S. Gupta , M.A. Climent Duran , S.S. Sridhar , T. Powles , J. Bellmunt , S.H. Park , H. Gurney , N. Tsuchiya , D.P. Petrylak , Y. Tomita , A. di Pietro , J. Manitz , K. Tyroller , J. Hoffman , N. Jacob , P. Grivas
{"title":"Avelumab first-line maintenance for advanced urothelial carcinoma: long-term outcomes from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial in older patients☆","authors":"S. Gupta , M.A. Climent Duran , S.S. Sridhar , T. Powles , J. Bellmunt , S.H. Park , H. Gurney , N. Tsuchiya , D.P. Petrylak , Y. Tomita , A. di Pietro , J. Manitz , K. Tyroller , J. Hoffman , N. Jacob , P. Grivas","doi":"10.1016/j.esmoop.2025.104506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase III trial, avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance plus best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) versus BSC alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) without progression following platinum-based chemotherapy. Older age (≥65 years) is a known risk factor for bladder cancer with a median age at diagnosis of 73.0 years. We report exploratory analyses in subgroups based on older age (≥65 years).</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>Eligible patients with la/mUC without progression after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive avelumab plus BSC (<em>n</em> = 350) or BSC alone (<em>n</em> = 350). This exploratory analysis included subgroups aged ≥65 years, ≥65-<75 years, ≥75 years, and the subset aged ≥80 years. OS (primary endpoint) and progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 700 patients, 464 (66.3%) were aged ≥65 years. Median OS with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone was 26.1 versus 15.5 months (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.89) in all patients aged ≥65 years and 28.7 versus 17.1, 24.0 versus 13.5, and 24.9 versus 10.0 months, respectively, in patients aged ≥65-<75, ≥75, and ≥80 years. PFS analyses favored avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone in all subgroups. No new safety concerns were identified in patients aged ≥65 years, including those treated for ≥12 months. Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity was 4.57 months longer with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone (a 30.35% relative improvement). Limitations include small sample size for the ≥80-year age subgroup and the exploratory design.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>These exploratory analyses support the efficacy and tolerability of avelumab 1L maintenance in patients aged ≥65 years with la/mUC that has not progressed following chemotherapy, suggesting that older age should not solely prevent a patient from receiving avelumab 1L maintenance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11877,"journal":{"name":"ESMO Open","volume":"10 4","pages":"Article 104506"},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESMO Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2059702925003758","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase III trial, avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance plus best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) versus BSC alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) without progression following platinum-based chemotherapy. Older age (≥65 years) is a known risk factor for bladder cancer with a median age at diagnosis of 73.0 years. We report exploratory analyses in subgroups based on older age (≥65 years).
Materials and methods
Eligible patients with la/mUC without progression after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized to receive avelumab plus BSC (n = 350) or BSC alone (n = 350). This exploratory analysis included subgroups aged ≥65 years, ≥65-<75 years, ≥75 years, and the subset aged ≥80 years. OS (primary endpoint) and progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method.
Results
Of 700 patients, 464 (66.3%) were aged ≥65 years. Median OS with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone was 26.1 versus 15.5 months (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.89) in all patients aged ≥65 years and 28.7 versus 17.1, 24.0 versus 13.5, and 24.9 versus 10.0 months, respectively, in patients aged ≥65-<75, ≥75, and ≥80 years. PFS analyses favored avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone in all subgroups. No new safety concerns were identified in patients aged ≥65 years, including those treated for ≥12 months. Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity was 4.57 months longer with avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone (a 30.35% relative improvement). Limitations include small sample size for the ≥80-year age subgroup and the exploratory design.
Conclusions
These exploratory analyses support the efficacy and tolerability of avelumab 1L maintenance in patients aged ≥65 years with la/mUC that has not progressed following chemotherapy, suggesting that older age should not solely prevent a patient from receiving avelumab 1L maintenance.
期刊介绍:
ESMO Open is the online-only, open access journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). It is a peer-reviewed publication dedicated to sharing high-quality medical research and educational materials from various fields of oncology. The journal specifically focuses on showcasing innovative clinical and translational cancer research.
ESMO Open aims to publish a wide range of research articles covering all aspects of oncology, including experimental studies, translational research, diagnostic advancements, and therapeutic approaches. The content of the journal includes original research articles, insightful reviews, thought-provoking editorials, and correspondence. Moreover, the journal warmly welcomes the submission of phase I trials and meta-analyses. It also showcases reviews from significant ESMO conferences and meetings, as well as publishes important position statements on behalf of ESMO.
Overall, ESMO Open offers a platform for scientists, clinicians, and researchers in the field of oncology to share their valuable insights and contribute to advancing the understanding and treatment of cancer. The journal serves as a source of up-to-date information and fosters collaboration within the oncology community.