Nivolumab + Ipilimumab as Immunotherapeutic Boost in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma
Authors: Grimm Marc-Oliver , Schostak Martin , Grün Christine Barbara , Loidl Wolfgang , Pichler Martin , Zimmermann Uwe , Schmitz-Dräger Bernd , Steiner Thomas , Roghmann Florian , Niegisch Günter , Bolenz Christian , Schmitz Marc , Baretton Gustavo , Leucht Katharina , Schumacher Ulrike , Foller Susan , Zengerling Friedemann , Meran Johannes ,   TITAN-TCC Study Group, Bögemann Martin , Bschleipfer Thomas , Casuscelli Jozefina , de Wit Maike , Goebell Peter , Greil Richard , Grüllich Carsten , Grünberger Birgit , Heers Hendrik , Hegele Axel , Kröger Nils , Lorch Anja , Neisius Andreas , Perst Volker , Pulte Thomas , Schultze-Seemann Wolfgang , Stöger Herbert , Werner Thorsten , Wirth Manfred 
Published: May 2024

Importance

Studies with nivolumab, an approved therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) after platinum-based chemotherapy, demonstrate improved outcomes with added high-dose ipilimumab.

Objective

To assess efficacy and safety of a tailored approach using nivolumab + ipilimumab as an immunotherapeutic boost for mUC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this phase 2 nonrandomized trial, patients with mUC composed 2 cohorts. Cohort 1 received first-line or second-/third-line nivolumab with escalating doses of ipilimumab, and cohort 2 received second-/third-line nivolumab with high-dose ipilimumab. Recruitment spanned 26 sites in Germany and Austria from August 8, 2017, to February 18, 2021. All patients had a 70% or higher Karnofsky Performance Score and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1.

Interventions

All patients initiated 4 doses of 240-mg nivolumab (1× every 2 wk). Week 8 nonresponders received nivolumab + ipilimumab (1× every 3 wk). Cohort 1 received 2 doses of 3-mg/kg nivolumab + 1-mg/kg ipilimumab followed by 2 doses of 1-mg/kg nivolumab + 3-mg/kg ipilimumab if no response. Due to safety concerns, cohort 1 treatment was halted, and first-line cohort 2 treatment was not pursued. Cohort 2 received 2 to 4 doses of 1-mg/kg nivolumab + 3-mg/kg ipilimumab. Responders continued with nivolumab maintenance but could receive nivolumab + ipilimumab for later progression.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was objective response rate.

Results

The study comprised 169 patients (118 [69.8%] men; median [range] age, 68 [37-84] years): 86 in cohort 1 (42 first-line; 44 second-/third-line) and 83 in cohort 2. The median (IQR) follow-up times were 10.4 (4.2-23.5) months (first-line cohort 1), 7.5 (3.1-23.8) months (second-/third-line cohort 1), and 6.2 (3.2-22.7) months (cohort 2). Response rates to nivolumab induction were 12/42 (29%, first-line cohort 1), 10/44 (23%, second-/third-line cohort 1), and 17/83 (20%, cohort 2). Response rates to a tailored approach were 20/42 (48% [90% CI, 34%-61%], first-line cohort 1), 12/44 (27% [90% CI, 17%-40%], second-/third-line cohort 1), and 27/83 (33% [90% CI, 23%-42%], cohort 2). Three-year overall survival rates for first-line cohort 1, second-/third-line cohort 1, and cohort 2 using the Kaplan-Meier method were 32% (95% CI, 17%-49%), 19% (95% CI, 8%-33%), and 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%), respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this nonrandomized trial, although first-line cohort 1 treatment improved objective response rates, considerable progression events urge caution with this as a first-line therapy. Second-/third-line cohort 1 treatment did not improve response rates compared with nivolumab monotherapy. However, added high-dose ipilimumab may improve tumor response and survival in patients with mUC.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03219775