Page 9 - CUA2019 Abstracts - Oncology-Kidney
P. 9

2019 CUA AbstrACts







       Podium Session 4: Mixed Oncology

       July 1, 2019; 0910–1010









       POD-4.1                                               1 Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia,
                                                                                 2
       TLD-1433 photodynamic therapy for Bacillus Calmette-Guerin-  Vancouver,  BC,  Canada;  Western  Health,  Melbourne,  Australia;
       unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A phase 1b   3 Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center
                                                                                               4
       clinical study                                        and Research Institute, Tampa FL, United States;  University of Auckland,
                                                                               5
                   1
                                                   3
       Girish S. Kulkarni , Lothar D. Lilge , Arkady Mandel , Roger White , Nathan   Auckland, New Zealand;  University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada;
                              2
                                          3
                       1
       Perlis , Michael Nesbitt , Michael A. Jewett 1        6 Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van
           1
                                                                                                       7
       1 Surgery and Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON,   Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;  Department
       Canada;  Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada;   of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States;
             2
       3 Research and Product Development, Theralase Inc., Toronto, ON, Canada  8 Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland,
                                                                          9
       Introduction: TLD-1433 is a ruthenium-based photodynamic compound   OH, United States;  Department of Urology, Fundacion Instituto Valenciano
                                                                                    10
       that demonstrates preferential uptake into bladder cancer cells. Upon expo-  de Oncologia, Valencia, Spain;  Department of Urology, University of
                                                                                                       11
       sure to green light (525 nm), TLD-1433 is activated to release free radicals   Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States;  Department
                                                                                                     12
       that cause cell death. Our aim was to assess the safety, tolerability, phar-  of Urology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany;  Department of
       macokinetics, and exploratory efficacy of TLD-1433 photodynamic therapy   Urology, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City,
                                                                           13
       (PDT) in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) Bacillus Calmette-  OK, United States;  Department of Urology, The James Buchanan Brady
       Guerin (BCG)-unresponsive patients.                   Urological Institute, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore,
                                                                           14
       Methods: TLD-1433 was instilled intravesically in the preoperative holding   MD, United States;  Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical
                                                                                       15
       area for one hour. Upon induction of general anesthesia, drug activation was   Center, Kansas City, KS, United States;  Department of Urology, University
                                                                                                      16
                                                    2
       performed using a 525 nm, 3 W laser with a target dose of 90 J/cm . A 3+3   of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, United States;  Hertfordshire
       dose escalation strategy, starting with the maximum recommended starting   and Bedfordshire Urological Cancer Centre, Department of Urology,
                                                                                              17
       dose (MRSD) of 0.35 mg/cm  with an increase to the planned therapeutic   Lister Hospital, Stevenage, United Kingdom;  Department of Urology,
                           2
                                                                                                       18
       dose of 0.70 mg/cm  was followed. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinet-  Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom;  Department
                    2
       ics were reviewed by an independent data safety and monitoring board.   of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington School of
       Patients underwent cystoscopy at three and six months post-treatment to   Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA,
                                                                        19
       assess efficacy, defined as recurrence-free survival.   United States;  Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College,
                                                                                                    20
       Results: Three patients were treated at the MRSD (0.35). At 30 days post-  Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, United States;  Department of
       treatment, all patients tolerated the procedure well with no grade 3, 4, or   Urology, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France;
       5 adverse events (AEs). Pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated minimal   21 Department of Surgery, Exeter Surgical Health Services Research Unit,
                                                                                                       22
       systemic absorption of drug with no photosensitivity reactions.  All drug   Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust, Exeter, United Kingdom;  Department
       was cleared from the plasma within 72 hours of activation. Three patients   of Surgery (Division of Urology), McGill University Health Centre,
                                                                              23
       were then treated at the therapeutic dose (0.70) with no grade 3, 4, or 5   Montréal, QC, Canada;  Department of Urology, University of California
                                                                                                         24
       AEs and an identical pharmacokinetic profile to half-dose.  At half-dose,   at Davis, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, United States;  Princess
                                                                                            25
       all patients had developed recurrent, but not progressive, NMIBC by the   Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada;  Bristol Urological Institute,
                                                                                               26
       180-day cystoscopy. At therapeutic dose, two of three patients were tumour-  North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom;  Department of Urology,
       free at the 180-day cystoscopy. Moderate bladder irritability was reported   Medical University of Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria;
       at full-dose that mostly resolved within 90 days.     27 Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United
                                                                  28
                                                                                                      29
       Conclusions: TLD-1433 PDT is safe and tolerable at the therapeutic dose.   States;  Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada;  Department
       The efficacy signal at 180 days post-treatment warrants further study in a   of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville,
                                                                           30
       phase 2 trial.                                        TN, United States;  Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology,
                                                             Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States;
                                                             31 Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford,
       POD-4.2                                               CA, United States;  USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Institute of
                                                                          32
       The prognostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio   Urology, University of Southern California, CA, United States
       in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with   Introduction: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an attractive
       neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical cystectomy       marker because it is derived from routine bloodwork. NLR has shown
               1
                             1,2
       Anna Black , Homayoun Zargar , Kamran Zargar-Shoshtari , Adrian S.   promise as a prognostic factor in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC),
                                                 3,4
                                               8,9
       Fairey , Laura S. Mertens , Colin P. Dinney , Maria C. Mir , Laura-Maria   but its value in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before
                        6
                                     7
           5
                              12
                                                        13
       Krabbe 10,11 , Michael S. Cookson , Niels-Erik Jacobsen , Nilay Gandhi ,   radical cystectomy (RC) is not yet established. Since NLR is related to an
                                             5
                14
                                                        18
       Joshua Griffin , Jeffrey S. Montgomery , Nikhil Vasdev 16,17 , Evan Y. Yu ,   oncogenic environment and poor anti-tumour host response, we hypoth-
                                  15
                                                  22
       Evanguelos Xylinas 19,20 , Nicholas J. Campain , Wassim Kassouf , Marc A.   esized that a high NLR would be associated with a poor response to NAC
                                     21
                     24
            23
       Dall’Era , Jo-An Seah , Cesar E. Ercole , Simon Horenblas , John S. McGrath ,   and would remain a poor prognostic indicator in patients receiving NAC.
                                            6
                                8
                                                        21
       Jonathan Aning 21,25 , Shahrokh F. Shariat 19,26 , Jonathan L. Wright , Andrew C.   Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with non-
                                                 27
       Thorpe , Todd M. Morgan , Jeff M. Holzbeierlein , Trinity J. Bivalacqua ,   metastatic MIBC who received NAC prior to RC between 2000 and 2013
                                                        13
                                         14
            17
                         15
                             29
                                     10
       Scott North , Daniel A. Barocas , Yair Lotan , Petros Grivas 18,30 , Andrew J.   at one of 19 centres across Europe and North America. The pre-NAC NLR
               28
                                      6
               8
                                                   3
       Stephenson , Jay B. Shah 7,31 , Bas W. van Rhijn , Philippe E. Spiess , Siamak   was used to split patients into a low (NLR ≤3) and high (NLR >3) group.
       Daneshmand , Srikala S Sridhar , Peter C. Black 1     Demographic and clinical parameters were compared between the groups
                             24
                32
       S154                                     CUAJ • June 2019 • Volume 13, Issue 6(Suppl5)
                                                  © 2019 Canadian Urological Association
   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11