-based chemotherapy has a proven survival benefit, both in patients who
are treated neoadjuvantly for locally advanced disease and in those with metastases. Standard
first-line regimens for locally advanced/metastatic disease include combination chemotherapy with
methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC), and doublet therapy with gemcitabine
plus cisplatin (GC). Despite an objective overall response rate (ORR) of greater than 50% to
cisplatin-based therapy, the duration of response is approximately 7 months and the median survival
time is 15 months.[3] Toxicity can be significant in this population of patients. Patients who do not
respond to initial cisplatin-based therapy, or who develop a relapse after initial chemotherapy,
respond poorly to subsequent treatments. The median survival time in these refractory patients is
approximately 9 months.[4]
A clearer understanding of molecular targets and immunologic characteristics of urothelial tumor
cells has resulted in new therapeutic leads that may help optimize first- and second-line therapy,
evaluate new combination approaches, and elucidate the role of maintenance therapy after initial
response. This article will review select novel targets and approaches relevant to urothelial cancer.
Therapeutic Leads: The Cancer Genome Atlas
The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Research Network is a multi-institutional, comprehensive,
widespread effort developed by the National Cancer Institute to collect specimens of a broad range
of cancer types, in the hope of analyzing the genetics and molecular biology of tumor subtypes, in
order to identify common mutations and targets for treatment. Upon initiation of the project in 2006,
researchers sought to identify genomic changes in more than 20 different types of human cancer,
including bladder cancer. A decade later, many targeted drugs are being used to treat other types of
cancer. Similarly, the focus of research in advanced urothelial cancer is now shifting away from
chemotherapy and toward targeted therapies.
TCGA recently published a comprehensive integrated study of 131 chemotherapy-naive high-grade
MIBCs.[5] Mutations in 32 genes have now been identified and found to be statistically significant in
the development and disease course of bladder cancer. These genomic alterations—including
changes impacting the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT)/mammalian target of
rapamycin (mTOR) and receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)/RAS pathways, ERBB2 (human epidermal
growth factor receptor 2 [HER2]), ERBB3, and fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3)—have
potential therapeutic implications.[6] Using data from the International Genomics Consortium to
identify specific topics in need of future study may prove beneficial in constructing new trials
involving agents that target these genes. Summarized in this article are studies that have evaluated
therapeutic agents aimed at targets identified by TCGA. (Table 1 lists select clinical trials of targeted
therapy agents in advanced bladder cancer, and Table 2 highlights some studies of checkpoint
inhibitors in this disease setting.)
Anti–PI3K/AKT/mTOR Therapy
The serine/threonine protein kinase mTOR is part of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, which plays a
Page 1 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
critical role in cell growth, angiogenesis, protein synthesis, and cell survival. Mutations, copy number
alterations, and RNA expression changes affecting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway are commonly found
in various malignancies, including bladder cancer.[7] Data from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer
Center showed mutations or copy number gains/losses of genes in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway,
including PIK3CA, PIK3R1, TSC1, PTEN, and the AKT3 isoforms in 26 of 95 patients (27%) with
high-grade MIBC. These genetic alterations were associated with a trend toward longer time to
recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; P = .08).[8] In a single-arm, nonrandomized, phase II trial,
treatment with the oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus yielded two partial responses (PRs) and a median
survival time of 8.3 months in patients with MUC refractory to up to four cytotoxic chemotherapy
regimens.[9] In another single-institution phase II study, everolimus showed antitumor activity in
only a small number of patients with advanced bladder cancer.[10] In these studies, patients were
unselected. However, enrichment of the patient population with genetic alterations, such as a TSC1
mutation[11] or mTOR-activating mutations (E2419K and E2014K),[12] may increase the observed
levels of sensitivity to mTOR inhibitors. In a phase I trial of pazopanib combined with everolimus, a
complete response (CR) of 14 months was observed for a patient who had mutations of both E2419K
and E2014K.[12] Several trials of the mTOR inhibitors sirolimus, temsirolimus, and everolimus are
currently accruing patients with advanced bladder cancer in order to assess these agents either in
combination with a standard chemotherapy regimen or as monotherapy.
Agents Targeting Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)
The 170-kDa transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinase EGFR is a member of the ErbB family of type-1
receptor tyrosine kinases. In addition to EGFR, this receptor family includes the human epidermal
growth factor receptors HER2 (ERBB2), HER3 (ERBB3), and HER4 (ERBB4). EGFR is expressed in a
variety of human epithelial tumors, including lung and bladder cancer. EGFR signaling has been
shown to regulate the cell proliferation, apoptosis, angiogenesis, invasion, and tumor metastasis
observed in preclinical models of transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the bladder.[13] This signaling
pathway is expressed in about two-thirds of specimens of nonmetastatic MIBC; correlates with
primary tumor stage; and is associated in some studies with tumor recurrence, progression, and
patient survival.[14] Strong EGFR immunostaining patterns were observed in the majority of bladder
cancer metastases (13 of 20) in one study.[15] Higher levels of EGFR appear to correlate with the
basal-like histologic subgroup of bladder cancer. Therefore, the EGFR pathway represents a potential
therapeutic target in urothelial carcinoma, either through antibodies that bind to the receptor or by
the use of small molecules that target the tyrosine kinase.
Gefitinib
The rationale for the investigation of gefitinib in bladder cancer was based on the investigation of
EGFR targeting by cetuximab (C225) in the early 2000s; cetuximab inhibited angiogenesis in mouse
models of TCC, and this activity was enhanced by paclitaxel.[16] Gefitinib, an orally active selective
EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has demonstrated antitumor activity synergistic with that of
platinum and other chemotherapeutic agents in a variety of cell lines and human tumor xenograft
models. In multiple studies, antitumor activity has been seen at all levels of EGFR expression, but
has been greatest against tumors with the highest degree of EGFR expression. In EGFR-expressing
human bladder cancer cell lines, gefitinib has inhibited extracellular signal-regulated kinase and AKT
phosphorylation, as well as EGFR phosphorylation.
The Southwest Oncology Group evaluated gefitinib administered as a single agent in patients with
MUC in whom prior platinum-based chemotherapy had failed.[17] Among the 31 patients treated, 1
patient demonstrated a PR in a lung metastasis and 2 patients had stable disease. At first evaluation,
81% of patients demonstrated progressive disease. The median survival time was 3 months.
A phase II trial (Cancer and Leukemia Group B 90102) sought to determine the efficacy of GC and
gefitinib in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.[18] Patients with previously untreated
measurable disease were treated with cisplatin at a dosage of 70 mg/m2 on day 1 and gemcitabine
at 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, given every 3 weeks concurrent with gefitinib at 500 mg/day orally
for 6 cycles. Maintenance gefitinib at 500 mg/day was continued for patients with responding or
stable disease. A total of 54 of 58 patients were assessable. There were 12 patients (22%) with
node-only disease, and 25 (46%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of
0. There were 23 objective responses, for an ORR of 42.6% (95% CI, 29.2%–56.8%). The median
survival time was 15.1 months (95% CI, 11.1–21.7 months) and the median time to progression was
7.4 months (95% CI, 5.6–9.2 months). However, the addition of gefitinib did not appear to improve
Page 2 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
the response rate or survival outcomes in comparison with historical controls of patients treated just
with cisplatin plus gemcitabine.
Erlotinib
Treatment with the EGFR TKI erlotinib has been studied in a variety of tumor types. In a phase II
open-label trial of this agent given prior to radical cystectomy for MIBC, 20 patients were treated
with 4 weeks of adjuvant erlotinib; 60% were downstaged to pT1 or less, suggesting single-agent
activity with EGFR inhibitors in this disease setting.[19] A similar trial at the University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center is assessing the rate of complete pathologic response after 3 to 5 weeks of
erlotinib therapy in patients with MIBC.[20]
Despite high levels of expression of EGFR in patients with MUC, the aforementioned results with the
TKIs have been disappointing, and may be related to the paucity of EGFR mutations in bladder
cancer specimens. In patients treated with EGFR TKIs for advanced lung cancer, point mutations at
exons 19 and 21 of the EGFR gene’s ATP-dependent tyrosine kinase domain are associated with
response. Chaux et al[21] found that mutations of these exons were not detected in micro-dissected
paraffin sections obtained from 19 urothelial tumors, despite immunohistochemical expression in
74% of the examined cases. Thus, alterations associated with TKI response have not been detected
in urothelial carcinoma.
Cetuximab
The anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab is approved for treatment of non–small-cell lung
cancer (NSCLC), head and neck cancer, and colorectal cancers. Cetuximab monotherapy has
preclinical activity in bladder tumor models. Although it has modest antitumor effects when used as
a single agent in this setting, enhanced tumor effects were revealed when cetuximab was combined
with the second-line agent paclitaxel.[16]
A randomized, noncomparative, phase II study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab with or
without paclitaxel in the second-line setting in bladder cancer.[22] A total of 39 patients were
randomly assigned to 4-week cycles of cetuximab at 250 mg/m2 with or without paclitaxel at 80
mg/m2 per week. The arm assessing single-agent cetuximab closed after 9 of the first 11 patients
had progressed by 8 weeks. However, there appeared to be some synergy between anti-EGFR
monoclonal antibodies and taxanes. Cetuximab may well augment paclitaxel antitumor activity; in
the combination arm (which accrued 28 patients) there was a 25% response rate, with 12 patients
having progression-free survival (PFS) beyond 16 weeks. However, in small studies such as this one,
the data must be interpreted with caution, since the median PFS and overall survival (OS) times
observed (16.4 and 42 weeks, respectively) were very modest and within the range reported for
other agents in this disease setting. Other trials currently evaluating cetuximab include TUXEDO
(Cancer Research UK trial number CRUK/09/021), a phase II trial in the United Kingdom of cetuximab
administered concurrently with chemoradiation therapy (using either mitomycin-C and 5-fluorouracil
or cisplatin) in MIBC.
Panitumumab
A phase I, multicenter, open-label study sequentially enrolled 86 patients with advanced refractory
solid tumors, to receive the EGFR antibody panitumumab (given at 6 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 9
mg/kg every 3 weeks).[23] Objective responses were reported in four patients (5%) with colon,
rectal, esophageal, and bladder cancers. The results suggested that panitumumab administered at 9
mg/kg every 3 weeks appeared to be safe, and studies using this dosing schedule are ongoing.
Further evaluation of panitumumab in urothelial carcinoma was planned in a randomized,
multicenter, phase II study by the German Association of Urological Oncology ([AUO] trial AB 34/09)
comparing GC in combination with panitumumab vs GC as first-line therapy for patients with locally
advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Unfortunately, this study was terminated due to
insufficient recruitment.
