Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) remains the cornerstone of therapy for high-risk non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). However, up to 40% of patients develop BCG-unresponsive disease, where radical cystectomy remains the gold standard but is often unfeasible. During the past few years, multiple novel intravesical therapies have been developed, reshaping the management of BCG-unresponsive disease. The FDA approvals of pembrolizumab, nadofaragene firadenovec, BCG combined with the IL-15 superagonist N‑803, and the recently approved drug-delivery device TAR-200, alongside promising results of the oncolytic agent CG0070, mark a new era in bladder-sparing management. These therapies demonstrate clinically relevant efficacy with limited toxicity, redefining the treatment algorithm for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC.
Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) accounts for nearly 75% of all new bladder cancer diagnoses in Europe. Despite adequate resection and adjuvant BCG instillations, recurrence occurs in up to 50% of patients, and 10–15% eventually progress to muscle-invasive disease [1]. Thus, the clinical and economic burden of NMIBC remains considerable, given the need for lifelong cystoscopic surveillance and repeated interventions.
The terminology surrounding BCG failure has evolved. Historically, ‘BCG refractory’ and ‘BCG relapsing’ were used inconsistently, complicating the interpretation of clinical trials. The harmonized definition of BCG-unresponsive disease, that is, persistent or recurrent high-grade T1 disease at first evaluation following BCG induction, or persistent or recurrent carcinoma in situ (CIS) within 12 months of adequate BCG treatment (defined as at least 5 of 6 induction doses plus at least 2 more doses) or recurrent high-grade Ta or T1 disease within 6 months of adequate BCG treatment, is now endorsed by the FDA and adopted by the 2025 EAU Guidelines [2], providing a unified framework. This standardization has accelerated research and potentiated regulatory alignment between the US and Europe, directly influencing daily urological practice.
In the BCG-unresponsive setting, radical cystectomy (RC) remains the curative gold standard [3], yet its significant morbidity and lifelong functional consequences have stimulated the search for effective bladder-sparing alternatives. For patients unfit for or declining RC, the need for effective bladder-sparing therapies is urgent. Therefore, recent progress has shifted from conventional chemotherapy instillations to advanced intravesical immuno- and drug-delivery systems that combine durable efficacy with excellent tolerability.
This narrative review is based on a selective synthesis of peer-reviewed literature and recent presentations from AUA, ASCO, and EAU meetings up to December 2025, focusing on phase II–III evidence and emerging therapies for the BCG-unresponsive setting.
US-Approved intravesical therapies for CIS BCG-unresponsive disease
Nadofaragene firadenovec (Adstiladrin®)
Nadofaragene firadenovec is a replication-deficient adenoviral vector encoding interferon-α2b, designed for local immune activation within the bladder. In the pivotal single arm phase III trial, the 3‑month complete response (CR) rate was 53%, and 45% of patients remained disease-free at 12 months, with only 4% grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AE) [4]. FDA approval was granted in 2022, and EMA review is ongoing. It is the first intravesical gene therapy to demonstrate durable efficacy in BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, preserving the familiar catheter-based administration route of BCG.
BCG + N-803 (Anktiva®)
N‑803 is an IL-15 superagonist that enhances NK-cell and CD8⁺ T‑cell proliferation in the bladder microenvironment. In the phase III QUILT 3.032 trial, combination BCG + N-803 achieved a 71% CR at 3 months with 24.1 months median duration of response and low rates of grade ≥ 3 immune-related toxicity [5]. FDA approval followed in 2024. As of December 2025, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) issued a positive opinion supporting conditional marketing authorisation for N‑803 + BCG, pending a European Commission decision. This combination maintains the procedural simplicity of standard BCG while significantly improving durable response rates.
TAR-200 (INLEXZO®)
TAR-200 is a novel intravesical drug delivery system releasing gemcitabine continuously over three months. The device maintains sustained local exposure with negligible systemic absorption. In SunRISe‑1, TAR-200 monotherapy achieved a centrally reviewed CR of 82.4% in CIS, with grade ≥ 3 AEs in 12.9%; adding cetrelimab increased toxicity without clear added benefit [6]. Combination with intravenous cetrelimab (anti-PD-1) did not enhance efficacy but increased toxicity, supporting TAR-200 monotherapy. FDA approval has been granted in September 2025 for treating patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with CIS, with or without papillary tumors. The ongoing SunRISe‑3 phase III trial (n = 1050) compares TAR-200 ± cetrelimab versus BCG in high-risk, BCG-naïve NMIBC; results are expected by 2029. If confirmed, TAR-200 could become the first purely intravesical alternative to systemic immunotherapy, combining efficacy, tolerability, and practicality.
