Gemcitabine Intravesical System Plus Cetrelimab or Cetrelimab Alone as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: SunRISe-4 Primary Analysis and Biomarker Results
Abstract
PURPOSE Standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is radical cystectomy (RC) with neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NAC). However, many patients are ineligible for or refuse cisplatin. SunRISe-4 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04919512 ) is an open-label, multicenter, parallel-cohort phase II study assessing neoadjuvant gemcitabine intravesical system (TAR-200/gem-iDRS) plus cetrelimab or cetrelimab monotherapy in patients with MIBC. METHODS Adults with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, cT2-T4a N0M0, ineligible/refusing NAC, and planned for RC were randomly assigned 5:3, stratified by transurethral resection of bladder tumor completeness (residual tumor ≤3 cm permitted) and T stage, to receive TAR-200 plus cetrelimab (cohort 1) or cetrelimab monotherapy (cohort 2). The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) at RC. Secondary end points included recurrence-free survival (RFS) and safety. Exploratory end points included pathologic overall response (pOR; ≤ypT1N0) and circulating tumor (ct) and urinary tumor (ut) DNA molecular residual disease (MRD). Side-by-side descriptive efficacy summary was planned. RESULTS At the May 9, 2025, data cutoff, 159 patients were treated; 88 in cohort 1 and 46 in cohort 2 underwent RC. pCR, pOR, and 1-year RFS rates were 38%, 53%, and 77% in cohort 1 and 28%, 44%, and 64% in cohort 2, respectively. pCR rates were consistent across subgroups. No new safety signals were observed. Across cohorts, utDNA– status before RC (week 12) and utDNA clearance correlated with pCR ( P < 10 –5 and < 10 –3 , respectively). ctDNA– status at baseline and week 12 was associated with longer RFS compared with ctDNA+ status at the same time point ( P = .04 and 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION TAR-200 plus cetrelimab provided higher pCR, pOR, and 1-year RFS rates compared with cetrelimab monotherapy, supporting further investigation of the neoadjuvant combination in MIBC. utDNA and ctDNA MRD results support further investigation as biomarkers for residual local and nonlocal disease, respectively.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (22)
Andrea Necchi
Department of Medical Oncology Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori University of Milan Milan Italy
Félix Guerrero-Ramos
Paul L. Crispen
Department of Urology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Bernardo Herrera-Imbroda
Urology Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria, IBIMA-Plataforma BIONAND, Málaga, Spain
Rohan Garje
3Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, United States
Bernadett Szabados
Charles C. Peyton
Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
Benjamin Pradere
Department of Urology, UROSUD, La Croix Du Sud Hospital, Quint-Fonsegrives, France
Ja Hyeon Ku
Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
Neal Shore
START Carolina Research, Myrtle Beach, SC
Martin Bögemann
Department of Urology, Münster University Hospital, Münster, Germany
Mark A. Preston
Evanguelos Xylinas
Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Université de Paris Cité, Paris, France
Cristina Sanchez de Llano
Johnson & Johnson, Madrid, Spain
Cinty Gong
Johnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ
Mohamad Hasan
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Karen Urtishak
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Sebastiano Battaglia
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Hind Stitou
Johnson & Johnson, Issy-les-Moulineaux, France
Sumeet Bhanvadia
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Hussein Sweiti
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Sarah P. Psutka
University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA