Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib for RCC
This was a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy versus sunitinib monotherapy. Randomization (in a 1:1 ratio) was performed with a block size of 4 with stratification according to IMDC risk score (0 vs. 1 or 2 vs. 3 to 6) and geographic region (United States vs. Canada and Europe vs. the rest of the world). Nivolumab and ipilimumab were administered intravenously at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram over a period of 60 minutes and 1 mg per kilogram over a period of 30 minutes, respectively, every 3 weeks for four doses (induction phase), followed by nivolumab monotherapy at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks (maintenance phase). Sunitinib was administered at a dose of 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle. No dose reductions were allowed for nivolumab or ipilimumab. Dose delays for adverse events were permitted in both groups. Patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab had to discontinue both nivolumab and ipilimumab if they had a treatment-related adverse event during the induction phase that required discontinuation, and they could not continue on to nivolumab maintenance therapy. Detailed discontinuation criteria are shown in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org. A November 2017 protocol amendment, after the primary end point had been met, permitted crossover from the sunitinib group to the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group. Nivolumab, ipilimumab, and sunitinib were provided by the sponsors, except when sunitinib was procured as a local commercial product in certain countries.
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol. The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Other organizations :
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Centro de Estudios Científicos, University Hospital Olomouc, Palacký University Olomouc, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard University, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, University Hospital Foundation, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Royal Free Hospital, Cancer Research UK, University College London, Queen Mary University of London, Aarhus University Hospital, Rabin Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, BC Cancer Agency, Fundación Arturo López Pérez, Westmead Hospital, Macquarie University, Cancer Research UK Technology, Hôpital Saint-André, Jena University Hospital, Ospedale San Donato, Hospital São Lucas da PUCRS, Niigata University, Hospital Universitario 12 De Octubre, Cleveland Clinic, Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States), Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Institut Gustave Roussy
Nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy
Sunitinib monotherapy
dependent variables
Overall survival
Progression-free survival
Objective response rate
control variables
IMDC risk score (0 vs. 1 or 2 vs. 3 to 6)
Geographic region (United States vs. Canada and Europe vs. the rest of the world)
Dose delays for adverse events permitted in both groups
controls
Positive control: Sunitinib monotherapy
Negative control: Not explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to
get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required