본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Exposure-response relationship of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma from the randomised phase 2 BIONIKK study.

British journal of cancer 2026 Vol.134(8) p. 1166-1175

Blanchet B, Puszkiel A, Jouinot A, Bennamoun M, Maillet D, Borchiellini D, Laguerre B, Pannier D, Gross-Goupil M, Chevreau C, Barthélémy P, Tournigand C, Coquan E, Gravis G, Lepicard E, Fridman WH, Sautes-Fridman C, Oudard S, Sun CM, Vano YA

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[BACKGROUND] We aimed to investigate the exposure-response (E/R) relationship for ipilimumab and nivolumab in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) patients from the randomised phase 2

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • 표본수 (n) 39
  • p-value p = 0.076
  • p-value p = 0.040

이 논문을 인용하기

BibTeX ↓ RIS ↓
APA Blanchet B, Puszkiel A, et al. (2026). Exposure-response relationship of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma from the randomised phase 2 BIONIKK study.. British journal of cancer, 134(8), 1166-1175. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-026-03340-1
MLA Blanchet B, et al.. "Exposure-response relationship of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma from the randomised phase 2 BIONIKK study.." British journal of cancer, vol. 134, no. 8, 2026, pp. 1166-1175.
PMID 41652222

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] We aimed to investigate the exposure-response (E/R) relationship for ipilimumab and nivolumab in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) patients from the randomised phase 2 BIONIKK trial (EudraCT 2016-003099-28).

[METHODS] This study included patients treated with either single-agent nivolumab (Nivo monotherapy group, n = 39) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (Ipi/Nivo group, n = 71). Trough plasma concentrations (C) were assayed at week 6 after treatment start. Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression models were used to investigate the E/R relationship between C and clinical outcomes.

[RESULTS] Low nivolumab C (<median) was not identified as an independent risk factor for progression in either the Nivo monotherapy group (HR 2.03, 95% CI [0.93-4.44]; p = 0.076) or the Ipi/Nivo group (HR 1.06, 95% CI [0.63-1.79]; p = 0.83). Interestingly, low ipilimumab C (<4.9 µg/mL) was independently associated with worse PFS in the Ipi/Nivo group (HR 1.77, 95% CI [1.03-3.05]; p = 0.040). In both groups, neither nivolumab C nor ipilimumab C was associated with the risk of death or grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurrence.

[CONCLUSIONS] This study suggests an E-R relationship for the efficacy of ipilimumab in m-ccRCC patients treated in combination with nivolumab. Prospective validation of our efficacy threshold in larger cohorts or phase 3 trials is essential prior to the implementation of a pharmacokinetically guided strategy.

MeSH Terms

Humans; Nivolumab; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Ipilimumab; Male; Female; Middle Aged; Kidney Neoplasms; Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Adult; Aged, 80 and over