Agents Targeting HER2
The second member of the EGFR family, HER2, plays an important role in the pathogenesis of
urothelial carcinoma. Several studies have reported HER2 protein overexpression rates of 5% to 80%
in bladder cancer. Lae et al analyzed 1,005 MIBC tissue samples for overexpression of HER2 and
HER2 gene amplification.[24] HER2 protein overexpression was found in 11.4% of tissue
Page 3 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
samples. HER2 gene amplification was found in 5.1% of MIBC. A study evaluating 80 cystectomy and
lymph node dissection specimens found 28% of cystectomy cases (22 of 80) were HER2-positive and
53% (17 of 32) had positive lymph nodes.
Trastuzumab
In a phase II trial, the anti-HER2 humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab was used in
combination with paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and carboplatin to treat patients with advanced
HER2-positive bladder cancer. The regimen produced a 70% response rate, including CRs, in patients
with metastatic disease.[25] Trastuzumab administered concurrently with paclitaxel chemoradiation
treatment is being evaluated in patients with MIBC who have undergone transurethral resection of
bladder tumor and are not candidates for radical cystectomy.
A study investigating trastuzumab combined with standard GC doublet chemotherapy for bladder
cancer in the first-line setting closed enrollment early (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02006667).
Another study investigating single-agent trastuzumab in the second-line setting (ClinicalTrials.gov
identifier: NCT02013765) closed early because of recruitment difficulties.
Lapatinib
The dual EGFR and HER2 TKI lapatinib is also being studied in combination with chemotherapy for
MUC. Although single-agent treatment with lapatinib in unselected patients with platinum-refractory
MUC yielded only a 1.7% ORR, it led to markedly worse OS in those with low copy numbers of EGFR
and HER2, compared with patients who had high overexpression of EGFR and/or HER2.[26] This
subgroup analysis reinforces the concept of selecting appropriate patients for targeted therapies.
Importantly, 18% of patients in the postoperative treatment group (no chemoradiation prior to
surgery) who were determined preoperatively to have T3 or T4 disease or lymph-node metastasis
were found to actually have T1 or T2 or node-negative tumors on pathologic examination of the
resected specimen. This important observation clearly highlights the limitations of preoperative
staging at the time the study was performed, and perhaps the potential for overtreatment of some
patients. The finding underscores the need for accurate staging so as to avoid unnecessary
treatment of patients with early-stage tumors.
A recently completed phase II/III trial (n = 223) comparing maintenance lapatinib vs placebo after
first-line chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer found no
difference in OS or PFS, even in HER2-positive patients.[27] A phase I trial that combined lapatinib
with GC has recently been completed (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00623064).
Agents Targeting the FGFR
TO PUT THAT INTO CONTEXT
Matthew D. Galsky, MD
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
New Hope for Patients With Advanced Urothelial Cancer
There has been a paucity of new drugs developed for the treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer,
with no drugs approved for this indication by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in more
than 30 years. This lack of progress likely has myriad causes, including a poor understanding of the
pathogenesis and heterogeneity of the disease, a patient demographic characterized by older age
and smoking-related comorbidities, and inadequate interest on the part of industry. However, after
decades without substantial progress, a series of advances in both the laboratory and the clinic in
the past few years have begun to change the outlook for patients with advanced urothelial cancer.
Page 4 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
How Have Targeted Approaches Changed Diagnosis and Treatment?
Several factors underlie recent advances in the management of urothelial cancer; these include
comprehensive efforts to define the molecular pathogenesis of urothelial cancer, and the
introduction of novel therapies directed at targets that range from tumor angiogenesis, to activating
somatic mutations in growth factor receptors, to adaptive immune resistance. Antibodies directed
against the immune checkpoint inhibitors programmed death 1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand
1 (PD-L1) have demonstrated durable responses in a subset of patients with platinum-resistant
urothelial cancer. Now, with the recent FDA approval of the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab, this drug
class represents the first to gain regulatory approval in this disease setting. Small-molecule inhibitors
of mutated FGFR3 (fibroblast growth factor receptor 3) have demonstrated single-agent responses in
the clinic, finally validating mutant FGFR3 as a relevant therapeutic target in this disease. With the
increasing availability of these tools in the clinic, it will be incumbent upon the bladder cancer
research community to begin to focus not only on developing new drugs but also on developing new
therapies. Questions regarding when to optimally employ these newer agents, in which patients, and
in which sequences and combinations will only be determined through iterative cycles of
bench-to-bedside research.
Financial Disclosure: Dr. Galsky receives research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, and
Novartis; and he serves on the advisory boards of Merck and Novartis.
Dovitinib
Mutations of the FGFR3 gene are prevalent in both non-MIBC and MIBC. The multikinase inhibitor
dovitinib targets FGFR3 kinase. This agent was evaluated in patients with platinum-refractory
metastatic disease as part of a phase II trial enrolling 44 patients and using a two-stage design.[28]
Median PFS was 3 months. Because of a lack of treatment response in the first stage and because
most patients did not receive more than 6 months of therapy, patients were not recruited for the
second stage of the trial. It is not clear why dovitinib lacked activity. Possible reasons include lack of
target inhibition due to low drug potency (much more potent FGFR3 inhibitors, including BGJ398 and
JNJ-42756493, are now available and have shown activity in humans) or inadequate selection of
patients (since activating translocations and FGFR3 expression were not quantified and may better
identify responders). It is also possible that the profile of kinases inhibited by dovitinib is not optimal
for effectiveness.
