All patients received the ADC intravenously at a dose of 1.5 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Treatment continued until PD or unacceptable toxicity. Investigators conducted disease assessments every 6 weeks from day 1 of cycle 1 for 72 weeks, and then every 12 weeks until PD.
Moreover, the primary end point of the study is confirmed ORR by blinded independent central review (BICR) and RECIST 1.1 criteria, and select secondary end points include DOR, DCR, and PFS by BICR; OS; and safety.
A total of 293 patients underwent screening, and 151 were enrolled in the study. Of the 151 patients, 73 comprised cohort A and 78 comprised cohort B. In cohort A, all patients received at least 1 dose of treatment, and 12.3% were still on treatment at the time of data cutoff, which was September 12, 2025. The most common reason for going off treatment was PD (65.8%; n = 48/64), and the most common reason for going off study was death (46.6%; n = 34/34). In cohort B, all patients received at least 1 dose of treatment, and only 6.4% of patients remained on treatment at cutoff. Again, the most common reasons for going off treatment and off study were PD (70.5%; n = 55/73) and death (64.1%; n = 50/50), respectively.
The median patient age across cohorts A and B was 69.5 years (range, 28-88), and most patients were male (71.2%; 70.5%). In cohort A, 54.8% of patients had an ECOG performance status of 0, and 43.8% had a status of 1; in cohort B, these rates were 39.7% and 60.3%, respectively. In terms of HER2 IHC score and ISH status, in cohort A, 30.1% of patients had a HER2 IHC score of 2+ with ISH positivity, and 69.9% had a HER2 IHC score of 3+. In cohort B, 28.2% of patients had a HER2 IHC score of 1+, and 71.8% had a HER2 IHC score of 2+ with ISH negativity or not evaluable. Across the cohorts, most patients had localized early-stage disease (65.8%; 75.6%).
In cohort A, 60.3% of patients had received 1 prior line of systemic therapy, and 39.7% had received 2 prior lines; in cohort B, these respective rates were 71.8% and 26.9%. The majority of patients across cohorts A and B had previously received systemic therapy in the metastatic setting (86.3%; 76.9%). Most patients had primary tumor located in the bladder (82.2%; 78.2%) and visceral metastases (68.5%; 82.1%).
What additional efficacy data were presented with disitamab vedotin in this population of patients with HER2-expressing urothelial carcinoma?
“CR was observed in participants primarily with IHC 2+/3+ tumors, those with visceral metastases or lymph node–only disease, and those with or without prior radical surgery,” Powles noted. He added that the response to the ADC was achieved across HER2 expression levels.
Additionally, for both cohorts, a numerically higher ORR was observed in the subgroup with lymph node metastases. “ORR was similar in subgroups with upper vs lower tract primary tumors, 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy, and across HER2 expression levels.”
What were the outcomes of patients who went on to receive subsequent therapy?
In cohort A, half of patients (50.0%) received any subsequent therapy; this included a PD-(L)1 inhibitor (9.4%), chemotherapy (14.1%), enfortumab vedotin-ejfv (Padcev; EV) monotherapy (17.2%), TROP2-targeted ADC (10.9%), enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab (P; 6.3%), HER2-directed ADC (6.3%), or other (9.4%). Moreover, 54.8% of those in cohort B received a subsequent therapy. In this group, the most common therapy received was a PD-(L)1 inhibitor (20.5%), followed by chemotherapy (15.1%), TROP2-directed ADC (13.7%), single-agent EV (11.0%), other (11.0%), EV+P (9.6%), and HER2-directed ADC (2.7%).
“Clinical activity was observed with subsequent EV-based therapy after discontinuation of DV,” Powles said. In cohort A, 17.2% of patients received EV monotherapy with best responses of PR (18.2%), SD (18.2%), and PD (27.3%). Moreover, 6.3% of patients in this cohort received EV+P with best response of SD (50.0%). Eleven percent of patients in cohort B received single-agent EV with best responses of PR in 12.5%, SD in 25.0%, and PD in 50.0%. Almost 10% (9.6%) received EV+P and experienced best responses of SD (28.6%) and PD (42.9%).
What was the safety profile of disitamab vedotin in HER2-expressing advanced urothelial cancer?
The ADC was administered for a median of 9 cycles in both cohorts. Grade 1 or 2 treatment-related adverse effects (TRAEs) were experienced by 50.3% of patients across cohorts A and B, and grade 3 or higher TRAEs were experienced by 41.1% of patients. The most common TRAEs experienced across the cohorts were fatigue (grade 1/2, 39.1%; grade ≥ 3, 13.9%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (50.3%; 2.0%), nausea (31.2%; 1.3%), decreased appetite (29.2%; 1.3%), alopecia (27.8%; 0%), diarrhea (23.8%; 4.0%), constipation (16.5%; 0.7%), decreased weight (15.9%; 0.7%), pruritus (11.9%; 0%), arthralgia (8.6%; 2.0%), peripheral motor neuropathy (9.9%; 0.7%), and vomiting (8.0%; 2.6%).
Powles reported that 1 patient in cohort B experienced a grade 1 treatment-emergent toxicity of pneumonitis, and that 1 patient experienced a TRAE that proved fatal, although the cause of death was unknown.
Across the cohorts, adverse effects (AEs) led to dose delays, reductions, or discontinuation for 68.9%, 60.9%, and 16.6% of patients, respectively. The most common AEs to lead to dose reductions of the ADC were peripheral sensory neuropathy (29.1%) and fatigue (11.3%). The AEs that led to discontinuation of disitamab vedotin were peripheral sensory neuropathy (6.0%), fatigue (1.3%), paresthesia (1.3%), and peripheral motor neuropathy (1.3%), which is “a known AE associated with MMAE payload–containing ADCs,” Powles noted.
Disclosures: Dr Powles disclosed receipt of honoraria from Astellas Pharma; AstraZeneca; BMS GmbH & Co. KG; Eisai; Exelixis; Incyte; Ipsen; Johnson & Johnson/Janssen; MashupMD; Merck; Merck Serono; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche; and Seagen. He serves in a consulting or advisory role for Astellas Pharma; AstraZeneca; Bristol Myers Squibb; Eisai; Exelixis; Incyte; Ipsen; Johnson & Johnson; MashupMD; Merck; Merck Serono; MSD; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche; and Seagen. Research funding was provided by Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Exelixis, Ipsen, Johnson & Johnson, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seagen. Travel, accommodations, and expenses were covered by AstraZeneca, Ipsen, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche.
References
- Powles T, Koshkin VS, Rosenberg JE, et al. RC48G001: a phase 2 study of disitamab vedotin in HER2-expressing previously treated advanced UC. J Clin Oncol. 2026;44(suppl 7):LBA631. doi:10.1200/JCO.2026.44.7_suppl.LBA631
- Sheng X, Wang L, He Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of disitamab vedotin in patients with Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–positive locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a combined analysis of two phase II clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(12):1391-1402. doi:10.1200/JCO.22.02912
- Yan X, Li J, Xu H, et al. Efficacy and safety of DV in HER2-negative and HER2-low locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: results of a phase 2 study. Med. 2025;6(7):100637. doi:10.1016/j.medj.2025.100637
- Powles TB, Grande E, Alimohamed N, et al. SGNDV-001: disitamab vedotin with pembrolizumab in HER2-expressing locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Future Oncol. 2025;21(21):2705-2712. doi:10.1080/14796694.2025.2535280