ArticleResearch and reports in urology2026
Clinical Outcomes of Sequential Cabozantinib and Axitinib After First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Single-Center Exploratory Study.
Article in Research and reports in urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Evidence regarding sequential vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy after first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains limited. This exploratory study described the clinical outcomes of sequential cabozantinib and axitinib administered as second- and third-line therapy, with additional analyses according to treatment order and early progressive disease (PD) status. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 12 patients with advanced RCC who sequentially received cabozantinib and axitinib as second- and third-line therapy after first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab between September 2018 and January 2026. Patients were categorized into cabozantinib-to-axitinib (n=8) and axitinib-to-cabozantinib (n=4) groups. Tumor response was assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Combined time to treatment failure (TTF) was measured from second-line initiation to progression during third-line therapy or death; event-free patients were censored at last follow-up. Results: Among patients receiving second-line cabozantinib, three (37.5%) had stable disease and five (62.5%) had PD; among those receiving axitinib, three (75.0%) had a partial response and one (25.0%) had stable disease. Median second-line TTF was 5.1 months (interquartile range [IQR], 2.6-8.6) with cabozantinib and 10.1 months (IQR, 8.9-10.4) with axitinib (p=0.154). Median third-line TTF was 3.0 months (IQR, 1.6-13.6) with cabozantinib and 3.5 months (IQR, 2.7-5.7) with axitinib (p=0.808). Median combined TTF was 14.2 months for axitinib-to-cabozantinib and 10.4 months for cabozantinib-to-axitinib (p=0.359), and 8.3 versus 13.9 months in patients with early versus non-early PD (p=0.113). Conclusion: Sequential cabozantinib and axitinib therapy after nivolumab plus ipilimumab was feasible in selected patients with advanced RCC. Given the small exploratory cohort, no firm conclusion regarding the comparative efficacy of the two sequences can be drawn. Patients with early PD showed a numerical trend toward shorter combined TTF, although this comparison was statistically inconclusive.
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.