Indications

Full Prescribing Information

Next Page Icon

Medication Guide

Next Page Icon

1L Intermediate- or Poor-Risk aRCC

 OPDIVO® (nivolumab) + YERVOY® logo

He wasn’t supposed to see this.

But thanks to dual I-O therapy, Terry has the chance to see more in life—including catching his wife sneaking a taste of his gumbo before it was ready.2

 

Actor portrayal.

OPDIVO® + YERVOY® treatment may not work for everyone. Individual results may vary.
OPDIVO + YERVOY are not indicated for children under 18 years of age.2

Inspired by years of real patient stories

INDICATION OPDIVO® (nivolumab), in combination with YERVOY® (ipilimumab), is indicated for the first-line treatment of adult patients with intermediate or poor risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

CHECKMATE 214: 1L INTERMEDIATE- OR POOR-RISK ADVANCED RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (aRCC) 

A chance for durable survival and durable responses with OPDIVO® + YERVOY®1

IN THE PRIMARY ANALYSIS OF CHECKMATE 214 (MEDIAN FOLLOW-UP TIME OF 25.2 MONTHS):
  • Median OS not yet reached (95% CI: 28.2–NE) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 25.9 months (95% CI: 22.1–NE) for sunitinib; HR=0.63 (99.8% CI: 0.44–0.89); P<0.00012,3
  • Confirmed ORR*: 41.6% (n=177/425 [95% CI: 36.9–46.5]) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 26.5% (n=112/422 [95% CI: 22.4–31.0]) for sunitinib (P<0.0001)2,3
    • CR: 9.4% (n=40) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 1.2% (n=5) for sunitinib2,3
    • PR: 32.2% (n=137) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 25.4% (n=107) for sunitinib2,3
    • Among responders, median DOR was not reached (95% CI: 21.8–NR) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 18.2 months (95% CI: 14.8–NR) for sunitinib2,3
  • Median PFS*: 11.6 months (95% CI: 8.7–15.5) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 8.4 months (95% CI: 7.0–10.8) for sunitinib; HR=0.82 (99.1% CI: 0.64–1.05)2,3
    • Per pre-specified analysis, progression-free survival did not meet statistical significance2,3
IN THE EXTENDED ANALYSIS OF CHECKMATE 214 (MEDIAN FOLLOW-UP TIME OF 99.1 MONTHS [RANGE: 91.0–107.3]):
  • mOS:
    • The 90-month OS rate for OPDIVO + YERVOY was 32.9% vs 22.0% for sunitinib1
    • mOS for OPDIVO + YERVOY was 46.7 months (95% CI: 35.0–55.7) vs 26.0 months (95% CI: 21.8–32.6) for sunitinib; HR=0.69 (95% CI: 0.59–0.81)1
  • ORR*:
    • OPDIVO + YERVOY: ORR: 42% (n=180/425 [95% CI: 38–47]; CR: 12% [n=50]; PR: 31% [n=130])1
    • Sunitinib: ORR: 27% (n=116/422 [95% CI: 23–32]; CR: 3% [n=11]; PR: 25% [n=105])1
  • mDOR:
    • Among responders, median DOR was 82.8 months (95% CI: 54.1–NE) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.4–26.4) for sunitinib1
    • HR=0.48 (95% CI: 0.33–0.69)1

*In the primary analysis and extended follow-up analysis, PFS and ORR were assessed by an independent radiographic review committee per RECIST v1.1.1-3
OS rates are based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.1
Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates of duration of response.1

CI=confidence interval; CR=complete response; DOR=duration of response; HR=hazard ratio; mDOR=median duration of response; mOS=median overall survival; NE=not evaluable; NR=not reached; ORR=overall response rate; OS=overall survival; PFS=progression-free survival; PR=partial response; RECIST=Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors.

Select Important Safety Information
Serious Adverse Reactions

In Checkmate 214, serious adverse reactions occurred in 59% of patients receiving OPDIVO plus YERVOY (n=547). The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported in ≥2% of patients were diarrhea, pyrexia, pneumonia, pneumonitis, hypophysitis, acute kidney injury, dyspnea, adrenal insufficiency, and colitis.

