Physician Sentiment on OPDIVO®

⭐️ Mind blowing results of immunotherapy across different tumor types presented #ESMO24 now at @NEJM - Melanoma (CM 067) 10 years FU Nivo, Nivo-Ipi. - TNBC (KEYNOTE-522): 5y OS perioperative chemo+pembro - Bladder cancer (NIAGARA): Perioperative chemo+durva #ESMOAmbassadors

Dr. Antonio Calles 🫁🚭

@Tony_Calles

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Relatlimab Versus Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma: An Indirect Treatment Comparison Using RELATIVITY-047 and CheckMate 067 Trial Data Hard to go too far with a sophisticated cross trial comparison but the analysis shows what one would

Udhayvir Grewal

@UGrewalMD

2⃣ Now my recent take after the long-term results of CheckMate-067 were published. Impressive results, a significant proportion of pts are cured! However IPI-NIVO much more toxic than NIVO, and still I'm still not convinced IPI-NIVO > NIVO as front-line therapy. Here is why

Timothée Olivier, MD

@Timothee_MD

Full physician voice list (19)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Dr. Antonio Calles 🫁🚭 @Tony_Calles	⭐️ Mind blowing results of immunotherapy across different tumor types presented #ESMO24 now at @NEJM - Melanoma (CM 067) 10 years FU Nivo, Nivo-Ipi. - TNBC (KEYNOTE-522): 5y OS perioperative chemo+pembro - Bladder cancer (NIAGARA): Peri…	Positive	20,062
Allison Betof Warner, MD, PhD @DrBetofMDPhD	Checkmate 067 10 year data 🚨 presented by James Larkin with concurrent @NEJM publication. 10 years of ipi+nivo revolutionizing melanoma care and changing the way we treat cancer!! 10y MSS is >50%! #ESMO24 @OncoAlert https://t.co/tHBIwqCppk	Neutral	5,867
Sapna Patel @DrSapnaPatel	🌟TY @myESMO fr our 🌎#Melanoma fam 💖! Annual shoutout to indefatiguable @KKronig @FedefedeFri @SimonaTe286 🫶🏽 Full cover @NEJM #ESMO24 incl Prof James Larkin CM067! Felicitats @AndresC27622123 @RebeccaDSing #Onwards #Berlin @FAndreMD @Myri…	Neutral	2,216
Dr Akhil Santhosh @tuttsakhil	Happened to raise some critical points regarding the "final overall survival results of checkmate 067" in today's edition of @NEJM .Happy that the authors have responded	Positive	2,215
Vivek Subbiah, MD @VivekSubbiah	First-Line Nivolumab Plus Relatlimab Versus Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma: An Indirect Treatment Comparison Using RELATIVITY-047 and CheckMate 067 Trial Data \| Journal of Clinical Oncology	Neutral	2,030
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	10-year follow-up in melanoma! 🔵Median OS: 71.9 months with Nivo+Ipi, 🔵36.9 months with Nivo, 🔵19.9 months with Ipi. Nivo+Ipi combo shows durable survival benefit! #Melanoma #ESMO24 @oncoalert @myESMO #cancer #Oncology @NEJM https://t.co…	Neutral	1,635
Mario Balsa @MarioBalsaMD	#SEOM24 @_SEOM 🗣️ Dra. @ainara_soria 📍 Melanoma BRAFwt 💉 Anti-PD-1 en monoterapia y… 🤔 ¿Añadir anti-CTLA4? ¿Añadir anti-LAG-3? 📈 Checkmate-067. mOS ➡️ 72% VS 37% VS 20% 📈 Relativity-047. mOS ➡️ 51m VS 34m Wow. ¡Brutal! @On…	Neutral	1,363
Timothée Olivier, MD @Timothee_MD	2⃣ Now my recent take after the long-term results of CheckMate-067 were published. Impressive results, a significant proportion of pts are cured! However IPI-NIVO much more toxic than NIVO, and still I'm still not convinced IPI-NIVO > NI…	Negative	1,060
Annie Wong 黃毅敏 @anmwongNZ	newsletter is out 🚨 Spotlight on melanoma IO combo 🔍 RELATIVITY047 vs CHECKMATE067 Indirect comparison using pt level data Similar efficacy except ❌brain Mets ❌acral ❌braf ❌LDH 2ULN Checkout paper 👇 https://t.co/Iso5Z67sir	Neutral	587
Jon Lim, MRCP PhD @DrJonLim	The 🔟 year update of the landmark practice-changing CheckMate 067 for advanced melanoma, as seen at #ESMO24 - out now @NEJM!👇 #ESMOAmbassadors @myESMO	Positive	401
Udhayvir Grewal @UGrewalMD	First-Line Nivolumab Plus Relatlimab Versus Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma: An Indirect Treatment Comparison Using RELATIVITY-047 and CheckMate 067 Trial Data Hard to go too far with a sophisticated cross trial comparison b…	Nuanced	345
Wafik S. El-Deiry, MD, PhD, FACP @weldeiry	Dr. Hadfield discussed some advances in treatment of metastatic melanoma at the 2024 R.I. Best of @ASCO conference.	Neutral	318
Diego A. Díaz García @diegoadiazg	10y outcomes in pts with advanced melanoma from Checkmate 067 trial. @myESMO 🤩 10y OS for nivolumab plus ipilimumab 43% (median 71.9m) vs 19% (median 19.9m) for ipilimumab alone. #ESMO24 Simultaneous publication in @NEJM	Neutral	310
Dr. Iván R. González @Dr_Ivanoncologo	CheckMate 067 Study❗️🙀: Final 10-Year Outcomes with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced #Melanoma 📉Median overall survival was 71.9 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 36.9 months with nivolumab, and 19.9 months with ipilimumab. 🔵HR …	Neutral	302
Alan Tan @alantanmd	Thank you for this - I think it’s also important to emphasize that when you have BRAF mutated metastatic disease, IO combination should be prioritized. High chance of durable remissions Checkmate 067, and being treatment free. (Unlike lu…	Neutral	287
Henrїk Jespersen @HeManJespersen	Can we all just agree now that these patients are cured? Time to stop the cautious talk about “long term benefit” and start giving patients with stage IV melanoma real hope. Final survival analysis of CM067 (nivo/ipi+nivo/ipi) in advanced …	Neutral	272
Dr. Estela Rodriguez @Latinamd	This is the definition of a landmark trial: Ten year final analysis of #CM617 in Advanced #melanoma presented at #ESMO24 ➡️MedianOS 72 mos (Ipi/nivo) vs 37 mos (nivo) HR 0.53 ➡️Among those with PFS at 3yr, 10 yr melanoma-free survival was …	Neutral	157
Lynn Schuchter @lynn_schuchter	10 year survival update from Checkmate 067 for patients with metastatic melanoma with ipi/nivo. Also pub in @NEJM. #melanoma.	Neutral	43
Andrea Boutros @boutrosand	3/ What about pts in the Nivo arm? 📉 7-year OS with Nivo in ABC: 26% 📈 10-year OS with Nivo in CheckMate 067: 37% 🔬 If brain mets worsen prognosis, Nivo should perform much worse in ABC than in CheckMate 067.	Neutral	40

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 2 · NCT02998528

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-816 trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-816 — Neoadjuvant resectable NSCLC (nivolumab + platinum chemotherapy)

FDA APPROVED · Mar 2022FDA-approved March 4, 2022, in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment of resectable (tumors >=4 cm or node-positive) non-small cell lung cancer.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-816: 29% of 65 verified physician voices positive, 15% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 51% neutral, 5% critical.

