Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35312175›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2022

Effect of systemic therapies or best supportive care after disease progression to both nivolumab and cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: The Meet-Uro 19BEYOND study.

Giandomenico Roviello, Elisabetta Gambale, Roberta Giorgione, Daniele Santini, Marco Stellato, Giuseppe Fornarini, Sara Elena Rebuzzi, Umberto Basso, Davide Bimbatti, Laura Doni and 12 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.

Giandomenico RovielloDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5504-8237
Elisabetta GambaleMedical Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Roberta GiorgioneMedical Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Daniele SantiniDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Marco StellatoDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe FornariniMedical Oncology Unit 1, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino di Genova, Genoa, Italy.
Sara Elena RebuzziMedical Oncology Unit, San Paolo General Hospital, Savona, Italy.
Umberto BassoMedicalOncology Unit 1, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Davide BimbattiMedicalOncology Unit 1, Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Laura DoniMedical Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Gabriella NesiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Melissa BersanelliMedical Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Sebastiano ButiMedical Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
Ugo De GiorgiIRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) "Dino Amadori", Italy.
Luca GalliMedical Oncology Unit 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy.
Andrea SbranaDepartment of Surgical, Medical and Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Raffaele ConcaDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Onco-Hematology, IRCCS-CROB, Referral Cancer Center of Basilicata, Rionero in Vulture, Italy.
Claudia CarellaIstituto Oncologico Giovanni Paolo II, Bari, Italy.
Emanuele NaglieriIstituto Oncologico Giovanni Paolo II, Bari, Italy.
Sandro PignataDepartment of Urology and Gynecology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples, Italy.
Giuseppe ProcopioDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2498-402X
Lorenzo AntonuzzoMedical Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3349-5604
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi · ITIstituto Oncologico Veneto · ITIstituto Tumori Bari · ITUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · ITUniversity of Florence · ITUniversity of Parma · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana · ITCentro di Riferimento Oncologico della Basilicata · ITFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · ITIstituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori · ITOspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITOspedale San Paolo · ITUniversity of Pisa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNivolumab and cabozantinib are currently approved agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but there are no data available for patients progressing to both treatments. The aim of this study was to compare active therapeutic options and best supportive care (BSC) after progression to nivolumab and cabozantinib in mRCC.

methodsIn this retrospective study, we selected 50 patients from eight Italian centers. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall survival (OS) of patients on active treatment versus BSC. Secondary endpoints were the progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). The efficacy of active therapy was also investigated.

resultsAfter progression to both nivolumab and cabozantinib, 57.1% of patients were given active treatment (mainly everolimus and sorafenib) while 42.9% received BSC. The median OS was 13 months (95% CI: 4-NR) in actively treated patients and 3 months (95% CI: 2-4) in BSC patients (p = 0.001). Patients treated with sorafenib had better disease control than those treated with everolimus (stable disease: 71.4% vs. 16.7%, progression disease: 14.3% vs. 58.3%; p = 0.03), with no significant differences in PFS (5 and 3 months, 95% CI: 1-6 vs. 2-5; p = 0.6) and OS (12 and 4 months, 95% CI: 3-NR vs. 2-NR; p = 0.2).

conclusionAfter treatment with both nivolumab and cabozantinib, the choice of a safe active systemic therapy offered better outcomes than BSC.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsAnilidesDisease ProgressionEverolimusHumansNivolumabPyridinesRetrospective StudiesSorafenibAnilidesAntineoplastic AgentscabozantinibEverolimusNivolumabPyridinesSorafenibfourth-line therapyimmune checkpoint inhibitorsmetastatic renal cell carcinomatargeted therapytyrosine kinase inhibitorsvascular endothelial growth factor receptor

Identifiers

PMID35312175
PMCPMC9385587
OpenAlexW4221037874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.