A phase 1/2 trial of durvalumab plus intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel in BCG-unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients (HCRN GU16-243: ADAPT-BLADDER Cohort 4).
Abstract
667 Background: A critical need persists to develop treatments for BCG-unresponsive (BCG-U) non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients (pts). The intravesical gemcitabine plus docetaxel (Gem/Doc) doublet and intravenous agents targeting the PD-(L)1 immune checkpoint have both demonstrated complete responses (CRs) in BCG-U NMIBC investigations. With this knowledge, we aimed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of durvalumab (D) in combination with intravesical Gem/Doc. Methods: The multi-arm, multi-stage ADAPT-BLADDER trial design has been previously described (Hahn NM et al, Eur Urol 2023). Here, we report outcomes from the D + Gem/Doc (cohort 4) phase 1 and phase 2 expansion arms. In phase 1, BCG-U NMIBC patients were enrolled in a 6 + 3 + 3 fashion to establish safety. In phase 2, additional patients were enrolled to evaluate the primary endpoint of CR rate in the total study population and to provide a CR rate estimate within the subset of patients with CIS. Per protocol, phase 1 and 2 efficacy analyses were combined. Enrollment of pure papillary patients was capped to ensure at least 20 patients with CIS. Patients received D 1500 mg iv on day 1 of each 4-week cycle for up to 6 cycles. In addition, they received intravesical Gem 1000 mg + Doc 37.5 mg weekly for the first 6 weeks. Patients achieving a CR were encouraged, but not required, to receive Gem/Doc monthly maintenance therapy. Cystoscopic and urine cytology assessments were performed every three months in year one with a mandatory biopsy at 12-months in responding patients. Toxicity rates were reported per CTCAE v5.0. Results: Between 1/2022-10/2024, 40 pts enrolled (12 phase 1, 28 phase 2) from 6 sites. The study completed its full planned accrual. Demographics included: median age 69 years; 83% male; CIS (8 pts), high-grade (HG) T1 + CIS (7 pts), HG Ta + CIS (6 pts), HG Ta (13 pts) and HG T1 (6 pts). No dose limiting toxicities were observed in the phase 1 portion. Among 27 patients (15 CIS, 12 papillary) evaluable for response at the August 2024 data lock, a CR was observed in 24 patients (89%) (CIS – 13/15 (87%); Papillary – 11/12 (92%)). Evaluation of pts still receiving study treatment for CR and durability of response is ongoing. One pt (4%) progressed to muscle invasion on study treatment. Highest grade treatment-related adverse events observed were grade 1 – 12 (36%) pts, grade 2 – 11 (33%) pts, grade 3 – 2 (6%) pts (sepsis n=1, pneumonitis n=1), and grade 4 – 1 (3%) pt (cough n=1) respectively. One on-study death due to retroperitoneal bleed unrelated to study therapy was observed. Conclusions: Combination treatment with durvalumab plus intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel demonstrates promising clinical efficacy with a high complete response rate. Observed adverse event type, frequency, and severity were consistent with prior durvalumab trial experiences. Clinical trial information: NCT03317158 .
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Noah M. Hahn
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
Marianna Zahurak
2Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Biostatistics, Baltimore, United States
Hristos Z. Kaimakliotis
Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN
Timothy A. Masterson
Indiana University Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN
Nabil Adra
Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN
David YT Chen
Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
Alexander Kutikov
Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA
Daniel M. Geynisman
From the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda (A.B.A., N.S., S.N., L.L., L.C.), the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore (J.H.-C.), and the Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville (H.S., E.S.) — all in Maryland; the Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (K.V.B., M.O., C.M., G.P.B.); AdventHealth Cancer Institute and the University of Central Florida, Orlando (G.S.); Dana–Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, Boston (S.B., B.M.); UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill (W.Y.K.), and Duke University Medical Center and Duke Cancer Institute, Durham (J.H., S.H.) — both in North Carolina; the University of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood (R.P.); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (M.Y.T., M.J.M., J.E.R.), and Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo (G.C.) — both in...
Woodson W Smelser
Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
Melissa A Reimers
Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
Christopher B. Anderson
Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
Mark N. Stein
Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY
Alexander S Baras
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
Gabriela Colocho
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
Deborah G Schwartz
Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD
David James McConkey
University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY
Sunil H. Patel
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
Bilal G. Rahim
University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center, Iowa City, IA
Michael A. O'Donnell
University of Iowa and Clinic Holden Cancer Center, Iowa City, IA
Max Kates