Cited by 5,887Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementMelanoma and MAPK Pathways

Pembrolizumab versus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Open access
Robert, Caroline, Schachter, Jacob, Long, Georgina V., Arance, Ana, Grob, Jean Jacques, Mortier, Laurent, Daud, Adil, Carlino, Matteo S. +14 more·2015·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab is the standard-of-care treatment for patients with advanced melanoma. Pembrolizumab inhibits the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint and has antitumor activity in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, phase 3 study, we assigned 834 patients with advanced melanoma in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight) every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks or four doses of ipilimumab (at 3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks. Primary end points were progression-free and overall survival. RESULTS: The estimated 6-month progression-free-survival rates were 47.3% for pembrolizumab every 2 weeks, 46.4% for pembrolizumab every 3 weeks, and 26.5% for ipilimumab (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.58; P<0.001 for both pembrolizumab regimens versus ipilimumab; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.46 to 0.72 and 0.47 to 0.72, respectively). Estimated 12-month survival rates were 74.1%, 68.4%, and 58.2%, respectively (hazard ratio for death for pembrolizumab every 2 weeks, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.83; P=0.0005; hazard ratio for pembrolizumab every 3 weeks, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.90; P=0.0036). The response rate was improved with pembrolizumab administered every 2 weeks (33.7%) and every 3 weeks (32.9%), as compared with ipilimumab (11.9%) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Responses were ongoing in 89.4%, 96.7%, and 87.9% of patients, respectively, after a median follow-up of 7.9 months. Efficacy was similar in the two pembrolizumab groups. Rates of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 to 5 severity were lower in the pembrolizumab groups (13.3% and 10.1%) than in the ipilimumab group (19.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival and had less high-grade toxicity than did ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; KEYNOTE-006 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01866319.).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1503093

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma and other cancers are heterogeneous and often not durable.

    “however responses to these therapies are often heterogeneous and not durable (1–3).”

    From Gut microbiome modulates response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in melanoma patients (2018) · cites this paper as [2]

    The Rates of Response section (page unavailable) shows varied response rates in advanced melanoma, but the Discussion (page unavailable) explicitly says responses appeared durable in all treatment groups: 93.0% of pembrolizumab responses and 87.8% of ipilimumab responses were ongoing at data cutoff. This contradicts the claim that responses were often not durable. The trial did not study other cancers. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Clinical trials of ICPis excluded patients with pre-existing active autoimmune diseases because of concerns of high susceptibility to severe irAEs.

    “Clinical trials of ICPis excluded patients with pre-existing active autoimmune diseases because of concerns of a high susceptibility to severe irAEs [49,50].”

    From Graves’ Disease during Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy (A Case Series and Literature Review) (2021) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Patients section (page unavailable) says this trial excluded people with a history of serious autoimmune disease. It does not limit that exclusion to active disease or state that concern about heightened susceptibility to severe immune-related adverse events was the reason. The Adverse Events section (page unavailable) reports immune-related events but does not establish that rationale. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination therapy are the most effective immunotherapies.

    “with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination therapy emerging as most effective [3, 4].”

    From Relating the gut metagenome and metatranscriptome to immunotherapy responses in melanoma patients (2019) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Discussion reports that pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 therapy, improved progression-free and overall survival compared with ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. The study did not test anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination therapy or establish that these are the most effective immunotherapies overall. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Response rate was 38%, in line with published clinical data of anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma patients.

    “There were 16 responders (from here on, referred to as R) and 26 nonresponders (NR), yielding a response rate of 38%, which is in line with published clinical data of anti–PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma patients (5, 6).”
  • Anti-PD-1 therapy gives long-term clinical benefit to about 40% of patients with advanced melanoma.

    “Immune checkpoint blockade with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) provides long-term clinical benefits to nearly 40% of patients with advanced melanoma (1–5).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [17]17. Robert C, Long GV, Brady B, et al. Nivolumab in previously untreated mela- noma without BRAF mutation. N Engl J Med 2015;372:320-30.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robert, C., Schachter, J., Long, G. V., Arance, A., Grob, J. J., Mortier, L., Daud, A., Carlino, M. S., McNeil, C., Lotem, M., Larkin, J., Lorigan, P., Neyns, B., Blank, C. U., Hamid, O., Mateus, C., Shapira-Frommer, R., Kosh, M., Zhou, H., Ibrahim, N., Ebbinghaus, S., & Ribas, A.
Affiliations
  • Université Paris-Sud (FR)
  • Sheba Medical Center (IL)
  • Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES)
  • Hôpital de la Timone (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille (FR)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (AU)
  • Hadassah Medical Center (IL)
  • Royal Marsden Hospital (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (BE)
  • The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL)
  • Angeles Clinic and Research Institute (US)
  • Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2015-06-25
Volume
372
Issue
26
Pages
2521-2532
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2152897456
Cited by
5,887
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 234 · 2025: 298 · 2024: 374 · 2023: 421 · 2022: 471 · 2021: 568 · 2020: 659 · 2019: 585 · 2018: 684 · 2017: 761 · 2016: 628 · 2015: 188 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2
FWCI
329.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Amgen
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb
  • Pfizer
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Genentech
  • Kite Pharma
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Melanoma and MAPK Pathways
Keywords
ipilimumab, advanced melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-PD-1 therapy, CTLA-4 inhibition, progression-free survival, overall survival, dosing frequency, treatment-related adverse events, immune-related adverse events, response rate
MeSH terms
Ipilimumab, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Antineoplastic Agents, Female, Humans, Male, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Skin Neoplasms, Survival Analysis, Young Adult, Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review