29%

15%

51%

Positive 29% Nuanced 15% Neutral 51% Critical 5%

Denominator: 65 distinct verified physician voices across 161 oncologist posts, 2021-04-10 to 2025-09-08. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT02998528 · NEJM 2022 — CheckMate-816 primary publication

Forde PM, Spicer J, Lu S, et al. Neoadjuvant Nivolumab plus Chemotherapy in Resectable Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(21):1973-1985.

Physician voices — verbatim

~13yrs of neoadjuvant adventure comes to positive conclusion (for now)! In @NEJM today & presented at #ASCO25 5 yr survival for pts w lung cancer that can be removed by surgery is better with just 3 doses of immunotherapy before the operation! https://t.co/RS4urrH1UB #LCSM 1/

Patrick Forde

@FordePatrick

Data that everyone is waiting for . Checkmate 816 . 3 year OS . 78 %vs 64 % . HR 0.62 ( 0.36 - 1.05 ) lot of censoring at around 3rd year . Not yet mature . Not yet statistically significant. @FordePatrick @JackWestMD @myESMO #ELCC2023 @PatelOncology @StephenVLiu @n8pennell

Dr Amol Akhade

@SuyogCancer

Time to read again our paper w/ @VPrasadMDMPH ➡️Would OS gain be observed if control arm pts had optimal anti-PD1 access upon recurrence? In CM816, 33% of recurrent pts on systemic ttt did not get immunotherapy – why, when all should have had access? https://t.co/ZyCQ2retUI https://t.co/Xe5cv6x0MR https://t.co/tmbec7edx0

