Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2021 Jan 6;39(3):860–870. doi: 10.1007/s10637-020-01039-5

Nephrotoxicity in patients with solid tumors treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Han Li 1, Jinsheng Xu 1,✉, Yaling Bai 1, Shenglei Zhang 1, Meijuan Cheng 1, Jingjing Jin 1
PMCID: PMC8068624  PMID: 33409896

Summary

Background Programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) have dramatically improved cancer therapy for many patients. Adverse kidney effects have been found to be an important complication but have unclear mechanisms. Methods We searched Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library to identify potential eligible studies. All included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining patients with solid tumors treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and/or chemotherapy. The relative risk (RR) was used to assess the risk of nephrotoxic events. Results We included 27 clinical trials (15,063 patients). Compared with chemotherapy, the RR of all-grade nephritis was significantly increased with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs (RR = 2.77, 95% CI: 1.09–6.99, P = 0.03). Furthermore, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy can significantly increase the RR of all-grade nephritis (RR = 2.99, 95% CI: 1.07–8.35, P = 0.04). There was also a significant increase in the RRs of all-grade increased blood creatinine (RR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.24–2.86, P = 0.003) and acute kidney injury (AKI) (RR =3.35, 95% CI: 1.48–7.60, P = 0.004). Conclusions Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs can significantly increase nephrotoxicity in patients with solid tumors, especially when combined with chemotherapy. During the application of these drugs, we should remain aware of nephrotoxicity for better efficacy. Trial registration number and date of registration Not applicable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10637-020-01039-5.

Keywords: Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies, Chemotherapy, Meta-analysis, Solid tumors, Nephrotoxicity

Introduction

According to estimates from the World Health Organization in 2015, cancer is the first or second leading cause of death before the age of 70 years in 91 of 172 countries, and it ranks third or fourth in an additional 22 countries [1]. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the most recent breakthroughs in the treatment of cancer, and these agents have dramatically increased the therapeutic options for multiple cancers. Since December 2015, the Food and Drug Administration has approved two anti-PD-1 mAbs (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and three anti-PD-L1 mAbs (atezolizumab, durvalumab and avelumab). They function by increasing the activity of the immune system to inhibit the inactivation of T lymphocytes and thereby enhance anticancer and cytotoxic effects [2]. Compared with previous standards of care, cancer immunotherapy has led to significant improvements for patients in terms of survival and quality of life [3].

However, immune system activation is detrimental not only to the survival of cancer cells but also to certain types of healthy tissues [4]. Thus, a new group of adverse events, called immune-related adverse events (irAEs), has been recognized. Renal irAEs are rare, with an estimated incidence of 2% with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs and 5% with combination therapy in a review of published phase 2 and 3 trials, but more recent studies have suggested that the incidence of AKI is higher than that initially reported [5, 6]. Acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) is the most commonly reported pathology, and other forms of nephrotoxicity mostly manifest as increased blood creatinine and AKI [7]. One recent meta-analysis [8] examined the risk of nephrotoxicity associated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs using control groups that received placebo, chemotherapy or other immunotherapy but did not include the latest research. In contrast, our meta-analysis focused on nephrotoxicity in patients who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs alone or in combination with chemotherapy. The combination therapy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents and chemotherapy has become increasingly prevalent, but the effect of this more aggressive treatment on the risk and severity of nephrotoxicity relative to chemotherapy alone remains unknown.

To investigate the relationship between the incidence risk of immune-related nephrotoxic events and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs, we performed this meta-analysis. Our systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the RR of nephrotoxicity in patients with solid tumors treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs alone, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy, or standard chemotherapy alone.

Methods

We searched Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library to identify eligible studies. All included studies were RCTs that examined patients with solid tumors who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs and/or chemotherapy. Combined RRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and fixed- or random-effects methods were used to evaluate the nephrotoxicity caused by anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs during treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [9], and the results were reported according to the PRISMA statement [10].

Search strategy

The PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases were searched for RCTs using the following key words: “PD-1”, “PD-L1”, “nivolumab”, “pembrolizumab”, “atezolizumab”, “durvalumab”, and “avelumab” for publications on or before June 25, 2020.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

According to our analysis design, the inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) studies on humans with solid tumors; (2) prospective RCTs; (3) studies that compared a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor with chemotherapy or a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy with the same chemotherapy agent (with or without placebo); and (4) studies that directly compared the nephrotoxicity data of patients receiving and not receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs treatment (nephritis, increased blood creatinine and AKI).

Studies were excluded if they were phase I trials, single-arm studies, or trials where patients had no adverse renal events in either treatment arm; if patients received other agents simultaneously, such as targeted drugs; if they were retrospective studies, meeting abstracts, case reports, unfinished studies, duplicate reports, letters, or reviews; and if they were in any language other than English.

Data extraction

Two authors (J.J. and H.L.) independently evaluated all studies for eligibility by initially checking the titles, abstracts, and full texts of the studies following the patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) chart [11]. The following information was extracted from all eligible studies: first author’s name, year of publication, trial phase, treatment groups, primary endpoint, underlying solid malignancy, number of patients in each group, chemotherapy agents, and adverse events (AEs). The two categories of AEs were all-grade (1 to 5) and high-grade (3 to 5) renal AEs, namely, increased blood creatinine, AKI, and nephritis.

Data analysis

The risk of bias was assessed using Review Manager 5.3 software. Two authors independently assessed the quality of the included RCTs using the Cochrane risk of bias tool [12]. The relative risk (RR) was used to assess the risk of nephrotoxic events. We used Stata (version 12.0) to evaluate publication bias.

Heterogeneity among the RCTs was quantified using the Q test and I2 statistics. If the I2 value was less than 50%, a fixed-effects model was used [13, 14]; otherwise, a random-effects model was used. Sensitivity analysis was performed by removing one study at a time and recalculating the results. All P values were 2-tailed, and a P value below 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Literature search

Our initial search yielded 5861 potentially relevant clinical trials. After the removal of overlapping studies from the three databases and a review of the titles and abstracts, we initially excluded 5827 studies because they did not fulfill our criteria. The excluded studies included review articles, retrospective studies, case reports, phase I trials, single-arm studies, nonrandomized clinical trials, and studies of non-solid tumors. After a review of the full texts of the remaining 34 studies, we excluded 7 trials because they had no information related to nephrotoxicity (Fig. 1). The 27 eligible studies examined patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, n = 13), melanoma (n = 8), carcinoma of the head and neck (n = 2), renal cell carcinoma, small cell lung cancer, urothelial carcinoma, and breast cancer (1 each). None of the included RCTs examined durvalumab. The 27 studies in this meta-analysis examined 15,063 patients. Depending on the tumor type, the standard treatment the patient receives may be chemotherapy or ipilimumab, and four articles included RCTs of combination therapy or comparisons with ipilimumab.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Flowchart depicting the RCT selection process

Eighteen of the 27 studies examined anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs vs. chemotherapy alone, and the other 9 studies examined anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone. The 18 studies of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs vs. chemotherapy examined patients treated with nivolumab (7 studies, 2536 patients), pembrolizumab (9 studies, 6452 patients), atezolizumab (1 study, 101 patients), and avelumab (1 study, 758 patients) (Reference: [15–32]). The 9 studies of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy examined patients treated with atezolizumab (4 studies, 2776 patients), pembrolizumab (3 studies, 1286 patients), and nivolumab (2 studies, 1154 patients) (Reference: [33–41]). The literature was distributed from 2014 to 2019.

Tables 1 and 2 show the baseline details and the relevant all-grade and high-grade renal AEs in each trial. In this analysis, we graded all laboratory values according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the 18 randomized controlled trials that compared anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies vs. chemotherapy

Year Trial phase Tumor type Treat arms pts Nephritis Blood creatinine AKI
G1–5 G3–5 G1–5 G3–5 G1–5 G3–5
2014 3 Melanoma Niv 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks 206 N N 1 0 1 1
Dac 1 g/m2 every 3 weeks 205 N N 1 0 0 0
2015 2 Melanoma Pem 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks 178 1 0 N N N N
Pem 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks 179 1 0 N N N N
ICC every 3 weeks 171 0 0 N N N N
2015 3 Melanoma Pem10mg/kg every 2/3 weeks 555 1 0 N N N N
Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks 256 1 1 N N N N
2015 3 NSCL Niv 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks 287 N N 5 0 1 0
Doc 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks 268 N N 1 0 0 0
2015 3 Melanoma Niv 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks 268 N N 2 0 N N
ICC every 3 weeks 102 N N 0 0 N N
2016 3 NSCL Pem 200 mg every 3 weeks 154 1 1 3 0 N N
platinum-based chemotherapy 150 0 0 15 1 N N
2016 3 Head-and-neck Niv 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks 236 N N N N 1 0
Methotrexate/Doc/cetuximab 111 N N N N 2 1
2016 2/3 NSCL Pem 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks 339 N N 6 0 N N
Pem 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks 343 N N 7 0 N N
Doc 75 mg/m2 every3weeks 309 N N 0 0 N N
2017 3 Urothelial Carcinoma Pem 200 mg every 3 weeks 266 2 2 13 2 15 7
ICC every 3 weeks 255 0 0 15 1 7 3
2017 3 NSCL Niv 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks 267 N N 5 1 N N
Platinum-based ICC every 3 weeks 263 N N 16 0 N N
2017 3 SC-NSCL Niv3mg/kg every 2 weeks 131 1 1 4 0 0 0
Docetaxe l75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks 129 0 0 2 0 1 1
2017 3 Melanoma Pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks 277 2 2 N N N N
ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks 278 0 0 N N N N
2018 3 Head-and-neck Pem 200 mg every 3 weeks 246 N N 0 0 1 1
Methotrexate/Doc 234 N N 2 0 1 0
2018 3 NSCL Avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks 393 N N N N 1 1
Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks 365 N N N N 0 0
2018 3 Melanoma Pembrolizumab 200 mg every3wees 509 2 2 N N N N
placebo every 3 weeks 502 1 0 N N N N
2018 3 NSCL Atezolizumab 56 1 1 N N N N
Docetaxel 45 0 0 N N N N
2019 3 NSCL Pem 200 mg every 3 weeks 636 3 1 N N N N
Platinum-based ICC every 3 weeks 615 0 0 N N N N
2019    3 Renal cell carcinoma Niv 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks 37 N N 1 0 N N
Everolimus 10 mg every day 26 N N 4 0 N N
Open in a new tab

Niv nivolumab, ICC investigator’s choice of chemotherapy, N not available, NSCLC non-small cell lung cancer, Doc docetaxel, Dac dacarbazine, PFS progression-free survival, Pem pembrolizumab, Pac Paclitaxel, UC urothelial cancer, Ave avelumab

Table 2.

