Petros Grivas1, Elizabeth R Plimack2, Arjun V Balar3, Daniel Castellano4, Peter H O'Donnell5, Joaquim Bellmunt6, Thomas Powles7, Noah M Hahn8, Ronald de Wit9, Dean F Bajorin10, Misoo C Ellison11, Tara L Frenkl11, James L Godwin11, Jacqueline Vuky12. 1. University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: pgrivas@uw.edu. 2. Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA. 4. Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain. 5. The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. 6. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 8. Johns Hopkins University Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. 9. Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 10. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 11. Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. 12. Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with treatment-naive advanced urothelial cancer (UC) ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy are typically older and have comorbidities, representing a difficult-to-treat population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and antitumor activity of first-line pembrolizumab in subgroups of cisplatin-ineligible older patients (aged ≥65 and ≥75 yr) with advanced UC in KEYNOTE-052 (NCT02335424), including those with poor performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 2 [ECOG PS2]). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients were cisplatin ineligible, had treatment-naive, histologically/cytologically confirmed, locally advanced/metastatic UC with measurable disease (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 [RECIST v1.1]), and had ECOG PS0-2. Patient subgroups analyzed were aged ≥65yr (n = 302), ≥75 yr (n = 179), ≥65yr with ECOG PS2 (≥65yr+ECOG PS2; n = 119), and ≥75 yr+ECOG PS2 (n = 78). INTERVENTION: All patients received pembrolizumab 200mg intravenously every 3 wk until confirmed progression, intolerable toxicity, patient withdrawal, or 24 mo of therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) as per RECIST v1.1. The key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR), and safety. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: ORRs for the ≥65yr, ≥75 yr, ≥65yr+ECOG PS2, and ≥75 yr+ECOG PS2 subgroups were 29%, 27%, 29%, and 31%, respectively; rates of complete and partial responses were similar across subgroups (9%, 5%, 6%, and 6%, and 20%, 22%, 23%, and 24%, respectively). Median DOR and OS were also consistent across the ≥65yr and ≥65yr+ECOG PS2 subgroups and the ≥75 yr and ≥75 yr+ECOG PS2 subgroups. Study limitations included open-label design, lack of a comparator group, and nature of post hoc exploratory analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefit of pembrolizumab in advanced UC appeared to be consistent regardless of age and/or poor performance status. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study looked at whether older age and poorer performance status affect how well patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial cancer ineligible for standard-of-care treatment respond to pembrolizumab. Outcomes with pembrolizumab were not affected by older age or poorer performance status, making it an effective option.
BACKGROUND:Patients with treatment-naive advanced urothelial cancer (UC) ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy are typically older and have comorbidities, representing a difficult-to-treat population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and antitumor activity of first-line pembrolizumab in subgroups of cisplatin-ineligible older patients (aged ≥65 and ≥75 yr) with advanced UC in KEYNOTE-052 (NCT02335424), including those with poor performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 2 [ECOG PS2]). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients were cisplatin ineligible, had treatment-naive, histologically/cytologically confirmed, locally advanced/metastatic UC with measurable disease (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 [RECIST v1.1]), and had ECOG PS0-2. Patient subgroups analyzed were aged ≥65yr (n = 302), ≥75 yr (n = 179), ≥65yr with ECOG PS2 (≥65yr+ECOG PS2; n = 119), and ≥75 yr+ECOG PS2 (n = 78). INTERVENTION: All patients received pembrolizumab 200mg intravenously every 3 wk until confirmed progression, intolerable toxicity, patient withdrawal, or 24 mo of therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) as per RECIST v1.1. The key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR), and safety. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: ORRs for the ≥65yr, ≥75 yr, ≥65yr+ECOG PS2, and ≥75 yr+ECOG PS2 subgroups were 29%, 27%, 29%, and 31%, respectively; rates of complete and partial responses were similar across subgroups (9%, 5%, 6%, and 6%, and 20%, 22%, 23%, and 24%, respectively). Median DOR and OS were also consistent across the ≥65yr and ≥65yr+ECOG PS2 subgroups and the ≥75 yr and ≥75 yr+ECOG PS2 subgroups. Study limitations included open-label design, lack of a comparator group, and nature of post hoc exploratory analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefit of pembrolizumab in advanced UC appeared to be consistent regardless of age and/or poor performance status. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study looked at whether older age and poorer performance status affect how well patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial cancer ineligible for standard-of-care treatment respond to pembrolizumab. Outcomes with pembrolizumab were not affected by older age or poorer performance status, making it an effective option.
Authors: Ali Raza Khaki; Shasank Chennupati; Catherine Fedorenko; Li Li; Qin Sun; Petros Grivas; Scott D Ramsey; Stephen M Schwartz; Veena Shankaran Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-05-19
Authors: Susanne Deininger; Peter Törzsök; Michael Mitterberger; Maximilian Pallauf; David Oswald; Christian Deininger; Lukas Lusuardi Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 6.639