Timothée Olivier, MD

@Timothee_MD

Full physician voice list (65)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Patrick Forde @FordePatrick	~13yrs of neoadjuvant adventure comes to positive conclusion (for now)! In @NEJM today & presented at #ASCO25 5 yr survival for pts w lung cancer that can be removed by surgery is better with just 3 doses of immunotherapy before the operati…	Positive	37,966
Stephen V Liu, MD @StephenVLiu	Dr. @FordePatrick presents final OS results from CheckMate 816 at #ASCO25. Adding nivolumab to 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable NSCLC improves OS with HR 0.72 and 5y OS rate 65% vs 55%. Effect greater in PDL1+ (HR 0.51) t…	Neutral	33,055
Nathan A. Pennell MD, PhD, FASCO @n8pennell	Based on the CM 816, Aegean and now KN 671, for stage 2/3 resectable NSCLC with no genomic alterations, do you give: #ASCO23	Neutral	32,093
Jonathan Spicer MD PhD @DoctorJSpicer	Curious to see how those periop vs neoadj debates go now that OS is positive for CM816! Excellent news for patients and health care systems! Congrats to the CM816 team brilliantly led by the wonderful ⁦@FordePatrick⁩!!! ⁦@IASLC⁩ ⁦@AATSHQ⁩	Positive	23,339
Paolo Tarantino @PTarantinoMD	Three phase 3 trials of neoadjuvant IO for NSCLC with survival data. 2-year EFS was: - 63.8% with neoadjuvant only nivo (CM816, 4 cycles of IO) - 62.4% with neoadjuvant + adjuvant pembro (KN671, 17 cycles of IO) - 63.3% with neoadjuvant + …	Neutral	23,080
Eric K. Singhi, MD @lungoncdoc	🔥#CM816 Press Release: Nivolumab + chemo is the first and only neoadjuvant-only IO regimen to show a significant OVERALL SURVIVAL benefit in resectable NSCLC! Waiting for the full data to update this slide 👇🏽 @OncBrothers @OncoAlert #lcsm…	Positive	21,900
Lei Deng, MD (He/Him) @LeiDeng3	While debating on Adj IO after Neoadj ChemoIO in NSCLC w/ #CM816, #AEGEAN, #KN671 data, the ❓ is probably not a simple ✅or❎. Rather, the ❓probably should start w/ Who. Our Periop Gastric Chemo data suggest Preop Response may inform Postop T…	Neutral	15,841
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	Data that everyone is waiting for . Checkmate 816 . 3 year OS . 78 %vs 64 % . HR 0.62 ( 0.36 - 1.05 ) lot of censoring at around 3rd year . Not yet mature . Not yet statistically significant. @FordePatrick @JackWestMD @myESMO #ELCC2023 @P…	Nuanced	12,355
Timothée Olivier, MD @Timothee_MD	Time to read again our paper w/ @VPrasadMDMPH ➡️Would OS gain be observed if control arm pts had optimal anti-PD1 access upon recurrence? In CM816, 33% of recurrent pts on systemic ttt did not get immunotherapy – why, when all should have…	Negative	9,990
Dr Riyaz Shah @DrRiyazShah	Excited to see these presentations at ASCO25. Both potentially practice affirming/changing	Positive	8,572
Jordi Remon @JordiRemon	Can we spare CT in neadjuvant NSCLC? Exploratory analysis from CheckMate 816: -Similar % of surgery cancelled ~20% -Higher pCR MPR -Longer EFS, but curves crossover at de biguining due to toxicity? Delayed effect of ICB Good strategy for PD…	Nuanced	7,716
Rami Manochakian MD, FASCO Cancer Education @RManochakian	🔥🚨@OncoAlert Hot Off the Press BIG NEWS Press Release by @bmsnews #CheckMate816 phase 3 trial of #Nivolumab + Chemo as #Neoadjuvant (only) Tx for resectable Non-Small-Cell #LungCancer shows statistically significant improvement⬆️in #Over…	Positive	7,673
Bharathi Muthusamy @BMuthusamyMD	With all the exciting perioperative updates, come check out our poster on the cost-effectiveness of CheckMate 816 and IMpower010 1247P! @n8pennell @IUCancerCenter #ESMO2023	Positive	7,439
Dipesh Uprety MD FACP @DipeshUpretyMD	CheckMate-816 #ESMO23 Pts with resectable IB (≥4 cm) -IIIA NSCLC randomized to Nivo plus Ipi vs Chemo (exploratory analysis) ➡️74% vs 76% underwent definitive surgery ➡️Md EFS was 54.8 vs 20.9 (HR 0.77) ➡️Higer MRP and pCR in IO arm #LCS…	Neutral	7,377
Hidehito HORINOUCHI @HHorinouchi	🔥CheckMate 77T 🎙️Dr. Tina Cascone 🎯EFS HR 0.58 (97.36%CI 0.42-0.81). Nivo is the only drug with positive EFS in both Neo (CM 816) and Periope (CM77T). ✅Phase III RCT, double-blind ✅Primary: EFS ✅Stage IIA(>4cm) to IIIB(N2) NSCLC ✅NCT0402587…	Positive	6,951
Biagio Ricciuti, MD PhD @BiagioRicciutMD	Perioperative vs Neoadjuvant Nivolumab for Resectable NSCLC: Patient-Level Data Analysis of CheckMate 77T vs CheckMate 816 #WCLC2024 @OncoAlert @IASLC Exploratory analysis ✅ 40% reduction in the risk of recurrence o death after surgery wi…	Neutral	5,700
Jarushka Naidoo @DrJNaidoo	#ASCO25 Lung orals🔥 Accomplished discussion by @HendriksLizza of CM816, NeoADAURA & Deluge LC screening/IPN study. Key next steps: - 816: next gen ways to predict pCR - Neoadaura: eval endpoints - DELUGE: reeval smoking hx in LCS risk scor…	Positive	4,960
Vivek Subbiah, MD @VivekSubbiah	5/ Overall Survival with Neoadjuvant Nivolumab plus Chemotherapy in Lung Cancer #ASCO25 @ASCO	Neutral	4,820
Chul Kim @chulkimMD	Exploratory analysis of CheckMate 77T vs. CheckMate 816 using propensity scoring weighting anlysis Landmark EFS: HR 0.61 favoring periop approach. In the absence of randomized trials, data is helpful, but a few caveats - From CheckMate …	Nuanced	4,478
Giuseppe Banna @gbanna74	My takeaways from #CheckMate816 update in @NEJM: 1⃣ pCR confirmed as surrogate for OS 2⃣ Supports not offering adjuvant IO if pCR achieved 3⃣ ctDNA clearance still not ready for clinical decision-making https://t.co/RedoUeeaw3 #LCSM @OncoAl…	Neutral	4,327
F Haroun, MD @Cancer_talks	#Keynote671 Presented at #ASCO23 by Dr. Mark Awad #LCSM EFS, trend toward OS benefit of this neoadj/adj chemo/io strategy vs neoadj chemo alone is impressive- pCR rates of 18% vs 4% HR 0.42 PDL1>50%, HR 0.51 1-49% and HR0.77 in PDL1 neg (…	Positive	3,795
Myriam Chalabi @MyriamChalabi	Happy to see positive results with chemo + neoandjuvant IO (without the adjuvant!), even as a non-lung specialist! First #NADINA @NKI_nl in #melanoma, now #NSCLC! Curious to see the data! Hoping to see more de-escalation trials, goe more ef…	Positive	3,174
Shankar Siva @_ShankarSiva	🚨 #ASCO25: Final OS from CheckMate 816 in resectable NSCLC ➡️ NIVO + chemo vs chemo alone (neoadjuvant) ➡️ OS HR 0.66 → 3-yr OS: 80.2% vs 73.4% ➡️ pCR ↑, EFS benefit maintained ⬆️ benefits across subgroups 💥 ?only <50% of control arm recei…	Neutral	3,108
Drew Moghanaki @DrewMoghanaki	Many thoracic medical oncologists I work with believe that it is unlikely more (postop) ICI will help pCR, MPR, or even non-responders after the first few cycles. If it worked, it worked. If it didn’t, or isn’t, it won’t.	Neutral	2,973
Brendon Stiles @BrendonStilesMD	Lots to think about! -If OS in CM816 shows similar improvement to KN671, should it be preferred regimen? -Will data dispel perceived need for adjuvant ICI after pCR? -Will neoadj TKIs move the needle? -Shouldn't we double down on increasing…	Neutral	2,520
Dr. Antonio Calles 🫁🚭 @Tony_Calles	These results will confirm the restriction on nivolumab approval to PD-L1+ve patients in Europe by @EMA_News previously based on EFS data. #ASCO25 #LCSM	Neutral	1,965
Balazs Halmos @BalazsHalmosMD	Robust OS benefit overall from just 3 rounds of neoadj chemo-IO for resectable st 1b-3a NSCLC with unprecedented OS for pts reaching a pathCR (95% OS at 5 yrs- i am 100% this is just stunning and practice-guiding!) I’d say this is an excel…	Positive	1,891
Yakup Ergün @dr_yakupergun	#ASCO25 @NEJM CheckMate 816 – Final OS 5y OS➡️65.4% vs 55.0% (HR:0.7) 5y OS with pCR➡️95.3% 5y OS with presurgery ctDNA clearance: 75.0% Long-term survival benefit confirmed with just 3 cycles of neoadjuvant NIVO + chemo https://t.co/…	Neutral	1,676
Niema Razavian, MD @RadOncDoc_Niema	Interesting #GrayZone case out now in @IJROBP: what do you do if a pt gets neoadjuvant chemo per CheckMate 816 for NSCLC 🫁, but cannot get surgery 🔪? Our opinion: Don’t wait, consolidate! 🔗: https://t.co/NBQHwTtJ50 #radonc #lcsm	Nuanced	1,640
Joshua Reuss @Joshua_Reuss	Incredible kickoff to #ESMO23 with presentation of the nivo-ipi cohort of the landmark CheckMate816 study by @DrMarkAwad.	Positive	1,501
Dr Akhil Santhosh @tuttsakhil	IPD analysis from checkmate 816 and checkmate 77T shows that periop IO strategy as in checkmate 77T had a benefit over neoadjuvant only approach in patients with pdl1 score<1% and non-path CR achievers	Neutral	1,500
Aakash Desai, MD, MPH @ADesaiMD	3.PL02.08: Battle of the titans! 🥊 Perioperative vs. Neoadjuvant Nivolumab for Resectable NSCLC analyzed in CheckMate 77T vs. CheckMate 816. Which is the superior strategy? 🤔 #LCSM #WCLC24 @FordePatrick et al. 🔍 Key Takeaways: ➡️ Propens…	Neutral	1,441
Angelica D'Aiello, MD @DAielloMD	16/29 #TumorBoardTuesday 👨‍🏫 Mini tweetorial 10 👨‍🏫 ✅Checkmate 816✅ 👉Neoadj chemoIO w nivolumab vs chemo alone 🔑Results ⭐️Med EFS 31.6 vs 20.8 mo ⭐️pCR rate 24.0% vs 2.2% ⭐️pCR a/w 📈EFS of 25.6 vs 18.0 mo ⭐️In PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%, pCR rate o…	Neutral	1,308
Jeff Ryckman @jryckman3	Yes, but the issue is, we don’t know if NA(C)-ICI—> surgery or NA(C)-ICI—> CCRT is superior for more advanced patients (e.g., multi-station N2, endobronchial involvement, central tumors… or patients req more advanced resections such as slee…	Nuanced	1,240
Devika Das, MD, MSHQS @DevikaDasMD	I see the benefits in clinic but would love to see the details of the OS data first. There remains several questions around peri operative therapy- need evidence on who benefits from adjuvant CPI, non path CR etc. Looking forward to some C…	Nuanced	1,207
Oncology Brothers @OncBrothers	3. #Checkmate816: Chemo + Nivo update (already approved) in neoadj resectable NSCLC. - 5yr OS 65.4% vs 55.0 (HR: 0.72). Majority of the benefit driven by PDL1 ≥1% (HR: 0.51) - mOS NR vs. 73.7mos - ctDNA clearance prior to ✂️ associated w…	Neutral	873
Dr. Estela Rodriguez @Latinamd	#ASCO25 🫁Lung Cancer Orals: #CM816 Neoadj chemoNivo x 3 cycles 🎙️@FordePatrick 🔹5 yr OS 65% vs 55% (HR 0.72) 🔹 5yr EFS of those with pCR: 95% ⬆️ OS in ctDNA clearance 👉🏽This trial reinforces the notion that less preop chemo (3 cycles)!…	Positive	830
Bijoy Telivala @BijoyTelivala	Biggest problem in community and many academic centers Trials included " resectable pts " These days so many unresectable pts offered neoadj- than cant get surgery or get bad surgery and than get chemo/xrt- pacific protocol When we abandom …	Negative	801
Mara Antonoff, MD, FACS @maraantonoff	CheckMate 816 shows that pneumonectomy after chemoIO need not be feared, with outcomes better than historical expectations. Differences in curves by surgical approach require cautious interpretation, as patient and disease factors confound …	Neutral	727
H. Jack West, MD @JackWestMD	Agree. My caution about having surgeons who don't meet quality criteria for st I-II NSCLC doing amateur hour surg for multistation N2 dzs applies to CM816, AEGEAN, NEOTORCH, KN-617, & NADIM2. This isn't broadly applicable strategy when yo…	Negative	694
David O Reilly @DavidOReilly2	ESMO Lung Mini-orals Checkmate816 - Improved OS in in PDL1 positive group (HR O.43) Rationale 315 - pCR of 40% AEGEAN - Non clearance of ctDNA predictive of patients unlikely to have pCR IMPower010 - High TGFB CAF associated with poor DFS …	Positive	639
Jaskirat Randhawa @Jaskirat__SR	Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and #Immunotherapy in #NSCLC – Unveiling the Treatment Landscape #ESMO23 #lungcancer - important results from checkmate 816, Aegean trial, checkmate 77T, keynote 671 https://t.co/u8kLoyNJFO	Neutral	568
𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐞𝐫 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐌𝐃 𝐅𝐀𝐂𝐏 @CParkMD	⭐️Dr. Luis Raez gives an outstanding presentation of NSCLC adjuvant/ neoadjuvant tx since 2004 inc latest data👉CheckMate 816,NADIM II,IMPower010 at 2023 ESMO/ASCO review. Will neoadjuvant AND adjuvant tx become the best approach? @Edgard…	Neutral	560
D. Ross Camidge @DRCamidge	1:1 official randomization to get periop io, but then placebo arm almost same odds of getting io if relapse. More gross bias as explanation for os effect. Means can’t compare os across trials in my book. Doesn’t show neoadjuvant alone infer…	Nuanced	536
eleni zairi @ZairiEleni	🚨 Final 5y OS results from #CheckMate816 at #ASCO25: presented by @FordePatrick 🧬 #Nivo #preop+ chemo in resectable NSCLC: ✅ OS benefit vs chemo (HR 0.72; p=0.0479) ✅ 5y OS: 65% vs 55% ✅ Benefit consistent across stages, PD-L1, histologies…	Neutral	466
Ken Kehl @kenlkehl	I guess the Keynote-671 data in adjuvant NSCLC must be impactful, since the top two entries in my Twitter feed are ads for the Checkmate-816 and IMPower-010 regimens	Neutral	399
Sandip Patel MD @PatelOncology	There was 17% pCR rate in PD-L1 neg though?Much higher than chemo alone and pCR so far has been reasonable surrogate for at least DFS and from above potentially OS now	Nuanced	367
Deborah Doroshow @DDoroshow	Desperately need cooperative group study comparing neoadj to periop!	Neutral	359
Praveen Kumar Marimuthu @drmpk91	💰 Slides from #ASCO25 Focus on 🫁 Checkmate 816 5 Yr Follow up NeoADAURA SAVANNAH Time of Day I/O infusion #LCSM	Neutral	344
Katsuaki Maehara 🇯🇵 @KatsuakiMaehara	🫁 #WCLC24 🫁 On the other hand, the results suggested that #Perioperative treatment tended to be more effective in the surgical stage of #lung cancer. 🫁CheckMate-816 & CheckMate-77T	Nuanced	326
Elliot Servais, MD, FACS @ElliotServaisMD	Especially considering there’s pretty convincing biologic argument against giving ICI after removing the tumor and many of the draining lymph nodes - likely less effective when you remove the tumor-immune microenvironment	Neutral	289
Fred R. Hirsch @fred_hirsch	Fran ASCO 25: Final results from neoadjuvant CM 816 study.	Neutral	252
Guilherme S. C. Correia, MD @guicorreiamd	presented an important data analysis of Checkmate 77T and Checkmate 816! Check his profile for a detailed discussion of the results! ❗️Benefits of the periop approach in PD-L1 <1% ❗️Apparent further benefit in those without pCR.	Neutral	231
Andrew Hong @hongdrew	very nice roundup as always! Thanks for sharing -- you may have this already, but early-stage NSCLC (CM-816, KN-091, AEGEAN... ASCO guidelines updated recently) https://t.co/TSMsJHknJ8	Nuanced	228
Elvina Almuradova @Dr_ElvinaA	🚨 IASLC 2024 Update: Perioperative nivolumab (neoadjuvant + adjuvant) improves event-free survival (EFS) in resectable NSCLC! 🌟 Analysis of CheckMate 77T vs. 816 shows greater EFS, especially in PD-L1 <1% tumors. No new safety signals. …	Neutral	201
Tom Newsom-Davis @tnewsomdavis	Still surprised by high pneumonectomy rates in CM-816. Our rates outside of trials <10%.	Neutral	145
Ivy Riano, M.D. @IvyLorena_Md	I’m eager to see the data!	Positive	113
Anis Toumeh, MD @AnisToumeh	Important update. I am very interested in looking at other peri-operative trials’ (AEGEAN, NEOTORCH) long term outcomes. #ASCO23 #lungcancer #Immunotherapy	Neutral	52
Andrew Jamroz @andrewjamroz	Four year CheckMate 816 update: nivolumab + chemotherapy shows sustained benefits over chemotherapy alone in resectable NSCLC EFS 49% vs 38%; OS 71% vs 58% https://t.co/zih4TAev3h	Positive	50
よし兄　Yoshi @aminfield	Neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for resectable NSCLC: subpopulation analysis of Chinese patients in CheckMate 816 - ESMO Open	Neutral	45
Andrea R. Filippi @AndrearicFili	I think that local therapy is not the main driver. Before extending the use of CM816 to unresectable pts, it should be demonstrated that surgery is superior when the response to CT-IO is the same, same pts, same biomarkers…	Neutral	19
Samuel Kareff, MD, MPH @SamuelKareffMD	6/16 #TumorBoardTuesday 👩🏻‍🏫Mini tweetorial 3👨🏻‍🏫 ✨CHECKMATE-816✨ Ph 3 nivo+chemo x3 for Stage IB-IIIA 📍EGFR & ALK muts excluded 📍mEFS 31.6 vs 20.8 mos 📍PCR 24 vs 2.2% 📍83.2% successful✂️ ⚡️Only current @FDA approved 👍🏽 #NSCLC regimen⚡️ …	Neutral	0
Toni Choueiri, MD @DrChoueiri	Very promising results from Checkmate-816 presented by @FordePatrick #AACR21: 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemo/Nivolumab vs. 3 cycles of chemo. Look at that OR (13.94!)	Positive	0
Mark Awad @DrMarkAwad	A major advance for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer with the FDA approval of neoadjuvant chemotherapy + nivolumab based on CheckMate-816. Thank you to all the clinical trial participants!	Positive	0
Nicolas Girard @nicogirardcurie	Proud to present at #AACR2022 the results of CheckMate-816 during the clinical trial plenary session! I thank all the investigators, #BMS teams, and my co-authors. The study would not have been possible without you. Results now available at	Positive	0

