Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 30, 2025

Induction of Invasive Transitional Cell Bladder Carcinoma in Immune Intact Human MUC1 Transgenic Mice: A Model for Immunotherapy Development
Published on: October 30, 2013
Tailored Immunotherapy Approach With Nivolumab in Advanced Transitional Cell Carcinoma
Marc-Oliver Grimm1, Bernd Jürgen Schmitz-Dräger2,3, Uwe Zimmermann4
1Department of Urology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Purpose:
Several anti-programmed cell death (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1) immune checkpoint inhibitors are approved in advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Recently, improved activity of an anti-PD-1/anticytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (CTLA-4) combination versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy has been reported. We report a response-based approach starting treatment with nivolumab monotherapy with nivolumab/ipilimumab as immunotherapeutic boost.
Methods:
After four doses of nivolumab induction, responders continued with nivolumab maintenance therapy. Patients with stable/progressive disease received nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 2 doses followed by nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 2 doses, if not responding to the initial boost. Responders to boosts continued with nivolumab maintenance. Between July 2017 and April 2019, 86 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up is 7.7 months. The primary end point is objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1. Secondary end points include efficacy of nivolumab induction, remission rate with nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts, overall survival, and safety.
Results:
Of all patients, 42, 39, and five were first- (1L), second- (2L), and third-line (3L), respectively. The median age was 68 years. The ORR with nivolumab monotherapy (assessed at week 8) was 29% in 1L and 23% in 2/3L, respectively. Forty-one patients received early (week 8) and 11 received later nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts. ORRs with nivolumab with or without nivolumab/ipilimumab (best overall response) were 45% and 27% in 1L and 2/3L, respectively. In 1L, 7 of 17 patients receiving boosts at week 8 improved, compared with 2 of 24 in 2/3L.
Conclusion:
The tailored approach of TITAN-TCC shows meaningful clinical activity supporting dual checkpoint inhibition in 1L mUC. However, starting therapy with nivolumab exclusively appears inadequate given the aggressive nature of mUC. In 2/3L, nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts with escalating ipilimumab dose did not improve efficacy outcomes versus nivolumab monotherapy. An independent 2L cohort of TITAN-TCC receiving nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 4 doses is ongoing.
Insights
This study explored a response-based approach for advanced urothelial carcinoma using nivolumab and ipilimumab. While dual checkpoint inhibition showed promise, starting with nivolumab alone was insufficient for aggressive disease.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Immunotherapy
- Urothelial Carcinoma Research
Background:
- Advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has limited treatment options.
- Anti-programmed cell death (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1) inhibitors are established therapies.
- Combination anti-PD-1/anticytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (CTLA-4) therapy shows improved activity.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate a response-based immunotherapy strategy for mUC.
- To assess nivolumab monotherapy followed by nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts.
- To determine the efficacy of dual checkpoint inhibition in first-line (1L) and later-line (2L/3L) mUC.
Main Methods:
- A cohort of 86 patients with mUC were enrolled between July 2017 and April 2019.
- Treatment involved nivolumab induction, with boosts of nivolumab/ipilimumab for non-responders.
- Objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1 was the primary endpoint.
Main Results:
- Nivolumab monotherapy achieved an ORR of 29% in 1L and 23% in 2/3L mUC.
- Overall response rates with nivolumab, with or without boosts, were 45% in 1L and 27% in 2/3L.
- In 1L, 7/17 patients receiving boosts improved, versus 2/24 in 2/3L.
Conclusions:
- A tailored response-based approach demonstrates clinical activity for dual checkpoint inhibition in 1L mUC.
- Initial nivolumab monotherapy appears insufficient for aggressive mUC.
- Escalating ipilimumab doses in boosts did not enhance efficacy in 2/3L mUC compared to nivolumab monotherapy.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Tumor Immunotherapy
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Cancer Vaccines
Cancer vaccines come in two categories: preventive (prophylactic) and treatment (active). Preventive vaccines, such as the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, protect against viruses that cause certain...

