Cited by 5,357Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementMelanoma and MAPK Pathways

Overall Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Open access
Wolchok, Jedd D., Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna, Gonzalez, Rene, Rutkowski, Piotr, Grob, Jean-Jacques, Cowey, C. Lance, Lao, Christopher D., Wagstaff, John +25 more·2017·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab resulted in longer progression-free survival and a higher objective response rate than ipilimumab alone in a phase 3 trial involving patients with advanced melanoma. We now report 3-year overall survival outcomes in this trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma to receive nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight plus ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks; nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo, until progression, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Randomization was stratified according to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage. The two primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group versus the ipilimumab group. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, the median overall survival had not been reached in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and was 37.6 months in the nivolumab group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.55 [P<0.001]; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.65 [P<0.001]). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 58% in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 52% in the nivolumab group, as compared with 34% in the ipilimumab group. The safety profile was unchanged from the initial report. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 59% of the patients in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group, in 21% of those in the nivolumab group, and in 28% of those in the ipilimumab group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced melanoma, significantly longer overall survival occurred with combination therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone than with ipilimumab alone. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505 .).

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/nejmoa1709684

Cites

18 of 18 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?

  • 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 [4]

    The Discussion reports that nivolumab alone and nivolumab plus ipilimumab significantly improved overall survival over ipilimumab alone in previously untreated advanced melanoma. This supports their effectiveness in that setting, but the paper does not establish that they are the most effective immunotherapies across all settings or against all alternatives. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • 3-year overall survival rates were 58%, 52%, and 34% in combination therapy, anti-PD-1, and anti-CTLA-4 groups, respectively.

    “3-year overall survival rates were 58%, 52%, and 34% in combination therapy, anti-PD-1, and anti-CTLA-4 groups, respectively [4].”
  • CXCL10 and CCL5 are dominant mediators for recruitment of CXCR3+ and CCR5+ tumor-specific T lymphocytes into tumors, and their intratumoral expression correlates with favorable clinical outcomes in melanoma.

    “These chemokines have been identified as the dominant mediators for the recruitment of CXCR3+ and CCR5+ tumor-specific T lymphocytes into the tumors and their intratumoral expression correlated with favorable clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma30–32.”

    From Epigenetic state determines the in vivo efficacy of STING agonist therapy (2023) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Discussion reports increased CXCL10 expression in the tumor microenvironment with combination treatment, but does not connect it to T-cell recruitment or favorable clinical outcomes. Searches for CCL5, CCR5, CXCR3, and intratumoral chemokine expression did not find passages addressing those claims. The paper’s survival analyses concern treatment and PD-L1 expression, not the claimed chemokine–outcome correlation. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Many of the studies used ICIs as monotherapy in a heavily pretreated population, whereas current standard first-line therapy often includes combination ICIs or ICI with chemotherapy for multiple tumor types.

    “Third, many of these studies utilized ICIs as monotherapy in a heavily pretreated population whereas current standard first-line therapy often includes a combination of ICIs or ICI with chemotherapy for multiple tumor types (35–40).”
  • Immune checkpoint blockade has shown promise in the adjuvant setting in patients with melanoma or non-small-cell lung cancer.

    “By contrast, ICB has shown promise in the adjuvant setting in patients with melanoma or NSCLC57–59”

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: 2

  1. [4]4. Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimu- mab or monotherapy in untreated mela- noma. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 23-34.
  2. [11]11. Hochberg Y. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple significance test- ing. Biometrika 1988; 75: 800-2.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wolchok, J. D., Chiarion-Sileni, V., Gonzalez, R., Rutkowski, P., Grob, J.-J., Cowey, C. L., Lao, C. D., Wagstaff, J., Schadendorf, D., Ferrucci, P. F., Smylie, M., Dummer, R., Hill, A., Hogg, D., Haanen, J., Carlino, M. S., Bechter, O., Maio, M., Marquez-Rodas, I., Guidoboni, M., McArthur, G., Lebbé, C., Ascierto, P. A., Long, G. V., Cebon, J., Sosman, J., Postow, M. A., Callahan, M. K., Walker, D., Rollin, L., Bhore, R., Hodi, F. S., & Larkin, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Siena (IT)
  • From the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York (J.D.W., M.A.P., M.K.C.); Oncology Institute of Veneto Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), Padua (V.C.-S.), European Institute of Oncology, Milan (P.F.F.), Center for Immuno-Oncology, University Hospital of Siena, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Siena (M.M.), the Immunotherapy and Somatic Cell Therapy Unit, IRCCS Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Meldola (M.G.),...
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2017-10-05
Volume
377
Issue
14
Pages
1345-1356
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2753432434
Cited by
5,357
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 159 · 2025: 282 · 2024: 569 · 2023: 705 · 2022: 746 · 2021: 947 · 2020: 900 · 2019: 578 · 2018: 428 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
234.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Use Siena air (University of Siena) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Ferrara (University of Ferrara) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (P30CA008748)
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
advanced melanoma, nivolumab, ipilimumab, combination immunotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, PD-1 inhibitors, CTLA-4 inhibitors, overall survival, progression-free survival, treatment-related adverse events, immune-related adverse events, PD-L1 expression, BRAF mutation, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, Adult, Aged, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Skin Neoplasms, Survival Rate, Disease-Free Survival, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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