Characteristics of the 9 randomized controlled trials that compared anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy

Year Trial phase Tumor type Treat arms pts Nephritis Blood creatinine AKI
G1–5 G3–5 G1–5 G3–5 G1–5 G3–5
2016 3 Advanced melanoma Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg 94 N N 2 1 N N
Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg + placebo 46 N N 0 0 N N
2017 3 Advanced melanoma Niv 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks 313 N N 14 1 N N
Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg+ placebo 311 N N 5 0 N N
2018 3 Non-squamous NSCLC Pem 200 mg + Platinum-based ICC every 3 weeks 405 7 6 36 2 21 8
Placebo + Platinum-based ICC every 3 weeks 202 0 0 11 0 1 1
2018 3 ES-SCLC Ate 1200 mg + Chemo (Car + Eto) every 3 weeks 198 1 1 1 0 4 2
Placebo + Chemo (Car + Eto) every 3 weeks 196 1 0 0 0 1 0
2018 3 Squamous-cell NSCLC Pem 200 mg + Chemo (Car+[Nb-]pac) every 3 weeks 278 2 2 N N 0 0
Placebo + Chemo (Car+[Nb-]pac) every 3 weeks 280 2 2 N N 1 1
2018 3 First-line NSCLC Ate 1200 mg + Bev + Car + Pac every 3 weeks 393 3 1 N N 2 1
Bev 15 mg/kg + Car + Pac every 3 weeks 394 0 0 N N 1 1
2018 3 Triple-negative BC Ate 840 mg + Nb-pac100 mg/m2 d1,8,15 every4weeks 452 1 0 N N N N
Placebo+ Nb-pac100 mg/m2 d 1,8,15 every4weeks 438 0 0 N N N N
2016 2 Non-squamous NSCLC Pem 200 mg + Chemo (Car + pemetrexed) every 3 weeks 59 N N 6 0 2 2
Chemo (Car +pemetrexed) every 3 weeks 62 N N 4 0 1 0
2019 3 Non-squamous NSCLC Ate 1200 mg + CarAUC6 q3w + Nb-pac100mg/m2qw 473 4 1 26 2 9 4
CarAUC6q3w + Nb-pac100mg/m2qw 232 0 0 7 0 3 1
Open in a new tab

Chemo chemotherapy, Car carboplatin, ES-SCLC extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer, Niv nivolumab, Ate Atezolizumab, Eto etoposide, BC breast cancer, Bev bevacizumab, AUC area under the curve

Nephrotoxicity: Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs vs. chemotherapy

All- and high-grade increased blood creatinine and AKI

The anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs and chemotherapy groups had no significant differences in RR for all-grade increased blood creatinine and AKI and no significant differences for high-grade increased blood creatinine and AKI (Fig. S1 and Table S1).

All- and high-grade nephritis

When comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs vs. chemotherapy, there was a significant increase in the RR of all-grade nephritis (RR =2.77, 95% CI: 1.09–6.99, P = 0.03; Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for all-grade nephritis in studies that compared anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs and chemotherapy

Nephrotoxicity: anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy

All- and high-grade increased blood creatinine and AKI

When comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy, there was a significant increase in the RR of all-grade increased blood creatinine (RR =1.88, 95% CI: 1.24–2.86, P = 0.003) and AKI (RR =3.35, 95% CI: 1.48–7.60, P = 0.004; Fig. 3). The two groups had no significant differences in the RRs of high-grade increased blood creatinine and high-grade AKI (Fig. S2 and Table S2).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for all grade increased blood creatinine and acute kidney injury caused by anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy

All- and high-grade nephritis

When comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy, there was a significant increase in the RR of all-grade nephritis (RR =2.99, 95% CI: 1.07–8.35, P = 0.04; Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for all-grade nephritis in studies that compared anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy

Quality assessment and publication bias

All studies were randomized controlled trials. Analysis using the Cochrane risk of bias tool indicated a low risk of bias for all included studies (Fig. 5). We used a fixed effects model for most comparisons due to the low heterogeneity among the included studies. Only one comparison used a random effects model and sensitivity analysis, and the results were not affected. The results of Begg’s test and Egger’s test indicated no evidence of publication bias.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Risk of bias summary. a Bar chart comparing the percentage of the risk of bias for each included RCT. Low risk of bias (green), high risk of bias (red), and unclear risk of bias (yellow). b Risk of bias for each included RCT, representing low risk of bias (+), high risk of bias (−), and unclear risk of bias (?)