Antiangiogenesis Agents
Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)
The VEGF family binds with high affinity to three tyrosine kinase receptors (VEGFR-1, VEGFR-2, and
VEGFR-3), mediating normal and pathogenic angiogenesis in various cancers, mostly through
interaction with VEGFR-2. VEGF is important in the pathophysiology of urothelial cancer. It is often
overexpressed in bladder cancer. A high level of VEGF in both serum and urine is correlated with
tumor progression, a higher recurrence rate,[29, 30] and poor survival. VEGFR-2 is expressed in 50%
of urothelial carcinomas, and expression is significantly higher in MIBC than in non-MIBC.[30]
Inoue et al evaluated the prognostic value of tumor VEGF expression in patients with MIBC treated
with neoadjuvant MVAC chemotherapy and radical cystectomy.[31] They examined VEGF expression
before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, along with basic fibroblast growth factor and
interleukin-8 expression and microvessel density by immunohistochemistry in biopsy specimens
from 55 patients with MIBC. VEGF expression and microvessel density in pretreated biopsy samples
showed a correlation with disease recurrence (P = .032 and P = .015, respectively). VEGF appears to
be a rational therapeutic target. Various VEGF-targeting agents are currently being evaluated in
MIBC. Although targeting angiogenesis by way of VEGF is a promising strategy in urothelial
carcinoma, the results with TKIs that target VEGFRs have not been encouraging.
Bevacizumab
Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting VEGF-A. Bevacizumab combinations have been
evaluated as first-line therapy in MUC. The Hoosier Oncology Group treated 43 chemotherapy-naive
patients with MUC and reported a 72% ORR, with 19% of patients attaining a CR. The median OS was
19.1 months.[32] Of note, grade 3 or higher vascular events, such as deep venous thrombosis or
pulmonary embolism, were observed in 21% of patients. This was postulated to be due to the initial
Page 5 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
1,250-mg/m2 dose of gemcitabine. In another phase II study of chemotherapy-naive
cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic disease, whose expected survival time was
approximately 9 months, bevacizumab combined with GC and carboplatin led to a 63% response
rate and an OS of 13.9 months.[33] Both of these studies showed better results than might be
expected compared with historical controls. Given these encouraging results, a phase III trial of GC
with and without bevacizumab as first-line treatment was launched as an intergroup study led by the
Alliance cooperative group (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00942331). In the metastatic setting, a
phase II trial of bevacizumab with GC as neoadjuvant therapy followed by adjuvant paclitaxel has
completed accrual (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00268450). The results of these studies are
pending.
Bevacizumab has also been investigated in the neoadjuvant setting. In two phase II trials, it was
combined with either GC or dose-dense MVAC, resulting in pathologic response rates of 31%[34] and
53%,[35] respectively, with downstaging to less than stage T2. The combination of bevacizumab plus
GC was associated with postoperative complications in some patients (5 of 12 [42%]), including
enterovesical fistula, delayed wound healing, prolonged ileus, and pelvic abscess.[35]
Aflibercept
Aflibercept (also known as VEGF-Trap) is a recombinant fusion protein that binds and neutralizes
multiple VEGF isoforms. A small phase II study evaluated this agent in 22 patients with measurable,
metastatic, or locally advanced urothelial cancer previously treated with 1 platinum-containing
regimen. One PR was reported. Median PFS was 2.79 months (95% CI, 1.74–3.88 months).
Aflibercept was well tolerated, with toxicities similar to those seen with other VEGF pathway
inhibitors. However, it was demonstrated to have limited single-agent activity in patients with
platinum-pretreated urothelial carcinoma.[36]
Ramucirumab
The fully humanized immunoglobulin (Ig)G1 monoclonal antibody ramucirumab blocks the binding of
VEGF to VEGFR-2. It is approved as a single agent or in combination with paclitaxel or docetaxel for
gastric cancer. In vitro, ramucirumab chemosensitizes bladder cancer cell lines to docetaxel. A
randomized phase II trial compared docetaxel at 75 mg/m2 (n = 45) intravenously (IV) vs
ramucirumab at a dose of 10 mg/kg IV in combination with the same dose and schedule of docetaxel
(n = 46).[37] These urothelial cancer patients were required to demonstrate progression within 12
months of administration of treatment with platinum-based regimens for metastatic disease, or
neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy. The addition of ramucirumab to docetaxel met the prespecified
efficacy endpoint for prolonging PFS in second-line treatment for patients with locally advanced
disease or MUC. PFS was significantly longer in the combination arm compared with docetaxel alone
(median PFS, 5.4 months [95% CI, 3.1–6.9 months] vs 2.8 months [95% CI, 1.9–3.6 months];
stratified HR, 0.389 [95% CI, 0.235–0.643]; P = .0002). OS, a secondary endpoint, was not
significantly different between the two arms. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were
neutropenia, fatigue, febrile neutropenia, and anemia. Patients in a third study arm, treated with the
VEGFR-1–directed antibody icrucumab plus docetaxel, demonstrated a worse overall median PFS
(1.6 months).[37] To further confirm these observations, RANGE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:
NCT02426125), a phase III study, is comparing docetaxel vs ramucirumab plus docetaxel.
Sunitinib
Sunitinib, an oral inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinase receptors, including VEGFR, has shown
synergistic antitumor effects with both cisplatin and gemcitabine in preclinical models of urothelial
cancer.[38] Sunitinib monotherapy produced mixed effects in patients with advanced urothelial
cancers, when administered either as a first-line therapy for patients who were not candidates for
cisplatin-based chemotherapy (because of renal impairment) or as second-line therapy after
chemotherapy.[39]
In trials in which sunitinib was combined with GC for either first-line metastatic or neoadjuvant
treatment of patients with urothelial cancer, high rates of toxicity and intolerability were a major
issue. Sunitinib, given as maintenance therapy in a randomized phase II trial to patients who had
achieved stable disease or a PR or CR after 4 to 6 cycles of chemotherapy, did not improve 6-month
PFS compared with placebo.[40] Because of these disappointing results, there are no ongoing trials
of sunitinib for MUC.
