Emerging Role of Padeliporfin Vascular-Targeted Photodynamic Therapy In Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Comprehensive Systematic Review
Abstract
Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is an uncommon malignancy, accounting for only 5–10% of urothelial tumors, and often presents with invasive disease. Consequently, radical nephroureterectomy remains the standard treatment despite its substantial impact on renal function. Padeliporfin vascular‑targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) is a novel kidney‑sparing modality in which intravenously administered padeliporfin is activated by endoluminal near‑infrared laser, selectively occlude tumor microvasculature and inducing coagulative necrosis while preserving surrounding tissues. This review synthesizes evidence from a Phase I study and the Phase III ENLIGHTED trial involving adults with low‑grade, non–muscle‑invasive UTUC suitable for kidney-sparing management, focusing on complete response (CR), durability of response, renal preservation, and safety outcomes. A search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science identified seven reports arising from these two single‑arm study programs. In the Phase I trial, which predominantly included patients with residual or recurrent UTUC following unsuccessful endoscopic treatment, the 30‑day CR rate was 50%,, increasing to 68% after retreatment of partial responders, with an overall response rate of 94% and preservation of both renal function and kidneys at 6 months. In the ENLIGHTED trial, which enrolled patients with one or two small, biopsy‑confirmed low‑grade lesions, padeliporfin VTP achieved a CR rate of 73% at first assessment, overall response rates exceeding 86%, and local recurrence rates ranging from 3.2 to 10.8%. Among complete responders, 88% maintained CR for at least 12 months, and the median duration of response was not reached after more than 23.9 months of follow-up. Adverse events were predominantly transient Grade 1–2 urinary or flank symptoms; Grade 3 events were infrequent and short-lived, and no phototoxicity or ureteral strictures were reported. Padeliporfin VTP appears to be a promising kidney‑sparing treatment for selected patients with low‑grade UTUC, although confirmation in randomized controlled trials is needed.
Keywords: Padeliporfin, Photodynamic Therapy, Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma, Kidney-Sparing Surgery, Endoscopic Ablation
Full Text:
PDFReferences
REFERENCES
Margulis, V., Kaufman, R., Marcq, G., et al. (2025). ENLIGHTED phase 3 study: Interim results of efficacy and safety of padeliporfin vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) in the treatment of low-grade upper tract urothelial cancer (LG UTUC). Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.17_suppl.lba4513
Margulis, V., Kaufman, R., Marcq, G., et al. (2024). ENLIGHTED phase 3 study: Efficacy and safety of padeliporfin vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) for treatment of low-grade upper tract urothelial cancer (LG UTUC). Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.tps4622
Coleman, J., Shore, N., Marcq, G., et al. (2024). Efficacy and safety of padeliporfin vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) for treatment of low-grade upper tract urothelial cancer (LG UTUC): Phase 3 preliminary results. Journal of Urology.
Yip, W., Sjoberg, D., Nogueira, L., et al. (2023). Final results of a phase I trial of WST-11 (TOOKAD soluble) vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003202
Coleman, J., Margulis, V., Scherz, A., et al. (2023). A phase 3 multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of padeliporfin vascular targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) in treatment of low-grade upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC). Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.tps4613
Kawada, T., Laukhtina, E., Quhal, F., et al. (2022). Oncologic and safety outcomes for endoscopic surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. European Urology Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.11.016
Siech, C., Jannello, L., de Angelis, M., et al. (2025). Endoscopic ablation versus nephroureterectomy in localized low-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A comparison in terms of cancer-specific and other-cause mortality. World Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-025-05626-0
Shen, C.-Y., Jou, Y., Kan, W.-C., et al. (2022). Outcome of non-muscle invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma receiving endoscopic ablation: An inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051307
Chen, Y.-T., Yu, C.-C., Yeh, H., et al. (2021). Endoscopic management versus radical nephroureterectomy for localized upper tract urothelial carcinoma in a high endemic region. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83495-4
Nogueira, L., Tracey, A., Alvim, R. G., et al. (2021). Updated treatment results from a phase I study of WST-11 phototherapy (VTP) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Journal of Urology.
Almås, B., Halvorsen, O., Gjengstø, P., et al. (2016). Grading of urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract according to the World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology classification from 2004 is a valuable tool when considering whether a patient is suitable for endoscopic treatment. Scandinavian Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.3109/21681805.2016.1144220
Kefalas, C., Datseris, N., Sitaridis, K., et al. (2026). Kidney-sparing approaches in upper tract urothelial cancer: A narrative review. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.103303
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30829/contagion.v8i3.29276
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Aldy Ridho Pangestu

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.