Discussion

The results of our analysis of 27 clinical trials including 15,063 cancer patients indicated that anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs were associated with a higher risk of all-grade nephrotoxicity than control treatments. The 18 studies that examined anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs vs. chemotherapy alone were distributed from 2014 to 2019, and the 9 studies that examined anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone were distributed from 2016 to 2019. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs monotherapy was applied early, and the studies had a wider time distribution. Combination strategies with conventional and immunotherapies were approved later but have gradually become the focus of attention. Similar to the literature we retrieved, the related RCTs were mostly distributed in the last 4 years. Our findings bridged the gap in previous studies by comparing the risk of renal toxicity in cancer patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs with or without chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone.

In our results, there was a significant increase in the RR of all-grade nephritis in patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs alone. Previous studies have shown that acute tubulointerstitial nephritis (ATIN) is the most commonly reported pathological lesion in patients who have received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs therapy [42]. Based on a recent retrospective cohort analysis of more than 1000 people, the majority of potential immune checkpoint inhibitor-related events were secondary to varying degrees of tubular and interstitial inflammation and injury [43]. These results are consistent with our results. From the perspective of nephrotoxicity, acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) is the most common biopsy-proven diagnosis in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors who develop kidney injury. The mechanism of renal irAEs is still a research focus. According to theories supported by most researchers, T cells are more likely to lose tolerance to native kidney antigens in the presence of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs, and uninhibited T cells may activate the typical drug-induced hypersensitivity reaction pathway more vigorously [44]. Thus, AIN is induced by anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs, which may be due to the reprogramming of the immune system, leading to the loss of tolerance against endogenous kidney antigens [44]. The interpretation of pathological types is of great help in the treatment of immune-related nephrotoxicity. When treating patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs alone, physicians should be alert to the possible clinical manifestations of nephritis. If there are potential alternative reasons for AKI, a lower threshold to perform a renal biopsy should be used.

When comparing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy and chemotherapy, there was also a significant increase in the RRs of all-grade increased blood creatinine and AKI. Compared with monotherapy, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy led to increased nephrotoxicity, which can cause AKI. In a combined analysis of 3695 patients treated with ICIs, AKI was more common in patients receiving combination therapy than in patients receiving ICI monotherapy [5], which is consistent with our results. The combined literature revealed the following characteristics of ICI-related AKI. Most patients had AKI with tubulointerstitial presentation, including normal urinary output, granular casts, aseptic leukocyturia, and low-grade (0.1 g per day) or no proteinuria [43]. A review of 13 cases from seven academic centers in the USA concluded that the great majority of cases of AKI with ICIs are due to AIN [5]. According to our analysis, AKI was likely to be secondary to varying degrees of tubular and interstitial inflammation and injury. However, it is important to note that there have been recent reports of glomerular diseases, including lupus nephritis, vasculitis, and podocytopathies [45]. In addition, chemotherapy drugs can also cause many types of kidney injury, such as AIN, thrombotic microangiopathy, and acute tubular necrosis, which may aggravate damage to the tubule and interstitium and lead to higher nephrotoxicity. Treatment should be suspended for complications above grade 2, and a corticosteroid regimen should be used promptly for complications above grade 3 [46]. Therefore, when using anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs plus chemotherapy, we should be more vigilant about nephrotoxicity and changes in blood creatinine. Continuous laboratory testing and necessary treatment are the basis of our treatment process.

This meta-analysis has some limitations. First, due to the lack of reports of renal adverse events in many studies, the number of qualified publications is limited. In addition, due to the heterogeneity of the selected RCTs and different diagnostic criteria, the identification of immune-related nephrotoxicity by researchers and organizations may not be completely consistent. Second, we were unable to obtain the patient’s personal information or the patient’s long-term follow-up data, so we did not consider the details of immune-related nephrotoxicity. Similarly, although patients with advanced tumors sometimes develop kidney metastases, the lack of patient-level information limits our ability to identify specific abnormalities in patients with renal adverse events.

Conclusion

Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs can significantly increase nephrotoxicity in patients with solid tumors, especially when combined with chemotherapy. During the application of these drugs, we should remain aware of nephrotoxicity for better efficacy.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1 (335.6KB, pdf)

(PDF 335 kb)

Acknowledgements

We thank J.J. for providing help for this article.

Data availability

The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. The retrieval and screening of the literature was performed by Jingjing Jin and Han Li. The collection of relevant data and the first draft of the manuscript were carried out by Li Han. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. Jingjing Jin and Meijuan Cheng revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Hebei Major Medical Science Project (GL2011–51), the Hebei Science and Technology Planning Project (16397733D), the Hebei Province Medical Technology Tracking Project (G2018050) and the Hebei Province Key Research and Development Project (20377704D).

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

None of the authors disclose any financial, consulting or personal relationships with other people or organizations that could influence the authors’ work.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Ethical approval and consent to participate

We did not use individual data but used published data. These data have been widely utilized in research and are generally available. Therefore, we confirm that any aspect of the work covered in this manuscript has been conducted with ethical approval.

