ReviewJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2021
Risks and benefits of reinduction ipilimumab/nivolumab in melanoma patients previously treated with ipilimumab/nivolumab.
Review in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of lifileucel, a one-time autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) cell therapy, in patients with advanced melanoma after progression on immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies: pooled analysis of consecutive cohorts of the C-144-01 study.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2022Trial
- Real-World Outcomes of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Metastatic Melanoma as Third Line and Beyond.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy after tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in unresectable melanoma.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Observational
- Efficacy of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab Rechallenge in a Long-Term Melanoma Survivor: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
- Bridging the Gap: Incorporating Lifileucel Into Management of Advanced PD-1 Blockade Resistant Melanomas.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Article
- Retreatment, rechallenge, and escalation with subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies across cancers after initial failure.ESMO open · 2025Review
- Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Cell Therapy for the Treatment of Advanced Melanoma: From Patient Identification to Posttreatment Management.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2025Review
- LPCAT1 promotes melanoma cell proliferation via Akt signaling.Oncology reports · 2024Article
- The features and management of acquired resistance to PD1-based therapy in metastatic melanoma.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2024Article
- Article
- Factors Determining Long-Term Antitumor Responses to Immune Checkpoint Blockade Therapy in Melanoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn melanoma patients who progress after prior ipilimumab/nivolumab (ipi/nivo) combination immunotherapy, there is no information regarding the risks and benefits of reinduction ipi/nivo.
methodsThis was a retrospective review of 26 melanoma patients treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) since 2012 who received reinduction ipi/nivo at least 6 months following completion of an initial course of ipi/nivo. We collected data on demographics, genetics, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), best overall responses (BORs), time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS).
resultsThe BOR rate (complete response+partial response) was 74% (95% CI 52% to 90%) after the first course of ipi/nivo but only 23% (95% CI 8% to 45%)) after reinduction. Response to reinduction did not correlate with response to the initial course. Among the 16 patients who had an objective response to the first course, only four (25%) responded to reinduction. Of five patients who did not respond to the first course, one responded to reinduction. For all patients, median TTF was 5.3 months after reinduction; TTF was shorter for reinduction than for the first course in 85% of patients. Median OS from reinduction was 8.4 months; estimated 2-year OS was 18%. Although reinduction was associated with fewer irAEs than the initial course of ipi/nivo (58% of patients vs 85% of patients in the initial course), eight (31%) patients experienced at least one new irAE after the second course.
conclusionsBOR rate and TTF were markedly less favorable after reinduction with ipi/nivo than after the initial course of ipi/nivo. Reinduction ipi/nivo was associated with frequent irAEs although less frequent than for the initial course.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.