scholarly journals Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Immunotherapy for Hemodialysis Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 225-228
Author(s):  
Y. Kobayashi ◽  
H. Arai ◽  
M. Honda

Combined immune checkpoint blockade with nivolumab and ipilimumab is standard therapy for the treatment of patients with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma who are at intermediate or poor risk. However, data about the safety and efficacy of combined immune checkpoint blockade with nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients on hemodialysis are limited. Renal function has no known clinically important effects on the pharmacokinetics and clearance of nivolumab and ipilimumab. Further, most immune-related adverse events in patients on hemodialysis are thought to be manageable with the same treatments applied in patients with normal renal function. We present a case of advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma in a patient on hemodialysis who received combined immune checkpoint blockade with nivolumab and ipilimumab and who showed no evident signs of immune-related adverse events. Here, we confirm the safety and efficacy of combined immune checkpoint blockade with nivolumab and ipilimumab in a patient on hemodialysis.

Aging ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (19) ◽  
pp. 19316-19324
Author(s):  
Pengju Li ◽  
Jeifei Xiao ◽  
Bangfen Zhou ◽  
Jinhuan Wei ◽  
Junhang Luo ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e000144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Abou Alaiwi ◽  
Wanling Xie ◽  
Amin H Nassar ◽  
Shaan Dudani ◽  
Dylan Martini ◽  
...  

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) induce a range of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with various degrees of severity. While clinical experience with ICI retreatment following clinically significant irAEs is growing, the safety and efficacy are not yet well characterized.MethodsThis multicenter retrospective study identified patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with ICI who had >1 week therapy interruption for irAEs. Patients were classified into retreatment and discontinuation cohorts based on whether or not they resumed an ICI. Toxicity and clinical outcomes were assessed descriptively.ResultsOf 499 patients treated with ICIs, 80 developed irAEs warranting treatment interruption; 36 (45%) of whom were restarted on an ICI and 44 (55%) who permanently discontinued. Median time to initial irAE was similar between the retreatment and discontinuation cohorts (2.8 vs 2.7 months, p=0.59). The type and grade of irAEs were balanced across the cohorts; however, fewer retreatment patients required corticosteroids (55.6% vs 84.1%, p=0.007) and hospitalizations (33.3% vs 65.9%, p=0.007) for irAE management compared with discontinuation patients. Median treatment holiday before reinitiation was 0.9 months (0.2–31.6). After retreatment, 50% (n=18/36) experienced subsequent irAEs (12 new, 6 recurrent) with 7 (19%) grade 3 events and 13 drug interruptions. Median time to irAE recurrence after retreatment was 2.8 months (range: 0.3–13.8). Retreatment resulted in 6 (23.1%) additional responses in 26 patients whose disease had not previously responded. From first ICI initiation, median time to next therapy was 14.2 months (95% CI 8.2 to 18.9) and 9.0 months (5.3 to 25.8), and 2-year overall survival was 76% (95%CI 55% to 88%) and 66% (48% to 79%) in the retreatment and discontinuation groups, respectively.ConclusionsDespite a considerable rate of irAE recurrence with retreatment after a prior clinically significant irAE, most irAEs were low grade and controllable. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm that retreatment enhances survival outcomes that justify the safety risks.


2021 ◽  
Vol 123 (3) ◽  
pp. 739-750
Author(s):  
Phillip M. Rappold ◽  
Andrew W. Silagy ◽  
Ritesh R. Kotecha ◽  
Ari A. Hakimi

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document