Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37500339›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology2024

Updated Overall Survival by Circulating Tumor DNA Status from the Phase 3 IMvigor010 Trial: Adjuvant Atezolizumab Versus Observation in Muscle-invasive Urothelial Carcinoma.

Thomas Powles, Zoe June Assaf, Viraj Degaonkar, Petros Grivas, Maha Hussain, Stephane Oudard, Jürgen E Gschwend, Peter Albers, Daniel Castellano, Hiroyuki Nishiyama and 9 more

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 84 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
37.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02450331 phase3terminatednot on this map

A Phase III, Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized Study of Atezolizumab (Anti-PD-L1 Antibody) Versus Observation as Adjuvant Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma After Surgical Resection

TypeinterventionalSponsorHoffmann-La RocheRan2015 to 2022Enrolled809ConditionsCarcinoma, Transitional CellArmsAtezolizumab
NCT07756437 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Internal Validation of Circulating Tumor DNA (ctDNA) Sequencing in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer and Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Prospective Observational Study

TypeobservationalSponsorAZ Sint-Lucas GentRan2025 to 2029Enrolled70ConditionsMuscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC), Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma, Urothelial Carcinoma (UC)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

84 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Liquid biopsy in bladder cancer: towards precision oncology.Journal of translational medicine · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 12 institutions in 6 countries.

Thomas PowlesBarts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London ECMC, Barts Health, London, UK. Electronic address: thomas.powles1@nhs.net.
Zoe June AssafRoche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Viraj DegaonkarRoche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Petros GrivasUniversity of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Maha HussainRobert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Stephane OudardGeorges Pompidou European Hospital, University of Paris, Paris, France.
Jürgen E GschwendDepartment of Urology, Rechts der Isar Medical Center, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Peter AlbersDepartment of Urology, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Daniel CastellanoMedical Oncology Department CIBER-ONC, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Hiroyuki NishiyamaDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan.
Siamak DaneshmandUSC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Shruti SharmaNatera, Inc, San Carlos, CA, USA.
Himanshu SethiNatera, Inc, San Carlos, CA, USA.
Alexey AleshinNatera, Inc, San Carlos, CA, USA.
Yi ShiRoche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Nicole DavarpanahRoche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Corey CarterRoche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Joaquim BellmuntDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Sanjeev MariathasanRoche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
La Roche College · USNatera (United States) · USCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer · ESDüsseldorf University Hospital · DEHarvard University · USHôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou · FRNorthwestern University · USQueen Mary University of London · GBTUM Klinikum · DEUniversity of Tsukuba · JPUniversity of Washington · USUSC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterim results from IMvigor010 showed an overall survival (OS) benefit for adjuvant atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) versus observation in patients with circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-positive muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC).

objectiveTo report updated OS and safety by ctDNA status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThis ad hoc analysis from a global, open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial (NCT02450331) included intention-to-treat (ITT) population with evaluable cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1) ctDNA samples.

interventionAtezolizumab (1200 mg every 3 wk) or observation for ≤1 yr. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: OS, relapse rates, and safety by ctDNA status were assessed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 581 of 809 ITT patients included, 214 (37%) were ctDNA positive. Atezolizumab did not improve OS versus observation in ITT patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.73-1.13]; median follow-up 46.8 mo [interquartile range, 36.1-53.6]). In the observation arm, ctDNA positivity versus negativity was associated with shorter OS (HR 6.3 [95% CI 4.3-9.3]). The ctDNA positivity identified patients with an OS benefit favoring atezolizumab versus observation (HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.42-0.83]). A greater reduction in ctDNA levels with atezolizumab (C3D1) was associated with longer OS (100% clearance, 60.0 mo [95% CI 35.5-not estimable]; 50-99% reduction, 34.3 mo [95% CI 15.2-not estimable]; <50% reduction, 19.9 mo [95% CI 16.4-32.2]). The ctDNA positivity at C1D1 + C3D1 was associated with relapse with greater sensitivity than C1D1 alone (68% vs 57%). Adverse events were more frequent with atezolizumab than with observation, regardless of ctDNA status. A study limitation was its exploratory design.

conclusionsEvidence suggests that ctDNA positivity in MIUC predicts a benefit with atezolizumab. An in-progress prospective study will further evaluate these findings. PATIENT SUMMARY: Among patients with urothelial cancer after surgery, survival was poorer if tumor-derived DNA was detected in their bloodstream; these patients' survival was longer with atezolizumab versus observation. Bloodstream tumor-derived DNA may identify patients who benefit from atezolizumab.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCarcinoma, Transitional CellCirculating Tumor DNAUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsHumansMusclesNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProspective StudiesRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedatezolizumabCirculating Tumor DNAAdjuvantAnti–PD-L1AtezolizumabCirculating tumor DNACystectomyImmune checkpoint inhibitorMuscle-invasive urothelial carcinomaOverall survivalRadical surgeryRelapse

Identifiers

PMID37500339
OpenAlexW4385319607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.