Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Genitourinary tumours, non-prostate

2129 - Atezolizumab (atezo) in Platinum-Treated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (mUC): Post-Progression Outcomes from the Phase 2 IMvigor210 Study


10 Sep 2017


Genitourinary tumours, non-prostate


Immunotherapy;  Urothelial Cancers


Andrea Necchi


Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v295-v329. 10.1093/annonc/mdx371


A. Necchi1, R.W. Joseph2, Y. Loriot3, J. Hoffman-Censits4, J.L. Perez Gracia5, D.P. Petrylak6, Q. Zhu7, B. Ding7, C. Kaiser7, J.E. Rosenberg8

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS - Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 - Milan/IT
  • 2 Department Of Hematology/oncology, Mayo Clinic, 32224 - Jacksonville/US
  • 3 Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, 94800 - Villejuif/FR
  • 4 Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Philadelphia/US
  • 5 Medical Oncology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona/ES
  • 6 Smilow Cancer Center, Yale University School of Medicine Medical Oncology, 06520-8032 - New Haven/US
  • 7 Oncology, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco/US
  • 8 Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 10065 - New York/US


Abstract 2129


mUC remains a disease with few treatment (tx) options and short OS. IMvigor210 demonstrated efficacy and safety of atezo (anti–PD-L1) in mUC and led to approval in the US and elsewhere. Here, we evaluate outcomes in platinum-treated IMvigor210 patients (pts) treated with atezo beyond progression.


IMvigor210 (NCT02108652 cohort 2) enrolled pts with mUC that progressed during/following platinum. Atezo was given 1200 mg IV q3w until loss of clinical benefit per investigator. In this descriptive, post hoc analysis (data cut 4 Jul 2016), assessments included on-study RECIST v1.1 response (pre– and post–first progressive disease [PD]; central review), sum of target lesion diameters (SLD; % change from PD), OS, post-progression (pp) OS and safety grouped by tx status post-PD.


220 pts who experienced PD (of 310 total in study) were evaluable: 137 continued atezo post-PD, and 83 received other (n = 19) or no (n = 64) systemic tx. Pts who continued atezo had fewer poor prognostic factors (Table). Pre-PD tx duration was similar in pts who did or did not continue atezo post-PD (median, 1.5 and 1.4 mo, respectively), and median post-PD atezo duration was 1.6 mo. Pts continuing atezo beyond PD had higher pre-PD ORR vs other groups (Table). 45 pts who continued atezo following initial PD (of 108 with post–first PD measurements) experienced decreases in target lesion SLD. OS data are in Table. In pts continuing atezo, pre- and post-PD exposure-adjusted tx-related AEs were similar (Table), with no related G5 AEs.Table:

852PD Key baseline characteristics and outcomes in patients treated beyond first RECIST v1.1 PD

Other systemic tx (n = 19)No systemic tx (n = 64)
Median age66 yr67 yr65 yr68 yr
Male sex80%71%63%73%
Primary site: bladder75%75%79%73%
ECOG PS 043%31%42%28%
Mets, visceral/liver82%/27%87%/41%84%/42%88%/41%
Response (with respect to study entry [baseline])
Pre-PD RECIST v1.1 ORR12%1%0%2%
Post-PD RECIST v1.1 ORR1%0%0%0%
Overall survival
Median follow-up duration (event/pt rate)21.2 mo (70%)20.0 mo (92%)19.0 mo (90%)20.0 mo (92%)
OS, median12.8 mo3.6 mo8.8 mo2.9 mo
18-mo OS33.4%3.9%10.5%1.7%
ppOS, median8.6 mo1.5 mo6.8 mo1.2 mo
12-mo ppOS37.1%2.7%10.5%0%
Treatment-related AEs, % (exposure-adjusted rate)
All Gr: on/before PD (total of 18 pt-yr)66% (512 per 100 pt-yr)
All Gr: after PD (total of 31 pt-yr)53% (234 per 100 pt-yr)
Gr 3-4: on/before PD (total of 43 pt-yr)9% (28 per 100 pt-yr)
Gr 3-4: after PD (total of 60 pt-yr)9% (22 per 100 pt-yr)


Pts who continued atezo beyond PD derived prolonged clinical benefit including tumor burden reduction and numerically longer OS vs pts who discontinued atezo post-PD in this single-arm study. Atezo was well tolerated throughout tx. An important future challenge in the post-PD setting will be to identify pts most likely to respond to atezo and appropriate sequencing of chemo agents thereafter.

Clinical trial identification


Legal entity responsible for the study

F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.


F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.


A. Necchi: Reports personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme. R.W. Joseph: Reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squib, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Nektar, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Cerulean, outside the submitted work. Y. Loriot: Consultancy: Sanofi, Astellas, Janssen, Roche AstraZeneca, MSD; Travel, accomodations, expenses: Astellas, Roche, MSD. J. Hoffman-Censits: Consultancy: Roche genentech, outside the submitted work. J.L. Perez Gracia: Reports grants from Roche, during the conduct of the study. D.P. Petrylak: Grants and personal fees from Genetech, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Merck, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, Agenysis, outside the submitted work. Q. Zhu, B. Ding, C. Kaiser: Employee and stock owner - Genentech, Inc. J.E. Rosenberg: Reports non-financial support from Roche-Genetech, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Agensys, Eli Lilly, Merck, Sanofi, Oncogenex, outside the submitted work.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.