Page 6 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
MET/Hepatocyte Growth Factor 1 (HGF1) Inhibition
Cabozantinib
The TKI cabozantinib primarily targets VEGFR-2 and c-MET (also known as MET or HGF1), which
might be potential targets in urothelial carcinoma.[41] Cabozantinib is being studied in an ongoing
phase II trial as second-line treatment of MUC.[42] In a preliminary report of 25 patients with
refractory urothelial cancer treated with 60 mg of oral cabozantinib daily, PRs were demonstrated in
14% of patients, and another 38% had stable disease. Grade 3 toxicities included fatigue and
mucositis. Of note, myeloid-derived stem cells and regulatory T cells (Tregs) were evaluated in
patients whose urothelial cancer was treated with cabozantinib; patients with low Tregs at baseline
had an improved PR rate (P = .014), PFS (P = .059), and OS (P = .071). Tregs decreased with
cabozantinib treatment (P = .015). Overall, programmed death 1 (PD-1) expression in Tregs
increased after cabozantinib (P = .011).[43]
Cytotoxic Agents
Cabazitaxel
Cabazitaxel is a taxane that exhibits preclinical antitumor activity in both docetaxel-sensitive and
-resistant tumors. A survival benefit has been demonstrated with cabazitaxel use in metastatic
castration-resistant prostate cancer. Modest antitumor activity has been demonstrated with other
taxanes, such as paclitaxel and docetaxel, with responses ranging between 6% and 20%. In cisplatinand gemcitabine-refractory cell lines, cabazitaxel demonstrated less cross-reactivity than standard
agents such as pemetrexed, methotrexate, oxaliplatin, and paclitaxel.[44] These preclinical data
justify further evaluation of cabazitaxel in urothelial carcinoma. The National Cancer Institute
evaluated cabazitaxel (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01437488), initially dosed at 20 mg/m2, then
escalated to 25 mg/m2 at the investigator’s discretion, and administered with growth factor support.
No responses were observed in 14 patients, with 1 patient dying from refractory hypoxia. Therefore,
further evaluation of cabazitaxel as a single agent in the treatment of urothelial carcinoma is
unwarranted. Cabazitaxel had limited clinical activity in platinum-refractory MUC and was associated
with toxicity (fatigue, diarrhea, anemia, nausea, neuropathy, increased creatinine levels,
lightheadedness, and hypophosphatemia). Unfortunately, the study did not proceed to the second
stage; it was closed early, due to lack of treatment efficacy. An ongoing phase II clinical trial
(ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01616875) is evaluating the efficacy of neoadjuvant cisplatin
combined with cabazitaxel.
Eribulin
Eribulin is a novel synthetic antimicrotubule agent that binds to the vinca domain of tubulin and
inhibits the polymerization of tubulin. It is an analog of halichondrin B, originally isolated from the
sea sponge. This agent demonstrates improved survival over physician’s-choice chemotherapy in
breast cancer patients who have received prior treatment. In an extended phase II trial by The
California/Pittsburgh Cancer Consortium, eribulin was administered at 1.8 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of
a 21-day cycle to 150 patients with advanced urothelial cancer who had received prior
platinum-based therapy. In developing the study, a response rate of 20% or higher was deemed by
the authors to be of clinical importance; an ORR of 34.7% was reported.[45] The median PFS and OS
were 4.1 and 9.5 months, respectively. There was no significant increase in neuropathy or
hematologic toxicity in patients who were tubulin-naive compared with patients who were
tubulin-exposed. Several trials are in development for the use of eribulin in patients with advanced
urothelial cancer and renal dysfunction (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00365157).
Antibodies for Immune Therapy: Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors
Immune therapy focusing on novel agents that target proteins in the immune checkpoint regulation
pathway (especially PD-1 and its ligand, programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1]) has produced a
survival benefit in a variety of solid tumors, including metastatic lung cancer and renal cancer.
Immune therapy is also emerging as a promising new treatment in bladder cancer, with significant
potential demonstrated in preclinical models and early clinical trials (see Table 2).
Ipilimumab
Page 7 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
The monoclonal antibody ipilimumab targets cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4).
CTLA-4 is a potent immune checkpoint molecule that downregulates T-cell activation after binding to
antigen-presenting cells. Ipilimumab first demonstrated clinical activity and improved clinical
outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma. To evaluate its efficacy in urothelial cancer, the
Hoosier Oncology Group treated 36 chemotherapy-naive MUC patients with ipilimumab in
combination with GC.[46] Patients were initially treated with 2 cycles of GC followed by 4 cycles of
GC/ipilimumab, followed by ipilimumab maintenance administered every 3 months. The observed
mean survival time of 14.6 months was no different from that of historical controls, but it was
achieved at the cost of additional immune-related toxicities such as diarrhea (in 8% of patients),
colitis (6%), and rash (6%). Treatment with ipilimumab was associated with an increased number of
CD4+ and CD8+ T cells.
Atezolizumab
Atezolizumab (also known as MPDL3280A) is a high-affinity human anti–PD-L1 monoclonal IgG1
antibody. It has demonstrated clinical activity in melanoma, breast cancer, NSCLC, and renal cancer.