Before the approval of dedicated intravesical agents, sequential gemcitabine-docetaxel (Gem/Doce) had become the most widely used off-label salvage regimen for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, particularly in North America. Retrospective series reported 1‑year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates around 50–60% with low toxicity [7]. Although no prospective randomized trials exist, Gem/Doce provides a cost-efficient benchmark against which the aforementioned newer agents can be contextualized. Its use remains relevant in settings with delayed access to approved therapies or as a bridge to RC.
US-Approved systemic therapy for CIS BCG-unresponsive disease
Pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-057)
Pembrolizumab, a systemic PD‑1 inhibitor, was the first systemic agent approved by the FDA (2020) for BCG-unresponsive CIS in patients ineligible for or declining cystectomy. This indication has not been authorised by the EMA (as of December 2025). In KEYNOTE-057, the 3‑month CR rate was 41%, with a median duration of 16 months; grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 13% of patients [8]. Although effective, pembrolizumab requires intravenous administration and careful toxicity monitoring. In clinical practice, it is generally reserved for patients unfit for intravesical therapy.
Systemic therapies under development
While pembrolizumab remains the only approved systemic option, additional immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted agents are under active investigation.
Atezolizumab (SWOG S1605)
In the phase II SWOG S1605 study, intravenous atezolizumab achieved a 27% CR with a median duration of 17 months [9]. Grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse effects occurred in 16% of patients, including three treatment-related deaths.
Durvalumab (ADAPT-BLADDER)
The ADAPT-BLADDER phase I trial combined durvalumab with intravesical BCG, yielding a 85% 3‑month CR and 73% at 12 months [10]. This suggests a possible synergistic effect between systemic checkpoint inhibition and local immune stimulation.
Erdafitinib (THOR-2)
Erdafitinib, an oral FGFR3 inhibitor, demonstrated 77% 12-month recurrence-free survival in FGFR3-altered, BCG-unresponsive NMIBC [11]. The THOR‑2 phase III trial is ongoing to confirm whether targeted precision therapy can replace or complement intravesical strategies in this molecular subset.
Collectively, these systemic approaches expand options for patients in whom intravesical therapy is contraindicated or has failed, while underscoring the growing importance of molecular profiling and multidisciplinary management in NMIBC.
Emerging intravesical therapies
CG0070 (Oncolytic adenovirus)
CG0070 selectively replicates in tumor cells with a defective retinoblastoma pathway, inducing GM-CSF-mediated immune activation. The phase III BOND-003 trial reported overall CR of ~75% in BCG-unresponsive CIS, with no grade ≥ 3 toxicities [12]. Combination with pembrolizumab in the CORE‑1 study achieved an exceptional 92% CR rate in early data (24 evaluable patients) [13]. The synergy between viral lysis and checkpoint inhibition represents a promising direction, though monotherapy remains attractive due to its safety profile and urologist-controlled administration.
Oncofid-P‑B enhances paclitaxel solubility and bladder adhesion via a hyaluronic acid conjugate, improving drug retention. In a phase I single-arm trial of 20 BCG-unresponsive patients, CR was 75% after induction and 40% at 12 months, with only mild local side effects [14]. A phase III study (NCT05024773) is ongoing, expected to conclude in 2027. Its simplicity and local tolerability make it particularly suitable for elderly or comorbid patients.
TAR-210 (Erdafitinib delivery system)
Designed for FGFR3-altered NMIBC, TAR-210 delivers erdafitinib intravesically through a sustained-release device. Early results from the ErdaRIS phase I trial (cohort 1) showed an 82% 3‑month recurrence-free rate in BCG-unresponsive papillary tumors (with no CIS) [15]. Systemic absorption was negligible. This represents the first true precision-medicine approach for NMIBC.
Other early-phase agents and technologies
Enfortumab vedotin (EV-104) is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting Nectin‑4 administered intravesically. Preliminary data (n = 6) showed a 75% CR rate with no significant toxicity [16].
TARA-002, a Streptococcus pyogenes-derived biologic immunotherapy, has shown acceptable safety and local immune activation in ADVANCED‑1 (phase I/II) [17], with further evaluation ongoing.
Nanoparticle-based formulations of paclitaxel (NCT06173349) are under exploration to improve urothelial penetration and retention [18], while hyperthermic intravesical chemotherapy (HIVEC) with mitomycin C offers an established device-assisted approach that enhances cytotoxicity and recurrence-free survival in post-BCG settings [19].
Together, these innovations signal a renewed era of locally delivered, bladder-preserving therapy, reinforcing the central role of the urologist in the management of BCG-unresponsive NMIBC.
Discussion
The management of BCG-unresponsive NMIBC remains a major clinical challenge in contemporary uro-oncology (Fig. 1). Although RC offers the best oncologic control, its morbidity and impact on quality of life drive the search for effective bladder-sparing alternatives [3].
Fig. 1
Proposed clinical management pathway for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. Schematic representation of the therapeutic pathway for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, integrating approved and emerging therapies
Within Europe, therapeutic decisions must balance oncological safety and efficacy, functional preservation, and health-system accessibility. Nadofaragene firadenovec, BCG + N-803 and TAR-200 are currently FDA-approved intravesical therapies. Together, these frame the reference standard for approved intravesical conservative treatment in 2025 [4‐6], and may be readily integrated into routine practice in Europe once EMA authorization and reimbursement are finalized.
TAR-200 and CG0070 represent a new generation of intravesical platforms based on sustained drug release and oncolytic viral activity, respectively, achieving response rates > 70% with excellent tolerability [6, 12]. These fit well with European outpatient models that emphasize quality of life and cost efficiency. TAR-210 extends the concept to targeted delivery and molecular selection, introducing precision medicine into the BCG unresponsive armamentarium [15].
Before the introduction of these dedicated intravesical agents, sequential intravesical gemcitabine-docetaxel (Gem/Doce) had become one of the most widely adopted off-label salvage regimens for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. Evidence for Gem/Doce derives exclusively from retrospective series [7], and although outcomes appear favorable, no head-to-head comparisons exist against the newly approved intravesical or systemic therapies. Accordingly, its role remains that of a pragmatic, cost-efficient option in healthcare settings where novel agents are not yet accessible.
From a patient-centered perspective, therapy selection should integrate comorbidities, bladder capacity, and willingness to undergo repeated cystoscopic procedures. TAR-200 and Oncofid-P‑B may be ideal for frail patients due to minimal systemic exposure, whereas CG0070 or N‑803 are suitable for younger, immunocompetent individuals seeking durable immune control. In all cases, shared decision-making is essential. From a tumor phenotype perspective, CIS favors immunomodulatory agents (Nadofaragene, N‑803, CG0070), while papillary disease may benefit from continuous-release systems (TAR-200, TAR-210). Systemic immunotherapy or oral targeted agents remain options for patients unsuitable for intravesical treatment.
The near future will likely see the combination of local immune stimulation and molecular targeting within a single platform. Biomarkers such as urinary cytokines, tumor genomics, and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may guide treatment sequencing and early response assessment [20, 21], aligning NMIBC management with precision oncology.
However, cost-effectiveness analyses reaffirm the central role of early RC in the BCG-unresponsive setting. Despite its higher upfront cost, RC remains the most cost-effective treatment for BCG-unresponsive CIS, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios lower than those of nadofaragene firadenovec, BCG + N-803, TAR-200, or pembrolizumab [22]. Similarly, the cumulative financial burden of recurrent NMIBC—including repeated instillations, cystoscopies, and hospitalizations—often exceeds that of early radical surgery [23].
Therefore, bladder-preserving therapies should complement rather than replace RC. While they are meaningful options for unfit patients or those prioritizing quality of life, early RC remains the gold standard from both oncologic and economic perspectives. Owing to this, future cost-effectiveness analyses in European healthcare systems will be crucial to refine patient selection and ensure sustainable integration of these novel therapies.
Conclusion
The treatment landscape for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC has evolved dramatically over the past five years. Intravesical agents such as nadofaragene firadenovec, BCG + N-803 and TAR-200 have set new standards of efficacy and safety. Next-generation systems (TAR-210) and viral or immunomodulatory agents (CG0070, TARA-002) are expanding bladder-preserving options.
From a European standpoint, integration of these innovations will require multidisciplinary coordination and depend on clear reimbursement frameworks. Once implemented, these will allow tailored treatment according to tumor biology, comorbidities, and patient needs.
Nevertheless, early RC remains the oncologic and economic gold standard for eligible patients, offering the highest long-term disease control and cost-effectiveness. The expanding armamentarium of intravesical and systemic agents should therefore provide safe and effective alternatives for patients unfit for surgery or seeking bladder preservation.
The future of NMIBC management lies in precision delivery, molecular selection, and patient-tailored sequencing—advancing bladder preservation while maintaining radical cystectomy as the definitive curative benchmark.
