First-Line Ipilimumab with Nivolumab versus Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Patients with Intermediate- or Poor-Risk Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

IF 1.9 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL Pub Date : 2025-04-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.15586/jkc.v12i2.387
Micah Ostrowski, Yeonjung Jo, Georges Gebrael, Chadi Hage Chehade, Zeynep Irem Ozay, Blake Nordblad, Ayana Srivastava, Diya Garg, Richard Ji, Gliceida Galarza Fortuna, Vinay Mathew Thomas, Beverly Chigarira, Ethan Anderson, Neeraj Agarwal, Benjamin L Maughan, Umang Swami
{"title":"First-Line Ipilimumab with Nivolumab versus Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Patients with Intermediate- or Poor-Risk Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.","authors":"Micah Ostrowski, Yeonjung Jo, Georges Gebrael, Chadi Hage Chehade, Zeynep Irem Ozay, Blake Nordblad, Ayana Srivastava, Diya Garg, Richard Ji, Gliceida Galarza Fortuna, Vinay Mathew Thomas, Beverly Chigarira, Ethan Anderson, Neeraj Agarwal, Benjamin L Maughan, Umang Swami","doi":"10.15586/jkc.v12i2.387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ipilimumab with nivolumab (Ipi + Nivo) and immune checkpoint inhibitors with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ICI + TKI) are the first-line approved treatments for intermediate- and poor-risk metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC); however, they have not been compared head-to-head in prospective trials to guide treatment selection. Thereupon, we sought to compare survival outcomes of patients receiving first-line Ipi + Nivo versus ICI + TKI, using a large, real-world database among patients with intermediate- and poor-risk mccRCC. This retrospective cohort study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, where patients with mccRCC with intermediate- or poor-risk who received first-line Ipi + Nivo or ICI + TKI between 20 June, 2016, and 26 January, 2023, were included. Primary outcomes were real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and real-world overall survival (rwOS), summarized via Kaplan-Meier survival estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and compared in the context of propensity score (PS) matching weighted analysis. Of the 12,707 patients in the dataset, 1,438 with mccRCC met eligibility and were included. After PS matching weighted analysis, no significant difference in rwOS was noted between both groups (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.86-1.19; p = 0.91); however, rwTTNT was significantly shorter with Ipi + Nivo than with ICI + TKI (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.89; p < 0.001). In this large real-world study, there was evidence that rwOS was comparable, while rwTTNT was superior in patients receiving ICI + TKI compared to those receiving Ipi + Nivo. These real-world data offer important guidance for clinicians in choosing between Ipi + Nivo and ICI + TKI as frontline treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":44291,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL","volume":"12 2","pages":"27-36"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12037790/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Kidney Cancer and VHL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15586/jkc.v12i2.387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ipilimumab with nivolumab (Ipi + Nivo) and immune checkpoint inhibitors with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (ICI + TKI) are the first-line approved treatments for intermediate- and poor-risk metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC); however, they have not been compared head-to-head in prospective trials to guide treatment selection. Thereupon, we sought to compare survival outcomes of patients receiving first-line Ipi + Nivo versus ICI + TKI, using a large, real-world database among patients with intermediate- and poor-risk mccRCC. This retrospective cohort study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, where patients with mccRCC with intermediate- or poor-risk who received first-line Ipi + Nivo or ICI + TKI between 20 June, 2016, and 26 January, 2023, were included. Primary outcomes were real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and real-world overall survival (rwOS), summarized via Kaplan-Meier survival estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and compared in the context of propensity score (PS) matching weighted analysis. Of the 12,707 patients in the dataset, 1,438 with mccRCC met eligibility and were included. After PS matching weighted analysis, no significant difference in rwOS was noted between both groups (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.86-1.19; p = 0.91); however, rwTTNT was significantly shorter with Ipi + Nivo than with ICI + TKI (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.89; p < 0.001). In this large real-world study, there was evidence that rwOS was comparable, while rwTTNT was superior in patients receiving ICI + TKI compared to those receiving Ipi + Nivo. These real-world data offer important guidance for clinicians in choosing between Ipi + Nivo and ICI + TKI as frontline treatment.

一线易普利姆单抗联合纳伏单抗与免疫检查点抑制剂联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂治疗中危或低危转移性透明细胞肾细胞癌
Ipilimumab联合nivolumab (Ipi + Nivo)和免疫检查点抑制剂联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(ICI + TKI)是中低风险转移性透明细胞肾细胞癌(mccRCC)的一线批准治疗方法;然而,它们还没有在前瞻性试验中进行正面比较,以指导治疗选择。因此,我们试图比较一线接受Ipi + Nivo和ICI + TKI的患者的生存结果,使用一个大型的、真实的数据库,在中危和低危mccRCC患者中。这项回顾性队列研究使用了一个全国性的电子健康记录衍生的未识别数据库,其中纳入了2016年6月20日至2023年1月26日期间接受一线Ipi + Nivo或ICI + TKI治疗的中度或低风险mccRCC患者。主要结局是到下一次治疗的实际时间(rwTTNT)和实际总生存期(rwOS),通过95%置信区间(CIs)的Kaplan-Meier生存估计进行总结,并在倾向评分(PS)匹配加权分析的背景下进行比较。在数据集中的12707例患者中,1438例mccRCC患者符合入选条件。经PS匹配加权分析,两组rwOS无显著差异(HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.86-1.19;P = 0.91);然而,Ipi + Nivo组的rwTTNT明显短于ICI + TKI组(HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.89;P < 0.001)。在这项大型现实世界研究中,有证据表明rwOS具有可比性,而rwTTNT在接受ICI + TKI的患者中优于接受Ipi + Nivo的患者。这些真实数据为临床医生选择Ipi + Nivo和ICI + TKI作为一线治疗提供了重要指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
6.20%
发文量
22
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信