Common Adverse Reactions

In Checkmate 214, the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) reported in patients treated with OPDIVO plus YERVOY (n=547) were fatigue (58%), rash (39%), diarrhea (38%), musculoskeletal pain (37%), pruritus (33%), nausea (30%), cough (28%), pyrexia (25%), arthralgia (23%), decreased appetite (21%), dyspnea (20%), and vomiting (20%).

Please see additional Important Safety Information below.

Extended Follow-up Data

OPDIVO + YERVOY showed enduring overall survival and a hazard ratio of 0.69 at an unprecedented 8 years of follow-up1*†

mOS at 99.1-month median follow-up: 46.7 months (95% CI: 35.0–55.7) with OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 26.0 months (95% CI: 21.8–32.6) with sunitinib; HR=0.69 (95% CI: 0.59–0.81)1

8-YEAR MEDIAN FOLLOW-UP: OVERALL SURVIVAL IN ADULT PATIENTS WITH INTERMEDIATE-/POOR-RISK aRCC1-3†‡
Checkmate 214 OS in Adult Patients with Intermediate/Poor Risk aRCC at 8 Years follow-up, Chart

Overall survival rates at follow-up analyses were not pre-specified within the study protocol and were not powered to detect differences between treatment arms.
 
In the primary analysis, the pre-specified 12-month overall survival rate was 80% (95% CI: 76–84) with OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 72% (95% CI: 67–76) with sunitinib. The median follow-up time was 25.2 months.3,4

mOS at primary analysis (median follow-up time of 25.2 months)2,3

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: Not yet reached (95% CI: 28.2–NE)2,3
  • Sunitinib: 25.9 months (95% CI: 22.1–NE)2,3
  • HR=0.63 (99.8% CI: 0.44–0.89); P<0.00012,3

mOS at extended follow-up analysis (median follow-up time of 99.1 months)1

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: 46.7 months (95% CI: 35.0–55.7)1
  • Sunitinib: 26.0 months (95% CI: 21.8–32.6)1
  • HR=0.69 (95% CI: 0.59–0.81)1

*Based on extended follow-up analysis results at a median follow-up time of 99.1 months (range: 91.0–107.3).1
OS rates are based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.1
Performance status is based on IMDC prognostic score (0=favorable, 1–2=intermediate, 3+=poor).1,3

IMDC=International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

Progression-free survival data at 8 years of follow-up1*

8-YEAR MEDIAN FOLLOW-UP: PFS IN ADULT PATIENTS WITH INTERMEDIATE-/POOR-RISK aRCC1-3†‡
Checkmate 214 PFS in Adult Patients with Intermediate/Poor Risk aRCC at 8 Years follow-up, Chart

PFS rates at follow-up analyses were not pre-specified within the study protocol and analyses were not powered to detect differences between treatment arms.4

mPFS at primary analysis (median follow-up time of 25.2 months)2,3

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: 11.6 months (95% CI: 8.7–15.5)2,3
  • Sunitinib: 8.4 months (95% CI: 7.0–10.8)2,3
  • HR=0.82 (99.1% CI: 0.64–1.05)2,3
  • Per a pre-specified analysis, PFS did not meet statistical significance

mPFS at extended follow-up analysis (median follow-up time of 99.1 months)1

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: 12.4 months (95% CI: 8.7–16.8)1
  • Sunitinib: 8.5 months (95% CI: 7.0–11.1)1
  • HR=0.73 (95% CI: 0.61–0.87)1

*Based on extended follow-up analysis results at a median follow-up time of 99.1 months (range: 91.0–107.3).1
Performance status is based on IMDC prognostic score (0=favorable, 1–2=intermediate, 3+=poor).1,3
PFS was assessed by an independent radiographic review committee per RECIST v1.1.1-3

NS=not significant.

