Barts Cancer Institute, Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Queen Mary University of London, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
Institute of Biomedicine of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío/CSIC/Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain; Institute of Biomedicine of Seville, Seville, Spain.
Lancet. 2018 Feb 24;391(10122):748-757. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33297-X. Epub 2017 Dec 18.
Few options exist for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after progression with platinum-based chemotherapy. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) versus chemotherapy in this patient population.
We conducted this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial (IMvigor211) at 217 academic medical centres and community oncology practices mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice and web response system with a permuted block design (block size of four), to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg or chemotherapy (physician's choice: vinflunine 320 mg/m, paclitaxel 175 mg/m, or 75 mg/m docetaxel) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression (expression on <1% [IC0] or 1% to <5% [IC1] of tumour-infiltrating immune cells vs ≥5% of tumour-infiltrating immune cells [IC2/3]), chemotherapy type (vinflunine vs taxanes), liver metastases (yes vs no), and number of prognostic factors (none vs one, two, or three). Patients and investigators were aware of group allocation. Patients, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. The primary endpoint of overall survival was tested hierarchically in prespecified populations: IC2/3, followed by IC1/2/3, followed by the intention-to-treat population. This study, which is ongoing but not recruiting participants, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02302807.
Between Jan 13, 2015, and Feb 15, 2016, we randomly assigned 931 patients from 198 sites to receive atezolizumab (n=467) or chemotherapy (n=464). In the IC2/3 population (n=234), overall survival did not differ significantly between patients in the atezolizumab group and those in the chemotherapy group (median 11·1 months [95% CI 8·6-15·5; n=116] vs 10·6 months [8·4-12·2; n=118]; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·63-1·21; p=0·41), thus precluding further formal statistical analysis. Confirmed objective response rates were similar between treatment groups in the IC2/3 population: 26 (23%) of 113 evaluable patients had an objective response in the atezolizumab group compared with 25 (22%) of 116 patients in the chemotherapy group. Duration of response was numerically longer in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median 15·9 months [95% CI 10·4 to not estimable] vs 8·3 months [5·6-13·2]; HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·26-1·26). In the intention-to-treat population, patients receiving atezolizumab had fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events than did those receiving chemotherapy (91 [20%] of 459 vs 189 [43%] of 443 patients), and fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (34 [7%] vs 78 [18%] patients).
Atezolizumab was not associated with significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma overexpressing PD-L1 (IC2/3). However, the safety profile for atezolizumab was favourable compared with chemotherapy, Exploratory analysis of the intention-to-treat population showed well-tolerated, durable responses in line with previous phase 2 data for atezolizumab in this setting.
F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.
在铂类化疗进展后,局部晚期或转移性尿路上皮癌患者的选择有限。我们旨在评估阿替利珠单抗(抗程序性死亡配体 1[PD-L1])与化疗在这一患者人群中的安全性和疗效。
我们在 217 家主要位于欧洲、北美和亚太地区的学术医疗中心和社区肿瘤学实践中进行了这项多中心、开放性、III 期随机对照试验(IMvigor211)。转移性尿路上皮癌患者在铂类化疗后进展,通过交互式语音和网络应答系统,以 1:1 的比例随机分配(随机化块大小为 4),接受阿替利珠单抗 1200mg 或化疗(医生选择:长春氟宁 320mg/m2、紫杉醇 175mg/m2 或 75mg/m2 多西他赛)每 3 周静脉注射一次。随机化按 PD-L1 表达(肿瘤浸润免疫细胞<1%[IC0]或 1%-<5%[IC1]与≥5%肿瘤浸润免疫细胞[IC2/3])、化疗类型(长春氟宁与紫杉烷类)、肝转移(是与否)和预后因素的数量(无、一个、两个或三个)分层。患者和研究者了解分组分配。患者、研究者和赞助商对 PD-L1 表达状态不知情。总生存期是在预先指定的人群中进行分层检验的主要终点:IC2/3,其次是 IC1/2/3,最后是意向治疗人群。这项正在进行但不招募参与者的研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上注册,编号为 NCT02302807。
2015 年 1 月 13 日至 2016 年 2 月 15 日,我们从 198 个地点随机分配 931 名患者接受阿替利珠单抗(n=467)或化疗(n=464)。在 IC2/3 人群(n=234)中,阿替利珠单抗组与化疗组患者的总生存期无显著差异(中位生存期 11.1 个月[95%CI 8.6-15.5;n=116]与 10.6 个月[8.4-12.2;n=118];分层危险比[HR]0.87,95%CI 0.63-1.21;p=0.41),因此无法进行进一步的正式统计学分析。在 IC2/3 人群中,两组治疗的确认客观缓解率相似:阿替利珠单抗组 113 名可评估患者中有 26 名(23%)有客观缓解,化疗组 116 名患者中有 25 名(22%)。在阿替利珠单抗组中,反应持续时间在数值上长于化疗组(中位反应持续时间 15.9 个月[95%CI 10.4 至无法估计]与 8.3 个月[5.6-13.2];HR 0.57,95%CI 0.26-1.26)。在意向治疗人群中,接受阿替利珠单抗治疗的患者比接受化疗的患者发生 3-4 级治疗相关不良事件的人数更少(459 名患者中有 91 名[20%]与 443 名患者中有 189 名[43%]),且因不良事件而停止治疗的人数也更少(34 名[7%]与 78 名[18%]患者)。
在铂类耐药转移性尿路上皮癌高表达 PD-L1(IC2/3)患者中,阿替利珠单抗与化疗相比,总生存期无显著延长。然而,与化疗相比,阿替利珠单抗的安全性较好,在该研究中,在意向治疗人群中进行的探索性分析显示,阿替利珠单抗的耐受性良好,且反应持久,与之前在该治疗环境下进行的阿替利珠单抗 II 期数据一致。
罗氏公司(F Hoffmann-La Roche)、基因泰克公司(Genentech)。