Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35810751›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2022

Niraparib plus nivolumab or niraparib plus ipilimumab in patients with platinum-sensitive advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised, phase 1b/2 trial.

Kim A Reiss, Rosemarie Mick, Ursina Teitelbaum, Mark O'Hara, Charles Schneider, Ryan Massa, Thomas Karasic, Rashmi Tondon, Chioma Onyiah, Mary Kate Gosselin and 3 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03404960 (PARPVAX), which is not on this map. Cited by 109 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT03404960 phase1 / phase2completednot on this map

PARPVAX: Parpvax: A Phase 1b/2, Open Label Study of Niraparib Plus Either Ipilimumab or Nivolumab in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Whose Disease Has Not Progressed on Platinum-based Therapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PennsylvaniaRan2018 to 2024Enrolled104ConditionsPancreatic AdenocarcinomaArmsNiraparib + Nivolumab, Niraparib + Ipilimumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

109 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 129 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Mitochondrial NADP(H)-dependent de novo dTMP biosynthesis counteracts the cytotoxicity of PARP inhibitors.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

49 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kim A ReissAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA. Electronic address: kim.reissbinder@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Rosemarie MickAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Ursina TeitelbaumAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Mark O'HaraAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Charles SchneiderAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Ryan MassaAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Thomas KarasicAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Rashmi TondonAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Pathology, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Chioma OnyiahAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Mary Kate GosselinAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Alyssa DonzeAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Susan M DomchekAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
Robert H VonderheideAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.
University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA CAN CTR SUPPORT GRANTP30CA016520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Robert H. Vonderheide · 1985 to 2026
$222.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016520
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEstablishing alternatives to lifelong chemotherapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has been proposed to address chemotherapy resistance and cumulative toxicity. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have shown efficacy in this setting, and concurrent immune checkpoint blockade could offer synergistic tumour control. The aim of this study was to test the safety and antitumour activity of maintenance with PARP inhibition combined with immune checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had a stable response to platinum-based chemotherapy.

methodsWe conducted an open-label, randomised, phase 1b/2 study of niraparib plus anti-PD-1 (nivolumab) or anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer whose cancer had not progressed after at least 16 weeks of platinum-based therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via permuted block randomisation (block sizes 2 and 4) to niraparib 200 mg orally per day plus either nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks (later changed to 480 mg intravenously every 4 weeks based on manufacturer update) or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks for four doses. The primary endpoints were safety and progression-free survival at 6 months. Treatment groups were not compared for activity, which was assessed in each group against a clinically meaningful progression-free survival at 6 months of 44% (null hypothesis). Superiority of a treatment regimen could be declared if 6-month progression-free survival was 60%, and inferiority if 6-month progression-free survival was 27%. All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and had at least one post-treatment assessment of response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 were included in the efficacy population. The safety population consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03404960, and enrolment is completed and follow-up is ongoing.

findings91 patients were enrolled between Feb 7, 2018, and Oct 5, 2021 and were randomly assigned to niraparib plus nivolumab (n=46) or niraparib plus ipilimumab (n=45). Of these patients, 84 were evaluable for the progression-free survival endpoint (niraparib plus nivolumab=44; niraparib plus ipilimumab=40). Median follow-up was 23·0 months (IQR 15·0-31·5). 6-month progression-free survival was 20·6% (95% CI 8·3-32·9; p=0·0002 vs the null hypothesis of 44%) in the niraparib plus nivolumab group; and 59·6% (44·3-74·9; p=0·045) in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group. Ten (22%) of 46 patients in the niraparib plus nivolumab group and 23 (50%) of 45 patients in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group had a grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the niraparib plus nivolumab group were hypertension (in four [8%] patients), anaemia (two [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (two [4%]) whereas in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group these were fatigue (in six [14%]), anaemia (five [11%]), and hypertension (four [9%]). There were no treatment-related deaths.

interpretationThe primary endpoint of 6-month progression-free survival was met in the niraparib plus ipilimumab maintenance group, whereas niraparib plus nivolumab yielded inferior progression-free survival. These findings highlight the potential for non-cytotoxic maintenance therapies in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

fundingBristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, the Basser Center Young Leadership Council, The Konner Foundation, The Pearl and Philip Basser Innovation Research Award, the Anonymous Foundation, and the US National Institutes of Health.

Indexed as

HypertensionPancreatic NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsIndazolesIpilimumabNivolumabPiperidinesPlatinumPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase InhibitorsImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsIndazolesIpilimumabniraparibNivolumabPiperidinesPlatinumPoly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID35810751
PMCPMC9339497
OpenAlexW4284886018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.