OPDIVO + YERVOY: More than 4X median DOR vs sunitinib, a TKI therapy at 8 years of follow-up1*

mDOR at 99.1 median follow-up: 82.8 months (95% CI: 54.1–NE) with OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.4–26.4) with sunitinib; HR=0.48 (95% CI: 0.33–0.69)1

8-YEAR MEDIAN FOLLOW-UP: DOR IN ADULT PATIENTS WITH INTERMEDIATE- OR POOR-RISK aRCC1-3†
Checkmate 214 Duration of Response (DOR) in Adult Patients with Intermediate/Poor Risk aRCC at 8 Years follow-up, Chart

DOR rates at follow-up analyses were not pre-specified within the study protocol and analyses were not powered to detect differences between treatment arms.4

ORR at primary analysis (median follow-up time of 25.2 months)2,3

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: ORR: 41.6% (n=177/425 [95% CI: 36.9–46.5]); CR: 9.4% (n=40); PR: 32.2% (n=137)2,3
  • Sunitinib: 26.5% (n=112/422 [95% CI: 22.4–31.0]); CR: 1.2% (n=5); PR=25.4% (n=107)2,3
  • P<0.0001 for ORR2

ORR at extended follow-up analysis (median follow-up time of 99.1 months)1

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: 42% (n=180/425 [95% CI: 38–47]); CR: 12% (n=50); PR: 31% (n=130)1
  • Sunitinib: 27% (n=116/422 [95% CI: 23–32]); CR: 3% (n=11); PR: 25% (n=105)1

mDOR at primary analysis (median follow-up time of 25.2 months)2,3

  • Not yet reached (95% CI: 21.8–NR) for OPDIVO + YERVOY vs 18.2 months (95% CI: 14.8–NR) for sunitinib2,3

mDOR at extended follow-up analysis (median follow-up time of 99.1 months)1

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: 82.8 months (95% CI: 54.1–NE)1
  • Sunitinib: 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.4–26.4)1
  • HR=0.48 (95% CI: 0.33–0.69)1

*Based on extended follow-up analysis results at a median follow-up time of 99.1 months (range: 91.0–107.3).1
Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates of duration of response.1
ORR was assessed by an independent radiographic review committee per RECIST v1.1.1-3

TKI=tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

84.0% of complete responses were ongoing at 8 years of follow-up1*

OPDIVO + YERVOY RESPONSE DATA AT 8 YEARS
Checkmate 214 Response Data at 8 Years follow-up, Graphic

ORR at primary analysis (median follow-up time of 25.2 months)2,3

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: ORR: 41.6% (n=177/425 [95% CI: 36.9–46.5]; CR: 9.4% [n=40]; PR: 32.2% [n=137])2,3
  • Sunitinib: ORR: 26.5% (n=112/422 [95% CI: 22.4–31.0]; CR: 1.2% [n=5]; PR: 25.4% [n=107])2,3
  • P<0.0001 for ORR2,3

ORR at extended follow-up analysis (median follow-up time of 99.1 months)1

  • OPDIVO + YERVOY: 42% (n=180/425 [95% CI: 38–47]; CR: 12% [n=50]; PR: 31% [n=130])1
  • Sunitinib: 27% (n=116/422 [95% CI: 23–32]; CR: 3% [n=11]; PR: 25% [n=105])1

*Based on extended follow-up analysis results at a median follow-up time of 99.1 months (range: 91.0–107.3).1
ORR was assessed by an independent radiographic review committee per RECIST v1.1.1-3

A pivotal, phase 3, head-to-head trial vs sunitinib2,3

CHECKMATE 214 STUDY DESIGN
Checkmate 214 Study Design in Intermediate or Poor Risk advanced RCC
  • Short-term induction dosing with OPDIVO + YERVOY during the combination phase followed by OPDIVO monotherapy during the maintenance phase2,3
  • Similar to trials reflective of the real-world population, 77% of patients in Checkmate 214 were intermediate-/poor-risk as measured by IMDC3,6-8
  • Patients were included regardless of their PD-L1 status. Patients were excluded due to any history of—or concurrent—brain metastases, active autoimmune disease, or medical conditions requiring systemic immunosuppression2
  • Median follow-up for the primary analysis was 25.2 months3
  • The safety analysis included 1,082 patients. The efficacy analysis of the co-primary endpoints included 425 patients in the OPDIVO + YERVOY arm and 422 patients in the sunitinib arm3

*In the primary analysis at a median follow-up of 25.2 months, ORR and PFS were assessed by an independent radiographic review committee.2,3
Checkmate 214 is no longer recruiting.5

IV=intravenous; PD-L1=programmed death-ligand 1; PO=orally; q2w=every 2 weeks; q3w=every 3 weeks; qd=once a day.

