Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 19, 2026

Intramucosal Inoculation of Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cells in Mice for Tumor Immune Profiling and Treatment Response Assessment
Published on: April 22, 2019
Nivolumab versus Cabozantinib: Comparing Overall Survival in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma
Witold Wiecek1, Helene Karcher1
1LASER Analytica, Halton House, 20-23 Holborn, London, EC1N 2JD, United Kingdom.
Abstract:
Renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) affects over 330,000 new patients every year, of whom 1/3 present with metastatic RCC (mRCC) at diagnosis. Most mRCC patients treated with a first-line agent relapse within 1 year and need second-line therapy. The present study aims to compare overall survival (OS) between nivolumab and cabozantinib from two recent pivotal studies comparing, respectively, each one of the two emerging treatments against everolimus in patients who relapse following first-line treatment. Comparison is traditionally carried out using the Bucher method, which assumes proportional hazard. Since OS curves intersected in one of the pivotal studies, models not assuming proportional hazards were also considered to refine the comparison. Four Bayesian parametric survival network meta-analysis models were implemented on overall survival (OS) data digitized from the Kaplan-Meier curves reported in the studies. Three models allowing hazard ratios (HR) to vary over time were assessed against a fixed-HR model. The Bucher method favored cabozantinib, with a fixed HR for OS vs. nivolumab of 1.09 (95% confidence interval: [0.77, 1.54]). However, all models with time-varying HR showed better fits than the fixed-HR model. The log-logistic model fitted the data best, exhibiting a HR for OS initially favoring cabozantinib, the trend inverting to favor nivolumab after month 5 (95% credible interval <1 from 10 months). The initial probability of cabozantinib conferring superior OS was 54%, falling to 41.5% by month 24. Numerical differences in study-adjusted OS estimates between the two treatments remained small. This study evidences that HR for OS of nivolumab vs. cabozantinib varies over time, favoring cabozantinib in the first months of treatment but nivolumab afterwards, a possible indication that patients with poor prognosis benefit more from cabozantinib in terms of survival, nivolumab benefiting patients with better prognosis. More evidence, including real-world observational data, is needed to compare effectiveness between cabozantinib and nivolumab.
Insights
Comparing nivolumab and cabozantinib for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) shows survival benefits vary over time. Cabozantinib may offer initial advantages, while nivolumab shows better long-term overall survival (OS) in mRCC patients.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Medical Statistics
- Pharmacoeconomics
Background:
- Metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) affects numerous patients, with a significant proportion requiring second-line therapy after initial treatment failure.
- Nivolumab and cabozantinib are emerging treatments for advanced RCC, necessitating comparative effectiveness studies.
- Traditional meta-analysis methods like the Bucher method assume proportional hazards, which may not accurately reflect survival data with intersecting curves.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare overall survival (OS) between nivolumab and cabozantinib in patients with relapsed or refractory metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC).
- To evaluate survival outcomes using network meta-analysis models that account for time-varying hazard ratios, addressing limitations of traditional methods.
- To analyze the temporal trends in treatment effectiveness for nivolumab versus cabozantinib.
Main Methods:
- Bayesian parametric survival network meta-analysis of overall survival (OS) data digitized from Kaplan-Meier curves of pivotal trials.
- Implementation of four models: one fixed hazard ratio (HR) model and three time-varying HR models (including log-logistic).
- Comparison of model fits to assess the appropriateness of proportional hazards assumption.
Main Results:
- The Bucher method (fixed HR) favored cabozantinib (HR=1.09), but models with time-varying HRs demonstrated superior data fit.
- The log-logistic model indicated an initial OS advantage for cabozantinib, transitioning to favor nivolumab after approximately 5 months.
- The probability of cabozantinib conferring superior OS decreased from 54% initially to 41.5% by 24 months; numerical differences in OS remained small.
Conclusions:
- Hazard ratios for OS between nivolumab and cabozantinib are not constant over time, suggesting differential patient benefit based on prognosis.
- Cabozantinib may benefit patients with poorer prognosis in the initial treatment phase, while nivolumab may benefit those with better prognosis long-term.
- Further real-world evidence is required to definitively compare the effectiveness of nivolumab and cabozantinib in mRCC.
More Related Videos
04:04Endobronchial Ultrasound-guided Intratumoral Injection of Cisplatin for the Treatment of Isolated Mediastinal Recurrence of Lung Cancer
Published on: February 12, 2017
10:27Testing Targeted Therapies in Cancer using Structural DNA Alteration Analysis and Patient-Derived Xenografts
Published on: July 25, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Treatment Resistent Cancers
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Targeted Cancer Therapies
Cancer Survival Analysis
Tumor Immunotherapy