In a phase I trial of second-line atezolizumab in TCC, tumor immune cell (IC) expression of PD-L1, but
not tumor cell expression, correlated with outcome. IC 0, 1, 2, and 3 expression was defined as 0%,
< 1%, 1% to 5%, 5% to 10%, and > 10% of immune cells expressing PD-L1. ORRs were 43% for
patients with tumor immune cells expressing high levels of PD-L1 (IC 2/3), compared with 11% in
patients whose tumor immune cells had low expression of IC (0/1).[47] The median duration of
response has not been reached, and is independent of PD-L1 status. The median PFS was 6 months
in the IC 2/3 group compared with 1 month in the 0/1 group.[48] The median survival in the IC 2/3
group has not yet been reached after a median of 14 months follow-up. The median survival in the IC
0/1 group was 8 months, similar to results with cytotoxic chemotherapy but with less toxicity. There
were no treatment-related deaths on the study; 5% of patients had grade 3 or 4 immune-mediated
toxicities, including elevated transaminase levels, increased bilirubin, and hypophysitis.
Atezolizumab was granted breakthrough therapy designation status by the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) in June 2014, and priority review for locally advanced bladder cancer or MUC in
March 2016. On May 18, 2016, it was approved by the FDA for the treatment of patients with locally
advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
Two trials have been designed to confirm the initial data: a large phase II study of
platinum-experienced patients (IMvigor 210; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02108652) and a phase
III trial comparing atezolizumab vs chemotherapy in 767 platinum-refractory patients (IMvigor 211;
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02302807). IMvigor 210 treated 315 platinum-refractory urothelial
cancer patients with atezolizumab at 1,200 mg IV every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint of IMvigor
210 was a response rate by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) of > 10%, which
was achieved in each of the prespecified immune cell groups. Twenty-seven percent of patients with
IC 2/3, 18% of those with IC 1/2/3, and 15% of all patients had response rates > 10% by RECIST. The
median PFS was 2.1 months, and PFS was similar in all immune cell groups. The median OS was 11.4
months in the IC 2/3 patients and 8.8 months in the IC 1/2/3 patients. For all patients, median
survival time was 7.9 months. An exploratory analysis found that PD-L1 immune cell prevalence was
highly enriched in the basal subtype of urothelial cancer, compared with the luminal subtype (60%
vs 23%; P < .001); the median mutation load was significantly higher in responders than in
nonresponders. The IMvigor 211 trial has completed accrual.
Pembrolizumab
Pembrolizumab is an anti–PD-1 antibody that blocks interaction with both PD-L1 and PD-L2. In
KEYNOTE-012, a phase Ib trial that selected for patients expressing PD-L1 in tumor cells, 33 patients
with urothelial cancer (approximately 75% of whom had prior platinum-based therapy) received
pembrolizumab every 2 weeks. The ORR was 27.6%, with 10.3% of patients demonstrating a PR. The
mean duration of response has not yet been reached; the median PFS and OS were 2 months and
12.7 months, respectively. Immune-related side effects included colitis, myositis, rhabdomyolysis,
rash, and uveitis (with 1 patient discontinuing treatment due to myositis and rhabdomyolysis). There
were no treatment-related deaths. A re-analysis of the PD-L1 immunoreactivity demonstrated no
objective responses when this marker was evaluated both in tumor cell samples and in
tumor-associated inflammatory cells. Immune-related gene expression using NanoString
Technologies’ nCounter Platform found that a 13-gene T-cell receptor signaling panel predicted
clinical benefit as measured by tumor response; however, no correlation with survival was found.[49]
The phase III KEYNOTE-045 trial, which has completed accrual, is comparing pembrolizumab vs
Page 8 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
treatment with paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine in patients with disease progression after
platinum-based therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02256436). The phase II KEYNOTE-052 trial,
currently recruiting patients, will investigate the efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients with
advanced urothelial cancer or MUC who have not received any previous systemic therapy (unless it
has been > 12 months since they completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant platinum-based
chemotherapy) and who are ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:
NCT02335424).
Conclusions
Advances have been made in targeted therapeutic and immunotherapeutic approaches to the
treatment of MUC. Randomized clinical trials will define the role of antiangiogenesis therapy in
combination with chemotherapy in both the first- and second-line settings. Identification of the
dramatic activity of immunotherapy in urothelial cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint
blockade is a significant advance in this disease; these response rates may be improved via
refinement of the markers used to predict response, and by novel combinations of immune
checkpoint inhibitors. The optimal sequences of immune therapy and targeted agents are yet to be
defined.
Financial Disclosure: Dr. Petrylak receives grant support from Agensys, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly,
Merck, Novartis, OncoGeneX, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi. He receives consultant fees from all
previously cited companies except Merck; and he is also a consultant to EMD Serono, Exelis, and
Sanofi-Aventis. Dr. Cheetham has no significant financial interest or other relationship with the
manufacturers of any products or providers of any service mentioned in this article.
Oncology (Williston Park). 30(6):571–579, 588.
Table 1. Selected Trials of Targeted Therapy
Agents in Advanced Bladde...
Table 2. Studies of Checkpoint Inhibitors in
Urothelial Cancer
References:
1. Kim JW, Tomita Y, Trepel J, Apolo AB. Emerging immunotherapies for bladder cancer. Curr Opin
Oncol. 2015;27:191-200.
2. von der Maase H, Sengelov L, Roberts JT, et al. Long-term survival results of a randomized trial
comparing gemcitabine plus cisplatin, with methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, plus cisplatin in
patients with bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4602-8.
3. von der Maase H, Hansen SW, Roberts JT, et al. Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate,
Page 9 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large,
randomized, multinational phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:3068-77.
4. Oing C, Rink M, Oechsle K, et al. Second line chemotherapy for advanced and metastatic
urothelial carcinoma: vinflunine and beyond—a comprehensive review of the current literature. J
Urol. 2016;195:254-63.
5. Park JC, Citrin DE, Agarwal PK, Apolo AB. Multimodal management of muscle invasive bladder
cancer. Curr Probl Cancer. 2014;38:80-108.
6. Vashistha V, Quinn DI, Dorff TB, et al. Current and recent clinical trials for perioperative systemic
therapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:966.
7. Weinstein JN, Akbani R, Broom BM, et al. Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial
bladder carcinoma. Nature. 2014;507:315-22.
8. Balar AV, Iyer G, Al-Ahmadie H, et al. Alterations in the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway and association
with outcome in invasive high-grade urothelial cancer (UC). J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(suppl 5):abstr 277.
9. Milowsky MI, Iyer G, Regazzi AM, et al. Phase II study of everolimus in metastatic urothelial cancer.
BJU Int. 2013;112:462-70.
10. Seront E, Rottey S, Sautois B, et al. Phase II study of everolimus in patients with locally advanced
or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract: clinical activity, molecular response,
and biomarkers. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:2663-70.
11. Iyer G, Hanrahan AJ, Milowsky MI, et al. Genome sequencing identifies a basis for everolimus
sensitivity. Science. 2012;338:221.
12. Wagle N, Grabiner BC, Van Allen EM, et al. Activating mTOR mutations in a patient with an
extraordinary response on a phase I trial of everolimus and pazopanib. Cancer Discov.
2014;4:546-53.
13. Bellmunt J, Hussain M, Dinney CP. Novel approaches with targeted therapies in bladder cancer.
Therapy of bladder cancer by blockade of the epidermal growth factor receptor family. Crit Rev
Oncol Hematol. 2003;46(suppl):S85-S104.
14. Lipponen P, Eskelinen M. Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in bladder cancer as
related to established prognostic factors, oncoprotein (c-erbB-2, p53) expression and long-term
prognosis. Br J Cancer. 1994;69:1120-5.
15. Bue P, Wester K, Sjostrom A, et al. Expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in urinary
bladder cancer metastases. Int J Cancer. 1998;76:189-93.
16. Inoue K, Salton JW, Perrotte P, et al. Paclitaxel enhances the effects of the anti-epidermal growth
factor receptor monoclonal antibody ImClone C225 in mice with metastatic human bladder
transitional cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6:4874-84.
17. Petrylak DP, Faulkner JR, Van Veldhuizen PJ, et al. Evaluation of ZD1839 for advanced transitional
cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urothelium: a Southwest Oncology Group Trial. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol.
2005;22:403.
18. Philips GK, Halabi S, Sanford BL, et al. A phase II trial of cisplatin (C), gemcitabine (G) and
gefitinib for advanced urothelial tract carcinoma: results of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)
90102. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1074-9.
19. Pruthi RS, Nielsen M, Heathcote S, et al. A phase II trial of neoadjuvant erlotinib in patients with
muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy: clinical and pathological results. BJU
Int. 2010;106:349-54.
Page 10 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
20. Strowd RE 3rd, Knovich MA, Lesser GJ. The therapeutic management of bleeding and thrombotic
disorders complicating CNS malignancies. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2012;13:451-64.
21. Chaux A, Cohen JS, Schultz L, et al. High epidermal growth factor receptor immunohistochemical
expression in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is not associated with EGFR mutations in exons 19
and 21: a study using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded archival tissues. Hum Pathol.
2012;43:1590-5.
22. Wong YN, Litwin S, Vaughn D, et al. Phase II trial of cetuximab with or without paclitaxel in
patients with advanced urothelial tract carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3545-51.
23. Stephenson JJ, Gregory C, Burris H, et al. An open-label clinical trial evaluating safety and
pharmacokinetics of two dosing schedules of panitumumab in patients with solid tumors. Clin
Colorectal Cancer. 2009;8:29-37.
24. Lae M, Couturier J, Oudard S, et al. Assessing HER2 gene amplification as a potential target for
therapy in invasive urothelial bladder cancer with a standardized methodology: results in 1005
patients. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:815-9.
25. Hussain MH, Mac Vicar GR, Petrylak DP, et al. Trastuzumab, paclitaxel, carboplatin, and
gemcitabine in advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor-2/neu-positive urothelial
carcinoma: results of a multicenter phase II National Cancer Institute trial. J Clin Oncol.
2007;25:2218-24.
26. Wülfing C, Machiels JP, Richel DJ, et al. A single-arm, multicenter, open-label phase 2 study of
lapatinib as second-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic transitional cell
carcinoma. Cancer. 2009;115:2881-90.
27. Powles T, Huddart RA, Elliott T, et al. A phase II/III double-blind, randomized trial comparing
maintenance lapatinib versus placebo after first line chemotherapy in HER1/2 positive metastatic
bladder cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(suppl):abstr 4505.
28. Milowsky MI, Dittrich C, Durán I, et al. Phase 2 trial of dovitinib in patients with progressive
FGFR3-mutated or FGFR3 wild-type advanced urothelial carcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:3145-52.
29. Crew JP, O’Brien T, Bicknell R, et al. Urinary vascular endothelial growth factor and its correlation
with bladder cancer recurrence rates. J Urol. 1999;161:799-804.
