Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Giving EV Pembro perioperatively for muscle-invasive bladder cancer provides the best chance for a cure. Waiting to use it in the first-line metastatic setting is a major gamble, as many patients relapse and may not get a second chance at effective therapy. The consensus is to use the best treatment upfront.

Related Insights

The B15 trial shows EV-Pembro is superior to chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. However, the true benchmark is now the Niagara study (chemo + durvalumab), which already beat chemo alone. The debate will focus on whether EV-Pembro offers a significant enough improvement to become the definitive standard over this new chemo-IO combination.

Major trials in prostate (PEACE-2), bladder (Keynote B15), and kidney cancer (LITESPARK-022) showcase a common strategy: moving potent systemic therapies into earlier, curative-intent settings. This approach of using the best drugs sooner aims to improve long-term outcomes, though it also raises questions about toxicity and overtreatment.

The anticipated approval of the highly effective EV-Pembro combination in the perioperative setting will create a new clinical challenge. When these patients eventually relapse years later, clinicians will face a dilemma: re-challenge with the same potent regimen that worked before or switch to older, likely less effective chemotherapies.

High relapse rates (~70%) in surgery-alone arms of recent trials suggest most patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) already have micrometastatic disease. This reframes the disease, prioritizing early systemic therapy over immediate surgery to achieve control and potential cure.

Historically, aggressive variants like micropapillary went directly to surgery. However, recent data suggests these patients do poorly due to micrometastatic disease. The trend is now to give neoadjuvant EV-Pembro to treat systemic disease, even with limited specific evidence.

Expert consensus shows a major paradigm shift: perioperative systemic therapy (like EV-Pembro, scoring 2.9) is the undisputed standard for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Approaches starting with cystectomy alone now score below 1.8, formally branding them as inferior options.

A key lesson in bladder cancer is that patient attrition is rapid between lines of therapy; many who relapse from localized disease never receive effective later-line treatments. This reality provides a strong rationale for moving the most effective therapies, like EV-pembrolizumab, to earlier settings to maximize the number of patients who can benefit.

With pathologic complete response rates approaching 67% in patients completing neoadjuvant EV-Pembro, a majority of cystectomies are now removing cancer-free bladders. This creates an ethical and clinical imperative to rapidly launch prospective trials to validate bladder preservation strategies and avoid overtreatment.

An expert oncologist identified a pathological complete response (pCR) rate over 50% as the benchmark that would fundamentally alter treatment. The EV Pembro trial's 57% pCR rate crossed this threshold, forcing a shift from a surgery-centric model toward bladder preservation strategies and systemic therapy.

The decision to test Enfortumab Vedotin/Pembrolizumab (EVP) in early-stage muscle-invasive bladder cancer was directly driven by its "flabbergasting" results in the metastatic setting. This highlights a strategy where overwhelming late-stage efficacy signals a therapy should be rapidly moved to earlier, curative-intent settings.