Plimack, Elizabeth R.

Bladder cancer, the sixth most common cancer in the United States, is most commonly of the urothelial carcinoma histologic subtype. The clinical spectrum of bladder cancer is divided into 3 categories that differ in prognosis, management, and therapeutic aims: (1) non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC); (2) muscle invasive, nonmetastatic disease; and (3) metastatic bladder cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer, including changes in the fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours: Urinary and Male Genital Tumours and how the NCCN Guidelines aligned with these updates; new and emerging treatment options for bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)–unresponsive NMIBC; and updates to systemic therapy recommendations for advanced or metastatic disease.

AbstractBackgroundThe VESPER trial demonstrated improved progression‐free (PFS) and (preliminarily) overall survival (OS) with six cycles of neoadjuvant dose‐dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (ddMVACx6) versus four cycles of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GCx4) before radical cystectomy (RC) for muscle‐invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), but with increased toxicity. This study compares the cost‐effectiveness of these regimens.MethodsA cost‐effectiveness analysis of neoadjuvant ddMVACx6 and GCx4 was performed using a decision‐analytic Markov model with 5‐year, 10‐year, and lifetime horizons. Probabilities were derived from reported VESPER data. Utility values were obtained from the literature. Primary outcomes were effectiveness measured in quality‐adjusted life years (QALY) and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) with a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY. One‐way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model.ResultsAt 5 years, ddMVACx6 improved QALYs by 0.30 at an additional cost of $16,100, rendering it cost‐effective relative to GCx4 (ICER: $53,284/QALY). Additionally, probabilistic sensitivity analysis found ddMVACx6 to be cost‐effective in 79% and 81% of microsimulations at10‐year and lifetime horizons, respectively. One‐way sensitivity analysis demonstrated a minimum difference in 5‐year progression of 0.9% and progression mortality of 0.7% between ddMVACx6 and GCx4 was necessary for ddMVACx6 to remain cost‐effective.ConclusionsNeoadjuvant ddMVACx6 was more cost‐effective than GCx4 for MIBC. These data, together with the improved PFS and (albeit preliminary) OS noted in VESPER, support use of this regimen in appropriate candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy before RC.Lay summary We performed a benefit‐to‐cost analysis using evidence from a randomized controlled trial that compared two different chemotherapy treatments before bladder removal for bladder cancer that had invaded into the bladder muscle. Despite being more expensive and having a greater likelihood of toxicity, six cycles of dose‐dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin was more cost‐effective (or had higher value) than four cycles of gemcitabine and cisplatin.

The NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer and other urinary tract cancers (upper tract tumors, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, primary carcinoma of the urethra). These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines regarding the treatment of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer, including how to treat in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage; new roles for immune checkpoint inhibitors in non–muscle invasive, muscle-invasive, and metastatic bladder cancer; and the addition of antibody–drug conjugates for metastatic bladder cancer.

AbstractBackgroundE3805 (CHAARTED) is a phase 3 trial demonstrating improved survival for men with metastatic hormone‐sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) randomized to treatment with docetaxel (D) and androgen‐deprivation therapy (ADT) versus ADT alone. We assessed the association of baseline body mass index (BMI) and metformin exposure with quality of life (QOL) and prostate cancer outcomes including survival in patients enrolled in the CHAARTED study.MethodsWe performed a posthoc exploratory analysis of the CHAARTED trial of men with mHSPC randomized to treatment with ADT with or without D between 2006 and 2012. Cox proportional hazards models and Kruskal–Wallis test were used to evaluate the association between BMI with QOL and prostate cancer outcomes and between metformin exposure and survival.ResultsIn 788 of 790 enrolled patients with prospectively recorded baseline BMI and metformin exposure status, lower BMI was not associated with survival, but was associated with high volume disease (p < 0.0001) and poorer baseline QOL on functional assessment of cancer therapy–prostate (p = 0.008). Only 68 patients had prevalent metformin exposure at baseline in the CHAARTED trial. Four groups were identified: ADT + D + metformin (n = 39); ADT + D (n = 357); ADT + metformin (n = 29); and ADT alone (n = 363). Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between groups. In this small exploratory multivariable analysis, metformin exposure was not associated with survival (hazard ratio: 1.15; 95% confidence interval: 0.81–1.63, p = 0.44).ConclusionsThere was no link between baseline BMI and survival, but lower baseline BMI was associated with features of greater cancer burden and poorer QOL.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC typically undergo surgery and/or receive systemic therapy. Tumor histology and risk stratification of patients is important in therapy selection. The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer stratify treatment recommendations by histology; recommendations for first-line treatment of ccRCC are also stratified by risk group. To further guide management of advanced RCC, the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel has categorized all systemic kidney cancer therapy regimens as “Preferred,” “Other Recommended Regimens,” or “Useful in Certain Circumstances.” This categorization provides guidance on treatment selection by considering the efficacy, safety, evidence, and other factors that play a role in treatment selection. These factors include pre-existing comorbidities, nature of the disease, and in some cases consideration of access to agents. This article summarizes surgical and systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC.

PURPOSE The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) is a standard therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Based on data that angiogenesis plays a role in urothelial carcinoma growth and progression, a randomized placebo-controlled trial was performed with the primary objective of testing whether patients treated with GC and bevacizumab (GCB) have superior overall survival (OS) than patients treated with GC and placebo (GCP). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between July 2009 and December 2014, 506 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma without prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease and no neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy within 12 months were randomly assigned to receive either GCB or GCP. The primary end point was OS, with secondary end points of progression-free survival, objective response, and toxicity. RESULTS With a median follow-up of 76.3 months among alive patients, the median OS was 14.5 months for patients treated with GCB and 14.3 months for patients treated with GCP (hazard ratio for death = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.05; two-sided stratified log-rank P = .14). The median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for GCB and 6.7 months for GCP (hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.95; P = .016). The proportion of patients with grade 3 or greater adverse events did not differ significantly between both arms, although increased bevacizumab-related toxicities such as hypertension and proteinuria occurred in the bevacizumab-treated arm. CONCLUSION The addition of bevacizumab to GC did not result in improved OS. The observed median OS of about 14 months is consistent with prior phase III trials of cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the guidelines, including changes to certain systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC. They also discuss the addition of a new section to the guidelines that identifies and describes the most common hereditary RCC syndromes and provides recommendations for genetic testing, surveillance, and/or treatment options for patients who are suspected or confirmed to have one of these syndromes.

4526 Background: Standard methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin (MVAC) demonstrates a survival benefit in the neoadjuvant setting for patients (pts) with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Compared with standard MVAC, AMVAC yielded higher response rates with less toxicity in the metastatic setting. Methods: Pts with MIBC, cT2-T4a, and N0-N1 with CrCl >=50 and adequate hepatic and marrow function were eligible. Pts received 3 cycles of AMVAC (methotrexate 30 mg/m2, vinblastine 3 mg/m2, doxorubicin 30 mg/m2, cisplatin 70mg/m2) on day 1, with pegfilgrastim 6 mg day 2 or 3, every 2 weeks. Pts with CrCl < 60 could receive cisplatin split over 2 days. Radical cystectomy (RC) with lymph node dissection was performed 4-8 weeks after the last dose of chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Results: Accrual is complete with 44 MIBC pts enrolled at 2 institutions (FCCC, TJU) over a 25 month period. Median age 64 (range 45-83). Three withdrew from study early and are not evaluable for response (2 physician discretion, 1 withdrawal of consent). An additional 8 are currently receiving treatment on study with toxicity and response data pending. Of the 33 evaluable pts for whom final data is available, 30 received all 3 cycles of AMVAC at full dose. Three pts received < 3 cycles due to grade 3 fatigue (1), low platelets (1), and disease progression precluding RC (1). 32/33 pts underwent RC, all within 8 weeks of last chemotherapy. Median time from start of chemotherapy to RC was 9.7 wks (range 4.6-13 wks). 13/33 pts (39.4%, 95% CI, 22.7-56.1%) had a pCR. An additional 3 (9.1%) were downstaged to non muscle invasive disease. For the intent to treat cohort (n=36) 8 pts had grade 3-4 AMVAC related adverse events, the most common being anemia (3), fatigue (3) and neutropenia (2) and overall pCR rate was 36.1%. (95% CI, 20.4-51.8%). All pts will have completed study treatment by April 2012. Final results will be presented. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant AMVAC is well tolerated and preliminary results show a pCR rate similar to that reported for standard 12-week MVAC, suggesting that AMVAC for three cycles (6 weeks) is a safe and efficient alternative.