ReviewPharmaceutics2024
Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Acting as Tormentors of Advanced Tumors by Unleashing Immune Cells and Associated Collateral Damage.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Extracellular Matrix Metalloproteinases: Implications for Renal Cell Carcinoma Pathophysiology, Diagnostics, and Therapeutics.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Engineering strategies and binding mechanisms of therapeutic anti-PD-1 antibodies approved by regulatory agencies globally.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Biology, Immunotherapy, and Evolving Prognostic Factors.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Review
- Review
- Article
- Immune evasion in cancer: mechanisms and cutting-edge therapeutic approaches.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Role of Immunotherapy in Ovarian Cancer: Advances, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Cancer treatment and research · 2025Review
- Potential signaling pathways, biomarkers, natural drugs, and chronic myeloid leukemia therapeutics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Deciphering molecular landscape of breast cancer progression and insights from functional genomics and therapeutic explorations followed by in vitro validation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Combining immune checkpoint inhibitors, specifically nivolumab (anti-PD-1) and ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4), holds substantial promise in revolutionizing cancer treatment. This review explores the transformative impact of these combinations, emphasizing their potential for enhancing therapeutic outcomes across various cancers. Immune checkpoint proteins, such as PD1 and CTLA4, play a pivotal role in modulating immune responses. Blocking these checkpoints unleashes anticancer activity, and the synergy observed when combining multiple checkpoint inhibitors underscores their potential for enhanced efficacy. Nivolumab and ipilimumab harness the host's immune system to target cancer cells, presenting a powerful approach to prevent tumor development. Despite their efficacy, immune checkpoint inhibitors are accompanied by a distinct set of adverse effects, particularly immune-related adverse effects affecting various organs. Understanding these challenges is crucial for optimizing treatment strategies and ensuring patient well-being. Ongoing clinical trials are actively exploring the combination of checkpoint inhibitory therapies, aiming to decipher their synergistic effects and efficacy against diverse cancer types. This review discusses the mechanisms, adverse effects, and various clinical trials involving nivolumab and ipilimumab across different cancers, emphasizing their transformative impact on cancer treatment.
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.