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 3 · NCT04025879

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-77T trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-77T — Perioperative resectable NSCLC (neoadjuvant chemo + nivolumab -> adjuvant nivolumab)

FDA APPROVED · Oct 2024FDA-approved October 3, 2024, with platinum-doublet chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment, then continued as single-agent adjuvant treatment after surgery, for resectable (tumors >=4 cm or node-positive) non-small cell lung cancer.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-77T: 28% of 40 verified physician voices positive, 25% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 45% neutral, 2% critical.

28%

25%

45%

Positive 28% Nuanced 25% Neutral 45% Critical 2%

Denominator: 40 distinct verified physician voices across 98 oncologist posts, 2023-09-22 to 2026-04-22. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

See full CheckMate-77T conference coverage & trial data →

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT04025879

Physician voices — verbatim

🚨🔥 @OncoAlert Hot off the press. As expected, based on results of #Checkmate77T, @US_FDA approved #Neoadjuvant #Nivolumab +Chemo followed by #Adjuvant Nivolumab (after surgery) for pts with resectable Stage IIA-IIIB #NSCLC with no EGFR/ALK mutations. 👇🏼 https://t.co/4BcvCzqans

Rami Manochakian MD, FASCO 🇺🇸🇸🇾CancerEducation

@RManochakian

Thoracic Oncologists — Siena is here Don't feel sad as #ASCO25 has no lung cancer plenary. But these lung cancer trials are unmissable: ✨ CheckMate 77T – Periop nivo shines in resectable NSCLC 🎯 KRYSTAL-7 – Adagrasib + pembro in KRAS G12C ⚡ DeLLphi-304 – Tarlatamab moves

Dr Amol Akhade

@SuyogCancer

Essentially, parallels KEYNOTE-671 & AEGEAN, now w/nivo. Would have been far more surprised (& disappointed) if it didn't show significant EFS benefit. Another trial that includes adjuvant ICI but can't isolate benefit of post-op; we're left to do cross-trial comp vs CM-816.

