ArticleBMC cancer2023
A non-inferiority randomized phase III trial of standard immunotherapy by checkpoint inhibitors vs. reduced dose intensity in responding patients with metastatic cancer: the MOIO protocol study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05078047 (Randomized Phase III Trial of Standard Immunotherapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Randomized Phase III Trial of Standard Immunotherapy (IO) by Checkpoint Inhibitors, Versus Reduced Dose Intensity of IO in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer in Response After 6 Months of Standard IO
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of the first-line systemic treatments in patients with advanced-stage urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Carbon Footprint of Antibody-Based Drugs and Biologics Using Hybrid Life Cycle Assessment.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Accelerating cancer treatment optimisation: A multistakeholder roadmap from the Cancer Medicines Forum.Journal of cancer policy · 2026Review
- Integrating Environmental Impact in Health Technology Assessment: An Exploratory Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Sample Size Calculation in Dose Optimization Trials Using the Margin of Practical Non-Inferiority.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Extending the dosing intervals of nivolumab: model-based simulations in unselected cancer patients.British journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors in treating metastatic urothelial cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Killing a fly with a sledgehammer: Atezolizumab exposure in real-world lung cancer patients.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Observational
- REFINE-Lung implements a novel multi-arm randomised trial design to address possible immunotherapy overtreatment.The Lancet. Oncology · 2023Review
- Therapeutic Management of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Revolution in Every Decade.Cancers · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmunotherapy (IO) has become a standard of care for treating various types of metastatic cancers and has significantly improved clinical outcome. With the exception of metastatic melanoma in complete response for which treatment can be stopped at 6 months, these treatments are currently administered until either disease progression for some IO, 2 years for others, or unacceptable toxicity. However, a growing number of studies are reporting maintenance of response despite discontinuation of therapy. There is currently no evidence of a dose effect of IO in pharmacokinetic studies. Maintaining efficacy despite a reduction in treatment intensity by decreasing the frequency of administration in patients with highly selected metastatic cancer, is the hypothesis evaluated in the MOIO study. METHOD/
designThis non-inferiority, randomized phase III study aims to compare the standard regimen to a 3 monthly regimen of variousIO drugs in adult patients with metastatic cancer in partial (PR) or complete response (CR) after 6 months of standard IO dosing (except melanoma in CR). This is a French national study conducted in 36 centers. The main objective is to demonstrate that the efficacy of a three-monthly administration is not unacceptably less efficacious than a standard administration. Secondary objectives are cost-effectiveness, quality of life (QOL), anxiety, fear of relapse, response rate, overall survival and toxicity. After 6 months of standard IO, patients with partial or complete response will be randomized 1:1 between standard IO or a reduced intensity dose of IO, administered every 3 months. The randomization will be stratified on therapy line,, tumor type, IO type and response status. The primary endpoint is the hazard ratio of progression-free survival. With a planned study duration of 6 years, including 36 months enrolment time, 646 patients are planned to demonstrate with a statistical level of evidence of 5% that the reduced IO regimen is non-inferior to the standard IO regimen, with a relative non-inferiority margin set at 1.3. DISCUSSION: Should the hypothesis of non-inferiority with an IO reduced dose intensity be validated, alternate scheduling could preserve efficacy while being cost-effective and allowing a reduction of the toxicity, with an increase in patient's QOL.
trial registrationNCT05078047.
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.