The authors used a meta-analysis to evaluate the risks of gastrointestinal adverse events in the cotreatment of malignant tumors with nivolumab and ipilimumab. The meta-analysis revealed that the most common gastrointestinal adverse event at all grades was diarrhea, followed by nausea, decreased appetite, vomiting, constipation, colitis and abdominal pain. The most common severe gastrointestinal adverse events were colitis and diarrhea. Different administration schemes differ in the risk of such events, and thus these events may be minimized by modulating the administration scheme of the cotreatment.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J. Clin. 71, 7–33 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Hegde PS, Chen DS. Top 10 challenges in cancer immunotherapy. Immunity 52, 17–35 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3. Bewersdorf JP, Shallis RM, Zeidan AM. Immune checkpoint inhibition in myeloid malignancies: moving beyond the PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways. Blood Rev. 45, 100709 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4. Di Federico A, Rizzo A, Ricci AD et al. Nivolumab: an investigational agent for the treatment of biliary tract cancer. Expert Opin. Investig Drugs 30, 325–332 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5. Karimi A, Alilou S, Mirzaei HR. Adverse events following administration of anti-CTLA4 antibody ipilimumab. Front. Oncol. 11, 624780 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
6. Owonikoko TK, Park K, Govindan R et al. Nivolumab and ipilimumab as maintenance therapy in extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 451. J. Clin. Oncol. 39, 1349–1359 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7. Paz-Ares L, Ciuleanu TE, Cobo M et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab combined with two cycles of chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 9LA): an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 22, 198–211 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
8. Nakajima EC, Lipson EJ, Brahmer JR. Challenge of rechallenge: when to resume immunotherapy following an immune-related adverse event. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 2714–2718 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9. Baas P, Scherpereel A, Nowak AK et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (CheckMate 743): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 397, 375–386 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Blank CU, Rozeman EA, Fanchi LF et al. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma. Nat. Med. 24, 1655–1661 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
11. D'Angelo SP, Mahoney MR, Van Tine BA et al. Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab treatment for metastatic sarcoma (Alliance A091401): two open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trials. Lancet Oncol. 19, 416–426 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12. Hammers HJ, Plimack ER, Infante JR et al. Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the CheckMate 016 study. J. Clin. Oncol. 35, 3851–3858 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13. Hellmann MD, Ciuleanu TE, Pluzanski A et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in lung cancer with a high tumor mutational burden. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 2093–2104 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
14. Hellmann MD, Paz-Ares L, Bernabe Caro R et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 381, 2020–2031 (2019). • The sample size is large and the research content is relatively complete.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Hellmann MD, Rizvi NA, Goldman JW et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 012): results of an open-label, phase 1, multicohort study. Lancet Oncol. 18, 31–41 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
16. Hodi FS, Chesney J, Pavlick AC et al. 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. 17, 1558–1568 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17. Hodi FS, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab alone in advanced melanoma (CheckMate 067): 4-year outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 19, 1480–1492 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Janjigian YY, Bendell J, Calvo E et al. CheckMate-032 study: efficacy and safety of nivolumab and nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with metastatic esophagogastric cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 2836–2844 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19. Lebbé C, Meyer N, Mortier L et al. Evaluation of two dosing regimens for nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: results from the phase IIIb/IV CheckMate 511 trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 867–875 (2019). • The sample size is large and the research content is relatively complete.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
20. Motzer RJ, Rini BI, McDermott DF et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma: extended follow-up of efficacy and safety results from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 20, 1370–1385 (2019). • The sample size is large and the research content is relatively complete.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Omuro A, Vlahovic G, Lim M et al. Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: results from exploratory phase I cohorts of CheckMate 143. Neuro Oncol. 20, 674–686 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22. Overman MJ, Lonardi S, Wong KYM et al. Durable clinical benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in DNA mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 36, 773–779 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Ready N, Hellmann MD, Awad MM et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 568): outcomes by programmed death ligand 1 and tumor mutational burden as biomarkers. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 992–1000 (2019). • The sample size is large and the research content is relatively complete.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Rozeman EA, Menzies AM, van Akkooi ACJ et al. Identification of the optimal combination dosing schedule of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma (OpACIN-neo): a multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 20, 948–960 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25. Scherpereel A, Mazieres J, Greillier L et al. Nivolumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with relapsed malignant pleural mesothelioma (IFCT-1501 MAPS2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-comparative, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 20, 239–253 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26. Sharma P, Siefker-Radtke A, de Braud F et al. Nivolumab alone and with ipilimumab in previously treated metastatic urothelial carcinoma: CheckMate 032 nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg expansion cohort results. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 1608–1616 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Tawbi HA, Forsyth PA, Algazi A et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in melanoma metastatic to the brain. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 722–730 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Wolchok JD, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R et al. Overall survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 1345–1356 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
29. Yau T, Kang YK, Kim TY et al. Efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma previously treated with sorafenib: the CheckMate 040 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 6, e204564 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
30. Zamarin D, Burger RA, Sill MW et al. Randomized phase II trial of nivolumab versus nivolumab and ipilimumab for recurrent or persistent ovarian cancer: an NRG oncology study. J. Clin. Oncol. 38, 1814–1823 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
31. Zimmer L, Livingstone E, Hassel JC et al. Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet 395, 1558–1568 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Bagchi S, Yuan R, Engleman EG. Immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of cancer: clinical impact and mechanisms of response and resistance. Annu. Rev. Pathol. 16, 223–249 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Barzin YN, Mohammad SE, Everett JM et al. Noninvasive early identification of therapeutic benefit from immune checkpoint inhibition. Cell 183, 363–376 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Galluzzi L, Humeau J, Buqué A et al. Immunostimulation with chemotherapy in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 17, 725–741 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
35. Schoenfeld AJ, Hellmann MD. Acquired resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Cancer Cell 37, 443–455 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36. Hu Y, Gong J, Zhang L et al. Colitis following the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a real-world analysis of spontaneous reports submitted to the FDA adverse event reporting system. Int. Immunopharmacol. 84, 106601 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Raschi E, Mazzarella A, Antonazzo IC et al. Toxicities with immune checkpoint inhibitors: emerging priorities from disproportionality analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system. Target Oncol. 14, 205–221 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
38. Paz-Ares L, Luft A, Vicente D et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 2040–2051 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Riaz N, Havel JJ, Makarov V et al. Tumor and microenvironment evolution during immunotherapy with nivolumab. Cell 171, 934–949; e916 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40. Sondak VK, Smalley KS, Kudchadkar R et al. Ipilimumab. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 10, 411–412 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41. Reid PD, Cifu AS, Bass AR. Management of immunotherapy-related toxicities in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. JAMA 325, 482–483 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42. Schneider BJ, Naidoo J, Santomasso BD et al. Management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: ASCO guideline update. J. Clin. Oncol. 39(36), JCO2101440 (2021).
Google Scholar

Vol. 19, No. 27

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 101 times

History

Received 17 June 2022

Accepted 11 August 2023

Published online 27 September 2023

Published in print September 2023

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/pme-2023-0017

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the conception, search terms and methodology of the review. K Liu and Y Wang came up with the study idea. K Liu, Y Wang, N Luo, J Gong, J Wang and B Chen designed the study. N Luo and J Gong completed the database searches and study selection. Y Wang and J Wang completed the assessment of bias of the included studies. J Wang and B Chen extracted data from the included studies. K Liu and Y Wang completed the meta-analyses. K Liu wrote the first draft of the manuscript. K Liu and Y Wang completed the critical revision of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the writing or revision of the final manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final version submitted to this journal.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download