Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41317031›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2026

Real-world efficacy and toxicity of ipilimumab and nivolumab as a first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma according to IMDC risk criteria-A multi-center retrospective analysis on behalf of the GUARDIANS group.

Hendrik Dinkel, Linus Materna, Ramona Stelmach, Stefanie Zschäbitz, Stephanie Neuberger, Can D Aydogdu, Jozefina Casuscelli, Timo Egenolf, Matteo Silberg, Julie Steinestel and 12 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

22 authors.

Hendrik DinkelDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7264-6335
Linus MaternaDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Ramona StelmachDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2083-5561
Stefanie ZschäbitzDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Stephanie NeubergerDepartment of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Can D AydogduDepartment of Urology, LMU University Hospital, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Jozefina CasuscelliInterdisciplinary Working Group Kidney Cancer of the German Cancer Society (IAGN-DKG).
Timo EgenolfDepartment of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Matteo SilbergDepartment of Urology, Marienhospital Herne, Ruhr University Bochum, Herne, Germany.
Julie SteinestelDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Arne StraussDepartment of Urology, University Medicine Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Florian KirchhoffDepartment of Urology, TUM University Hospital Rechts der Isar Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Marit AhrensInterdisciplinary Working Group Kidney Cancer of the German Cancer Society (IAGN-DKG).
Pia PaffenholzInterdisciplinary Working Group Kidney Cancer of the German Cancer Society (IAGN-DKG).
Richard CathomasDivision of Oncology/Hematology, Kantonspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland.
Berna C ÖzdemirDepartment of Medical Oncology, Inselspital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Christopher GosslerDepartment of Urology, Krankenhaus St. Josef, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Philipp IvanyiInterdisciplinary Working Group Kidney Cancer of the German Cancer Society (IAGN-DKG).
Marc RehlinghausDepartment of Urology, University Hospital and Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Thomas HilserDepartment of Internal Medicine (Tumor Research), University of Duisburg-Essen, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)-University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Viktor GrünwaldInterdisciplinary Working Group Kidney Cancer of the German Cancer Society (IAGN-DKG).
Katrin SchlackDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ipilimumab and nivolumab are recommended as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic or advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate or poor risk. We retrospectively evaluated efficacy and safety in a multi-center real-world cohort with 356 patients initiating ipilimumab and nivolumab from 17 centers in Germany and Switzerland. Median age was 64 years, most patients were male (69.1%) and had clear cell histology (74.1%). IMDC risk was intermediate in 61.8% and poor in 28.7%. About 37.1% of cases did not meet the inclusion criteria for the CheckMate 214 pivotal study (e.g., poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [Performance Status Scale] [ECOG] status, comorbidities, brain metastases, and impaired renal function). After a median follow-up of 17.5 months, complete response was seen in 8.7%, partial response in 28.7% of patients. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.4-10.6) and median overall survival (OS) 39 months (95% CI 27.5-50.5). Subgroup analysis of patients with non-clear cell histology showed a shorter PFS and OS. Other negative predictors were poor ECOG, fewer induction cycles, ineligibility to pivotal study, and hepatic metastases. Adverse events occurred in 76.4% of patients (35.4% ≥ grade 3). High-dose corticosteroids were applied in 27.3% of cases. Cabozantinib was most frequently administered (63.4%) as subsequent therapy and showed superior OS and PFS compared to other second-line options. Our data support ipilimumab and nivolumab as a first-line treatment of aRCC with robust efficacy and safety. Patient selection was less restrictive in our clinical practice and may explain differences to CheckMate 214 trial.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Renal CellIpilimumabKidney NeoplasmsNivolumabAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedProgression-Free SurvivalRetrospective StudiesSwitzerlandIpilimumabNivolumabimmunotherapyipilimumabnivolumabreal‐worldrenal cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID41317031
PMCPMC12963715

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.