Conflict of interest
A. Vilaseca is principal author and investigator of the First-in-human TAR-210 trial (J Clin Oncol 2023;41 suppl 6:TPS583). H. Alfambra and E. Carbonell declare that they have no competing interests.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Richters A, Aben KKH, Kiemeney LALM. The global burden of urinary bladder cancer: an update. Eur Urol. 2021;79(1):82–92.
2.
European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer (Ta, T1, and CIS). Arnhem: EAU Guidelines Office; 2025.
3.
Hautmann RE, de Petriconi RC, Pfeiffer C, et al. Radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy: long-term results in 1100 patients. Eur Urol. 2012;61(5):1039–47.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Boorjian SA, Alemozaffar M, Konety BR, et al. Intravesical nadofaragene firadenovec gene therapy for BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a single-arm, open-label, repeat-dose clinical trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(1):107–17.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Chamie K, Chang S, Gonzalgo M, et al. Final clinical results of pivotal trial of IL-15RαFc superagonist N‑803 with BCG in BCG-unresponsive CIS and papillary nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:4508–4508.CrossRef
6.
Daneshmand S, van der Heijden MS, Jacob JM, et al. TAR-200 for Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-unresponsive high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: results from the phase IIb SunRISe‑1 study. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(33):3578–88.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Chevuru PT, McElree IM, Mott SL, et al. Long-term follow-up of sequential intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel salvage therapy for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2023;41(3):148.e1–148.e7.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Balar AV, Kamat AM, Kulkarni GS, et al. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for the treatment of high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer unresponsive to BCG (KEYNOTE-057): an open-label, single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(7):919–30.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Black PC, Tangen CM, Singh P, et al. Phase II trial of atezolizumab in BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: SWOG S1605. Eur Urol. 2023;84(6):536–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Hahn NM, O’Donnell MA, Efstathiou JA, et al. A phase 1 trial of durvalumab in combination with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) or external beam radiation therapy in patients with BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: the Hoosier Cancer Research Network GU16-243 ADAPT-BLADDER study. Eur Urol. 2023;83(6):486–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Daneshmand S, Zaucha R, Catto J, et al. Erdafitinib in patients with high- and intermediate-risk non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer: final analysis of THOR‑2 study. Eur Urol. 2025;S0302–2838(25)04702‑5.
12.
Tyson MD, Uchio EM, Nam JK, et al. Final results: BOND-003 Cohort C—phase 3, single-arm study of intravesical cretostimogene grenadenorepvec for high-risk BCG-unresponsive non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer with carcinoma in situ. J Urol. 2025;213(5S2)e1.CrossRef
13.
Li R, Steinberg G, Uchio EM, et al. PD13-08 CORE1: phase 2 single arm study of CG0070 combined with pembrolizumab in patients with non muscle invasive bladder cancer unresponsive to Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG). J Urol. 2023;209(Suppl 4)e408.
14.
Hurle R, Guazzoni G, Colombo P, et al. Oncofid-P-B: a novel treatment for BCG unresponsive carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the bladder: results of a prospective European multicentre study at 15 months from treatment start. Urol Oncol. 2022;40(1):11.e9–11.e15.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Vilaseca A, Jayram G, Raventos C, et al. PD48-02 First safety and efficacy results of the TAR-210 erdafitinib intravesical delivery system in patients with non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer with select FGFR alterations. J Urol. 2024;211(5 Suppl)e987.
16.
Kamat AM, Lotan Y, Roupret M, et al. A first-in-human trial of intravesical enfortumab vedotin (EV), an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), in patients with non–muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC): Interim results of a phase 1 study (EV-104). J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(16_suppl)4596.CrossRef
ClinicalTrials.gov. PLZ4-coated paclitaxel-loaded micelles for the treatment of patients with recurrent or refractory non-muscle invasive bladder cancer]. Identifier: NCT06173349 [Internet. 2024. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06173349. Accessed 20.9.2025.
19.
Kastner L, Rieger C, Pfister D, et al. HIVEC as an alternative option in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: experiences from a high-volume center. Urol Oncol. 2024;42(8):245.e19–245.e26.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Rink M, Schwarzenbach H, Vetterlein MW, et al. The current role of circulating biomarkers in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Transl Androl Urol. 2019;8(1):61–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Jaromin M, Konecki T, Kutwin P. Revolutionizing treatment: breakthrough approaches for BCG-unresponsive non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cancers. 2024;16(7):1366–1366.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Myers AA, Talwar R, Duan Z, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-unresponsive carcinoma in situ of the bladder. Eur Urol. 2025:S0302–2838(25)04675‑5.
23.
Scilipoti P, Moschini M, Li R, et al. The financial burden of localized and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2025;87(5):536–50.CrossRefPubMed