H. Jack West, MD

@JackWestMD

Full physician voice list (40)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Rami Manochakian MD, FASCO 🇺🇸🇸🇾CancerEducation @RManochakian	🚨🔥 @OncoAlert Hot off the press. As expected, based on results of #Checkmate77T, @US_FDA approved #Neoadjuvant #Nivolumab +Chemo followed by #Adjuvant Nivolumab (after surgery) for pts with resectable Stage IIA-IIIB #NSCLC with no EGFR/ALK…	Positive	19,788
H. Jack West, MD @JackWestMD	Essentially, parallels KEYNOTE-671 & AEGEAN, now w/nivo. Would have been far more surprised (& disappointed) if it didn't show significant EFS benefit. Another trial that includes adjuvant ICI but can't isolate benefit of post-op; we're l…	Negative	13,293
Stephen V Liu, MD @StephenVLiu	Dr. Tina Cascone at #AACR26 with a fantastic, data-rich update on genomic markers and ctDNA dynamics from CheckMate 77T. Already an approved SOC after demonstrating increase in pCR and EFS with addition of perioperative nivolumab to neoadju…	Positive	11,235
Oncology Brothers @OncBrothers	#AACR26 highlights #CommunityOnc: 1. #CM77T: PeriOP/PostOP Nivo in NSCLC 2. #TRUST: ROS1 1L NSCLC 3. RAS Inhibitor - Zoldonrasib in 2L and beyond NSCLC 4. RAS Inhibitor in Panc Ca - Daraxonrasib monotherapy in 1 L - Daraxonrasib + ch…	Neutral	8,690
Hidehito HORINOUCHI @HHorinouchi	🔥CheckMate 77T 🎙️Dr. Tina Cascone 🎯EFS HR 0.58 (97.36%CI 0.42-0.81). Nivo is the only drug with positive EFS in both Neo (CM 816) and Periope (CM77T). ✅Phase III RCT, double-blind ✅Primary: EFS ✅Stage IIA(>4cm) to IIIB(N2) NSCLC ✅NCT0402587…	Positive	6,951
Toni Choueiri, MD @DrChoueiri	JUST IN: @US_FDA approved nivolumab with platinum-doublet chemo as neoadjuvant treatment, followed by single-agent nivolumab after surgery as adjuvant treatment, for resectable (tumors ≥ 4 cm/node +) NSCLC. Efficacy based on CHECKMATE-77T…	Neutral	6,126
Jarushka Naidoo @DrJNaidoo	#ESMO23 Excellent discussion by @marinagarassino of CM77T and ALINA In this discussion, she performed her own mini meta-analysis to address whether we should give neoadj chemoIO in: stage II YES PDL1<1% YES Impressive insights @myESM…	Positive	6,059
Biagio Ricciuti, MD PhD @BiagioRicciutMD	Perioperative vs Neoadjuvant Nivolumab for Resectable NSCLC: Patient-Level Data Analysis of CheckMate 77T vs CheckMate 816 #WCLC2024 @OncoAlert @IASLC Exploratory analysis ✅ 40% reduction in the risk of recurrence o death after surgery wi…	Neutral	5,700
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	Thoracic Oncologists — Siena is here Don't feel sad as #ASCO25 has no lung cancer plenary. But these lung cancer trials are unmissable: ✨ CheckMate 77T – Periop nivo shines in resectable NSCLC 🎯 KRYSTAL-7 – Adagrasib + pembro in KRAS G…	Nuanced	5,350
Christian Rolfo @ChristianRolfo	Great presention at Presidential Session by Dr Tina Cascone on Checkmate 77T impressive data on perioperative IO in resected patients. Congrats to all the authors for this important trial #ESMO23 @OncoAlert @myESMO	Positive	5,297
Misty Dawn Shields @drshieldsmd	Fantastic #oralabstract session today for #NSCLC, #mesothelioma, & #SCLC w/ my fabulous co-chair @_ShankarSiva at #ASCO24 ⭐️BEAT-SC, BEAT-Meso ✅PFS/🛑OS 🚨ALINA ⬆️QOL > Chemo 💪ADAURA ⬇️MRD+ > PBO ‼️CM 77T 💉➕N2, ⬇️ micromets 🏠+FH 🫁 ⬆️risk in …	Positive	4,937
Patrick Forde @FordePatrick	Based on CheckMate 816 and 77T both neoadj only and perioperative chemo nivo approved! FDA approves neoadjuvant/adjuvant nivolumab for resectable non-small cell lung cancer	Positive	4,671
Chul Kim @chulkimMD	Exploratory analysis of CheckMate 77T vs. CheckMate 816 using propensity scoring weighting anlysis Landmark EFS: HR 0.61 favoring periop approach. In the absence of randomized trials, data is helpful, but a few caveats - From CheckMate …	Nuanced	4,478
Uğur Özkerim @UOzkerim	This is not just about EFS anymore. We are finally seeing OS signals with neoadjuvant + perioperative IO in NSCLC 👀 📊 CheckMate-816 → HR 0.72 📊 KEYNOTE-671 → HR 0.74 📊 RATIONALE-315 → HR 0.65 Different strategies, different designs… 👉 sam…	Neutral	3,844
Elliot Servais, MD, FACS @ElliotServaisMD	100% When patients can be resected with R0 & periop chemo-ICI (including N2 single or multi-station) as in Checkmate 77T, 76% 2-year EFS in locoregionally advanced NSCLC. These results are unmatched to date for resectable N2. (Resectable …	Neutral	3,262
Gavitt Woodard @GavittWoodard	CheckMate 77T published! Perioperative nivo improved EFS over neoadj chemo in NSCLC. Not surprising given results from other periop IO trials…but this will be an interesting group to make X trial comparisons with the CM816 pts who were trea…	Nuanced	3,003
Jonathan Spicer MD PhD @DoctorJSpicer	This went a bit under the radar, but important data from #ELCC24 from the 77T periop Nivo trial. Nice demonstration of impact on QoL that includes the entire therapeutic trajectory! Important improvement in time to definitive deterioration.…	Nuanced	2,765
Tom Newsom-Davis @tnewsomdavis	CheckMate-77T update ❓Is neo-adj chemoIO appropriate with N2 (poorer prog) St3 ✅ EFS maintained HR 0.60 (N2) v 0.60 (non-N2) ✅ 67% w N2 had nodal downstaging ✅ N2 w/o pCR = ⬆️EFS w Niv HR 0.48 🤔 If resectable, N2 not a reason per se to a…	Neutral	2,236
Gerry Hanna @gerryhanna	Slightly old news, but just out in this week's @NEJM 🚨CheckMate 77T of perioperative Nivolumab vs Chemo in stage IIA to IIIB #NSCLC ➡️18 mth EFS 70.2% vs 50.0% ➡️MPR 35.4% vs 12.1% ➡️Gr3 or 4 AEs 32.5% vs 25.2% ➡️No OS readout 🔗: https:…	Nuanced	1,737
Julien Mazieres @JulienMazieres	Checkmate 77T trial update. Exploratory analyses showed greater ctDNA clearance in the NIVO v PBO arm, which was associated with pCR benefit. Interesting as a surrogate marker …. But predictive markers are awaited in this setting. @myESMO #…	Nuanced	1,705
Dr. Antonio Calles 🫁🚭 @Tony_Calles	Exploratory analyses from CheckMate 77T, perioperative NIVO showed clinical benefit in pts with resectable NSCLC, including those who received < 4 cycles of neoadj NIVO + chemo, although numerically lower pCR and MPR rates. #ELCC24 #LCSM	Nuanced	1,640
Dr Akhil Santhosh @tuttsakhil	IPD analysis from checkmate 816 and checkmate 77T shows that periop IO strategy as in checkmate 77T had a benefit over neoadjuvant only approach in patients with pdl1 score<1% and non-path CR achievers	Neutral	1,500
Drew Moghanaki 🐕 @DrewMoghanaki	Here are the details for why patients in CM77T didn't make it to surgery after starting down a "Drugs & Surgery" pathway for stage III NSCLC. https://t.co/Vlc0SvPjqT	Neutral	1,468
Aakash Desai, MD, MPH @ADesaiMD	3.PL02.08: Battle of the titans! 🥊 Perioperative vs. Neoadjuvant Nivolumab for Resectable NSCLC analyzed in CheckMate 77T vs. CheckMate 816. Which is the superior strategy? 🤔 #LCSM #WCLC24 @FordePatrick et al. 🔍 Key Takeaways: ➡️ Propens…	Neutral	1,441
Normand Blais, MD @NormandBlais	Well said, completely agree @marinagarassino. "Although perioperative approaches, including the strategy that was used in CheckMate 77T, have shown a benefit, they may not be superior to neoadjuvant-only strategies."	Nuanced	1,421
Oriol Mirallas MD @DrMirallas	#ESMO24 🫁#NSCLC 1. Checkmate77T: Nivo+CT-IQ-Nivo 👉🏽 mEFS 40 vs 17m 👉🏽 ctDNA rel to pCR 👉🏽 ctDNA+ rel to no pCR and ⬇️EFS 🗣️ @jonathanspicer 2. CA209-159: Nivo vs Nivo-Ipi pre-IQ 👉🏽 5yrs OS 70.5 vs 69.9% 👉🏽No diff OS rel to MPR or pCR 🗣️ Dr.…	Positive	984
Noemi Reguart @NReguart	#ASCO25 update on CheckMate 77T: Periop nivo vs plb in resectable NSCLC (mFUP 41 mo) @MARIANOPROVENCI 🔹 EFS: 46.6 vs 16.9 mo (HR 0.61), 30-mo 61% vs 43% 🔹 Benefit regardless of KRAS, STK11, KEAP1, PD-L1 status 🔹 ctDNA/pCR linked to EFS 🔹 O…	Neutral	827
Dipesh Uprety MD FACP @DipeshUpretyMD	CheckMate-77T @NEJM ➡️Pts with resectable stage IIA-IIIB NSCLC ➡️Randomized to neoadj nivo + chemo or chemo for 4 cycles, followed by surgery and adjuvant nivo or placeboX1 year ➡️↑ EFS, pCR and MPR in the Nivo arm #LCSM @OncoAlert @BT…	Neutral	773
Dr Riyaz Shah @DrRiyazShah	CM77T update; OS still not positive; nice ctDNA clearance data #ASCO25	Positive	720
Marcelo Corassa, MD. @MarceloCorassa	Perioperative chemo+IO with vivo in CM77T shows interesting exploratory analyses. Dr. Mariano Provencio shows that ctDNA clearance is associated with path response and both combined reflect survival. KEAP and STK11 did not provide a worse p…	Neutral	570
Jaskirat Randhawa @Jaskirat__SR	Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and #Immunotherapy in #NSCLC – Unveiling the Treatment Landscape #ESMO23 #lungcancer - important results from checkmate 816, Aegean trial, checkmate 77T, keynote 671 https://t.co/u8kLoyNJFO	Neutral	568
Bartomeu Massuti @bmassutis	ctDNA clearance and mutational status in CheckMate 77T impact on outcomes @MARIANOPROVENCI at #ASCO25 @OncoAlert	Neutral	503
Tejas Patil @TejasPatilMD	A very interesting analysis of < 4 vs 4 cycles of perioperative chemoIO from CheckMate 77T. Common clinical conundrum. Not sure this settles debate on 3 vs 4 cycles, but reinforces pathCR benefit from neoadj chemoIO generally. @lcsmchat @Lu…	Nuanced	475
Katsuaki Maehara 🇯🇵 @KatsuakiMaehara	🫁 #WCLC24 🫁 On the other hand, the results suggested that #Perioperative treatment tended to be more effective in the surgical stage of #lung cancer. 🫁CheckMate-816 & CheckMate-77T	Nuanced	326
Alfredo Addeo MD @Alfdoc2	We can say that 9 months (keynote671) adj post neoadjuvant is as good as 12 (checkmate 77T). So 12 months are not necessary and we can spare 3 months of possible tox and cost	Neutral	241
Guilherme S. C. Correia, MD @guicorreiamd	presented an important data analysis of Checkmate 77T and Checkmate 816! Check his profile for a detailed discussion of the results! ❗️Benefits of the periop approach in PD-L1 <1% ❗️Apparent further benefit in those without pCR.	Neutral	231
Edoardo Garbo @EdoardoGarbo	💡Checkmate77T: Adding another crucial piece to the puzzle, strongly supporting the integration of neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy in resectable NSCLC. A fantastic editorial gives us a solid overview of this crowded scenario! 🇮🇹 …	Positive	219
Elvina Almuradova @Dr_ElvinaA	🚨 IASLC 2024 Update: Perioperative nivolumab (neoadjuvant + adjuvant) improves event-free survival (EFS) in resectable NSCLC! 🌟 Analysis of CheckMate 77T vs. 816 shows greater EFS, especially in PD-L1 <1% tumors. No new safety signals. …	Neutral	201
Jennifer A. Marks, MD @jennifermarksmd	Updated survival and biomarker analyses from CheckMate 77T: ctDNA clearance and pCR were associated with improved EFS; nivo favored regardless of KRAS, KEAP1, and/or STK11 @asco #ASCO25 #lcsm #lcam	Positive	165
Hakan Önder @onder_haka2124	There is something I cannot understand. While HR and p significance were achieved when Pdl-1>%1 in the Adjuvant Immunotherapy studies Impower-010 and KEYNOTE-091/PEARLS, how can Pdl1<%1 in perioperative treatment increase the adjuvant IO ef…	Neutral	116

