Vikram M. Narayan, MD, on Nadofaragene Firadenovec Efficacy Across Different Patient Subgroups for NMIBC

Video

At the 2020 SUO Meeting, Vikram M. Narayan, MD, spoke about the preliminary finds of his work with nadofaragene firadenovec.

Vikram M. Narayan, MD, spoke with CancerNetwork® regarding the findings from a handful of posters presented at the 21st Annual Meeting of the Society of Urologic Oncology researching investigating nadofaragene firadenovec to as treatment of patients with non–-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).

Transcription:

With respect to the projects that we did, specifically in our first project, our goal was to analyze efficacy in various subgroups. That is to say, we wanted to look at factors like age, gender, and prior treatments that patients received, including the number of courses of bacillus Calmette-Guérin [(BCG]) or non-BCG therapies that they may have had. We wanted to understand whether these factors effected how patients responded to nadofaragene. So, the study that was published met its primary end point in that 53% of patients who had CIS [carcinoma in situ] achieved a complete response by 3 months. But our first poster looked at, – if you were to look at subgroups, do [whether] certain patients do better or worse and can we use that information to guide decision making?

The first take home message was that we found that in our analysis was that there were no significant differences in the response rates to nadofaragene, both at 3 months and at 15 months, when comparing between males and females, different age groups, [or] whether or not they had gotten different courses of BCG or non-BCG treatments. And what this tells us is that regardless of the patient population, nadofaragene appears to be similarly efficacious which allows it to be potentially applicable to a broader range of patients.

Recent Videos
Paolo Tarantino, MD discusses updated breast cancer trial findings presented at ESMO 2024 supporting the use of agents such as T-DXd and ribociclib.
Higher, durable rates of response to frontline therapy are needed to potentially improve long-term survival among patients with non–small cell lung cancer.
Although no responses were observed in 11 patients receiving abemaciclib monotherapy, combination therapies with abemaciclib may offer clinical benefit.
Findings show no difference in overall survival between various treatments for metastatic RCC previously managed with immunotherapy and TKIs.
An epigenomic profiling approach may help pick up the entire tumor burden, thereby assisting with detecting sarcomatoid features in those with RCC.
Future meetings may address how immunotherapy, bispecific agents, and CAR T-cell therapies can further impact the AML treatment paradigm.
Treatment with revumenib appeared to demonstrate efficacy among patients with KMT2A-rearranged acute leukemia in the phase 2 AUGMENT-101 study.
Advocacy groups such as Cancer Support Community and the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society may help support patients with CML undergoing treatment.
Paolo Tarantino, MD, discusses the potential utility of agents such as datopotamab deruxtecan and enfortumab vedotin in patients with breast cancer.
Related Content