Tom Powles, Head of Solid Tumor Research at Barts Cancer Institute, shared a post on X:
“Five great UC studies at ESMO25:
1. Disitimab Vedotin (HER2) + Toripalimab vs platinum chemo in 1st line HER2+ve UC is positive for PFS/OS. Press release says “This reshapes the global treatment landscape of UC”, which sounds very good. Can it be better than EVP? Are sfx different?
2. KN905: Perioperative EVP in MIBC shows EFS, OS, and pCR vs cystectomy alone in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC. Gem/cis durvalumab showed pCR=37% and OS HR of 0.75. Will EVP be much better? Will it only apply to the cisplatin-ineligible population? Will we see pembro only arm?
3. IMVIGOR011: Atezo vs placebo in ctDNA+ve UC post cystectomy hit OS/PFS. It also tracks outcomes in the ctDNA-ve supporting a ctDNA-adjusted approach, potentially sparing persistently negative patients adjuvant therapy. What is its relevance in the era of perioparive IO?
4. POTOMAC (Durvalumab/BCG vs BCG alone in MIBC) is +ve for EFS, but is it practice-changing? ALBAN trial (atezo/BCG vs BCG in MIBC-result unknown) is also at ESMO. How will they compare with CREST (sasanlimab/BCG)? Will there be consistency or a subgroup that benefits?
5. The DISCUS trial randomises 3 vs 6 cycles of chemotherapy+sequenced avelumab in M1 UC. Patient-reported outcome is the primary endpoint. 3 cycles are likely to be better tolerated, but is efficacy compromised? Does this open the door for shorter periods of ADC trials?”
More posts featuring Tom Powles on OncoDaily.