ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2022
Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in elderly patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, version 3.0.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Guideline
- Age-Related Survival Disparities in Advanced Renal Carcinoma in the Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Era using the SEER Database and Meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Epidemiology of cancer in older adults: a systematic review of age-related differences in solid malignancies treatment.Current oncology reports · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus cabozantinib in octogenarian patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Immunosenescence and cancer: molecular hallmarks, tumor microenvironment remodeling, and age-specific immunotherapy challenges.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Molecular and immune landscape of tumours in geriatric patients with non-small cell lung cancer, melanoma and renal cell carcinoma.BMJ oncology · 2025Article
- PD-1 inhibitor-augmented HAIC-TKI therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis: real-world survival benefits, safety, and subgroup-specific efficacy.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Real-world outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combination therapy in older adult patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a multi-center, retrospective analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in elderly patients with primary liver cancer: a retrospective, multicenter, real-world cohort study.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo clarify the efficacy and safety profile of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for elderly patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 149 mRCC patients treated with nivolumab monotherapy as subsequent therapy (n = 89) and nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy (n = 60) at 5 affiliated institutions. The patients were divided according to age: > 70 (elderly) vs. ≤ 70 years (young). Efficacy was analyzed by comparing progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) between elderly and young patients. Safety was assessed by comparing the incidence rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs).
resultsIn the nivolumab monotherapy group, 34/89 patients (38%) were classified as elderly. There was no significant difference in PFS (p = 0.607), OS (p = 0.383), ORR (p = 0.0699), or DCR (p = 0.881) between elderly and young patients. In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 20/60 patients (33%) were classified as elderly. There was no significant difference in PFS (p = 0.995), OS (p = 0.714), ORR (p = 0.763), or DCR (p = 1.000) between the two groups. The incidence rate of irAEs was not significantly different in the nivolumab (any grade: p = 0.121; grade ≥ 3: p = 0.542) or in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab (any grade: p = 0.666; grade ≥ 3: p = 0.576) group; a higher rate of gastrointestinal irAEs was observed in elderly than in young patients (any grade 15% vs. 3%).
conclusionsThe efficacy and safety of nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab were comparable between elderly and young patients. Thus, chronological age alone should not be a contraindication in the use of ICIs for mRCC.
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.