See full CheckMate-77T conference coverage & trial data →

Trial 4 · NCT04026412

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-73L trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-73L — Unresectable stage III NSCLC — nivolumab + chemoradiation then nivolumab +/- ipilimumab (INVESTIGATIONAL)

INVESTIGATIONAL · DID NOT MEET PRIMARY ENDPOINTInvestigational in this setting. CheckMate-73L tested nivolumab with concurrent chemoradiation, then nivolumab +/- ipilimumab, against the standard chemoradiation-then-durvalumab approach in unresectable stage III NSCLC, and did NOT meet its primary progression-free-survival endpoint. Nivolumab is not FDA-approved for this setting.

Physicians are skeptical on CheckMate-73L: 4% of 22 verified physician voices positive, 14% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 50% neutral, 32% critical.

14%

50%

32%

Positive 4% Nuanced 14% Neutral 50% Critical 32%

Denominator: 22 distinct verified physician voices across 50 oncologist posts, 2018-09-25 to 2024-05-14. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT04026412

Physician voices — verbatim

I have felt the love of @DrSteveMartin, who previously worried radiation oncologists were being left out of the "Chemo-Nivo Craze" among thoracic surgeons. Don't worry; the "Chemo-Nivo Craze" with radiation therapy is on the horizon. Say hello to Checkmate 73L. #radonc

Drew Moghanaki 🐕

@DrewMoghanaki

We’ll see how curves and TRAEs look, but in my opinion more evidence that we should be sprinting towards induction immunotherapy for patients w/ NSCLC treated with chemoradiation. @NitinOhri3 @DrSteveMartin https://t.co/1ozrFkRbqf

Brendon Stiles

@BrendonStilesMD

Concurrent immunotherapy (+ chemo) with standard radiation is not a viable approach in nsclc, now a second negative phase 3 trial after pacific 2 #lcsm

Patrick Forde

@FordePatrick

Full physician voice list (22)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Drew Moghanaki 🐕 @DrewMoghanaki	I have felt the love of @DrSteveMartin, who previously worried radiation oncologists were being left out of the "Chemo-Nivo Craze" among thoracic surgeons. Don't worry; the "Chemo-Nivo Craze" with radiation therapy is on the horizon. Say he…	Positive	15,840
Patrick Forde @FordePatrick	Concurrent immunotherapy (+ chemo) with standard radiation is not a viable approach in nsclc, now a second negative phase 3 trial after pacific 2 #lcsm	Negative	13,568
Stephen V Liu, MD @StephenVLiu	Disappointing results from phase 3 CheckMate 73L study of concurrent nivolumab + chemoradiation for stage III NSCLC & nivol +/- ipilimumab vs durvalumab consolidation. No improvement in PFS over standard PACIFIC approach. Similar to negativ…	Negative	7,667
Brendon Stiles @BrendonStilesMD	We’ll see how curves and TRAEs look, but in my opinion more evidence that we should be sprinting towards induction immunotherapy for patients w/ NSCLC treated with chemoradiation. @NitinOhri3 @DrSteveMartin https://t.co/1ozrFkRbqf	Nuanced	7,657
M. Torasawa \| Medical Oncologist🫁 @M_Torasawa	【PACIFIC2に続く2つめのnegative試験】 📚CheckMate73L試験（P3） ☑︎切除不能III期NSCLCに対する ❶ニボルマブ＋CRT併用 →ニボルマブ＋イピリムマブ地固め療法は ❷従来のPACIFICレジメン（CRT→デュルバルマブ地固め療法）と比較してPFSの改善なし https://t.co/q4HN84FELr	Neutral	3,950
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	One more trial to show that u can not give IO drugs along with Chemoradiation in stage IIIB NSCLC . Checkmate 73L . Concurrent Nivo plus cCRT followed by Nivo plus IPI or Nivo alone vs Pacific arm ( cCRT followed by Durva ) failed to show P…	Negative	3,765
Joe Y Chang @JoeChangMD	Pacific-2 and CK-73K are both negative for PFS benefits with adding concurrent IO to chemo/RT in stage III NSCLC. Induction chemo/IO followed by novel RT is the future. https://t.co/as01XENiWo	Negative	1,084
Jonathan Spicer MD PhD @DoctorJSpicer	Agree! It’s pretty obvious that if you can achieve 24% PCR before you get to the RT part you’re gonna have good outcomes. And that’s without much selection of patients most likely to benefit…	Neutral	822
Balazs Halmos @DrSteveMartin	Dr. Moghanaki trying to drink from the neoadj chemo/IO Kool-Aid😉 👇	Neutral	707
Dr. Luis E. Raez @LuisRaezMD	Unfortunatly this approach of adding IO to chemo/radiation is not working but we have other options to explore and the most important thing we need good biomarkers to guide #immunotherapy use. #lungcancer #lcsm @FLASCO_ORG @OLACANCER1 @MCIS…	Nuanced	649
M. Bolton @5_utr	Let’s see the HR and curves, I hate press releases like this there is almost no information	Negative	293
Normand Blais, MD 🌻 @NormandBlais	Worked hard to contribute to KEYLYNK-012. I’m afraid to see the results after PACIFIC-2 and now this :	Negative	267
Andrea R. Filippi @AndrearicFili	Completely agree !	Neutral	198
David Heredia. @HerediaOncologo	Bristol Myers Squibb today announced the Phase 3 CheckMate -73L trial did not meet its primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) in unresectable, locally advanced stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).	Neutral	184
Elliot Servais, MD, FACS @ElliotServaisMD	Show me where in pacific there is any indication that the patients were evaluated by MDTB including a thoracic surgeon….. It may take you a while… So in the meantime, check out this editorial from Harvey pass in 2018	Neutral	176
Yungan TAO @YG_TAO	More details will be interesting: whether concur/adjuv Nivo non-inferior to or worse than adjuv Durva? Not same negative as Pacific 2 (Durva vs placebo). @PBlanchardMD @BenjaminBesseMD Bristol Myers Squibb Provides Update on Phase 3 CheckM…	Neutral	171
Dr. Antonio Calles 🫁🚭 @Tony_Calles	Now there are modern chemorads -> IO trials for unresectable stage III (eg, CheckMate-73L) in which randomization is before treatment initiation. Same premise as in PACIFIC, it has to be considered unresectable. In our case, the same MTD de…	Neutral	156
Seth Krantz, MD, FACS @SethBKrantz	It’s the concurrent chemoRT that’s hard. excuse my ignorance, but are we looking at concurrent/induction chemo/io followed by RT. This would allow us to treat locally advanced with same induction regimen followed by best local therapy.	Nuanced	153
Angel Lopez-Galindo, MD, MHA @drlopezgalindo	CheckMate -73L trial did not meet its primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) in unresectable, locally advanced stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): adding immunotherapy concurrently with definitive chemoradiation did n…	Negative	104
Ippokratis Korantzis, Medical Oncologist, MD, PhD @newsincancer	Bristol Myers Squibb (NYSE: BMY) today announced the Phase 3 #CheckMate73L trial did not meet its primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) in unresectable, locally advanced stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)	Neutral	76
Dr. Nagla Abdel Karim @NaglaAKarimMD	To build on the data reported from the pivotal phase 3 PACIFIC trial, the phase 3 CheckMate-73L trial has been launched to examine nivolumab plus chemoradiation followed by nivolumab/ipilimumab @GACancerCenter #LCSM #medtwitter	Neutral	0
Akif Turna @akifturna	The begining of the end of resection of NSCLC patients with N2 disease: Mature results of Pacific Trial #WCLC2018	Neutral	0

