» Articles » PMID: 35626149

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors As a Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant Treatment of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Bladder cancer is the ninth most common cancer worldwide. Over 75% of non-muscle invasive cancer patients require conservative local treatment, while the remaining 25% of patients undergo radical cystectomy or radiotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors represent a novel class of immunotherapy drugs that restore natural antitumoral immune activity via the blockage of inhibitory receptors and ligands expressed on antigen-presenting cells, T lymphocytes and tumour cells. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in bladder cancer has been expanded from the neoadjuvant setting, i.e., after radical cystectomy, to the adjuvant setting, i.e., before the operative time or chemotherapy, in order to improve the overall survival and to reduce the morbidity and mortality of both the disease and its treatment. However, some patients do not respond to checkpoint inhibitors. As result, the capability for identifying patients that are eligible for this immunotherapy represent one of the efforts of ongoing studies. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the most recent evidence regarding the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, in a neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting, in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Citing Articles

Recent Advances in Artificial Intelligence to Improve Immunotherapy and the Use of Digital Twins to Identify Prognosis of Patients with Solid Tumors.

DOrsi L, Capasso B, Lamacchia G, Pizzichini P, Ferranti S, Liverani A Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(21).

PMID: 39519142 PMC: 11546512. DOI: 10.3390/ijms252111588.


An overview of immune checkpoint inhibitor toxicities in bladder cancer.

Mavadia A, Choi S, Ismail A, Ghose A, Tan J, Papadopoulos V Toxicol Rep. 2024; 13:101732.

PMID: 39318722 PMC: 11420502. DOI: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2024.101732.


Prognostic Value of Postneoadjuvant Chemotherapy Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Patients undergoing Radical Cystectomy.

Kaczmarek K, Malkiewicz B, Gurwin A, Krawczyk W, Skonieczna-Zydecka K, Leminski A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(7).

PMID: 38610718 PMC: 11012838. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13071953.


Advances in tumor microenvironment and underlying molecular mechanisms of bladder cancer: a systematic review.

Tang L, Xu H, Wu T, Wu W, Lu Y, Gu J Discov Oncol. 2024; 15(1):111.

PMID: 38602556 PMC: 11009183. DOI: 10.1007/s12672-024-00902-8.


Effect of Clinical Complete Remission Following Neoadjuvant Pembrolizumab or Chemotherapy in Bladder-Preservation Strategy in Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Declining Definitive Local Therapy.

Chang P, Chen H, Chang Y, Su P, Huang W, Lin C Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(5).

PMID: 38473256 PMC: 10930778. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16050894.


References
1.
Ferro M, Chiujdea S, Musi G, Lucarelli G, Del Giudice F, Hurle R . Impact of Age on Outcomes of Patients With Pure Carcinoma In Situ of the Bladder: Multi-Institutional Cohort Analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2022; 20(2):e166-e172. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2021.12.005. View

2.
Carthon B, Wolchok J, Yuan J, Kamat A, Ng Tang D, Sun J . Preoperative CTLA-4 blockade: tolerability and immune monitoring in the setting of a presurgical clinical trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16(10):2861-71. PMC: 2919850. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0569. View

3.
Contardi E, Palmisano G, Tazzari P, Martelli A, Fala F, Fabbi M . CTLA-4 is constitutively expressed on tumor cells and can trigger apoptosis upon ligand interaction. Int J Cancer. 2005; 117(4):538-50. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.21155. View

4.
Crocetto F, Pandolfo S, Aveta A, Martino R, Trama F, Caputo V . A Comparative Study of the Triglycerides/HDL Ratio and Pseudocholinesterase Levels in Patients with Bladder Cancer. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(2). PMC: 8871224. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12020431. View

5.
Bajorin D, Witjes J, Gschwend J, Schenker M, Valderrama B, Tomita Y . Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Placebo in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2021; 384(22):2102-2114. PMC: 8215888. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2034442. View