Will you offer adjuvant nivolumab for high-risk muscle invasive bladder cancer based on results of CheckMate 274?

CheckMate 274 met the co-primary endpoints of statistically significant improvements of DFS in all-comers (HR 0.70) and the PD-L1+ (HR 0.53) populations. These endpoints were presumably chosen by the investigators in discussion with the FDA for a registration trial like this, given that improved DFS...

Based on the results of CM274, I do discuss the use of adjuvant nivolumab in patients with high risk MIBC (pT3, pT4a, or pN+ and patients not eligible for or declined adjuvant cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy for patients who had not received neoadjuvant cisplatin based chemotherapy and ypT2...

Until overall survival is available, I would restrict this to PDL1+ patients. As is unfortunately typical, ITT and PDL1+ DFS were described, but not the PDL1- subgroup. When ITT HR is 0.7 and PDL1+ subgroup HR is 0.53, one should doubt whether a PDL1- subgroup would derive a statistically significan...

I do not believe that universal use of adjuvant Nivolumab should be the new standard of care based on improved disease-free survival, however, I still believe that the CheckMate 274 data is compelling and that delaying time to recurrence is a meaningful outcome for patients. This is particularly the...

Based on the updated survival data presented at ASCO GU 2025, I am considering adjuvant nivolumab for patients who meet the eligibility criteria of CheckMate 274. In the CheckMate 274 trial, patients with ypT2-ypT4a disease or ypN+ muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC) after receiving neoadjuv...