Publication:
Liver metastases in advanced urothelial carcinoma (ARON-2): do pembrolizumab and avelumab make a difference in a poor-prognosis scenario?

dc.contributor.coauthorCerbone, Linda
dc.contributor.coauthorRoviello, Giandomenico
dc.contributor.coauthorCalabro, Fabio
dc.contributor.coauthorTaha, Tarek
dc.contributor.coauthorGrande, Enrique
dc.contributor.coauthorBinz, Kirstin
dc.contributor.coauthorKanesvaran, Ravindran
dc.contributor.coauthorPirstuk, Alina
dc.contributor.coauthorFiala, Ondrej
dc.contributor.coauthorMolina-Cerrillo, Javier
dc.contributor.coauthorAlonso-Gordoa, Teresa
dc.contributor.coauthorRizzo, Alessandro
dc.contributor.coauthorPichler, Renate
dc.contributor.coauthorMyint, Zin W.
dc.contributor.coauthorPoprach, Alexandr
dc.contributor.coauthorFacchini, Gaetano
dc.contributor.coauthorBohuslav, Melichar
dc.contributor.coauthorStudentova, Hana
dc.contributor.coauthorMorelli, Franco
dc.contributor.coauthorBuchler, Tomas
dc.contributor.coauthorMennitto, Alessia
dc.contributor.coauthorFormisano, Luigi
dc.contributor.coauthorOrejana, Inmaculada
dc.contributor.coauthorCatalano, Martina
dc.contributor.coauthorButi, Sebastiano
dc.contributor.coauthorMonteiro, Fernando Sabino Marques
dc.contributor.coauthorSoares, Andrey
dc.contributor.coauthorGupta, Shilpa
dc.contributor.coauthorMassari, Francesco
dc.contributor.coauthorSantoni, Matteo
dc.contributor.departmentKUH (Koç University Hospital)
dc.contributor.kuauthorTural, Deniz
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteKUH (KOÇ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL)
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-02T07:30:42Z
dc.date.issued2026
dc.description.abstractBackground: Over the past decade, the treatment landscape for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has improved significantly with the introduction of immunotherapy, targeted agents, and antibody-drug conjugates. The median overall survival (mOS) reached 36.7 months in cisplatin-eligible and 25.6 months in cisplatin-ineligible patients in the first-line setting and over 10 months post-platinum failure. However, liver metastases remain a known poor prognostic factor. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of mUC patients treated at 79 global institutions. Two cohorts were defined: cohort 1 included patients who progressed after platinum-based therapy and received pembrolizumab, and cohort 2 included patients who received avelumab as maintenance therapy. Treatments were administered between 1 January 2016 and 31 October 2024. Results: Cohort 1 (n = 1,341) had an mOS of 17.5 months. Patients without liver metastases had significantly longer OS than those with liver involvement (20.1 vs. 9.4 months, p <0.001). Among patients with liver metastases, OS was 11.8 months in males vs. 5.8 months in females (p = 0.066). OS was longer in those with BMI >= 25 kg/m & sup2
dc.description.abstract(14.1 vs. 8.1 months, p = 0.028) and better ECOG-PS (ECOG 0: 17.0 months
dc.description.abstractECOG 1: 9.8
dc.description.abstractECOG >= 2: 3.1
dc.description.abstractp <0.001). Cohort 2 (n = 291) had an mOS of 25.8 months. Again, OS was longer in patients without liver metastases (27.0 vs. 16.4 months, p <0.001). Among those with liver involvement, OS was 14.7 months in males and 20.0 months in females (p = 0.310). Patients with BMI >= 25 had non-reached OS versus 17.1 months in those with lower BMI (p <0.001). ECOG-PS remained a strong prognostic factor (NR for ECOG 0
dc.description.abstract14.7 months for ECOG 1
dc.description.abstract4.6 months for ECOG >= 2, p <0.001). Conclusion: Liver metastases are associated with significantly reduced survival in patients with mUC receiving immunotherapy. However, both pembrolizumab and avelumab demonstrated improved outcomes compared with historical chemotherapy data. These findings underscore the need for personalized treatment strategies in high-risk subgroups.
dc.description.fulltextNo
dc.description.harvestedfromManual
dc.description.indexedbyWOS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.openaccessGreen Submitted, gold
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.readpublishN/A
dc.description.sponsoredbyTubitakEuN/A
dc.description.versionPublished Version
dc.identifier.WoSQuartileQ1
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fimmu.2026.1667155
dc.identifier.embargoNo
dc.identifier.issn1664-3224
dc.identifier.pubmed41816343
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105032426683
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1667155
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/33054
dc.identifier.volume17
dc.identifier.wos001709738900001
dc.keywordsAvelumab
dc.keywordsImmunotherapy
dc.keywordsLiver metastases
dc.keywordsNCT05290038
dc.keywordsPembrolizumab
dc.keywordsUrothelial carcinoma
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherFrontiers Media
dc.relation.affiliationKoç University
dc.relation.collectionKoç University Institutional Repository
dc.relation.ispartofFrontiers in Immunology
dc.relation.openaccessN/A
dc.rightsN/A
dc.rights.uriN/A
dc.subjectImmunology
dc.titleLiver metastases in advanced urothelial carcinoma (ARON-2): do pembrolizumab and avelumab make a difference in a poor-prognosis scenario?
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationf91d21f0-6b13-46ce-939a-db68e4c8d2ab
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryf91d21f0-6b13-46ce-939a-db68e4c8d2ab
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication055775c9-9efe-43ec-814f-f6d771fa6dee
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery055775c9-9efe-43ec-814f-f6d771fa6dee

Files