Advertisement
You are prohibited from using or uploading content you accessed through this website into external applications, bots, software, or websites, including those using artificial intelligence technologies and infrastructure, including deep learning, machine learning and large language models and generative AI.
Advertisement
You have accessJournal of UrologyOriginal Research Articles1 Feb 2025

Reply by Authors

View All Author Information

We thank Dr Passarelli and colleagues for their insightful comments,1 and we agree that UGN-102 is a valuable potential treatment of patients with low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (LG-IR-NMIBC).2 We disagree that comparison with agents used in the postsurgery adjuvant setting is relevant to consideration of the clinical benefits of UGN-102, which has been developed as primary medical therapy for patients with LG-IR-NMIBC. UGN-102 produces durable recurrence-free survival exceeding that achieved by primary transurethral resection of bladder tumor with an acceptable safety profile.3 Patients enrolled in the ENVISION trial had biopsy confirmation of low-grade histology before the initiation of treatment with UGN-102. Debulking to reduce tumor burden to a prespecified limit was not performed as part of the ENVISION protocol. This is in contrast to the OLYMPUS trial that led to the approval of UGN-101 for the treatment of low-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma, in which debulking was performed in many study participants before drug treatment to reduce total tumor burden to a prespecified 5 to 15 mm.4 Although we appreciate the concern that pretreatment biopsy could have affected the complete response rate observed in the ENVISION trial, it is important to note that a representative biopsy was required before treatment, not a biopsy of each tumor noted during screening. Eighty-three percent of patients enrolled in the ENVISION trial had multifocal disease at baseline, which is typical for patients with recurrent LG-IR-NMIBC. It would therefore not be plausible that pretreatment biopsy would have significantly altered total tumor burden at the outset of treatment with UGN-102 in most of the enrolled patients.

REFERENCES

  • 1. . Editorial Comment. J Urol. 2025; 213(2):215-216. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004308 LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 2. . Primary chemoablation of recurrent low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer with UGN-102: a single-arm, open-label, phase 3 trial (ENVISION). J Urol. 2025; 213(2):205-216. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004296 LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 3. . Treatment of low-grade intermediate-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer with UGN-102 ± transurethral resection of bladder tumor compared to transurethral resection of bladder tumor monotherapy: a randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial (ATLAS). J Urol. 2023; 210(4):619-629. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003645 LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 4. . Primary chemoablation of low-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma using UGN-101, a mitomycin-containing reverse thermal gel (OLYMPUS): an open-label, single-arm, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020; 21(6):776-785. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30147-9 Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar