ArticleCancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII2026
A real-world comparison of nivolumab plus cabozantinib and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib focusing on safety outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: results from the JK-FOOT consortium.
Article in Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Geriatric Population: Toward a Frailty-Adapted Therapeutic Paradigm.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Future direction of systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma: lessons from final and extended follow-up data from the CheckMate 9ER trial.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImmune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapy is a standard first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), with combinations such as nivolumab plus cabozantinib (Nivo + Cabo) and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib (Pem + Len) demonstrating favorable oncologic outcomes. However, no direct comparisons between these two regimens have been conducted. This study aimed to compare the safety and oncologic outcomes of Nivo + Cabo and Pem + Len in patients with mRCC.
methodsThis retrospective study included 185 patients with mRCC treated with Nivo + Cabo (n = 81) or Pem + Len (n = 104) between January 2018 and June 2025 across multiple institutions. The primary outcome was a comparison of treatment-related adverse events (TrAEs). Oncologic outcomes, including objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS), were compared using one-to-one propensity score matching.
resultsAny-grade TrAEs occurred in 90% of patients in the Nivo + Cabo group and 92% in the Pem + Len group (p = 0.6). Severe TrAEs (grade ≥ 3) were more frequent in the Pem + Len group (44%) than in the Nivo + Cabo group (30%, p = 0.048). Tyrosine kinase inhibitor dose reduction and treatment discontinuation rates were similar between groups. In the matched cohort (Nivo + Cabo: n = 74; Pem + Len: n = 74), ORRs were comparable (66% vs. 71%, p = 0.6). With a median follow-up of 17 months, no significant differences were observed in PFS (p = 0.4), CSS (p = 0.9), or OS (p = 0.5).
conclusionsNivo + Cabo and Pem + Len demonstrated similar oncologic efficacy as first-line treatments for mRCC. However, Pem + Len was associated with more severe TrAEs. Careful toxicity management and shared decision-making are essential when selecting ICI-based combinations.
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.