Checkmate 214 baseline characteristics2,3,6-9

IMDC INTERMEDIATE- OR POOR-RISK PATIENTS
Checkmate 214 baseline characteristics, Graphic

*Of evaluable patients (n=284/384).3

CHARACTERISTICS

OPDIVO + YERVOY (n=425)

SUNITINIB (n=422)

Median age, years3,9
≥65 years, % 
≥75 years, %
62 
38 
8
61 
39 
7
Male, %2 74 71
IMDC prognostic score, %3 
  Intermediate (1–2) 
  Poor (3–6)

 

79 
21


79 
21
No. of sites with 
≥1 target/non-target lesion
, %3 

≥2


21 
79


20 
80
Quantifiable tumor 
PD-L1 expression,
%
<1% 
≥1%

(n=384) 
74 
26

(n=392) 
71 
29
Most common site of metastasis, %3
Lung 
Lymph node 
Bone 
Liver

69 
45 
22 
21

70 
51 
23 
21

Approximately 75%–80% of 1L aRCC patients qualify as
intermediate or poor risk6†

Based on large, retrospective, population-based studies.6

No.=number.

Up to 80% of 1L aRCC patients qualify as intermediate or poor risk6*

IMDC RISK FACTORS
IMDC Risk Factors, Graphic

Intermediate- or poor-risk patients have ≥1 prognostic risk factor per the IMDC criteria.6

*Based on large, retrospective, population-based studies.6

LLN=lower limit of normal; PS=performance status; ULN=upper limit of normal.

OPDIVO + YERVOY dosing2

OPDIVO® (nivolumab) + YERVOY® (ipilimumab) Induction & Maintenance Dosing Schedule
  • Based on exploratory dose exposure-response relationships for efficacy and safety, OPDIVO 240 mg q2w and 480 mg q4w are predicted to be similar10
  • The first dose of OPDIVO monotherapy should be administered after completing 4 doses of the OPDIVO and YERVOY combination2
  • Review the Full Prescribing Information for OPDIVO and YERVOY prior to initiation
  • No premedications required2

*OPDIVO is administered as an intravenous infusion over 30 minutes.2
YERVOY is administered as an intravenous infusion over 30 minutes.11

q4w=every 4 weeks.

Bar graph with magnifying glass icon
Safety Data

View a selected safety profile of adverse reactions seen in clinical trials.

OPDIVO® (nivolumab) vial with timer icon
Dosing Schedules

Find dosing information to get patients started on therapy. 

Kidney icon
Another Advanced RCC Option

Learn more about another OPDIVO-based combination for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

See OPDIVO + YERVOY dual I-O efficacy data in multiple tumor types

References:

  1. Tannir NM, Escudier B, McDermott DF, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: long-term follow-up data from the phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial. Oral presentation at ASCO GU 2024. Abstract 363.
  2. OPDIVO [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.
  3. Motzer RJ, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, et al; for CheckMate 214 Investigators. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(14):1277-1290. 
  4. Motzer RJ, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, et al; for CheckMate 214 Investigators. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(14):1277-1290 [protocol].
  5. Clinicaltrials.gov. NCT02231749. Accessed October 11, 2022.
  6. Heng DY, Xie W, Regan MM, et al. External validation and comparison with other models of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(2):141-148.
  7. Ko JJ, Xie W, Kroeger N, et al. The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model as a prognostic tool in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma previously treated with first-line targeted therapy: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(3):293-300.
  8. Yip SM, Wells C, Moreira R, et al. Real world experience of immuno-oncology agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC). Poster presentation at ASCO GU 2017. Abstract 492.
  9. Data on file. NIVO 441. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; 2019.
  10. Long GV, Tykodi SS, Schneider JG, et al. Assessment of nivolumab exposure and clinical safety of 480 mg every 4 weeks flat-dosing schedule in patients with cancer. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(11):2208-2213.
  11. YERVOY [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.


466-US-2400254   10/24