Trial reportCancer2025
Administration of nivolumab plus ipilimumab: Infusion of the fixed-ratio combination versus sequential infusions in two randomized controlled trials of metastatic melanoma (CheckMate 742) and renal cell carcinoma (CheckMate 800).
Trial report in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Phase IIIb, Randomized, Study of Multiple Administration Regimens for Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Subjects With Previously Untreated Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma
Phase II, Randomized, Study of Multiple Administration Regimens for Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Subjects With Renal Cell Carcinoma
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Immunotherapy in urological cancers: new paradigms and a systematic review of clinical trials and real-world evidence.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors can be coadministered as a fixed-ratio combination (FRC) or administered as sequential infusions (ASI). Two randomized, open-label trials compared nivolumab + ipilimumab as a FRC versus ASI in patients with melanoma or renal cell carcinoma.
methodsCheckMate 742 was a Phase 3b study in patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma who received nivolumab 1 mg/kg and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg either concurrently as an FRC or sequentially as ASI every 3 weeks. CheckMate 800 was a Phase 2 study in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received nivolumab 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg either concurrently as an FRC or sequentially as ASI every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of adverse events (AEs) in the Broad Scope Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) Anaphylactic Reaction Standardized MedDRA Queries (SMQ) occurring within 2 days after dosing. Secondary endpoints included incidence of AEs in the Narrow Scope MedDRA Anaphylactic Reaction SMQ.
resultsThere was no clinically relevant difference in safety between FRC and ASI as measured by the primary endpoint in either study; odds ratio (95% CI) of 0.87 (0.30-2.49) and 1.0 (0.30-3.39) for CheckMate 742 and CheckMate 800, respectively. No AEs were reported in the Narrow Scope MedDRA Anaphylactic Reaction SMQ in either study. One death from drug toxicity occurred in CheckMate 742.
conclusionsBoth studies met their primary endpoint. The safety profiles of nivolumab + ipilimumab as FRC or ASI were acceptable and manageable. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02905266 and NCT03029780 for CheckMate 742 and CheckMate 800, respectively.
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.