Enfortumab vedotin 30mg powder for solution for infusion vials

Importance: Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) presents a therapeutic challenge with poor outcome. Enfortumab vedotin has emerged as a promising treatment, necessitating a comprehensive evaluation of its effectiveness and safety. Objective: To synthesize the available evidence on enfortumab vedotin, both as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab, as an mUC treatment for the purpose of guiding clinical decision-making and future research. Data Sources: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Google Scholar, and Web of Science were searched from database inception to August 31, 2024. Major conference abstracts from 2019 to 2024 were also included. Search strategy used a combination of Medical Subject Heading terms and free-text keywords related to mUC and enfortumab vedotin. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and prospective studies investigating enfortumab vedotin in adult patients with mUC were included. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool. The meta-analysis used a random effects model, while a network meta-analysis was performed using a frequentist approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and 1-year survival rate. Results: The 11 included studies (3 randomized clinical trials [27.3%] and 8 nonrandomized prospective studies [72.7%]) involved 2128 patients. Of these patients, 563 (26.5%) received enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab, 814 (38.3%) received enfortumab vedotin without pembrolizumab, and 751 (35.3%) received chemotherapy. Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab was associated with a pooled DCR of 86% (95% CI, 83%-89%), ORR of 68% (95% CI, 64%-71%), and a 1-year survival rate of 79% (95% CI, 75%-82%). Enfortumab vedotin monotherapy had a pooled DCR of 73% (95% CI, 70%-76%), ORR of 43% (95% CI, 40%-47%), and a 1-year survival rate of 52% (95% CI, 48%-56%). Network meta-analysis revealed that enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab significantly outperformed chemotherapy in ORR (odds ratio [OR], 3.47; 95% CI, 1.49-8.09; P = .004) and 1-year survival (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.75-3.06; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab showed high response rates in first-line settings, while enfortumab vedotin monotherapy was associated with clinical benefit in later lines of therapy. These findings underscore the importance of personalized treatment approaches, and future research is warranted to refine enfortumab vedotin-based therapies for mUC management.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy has been the standard of care for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC). Enfortumab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate directed to Nectin-4, and pembrolizumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, are two therapies that have individually provided a survival benefit in patients with la/mUC. The combination regimen of enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab was evaluated in EV-302 (KEYNOTE-A39; NCT0422385), a phase 3 study that showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival, progression-free survival, and a key secondary endpoint of overall response rate versus chemotherapy. Based on these results and those from the EV-103 (KEYNOTE-869; NCT03288545) Dose Escalation cohort, Cohort A, and Cohort K, enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab was granted approval from the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of adults with la/mUC. While guidelines and recommendations for the management of adverse events (AEs) have been developed for immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy and enfortumab vedotin monotherapy, additional guidance is needed for managing AEs that occur with enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab. As monotherapies, enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab are both associated with some of the AEs observed with the combination, such as skin reactions, pneumonitis, and diarrhea, which may confound the attribution of the AE to a specific agent and thereby complicate clinical management. In this manuscript, we aim to provide recommendations for best practice for patient care and the management of AEs of clinical interest for patients with la/mUC receiving enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab, including skin reactions, peripheral neuropathy, hyperglycemia, and pneumonitis. These recommendations were developed based on published guidelines, expert opinions, and the clinical experience of the authors, which include oncologist, advanced practice provider, nursing, and pharmacy perspectives. In addition, guidance on patient education and communication is provided. With vigilant monitoring, early detection, and prompt intervention of treatment-emergent AEs based on recommended approaches described herein, it is the authors' experience that most AEs can be managed with supportive therapy and dose modification/interruptions, allowing patients to continue treatment.