30. Kopparapu PK, Boorjian SA, Robinson BD, et al. Expression of VEGF and its receptors
VEGFR1/VEGFR2 is associated with invasiveness of bladder cancer. Anticancer Res.
2013;33:2381-90.
31. Inoue K, Slaton JW, Karashima T, et al. The prognostic value of angiogenesis factor expression for
predicting recurrence and metastasis of bladder cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical
cystectomy. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6:4866-73.
32. Hahn NM, Stadler WM, Zon RT, et al. Phase II trial of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and bevacizumab as
first-line therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Hoosier Oncology Group GU 04-75. J Clin Oncol.
2011;29:1525-30.
33. Balar AV, Apolo AB, Ostrovnaya I, et al. Phase II study of gemcitabine, carboplatin, and
bevacizumab in patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol.
2013;31:724-30
34. Chaudhary U, Golshayan A, Brisendine A, et al. Phase II trial of neoadjuvant cisplatin,
gemcitabine, and bevacizumab followed by radical cystectomy (RC) in patients with muscle-invasive
transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) of the bladder. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(suppl 7):abstr 276.
Page 11 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
35. Siefker-Radtke AO, Kamat AM, Corn PG, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with DD-MVAC and
bevacizumab in high-risk urothelial cancer: results from a phase II trial at the M.D. Anderson Cancer
Center. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(suppl 5):abstr 261.
36. Twardowski P, Stadler W, Frankel P, et al. Phase II study of aflibercept (VEGF-Trap) in patients
with recurrent or metastatic urothelial cancer, a California Cancer Consortium Trial. Urology.
2010;76:923-6.
37. Petrylak DP, Tagawa ST, Kohli M, et al. Docetaxel as monotherapy or combined with
ramucirumab or icrucumab in second-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial
carcinoma: an open-label, three-arm, randomized controlled phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb 29.
[Epub ahead of print]
38. Sonpavde G, Jian W, Liu H, et al. Sunitinib malate is active against human urothelial carcinoma
and enhances the activity of cisplatin in a preclinical model. Urol Oncol. 2009;27:391-9.
39. Gallagher DJ, Milowsky MI, Gerst SR, et al. Phase II study of sunitinib in patients with metastatic
urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1373-9.
40. Grivas PD, Daignault S, Tagawa ST, et al. Double-blind, randomized, phase 2 trial of maintenance
sunitinib versus placebo after response to chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial
carcinoma. Cancer. 2014;120:692-701.
41. Lee RJ, Smith MR. Cabozantinib and prostate cancer: inhibiting seed and disrupting soil? Clin
Cancer Res. 2014;20:525-7.
42. Apolo AB, Parnes HL, Madan RA, et al. A phase II study of cabozantinib in patients (pts) with
relapsed or refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma (MUC). J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(suppl 4):abstr
307.
43. Apolo AB, Tomita Y, Lee MJ, et al. Effect of cabozantinib on immunosuppressive subsets in
metastatic urothelial carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(suppl 5S):abstr 4501.
44. Vallo S, Michaelis M, Rothweiler F, et al. Drug-resistant urothelial cancer cell lines display diverse
sensitivity profiles to potential second-line therapeutics. Transl Oncol. 2015;8:210-6.
45. Quinn DI, Ruel N, Twardowski P, et al. Eribulin in advanced urothelial cancer (AUC) patients (pts):
a California Cancer Consortium trial—NCI/CTEP 7435. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(suppl):abstr 4504.
46. Galsky MD, Hahn NM, Albany C, et al. Phase II trial of gemcitabine + cisplatin + ipilimumab in
patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(suppl 2S):abstr 357.
47. Powles T, Eder JP, Fine GD, et al. MPDL3280A (anti-PD-L1) treatment leads to clinical activity in
metastatic bladder cancer. Nature. 2014;515:558-62.
48. Petrylak DP, Powles T, Bellmunt J, et al. A phase Ia study of MPDL3280A (anti-PDL1): updated
response and survival data in urothelial bladder cancer (UBC). J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(suppl):abstr
4501.
49. Plimack ER, Bellmunt J, Gupta S, et al. Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) for advanced urothelial cancer:
updated results and biomarker analysis from KEYNOTE-012. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(suppl):abstr 4502.
50. Bellmunt J, Gonzalez-Larriba JL, Prior C, et al. Phase II study of sunitinib as first-line treatment of
urothelial cancer patients ineligible to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy: baseline interleukin-8
and tumor contrast enhancement as potential predictive factors of activity. Ann Oncol.
2011;22:2646-53.
51. Hoffman-Censits JH, Grivas P, Van Der Heijden MS, et al. IMvigor 210, a phase II trial of
atelolizumab (MPDL3280A) in platinum-treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. J
Page 12 of 13
New Agents for the Treatment of Advanced Bladder Cancer
Published on Cancer Network (http://www.cancernetwork.com)
Clin Oncol. 2016;34(suppl 2S):abstr 355.
Source URL:
http://www.cancernetwork.com/oncology-journal/new-agents-treatment-advanced-bladder-cancer
Links:
[1] http://www.cancernetwork.com/review-article
[2] http://www.cancernetwork.com/oncology-journal
[3] http://www.cancernetwork.com/bladder-cancer
[4] http://www.cancernetwork.com/genitourinary-cancers
[5] http://www.cancernetwork.com/authors/philippa-j-cheetham-md
[6] http://www.cancernetwork.com/authors/daniel-p-petrylak-md
Page 13 of 13