Mitomycin Gel (UGN-101) as a Kidney-sparing Treatment for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma in Patients with Imperative Indications and High-grade Disease.

Document Type


Publication Date


Publication Title

Eur Urol Focus


california; psjhc; santa monica


BACKGROUND: Intracavitary UGN-101 is approved for the treatment of low-grade noninvasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Post-commercialization studies underscore the benefit of UGN-101 administration for patients with imperative indications for whom radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) is not a viable option.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use, efficacy, and safety of UGN-101 in patients with UTUC with imperative indications for renal preservation, including high-grade disease.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving UGN-101 with imperative indications were retrospectively analyzed using a multicenter centralized registry from 15 high-volume academic and community centers.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We defined imperative indications as patients with a solitary kidney, the presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) with a glomerular filtration rate/min, bilateral UTUC, and patients unfit for or unwilling to undergo surgical extirpation. Tumor characteristics, disease progression/recurrence, and adverse events were recorded on a per-renal-unit basis.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: UGN-101 was instilled into 52 renal units (38%) in 48 patients for imperative indications, including 29 patients (56%) with a solitary kidney, 11 kidneys (21%) in the setting of bilateral UTUC, six patients (12%) with CKD, and six patients (12%) who were unfit for or unwilling to undergo RNU. Twelve renal units had biopsy-proven high-grade papillary disease. Tumors were completely ablated before induction therapy in 34% of cases, while 66% had tumor present. Following induction therapy, 17 patients (40%) had no evidence of disease (NED) on ureteroscopy, 88% of whom maintained this status at median follow-up of 10.8 mo. In the cohort with high-grade disease, five patients (45%) had NED at initial post-induction primary disease evaluation. Adverse events included pyelonephritis (8%), ureteral stenosis (8%), anemia (6%), and acute renal failure (4%). Limitations include the retrospective study design, the lack of long-term follow up, and patient selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS: Intracavitary therapy with UGN-101 in patients with UTUC and imperative indications shows promise as a kidney-sparing treatment modality. While long-term follow-up is needed, this intracavitary treatment may help in prolonging time to RNU and delaying the morbidity of hemodialysis in this comorbid population.

PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed results for patients with cancer in the upper urinary tract and an additional condition that would not allow kidney removal who received treatment with a gel called UGN-101. Our results suggest that UGN-101 shows promise as a kidney-sparing treatment. It may delay the time until kidney removal is needed in these patients and avoid the negative effects associated with dialysis.

Clinical Institute


Clinical Institute

Kidney & Diabetes