Abstract licence: CC BY

PURPOSE The anti-NECTIN4 antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin (EV) is approved for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). However, durable benefit is only achieved in a small, yet uncharacterized patient subset. NECTIN4 is located on chromosome 1q23.3, and 1q23.3 gains represent frequent copy number variations (CNVs) in urothelial cancer. Here, we aimed to evaluate NECTIN4 amplifications as a genomic biomarker to predict EV response in patients with mUC. MATERIALS AND METHODS We established a NECTIN4-specific fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay to assess the predictive value of NECTIN4 CNVs in a multicenter EV-treated mUC patient cohort (mUC-EV, n = 108). CNVs were correlated with membranous NECTIN4 protein expression, EV treatment responses, and outcomes. We also assessed the prognostic value of NECTIN4 CNVs measured in metastatic biopsies of non–EV-treated mUC (mUC-non-EV, n = 103). Furthermore, we queried The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data sets (10,712 patients across 32 cancer types) for NECTIN4 CNVs. RESULTS NECTIN4 amplifications are frequent genomic events in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (TCGA bladder cancer data set: approximately 17%) and mUC (approximately 26% in our mUC cohorts). In mUC-EV, NECTIN4 amplification represents a stable genomic alteration during metastatic progression and associates with enhanced membranous NECTIN4 protein expression. Ninety-six percent (27 of 28) of patients with NECTIN4 amplifications demonstrated objective responses to EV compared with 32% (24 of 74) in the nonamplified subgroup ( P &lt; .001). In multivariable Cox analysis adjusted for age, sex, and Bellmunt risk factors, NECTIN4 amplifications led to a 92% risk reduction for death (hazard ratio, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34]; P &lt; .001). In the mUC-non-EV, NECTIN4 amplifications were not associated with outcomes. TCGA Pan-Cancer analysis demonstrated that NECTIN4 amplifications occur frequently in other cancers, for example, in 5%-10% of breast and lung cancers. CONCLUSION NECTIN4 amplifications are genomic predictors of EV responses and long-term survival in patients with mUC.

Abstract licence: CC BY

The combination of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab (EVP) has been recently approved for patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma. This combination showed a higher objective response rate and superior progression-free survival and overall survival over traditional platinum-based chemotherapy in the frontline setting in the pivotal EV-302 trial. Despite the success, a subset of patients has primary refractory disease, and another subset will develop secondary resistance over time. Resistance to enfortumab vedotin may include the downregulation of nectin-4 expression to minimize antibody binding, upregulation of efflux pumps against the toxin, or direct resistance by the tubulin against the toxin. Resistance to pembrolizumab includes several methods to downregulate the immune system. Additionally, the type of histology of the urothelial carcinoma likely plays an important role in resisting EVP. This review summarizes these possible mechanisms of primary and secondary resistance, potential biomarkers predictive of response and resistance, and methods to overcome the resistance to EVP.

Abstract licence: CC BY

In patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who have progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy, enfortumab vedotin (EV) improves overall survival compared to standard chemotherapy. Additionally, for treatment-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, the combination of pembrolizumab and EV demonstrates superior efficacy over platinum-based chemotherapy. Hence, EV becomes a standard treatment option. Although EV monotherapy is generally well tolerated, with severe skin toxicities occurring in some cases, higher rates have been reported when combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Severe EV-induced skin toxicities have reportedly occurred. Management of these toxicities remains challenging because of inconsistent recommendations and varied responses to therapies. Hence, to determine the difference in the frequency and severity of skin toxicity induced by EV based on whether ICIs were used concomitantly with or before EV therapy, we searched PubMed, Medical Online, and Cochrane Library for articles published from January 2012 to March 2025. We included clinical trials and cohort studies. To identify data on severe skin toxicity, data were extracted with a focus on grade ≥3 skin toxicities. As a result, a total of 644 articles were identified through the literature search. Of these, 11 publications were included based on predefined eligibility criteria for the literature review. The frequency of EV-related grade ≥3 skin toxicity was higher in patients treated with EV in combination with ICIs or following prior ICI therapy, compared to EV monotherapy. Heterogeneity among studies may involve differences in the duration and method of assessment of adverse events. Specific management is needed because EV-induced skin toxicity can be more severe during concomitant or sequential ICI indications than monotherapy of EV. An inflammatory infiltrate composed of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells was identified as a contributing factor to EV-associated skin toxicity based on histopathological data from prior studies, suggesting that it shares pathologic features with ICI-associated skin toxicity. Allergic reactions were considered a contributing factor to skin toxicity induced by the combination of EV and ICI, as supported by both clinical and histopathological findings. Clinically, affected patients often presented with erythematous, pruritic rashes resembling drug eruptions, while histopathological analysis revealed features such as spongiosis, perivascular lymphocytic infiltrates with eosinophils, and interface dermatitis, consistent with hypersensitivity reactions. Antihistamines and topical steroids have anti-inflammatory effects on the above mechanisms and can be useful for EV-related skin toxicities. Therefore, prophylaxis with antihistamines and early steroid intervention at the onset of skin toxicity are needed.

Abstract licence: CC BY