Consent for publication

Written informed consent for publication was obtained from all participants.

Competing interests

The authors do not have any possible conflicts of interest.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Postow MA, Sidlow R, Hellmann MD. Immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(2):158–168. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1703481. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Esfahani K, Roudaia L, Buhlaiga N, Del Rincon SV, Papneja N, Miller WH., Jr A review of cancer immunotherapy: from the past, to the present, to the future. Curr Oncol. 2020;27(Suppl 2):S87–s97. doi: 10.3747/co.27.5223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Brahmer JR, Tykodi SS, Chow LQ, Hwu WJ, Topalian SL, Hwu P, et al. Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(26):2455–2465. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cortazar FB, Marrone KA, Troxell ML, Ralto KM, Hoenig MP, Brahmer JR, Le DT, Lipson EJ, Glezerman IG, Wolchok J, Cornell LD, Feldman P, Stokes MB, Zapata SA, Hodi FS, Ott PA, Yamashita M, Leaf DE. Clinicopathological features of acute kidney injury associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Kidney Int. 2016;90(3):638–647. doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2016.04.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jamal S, Hudson M, Fifi-Mah A, Ye C. Immune-related adverse events associated with Cancer immunotherapy: a review for the practicing rheumatologist. J Rheumatol. 2020;47(2):166–175. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.190084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wanchoo R, Karam S, Uppal NN, Barta VS, Deray G, Devoe C, Launay-Vacher V, Jhaveri KD, Cancer, Kidney International Network Workgroup on Immune Checkpoint I Adverse renal effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a narrative review. Am J Nephrol. 2017;45(2):160–169. doi: 10.1159/000455014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Iacovelli R, Ciccarese C, Fantinel E, Bimbatti D, Romano M, Porcaro AB, Siracusano S, Mazzarotto R, Artibani W, Tortora G. Renal toxicity in patients treated with anti-Pd-1 targeted agents for solid tumors. J Onco-Nephrol. 2017;1(2):132–142. doi: 10.5301/jo-n.5000019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, Thomas J. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:ED000142. doi: 10.1002/14651858.ED000142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010;8(5):336–341. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Huang X, Lin J, Demner-Fushman D. Evaluation of PICO as a knowledge representation for clinical questions. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006;2006:359–363. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Higgins JPT. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–560. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials revisited. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015;45(Pt A):139–145. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.09.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Barlesi F, Vansteenkiste J, Spigel D, Ishii H, Garassino M, de Marinis F, Özgüroğlu M, Szczesna A, Polychronis A, Uslu R, Krzakowski M, Lee J-S, Calabrò L, Arén Frontera O, Ellers-Lenz B, Bajars M, Ruisi M, Park K. Avelumab versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (JAVELIN lung 200): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(11):1468–1479. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30673-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Bellmunt J, de Wit R, Vaughn DJ, Fradet Y, Lee JL, Fong L, Vogelzang NJ, Climent MA, Petrylak DP, Choueiri TK, Necchi A, Gerritsen W, Gurney H, Quinn DI, Culine S, Sternberg CN, Mai Y, Poehlein CH, Perini RF, Bajorin DF, Investigators K. Pembrolizumab as second-line therapy for advanced Urothelial carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(11):1015–1026. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1613683. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Borghaei H, Paz-Ares L, Horn L, Spigel DR, Steins M, Ready NE, Chow LQ, Vokes EE, Felip E, Holgado E, Barlesi F, Kohlhäufl M, Arrieta O, Burgio MA, Fayette J, Lena H, Poddubskaya E, Gerber DE, Gettinger SN, Rudin CM, Rizvi N, Crinò L, Blumenschein GR, Jr, Antonia SJ, Dorange C, Harbison CT, Graf Finckenstein F, Brahmer JR. Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(17):1627–1639. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1507643. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Brahmer J, Reckamp KL, Baas P, Crino L, Eberhardt WE, Poddubskaya E, et al. Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in advanced squamous-cell non-small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(2):123–135. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504627. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Carbone DP, Reck M, Paz-Ares L, Creelan B, Horn L, Steins M, Felip E, van den Heuvel M, Ciuleanu TE, Badin F, Ready N, Hiltermann TJN, Nair S, Juergens R, Peters S, Minenza E, Wrangle JM, Rodriguez-Abreu D, Borghaei H, Blumenschein GR Jr, Villaruz LC, Havel L, Krejci J, Corral Jaime J, Chang H, Geese WJ, Bhagavatheeswaran P, Chen AC, Socinski MA, CheckMate 026 Investigators First-line Nivolumab in stage IV or recurrent non-small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(25):2415–2426. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1613493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Cohen EEW, Soulières D, Le Tourneau C, Dinis J, Licitra L, Ahn M-J, et al. Pembrolizumab versus methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab for recurrent or metastatic head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-040): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2019;393(10167):156–167. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31999-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Ferris RL, Blumenschein G, Jr, Fayette J, Guigay J, Colevas AD, Licitra L, Harrington K, Kasper S, Vokes EE, Even C, Worden F, Saba NF, Iglesias Docampo LC, Haddad R, Rordorf T, Kiyota N, Tahara M, Monga M, Lynch M, Geese WJ, Kopit J, Shaw JW, Gillison ML. Nivolumab for recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(19):1856–1867. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602252. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Herbst RS, Baas P, Kim D-W, Felip E, Pérez-Gracia JL, Han J-Y, Molina J, Kim J-H, Arvis CD, Ahn M-J, Majem M, Fidler MJ, de Castro G, Garrido M, Lubiniecki GM, Shentu Y, Im E, Dolled-Filhart M, Garon EB. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1540–1550. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(15)01281-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Mok TSK, Wu Y-L, Kudaba I, Kowalski DM, Cho BC, Turna HZ, Castro G, Jr, Srimuninnimit V, Laktionov KK, Bondarenko I, Kubota K, Lubiniecki GM, Zhang J, Kush D, Lopes G, Adamchuk G, Ahn MJ, Alexandru A, Altundag O, Alyasova A, Andrusenko O, Aoe K, Araujo A, Aren O, Arrieta Rodriguez O, Ativitavas T, Avendano O, Barata F, Barrios CH, Beato C, Bergstrom P, Betticher D, Bolotina L, Bondarenko I, Botha M, Buddu S, Caglevic C, Cardona A, Castro G, Jr, Castro H, Cay Senler F, Cerny CAS, Cesas A, Chan GC, Chang J, Chen G, Chen X, Cheng S, Cheng Y, Cherciu N, Chiu CH, Cho BC, Cicenas S, Ciurescu D, Cohen G, Costa MA, Danchaivijitr P, de Angelis F, de Azevedo SJ, Dediu M, Deliverski T, de Marchi PRM, de The Bustamante Valles F, Ding Z, Doganov B, Dreosti L, Duarte R, Edusma-Dy R, Emelyanov S, Erman M, Fan Y, Fein L, Feng J, Fenton D, Fernandes G, Ferreira C, Franke FA, Freitas H, Fujisaka Y, Galindo H, Galvez C, Ganea D, Gil N, Girotto G, Goker E, Goksel T, Gomez Aubin G, Gomez Wolff L, Griph H, Gumus M, Hall J, Hart G, Havel L, He J, He Y, Hernandez Hernandez C, Hespanhol V, Hirashima T, Ho CMJ, Horiike A, Hosomi Y, Hotta K, Hou M, How SH, Hsia TC, Hu Y, Ichiki M, Imamura F, Ivashchuk O, Iwamoto Y, Jaal J, Jassem J, Jordaan C, Juergens RA, Kaen D, Kalinka-Warzocha E, Karaseva N, Karaszewska B, Kazarnowicz A, Kasahara K, Katakami N, Kato T, Kawaguchi T, Kim JH, Kishi K, Kolek V, Koleva M, Kolman P, Koubkova L, Kowalyszyn R, Kowalski D, Koynov K, Ksienski D, Kubota K, Kudaba I, Kurata T, Kuusk G, Kuzina L, Laczo I, Ladrera GEI, Laktionov K, Landers G, Lazarev S, Lerzo G, Lesniewski Kmak K, Li W, Liam CK, Lifirenko I, Lipatov O, Liu X, Liu Z, Lo SH, Lopes V, Lopez K, Lu S, Martinengo G, Mas L, Matrosova M, Micheva R, Milanova Z, Miron L, Mok T, Molina M, Murakami S, Nakahara Y, Nguyen TQ, Nishimura T, Ochsenbein A, Ohira T, Ohman R, Ong CK, Ostoros G, Ouyang X, Ovchinnikova E, Ozyilkan O, Petruzelka L, Pham XD, Picon P, Piko B, Poltoratsky A, Ponomarova O, Popelkova P, Purkalne G, Qin S, Ramlau R, Rappaport B, Rey F, Richardet E, Roubec J, Ruff P, Rusyn A, Saka H, Salas J, Sandoval M, Santos L, Sawa T, Seetalarom K, Seker M, Seki N, Seolwane F, Shepherd L, Shevnya S, Shimada AK, Shparyk Y, Sinielnikov I, Sirbu D, Smaletz O, Soares JPH, Sookprasert A, Speranza G, Srimuninnimit V, Sriuranpong V, Stara Z, Su WC, Sugawara S, Szpak W, Takahashi K, Takigawa N, Tanaka H, Tan Chun Bing J, Tang Q, Taranov P, Tejada H, Tho LM, Torii Y, Trukhyn D, Turdean M, Turna H, Ursol G, Vanasek J, Varela M, Vallejo M, Vera L, Victorino AP, Vlasek T, Vynnychenko I, Wang B, Wang J, Wang K, Wu Y, Yamada K, Yang CH, Yokoyama T, Yokoyama T, Yoshioka H, Yumuk F, Zambrano A, Zarba JJ, Zarubenkov O, Zemaitis M, Zhang L, Zhang L, Zhang X, Zhao J, Zhou C, Zhou J, Zhou Q, Zippelius A. Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for previously untreated, PD-L1-expressing, locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-042): a randomised, open-label, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2019;393(10183):1819–1830. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32409-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Reck M, Rodriguez-Abreu D, Robinson AG, Hui R, Csoszi T, Fulop A, Gottfried M, Peled N, Tafreshi A, Cuffe S, O'Brien M, Rao S, Hotta K, Leiby MA, Lubiniecki GM, Shentu Y, Rangwala R, Brahmer JR, Investigators K. Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for PD-L1-positive non-small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(19):1823–1833. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ribas A, Puzanov I, Dummer R, Schadendorf D, Hamid O, Robert C, Hodi FS, Schachter J, Pavlick AC, Lewis KD, Cranmer LD, Blank CU, O'Day SJ, Ascierto PA, Salama AKS, Margolin KA, Loquai C, Eigentler TK, Gangadhar TC, Carlino MS, Agarwala SS, Moschos SJ, Sosman JA, Goldinger SM, Shapira-Frommer R, Gonzalez R, Kirkwood JM, Wolchok JD, Eggermont A, Li XN, Zhou W, Zernhelt AM, Lis J, Ebbinghaus S, Kang SP, Daud A. Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(8):908–918. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00083-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Robert C, Long GV, Brady B, Dutriaux C, Maio M, Mortier L, Hassel JC, Rutkowski P, McNeil C, Kalinka-Warzocha E, Savage KJ, Hernberg MM, Lebbé C, Charles J, Mihalcioiu C, Chiarion-Sileni V, Mauch C, Cognetti F, Arance A, Schmidt H, Schadendorf D, Gogas H, Lundgren-Eriksson L, Horak C, Sharkey B, Waxman IM, Atkinson V, Ascierto PA. Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(4):320–330. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1412082. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, Arance A, Grob JJ, Mortier L, Daud A, Carlino MS, McNeil C, Lotem M, Larkin J, Lorigan P, Neyns B, Blank CU, Hamid O, Mateus C, Shapira-Frommer R, Kosh M, Zhou H, Ibrahim N, Ebbinghaus S, Ribas A, investigators K Pembrolizumab versus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(26):2521–2532. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1503093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Tomita Y, Fukasawa S, Shinohara N, Kitamura H, Oya M, Eto M, Tanabe K, Saito M, Kimura G, Yonese J, Yao M, Uemura H. Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: Japanese subgroup 3-year follow-up analysis from the phase III CheckMate 025 study. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2019;49(6):506–514. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyz026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Weber JS, D'Angelo SP, Minor D, Hodi FS, Gutzmer R, Neyns B, Hoeller C, Khushalani NI, Miller WH, Jr, Lao CD, Linette GP, Thomas L, Lorigan P, Grossmann KF, Hassel JC, Maio M, Sznol M, Ascierto PA, Mohr P, Chmielowski B, Bryce A, Svane IM, Grob JJ, Krackhardt AM, Horak C, Lambert A, Yang AS, Larkin J. Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma who progressed after anti-CTLA-4 treatment (CheckMate 037): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(4):375–384. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(15)70076-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Eggermont AMM, Blank CU, Mandala M, Long GV, Atkinson V, Dalle S, Haydon A, Lichinitser M, Khattak A, Carlino MS, Sandhu S, Larkin J, Puig S, Ascierto PA, Rutkowski P, Schadendorf D, Koornstra R, Hernandez-Aya L, Maio M, van den Eertwegh AJM, Grob JJ, Gutzmer R, Jamal R, Lorigan P, Ibrahim N, Marreaud S, van Akkooi ACJ, Suciu S, Robert C. Adjuvant Pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(19):1789–1801. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1802357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hida T, Kaji R, Satouchi M, Ikeda N, Horiike A, Nokihara H, Seto T, Kawakami T, Nakagawa S, Kubo T. Atezolizumab in Japanese patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung Cancer: a subgroup analysis of the phase 3 OAK study. Clin Lung Cancer. 2018;19(4):e405–e415. doi: 10.1016/j.cllc.2018.01.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Schachter J, Ribas A, Long GV, Arance A, Grob J-J, Mortier L, Daud A, Carlino MS, McNeil C, Lotem M, Larkin J, Lorigan P, Neyns B, Blank C, Petrella TM, Hamid O, Zhou H, Ebbinghaus S, Ibrahim N, Robert C. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab for advanced melanoma: final overall survival results of a multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-006) Lancet. 2017;390(10105):1853–1862. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(17)31601-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gandhi L, Rodriguez-Abreu D, Gadgeel S, Esteban E, Felip E, De Angelis F, et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(22):2078–2092. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Horn L, Mansfield AS, Szczesna A, Havel L, Krzakowski M, Hochmair MJ, Huemer F, Losonczy G, Johnson ML, Nishio M, Reck M, Mok T, Lam S, Shames DS, Liu J, Ding B, Lopez-Chavez A, Kabbinavar F, Lin W, Sandler A, Liu SV, Group IMS First-line Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(23):2220–2229. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1809064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Langer CJ, Gadgeel SM, Borghaei H, Papadimitrakopoulou VA, Patnaik A, Powell SF, Gentzler RD, Martins RG, Stevenson JP, Jalal SI, Panwalkar A, Yang JC-H, Gubens M, Sequist LV, Awad MM, Fiore J, Ge Y, Raftopoulos H, Gandhi L. Carboplatin and pemetrexed with or without pembrolizumab for advanced, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, phase 2 cohort of the open-label KEYNOTE-021 study. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(11):1497–1508. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30498-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Paz-Ares L, Luft A, Vicente D, Tafreshi A, Gumus M, Mazieres J, Hermes B, Cay Senler F, Csoszi T, Fulop A, Rodriguez-Cid J, Wilson J, Sugawara S, Kato T, Lee KH, Cheng Y, Novello S, Halmos B, Li X, Lubiniecki GM, Piperdi B, Kowalski DM, Investigators K. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for squamous non-small-cell lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(21):2040–2051. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1810865. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Schmid P, Adams S, Rugo HS, Schneeweiss A, Barrios CH, Iwata H, Dieras V, Hegg R, Im SA, Shaw Wright G, Henschel V, Molinero L, Chui SY, Funke R, Husain A, Winer EP, Loi S, Emens LA, Investigators IMT. Atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in advanced triple-negative breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(22):2108–2121. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1809615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Socinski MA, Jotte RM, Cappuzzo F, Orlandi F, Stroyakovskiy D, Nogami N, Rodriguez-Abreu D, Moro-Sibilot D, Thomas CA, Barlesi F, Finley G, Kelsch C, Lee A, Coleman S, Deng Y, Shen Y, Kowanetz M, Lopez-Chavez A, Sandler A, Reck M, Group IMS Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(24):2288–2301. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1716948. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.West H, McCleod M, Hussein M, Morabito A, Rittmeyer A, Conter HJ, Kopp H-G, Daniel D, McCune S, Mekhail T, Zer A, Reinmuth N, Sadiq A, Sandler A, Lin W, Ochi Lohmann T, Archer V, Wang L, Kowanetz M, Cappuzzo F. Atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower130): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(7):924–937. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30167-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Hodi FS, Chesney J, Pavlick AC, Robert C, Grossmann KF, McDermott DF, Linette GP, Meyer N, Giguere JK, Agarwala SS, Shaheen M, Ernstoff MS, Minor DR, Salama AK, Taylor MH, Ott PA, Horak C, Gagnier P, Jiang J, Wolchok JD, Postow MA. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma: 2-year overall survival outcomes in a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(11):1558–1568. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30366-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Wolchok JD, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Rutkowski P, Grob JJ, Cowey CL, Lao CD, Wagstaff J, Schadendorf D, Ferrucci PF, Smylie M, Dummer R, Hill A, Hogg D, Haanen J, Carlino MS, Bechter O, Maio M, Marquez-Rodas I, Guidoboni M, McArthur G, Lebbé C, Ascierto PA, Long GV, Cebon J, Sosman J, Postow MA, Callahan MK, Walker D, Rollin L, Bhore R, Hodi FS, Larkin J. Overall survival with combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(14):1345–1356. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709684. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Zheng K, Qiu W, Wang H, Si X, Zhang X, Zhang L, Li X. Clinical recommendations on diagnosis and treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced renal immune-related adverse events. Thorac Cancer. 2020;11(6):1746–1751. doi: 10.1111/1759-7714.13405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Seethapathy H, Zhao S, Chute DF, Zubiri L, Oppong Y, Strohbehn I, Cortazar FB, Leaf DE, Mooradian MJ, Villani AC, Sullivan RJ, Reynolds K, Sise ME. The incidence, causes, and risk factors of acute kidney injury in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;14(12):1692–1700. doi: 10.2215/CJN.00990119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Hu R, Chen M, Xu Y, Wang M, Zheng K, Li X. Renal immune-related adverse events of immune checkpoint inhibitor. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2020;16:305–311. doi: 10.1111/ajco.13387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Mamlouk O, Selamet U, Machado S, Abdelrahim M, Glass WF, Tchakarov A, Gaber L, Lahoti A, Workeneh B, Chen S, Lin J, Abdel-Wahab N, Tayar J, Lu H, Suarez-Almazor M, Tannir N, Yee C, Diab A, Abudayyeh A. Nephrotoxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors beyond tubulointerstitial nephritis: single-center experience. J Immunother Cancer. 2019;7(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s40425-018-0478-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Brahmer JR, Lacchetti C, Schneider BJ, Atkins MB, Brassil KJ, Caterino JM, Chau I, Ernstoff MS, Gardner JM, Ginex P, Hallmeyer S, Holter Chakrabarty J, Leighl NB, Mammen JS, McDermott DF, Naing A, Nastoupil LJ, Phillips T, Porter LD, Puzanov I, Reichner CA, Santomasso BD, Seigel C, Spira A, Suarez-Almazor ME, Wang Y, Weber JS, Wolchok JD, Thompson JA, in collaboration with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Management of Immune-Related Adverse Events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(17):1714–1768. doi: 10.1200/jco.2017.77.6385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

ESM 1 (335.6KB, pdf)

(PDF 335 kb)

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Articles from Investigational New Drugs are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES