ArticleCancer diagnosis & prognosis
Safety of Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Hemodialysis Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Case Report.
Article in Cancer diagnosis & prognosis. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-Line Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Platinum-Ineligible Urothelial Carcinoma: A Three-Case Series.Cureus · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Enfortumab Vedotin and Pembrolizumab in 2 Hemodialysis Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Case Series.Case reports in oncologyArticle
- First-line Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Platinum-ineligible Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aim: Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab (EVP) is a first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) based on the EV302 trial; however, patients receiving hemodialysis were excluded from this study. Therefore, evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of this combination therapy in patients undergoing hemodialysis is insufficient. We present a case of mUC in a patient undergoing hemodialysis treated with EVP. Case Report: A 72-year-old man underwent total urinary tract extirpation for high-grade UC and subsequently required hemodialysis. Four years later, he developed right ischial metastasis. First-line systemic therapy with enfortumab vedotin (EV) 1.25 mg/kg plus pembrolizumab (200 mg) was initiated, with infusions scheduled on nonhemodialysis days. The patient completed three cycles without any dose reduction. Treatment-related adverse events were limited to grade 2 pruritus and grade 1 fatigue, with no grade ≥3 adverse events. Restaging computed tomography after three cycles revealed enlargement of the ischial lesion, indicating progressive disease, and systemic therapy was discontinued. Conclusion: A standard dose of EVP can be safely administered to patients on hemodialysis, with manageable toxicities comparable to those observed in nonhemodialysis patients. Although its antitumor efficacy was not confirmed, our experience suggests that EVP may remain a therapeutic option for selected dialysis patients with mUC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.