Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39941841›Full record

ArticleCancers2025

Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Patients 75 Years and Older: Multicenter Retrospective Study.

Shimpei Yamashita, Shuzo Hamamoto, Junya Furukawa, Kazutoshi Fujita, Masayuki Takahashi, Makito Miyake, Noriyuki Ito, Hideto Iwamoto, Yasuo Kohjimoto, Isao Hara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
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

10 authors.

Shimpei YamashitaDepartment of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama 641-0012, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7402-6164
Shuzo HamamotoDepartment of Nephro-urology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya 467-8601, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9968-7468
Junya FurukawaDepartment of Urology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe 650-0017, Japan.
Kazutoshi FujitaDepartment of Urology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, 377-2 Onohigashi, Osakasayama 589-0014, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6774-7497
Masayuki TakahashiDepartment of Urology, Tokushima University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 3-18-15 Kuramo-to-cho, Tokushima 770-8503, Japan.
Makito MiyakeDepartment of Urology, Nara Medical University, 840 Shinjo-cho, Kashihara 634-8521, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9503-7356
Noriyuki ItoDepartment of Urology, Japanese Red Cross Wakayama Medical Center, 4-20 Komatsubara-dori, Wakayama 640-8558, Japan.
Hideto IwamotoDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, 86 Nishi-cho, Yonago 683-8503, Japan.
Yasuo KohjimotoDepartment of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama 641-0012, Japan.
Isao HaraDepartment of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama 641-0012, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4542-4045

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesThe efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) for elderly patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma have not been reported with sufficient evidence. Our study therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of NIVO + IPI between patients ≥75 years and patients <75 years with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed a multi-center cohort of the 156 patients that received NIVO + IPI treatment at eight institutions. Among them, 33 patients were ≥75 years old, and the remainder were <75 years old.

resultsPatient demographics and tumor characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups except for age. The objective response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival, or cancer-specific survival were not significantly different between the groups. However, overall survival in the patients ≥75 years was significantly shorter than that in the patients <75 years (median: 18 months vs. 46 months,

conclusionsAlthough the clinical efficacy and safety of NIVO + IPI was demonstrated in patients ≥75 years old, it is suggested that the indication for NIVO + IPI in this age group should be carefully considered, taking into account patients' expected life expectancy.

Indexed as

efficacyelderlyimmunotherapynivolumab plus ipilimumabrenal cell carcinomatolerability

Identifiers

PMID39941841
PMCPMC11816081

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.