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 5 · NCT02231749

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-214 trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-214 — 1L intermediate/poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (nivolumab + ipilimumab)

FDA APPROVED · Apr 2018FDA-approved April 16, 2018, in combination with ipilimumab for the first-line treatment of intermediate- or poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-214: 38% of 24 verified physician voices positive, 12% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 46% neutral, 4% critical.

38%

12%

46%

Positive 38% Nuanced 12% Neutral 46% Critical 4%

Denominator: 24 distinct verified physician voices across 38 oncologist posts, 2024-01-22 to 2026-03-04. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT02231749 · NEJM 2018 — CheckMate-214 primary publication

Motzer RJ, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, et al. Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(14):1277-1290.

Physician voices — verbatim

Ab#363 @ASCO #GU24 by #NizarTannir👉https://t.co/hF1SNo8UWt👉CheckMate214 ph3 mRCC #kidneycancerupdate at 80 mof/u👉Ipi+Nivo continues to show survival benefits vs Sunitinib➡️ mOS 47 vs 26 mos in int/poor risk pts👇@motzermd @OncoAlert @urotoday @Uromigos @KidneyCancer

Neeraj Agarwal, MD, FASCO

@neerajaiims

Always so useful to hear updates on pivotal P3 trials in #kidneycancer. Congrats to @BourlonMaite, Tannir & Grunwald on terrific talks updated #CM9ER, #CM214 & #CLEAR datasets. The #CM214 favorable risk data is particularly intriguing, but in general, the data today reinforces… https://t.co/FxE4YvfCin

Sumanta K. Pal, MD, FASCO

@montypal

Couldn’t agree more, of course there can be upfront toxicity concerns, patients that desire cure and a chance to be off tx may consider benefits > risks. Primary PD in this population leading to death less of concern. They will get subsequent tx.

Alan Tan

@alantanmd

Full physician voice list (24)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Tom Powles @tompowles1	It’s hard not to reconsider the activity of ipi/nivo in the good risk population (HR0.82). It now seems to be at least as good as other options and the crossing of the curves is interesting. I’d like to stop using IMDC to determine choice o…	Neutral	17,824
Neeraj Agarwal, MD, FASCO @neerajaiims	Ab#363 @ASCO #GU24 by #NizarTannir👉https://t.co/hF1SNo8UWt👉CheckMate214 ph3 mRCC #kidneycancerupdate at 80 mof/u👉Ipi+Nivo continues to show survival benefits vs Sunitinib➡️ mOS 47 vs 26 mos in int/poor risk pts👇@motzermd @OncoAlert @urotoda…	Positive	16,909
Toni Choueiri, MD @DrChoueiri	9️⃣ years later, the story of dual immune checkpoint blockade in metastatic RCC is still being written. The final "very" long-term follow-up of CheckMate-214 confirms what many hoped in 2018: durable survival, deep responses, and a subset …	Neutral	15,885
Brian Rini, MD @brian_rini	Updated table of IO combos (ITT population) in front line mRCC after #ASCOGU24. Has anything changed for you based on these data?	Neutral	9,312
David Braun @BraunMDPhD	Wow. Update from Dr. Tannir @MDAndersonNews presenting 8 year f/u for CM214. For patients who responded to nivo+ipi, half are still responding 8 years later. Also interesting OS for IMDC favorable risk. @OncLive @OncoAlert @urotoday @kidney…	Positive	5,643
Enrique Grande @drenriquegrande	#ASCO25 abstracts titlkes are out!!!!! https://t.co/ybAeFhH4He Much Looking forward to seeing the exciting new data in GU tumors!!!! See you all in Chicago!!!! @ASCO @ASCOPost @DrChoueiri @tompowles1 @shilpaonc @Heijden @motzermd @GuardCons…	Positive	4,374
Sumanta K. Pal, MD, FASCO @montypal	Always so useful to hear updates on pivotal P3 trials in #kidneycancer. Congrats to @BourlonMaite, Tannir & Grunwald on terrific talks updated #CM9ER, #CM214 & #CLEAR datasets. The #CM214 favorable risk data is particularly intriguing, but …	Nuanced	4,064
Emre Yekedüz @yekeduz_emre	Super star @VincentWenxinXu from @DanaFarber_GU is rocking the stage at @ASCO #GU25 CheckMate 214 post-hoc analysis: Circulating KIM-1 predicts prognosis & response to NIVO+IPI in advanced RCC. ✅ Key Findings: 🔹 High baseline KIM-1 = wors…	Neutral	2,779
Kunal Jobanputra MD, DM @KNJobanputra	CHECKMATE 214 update at 9-YEARS - NIVO+IPI vs SUN in advanced RCC OS @ 9Y ITT: HR 0.71, 31% vs 20%. Int/Poor : HR 0.69, 30% vs 19%. Fav: HR 0.80 (improved from 1.45), 35% vs 22%. PFS @ 8Y: ITT: 23% vs 9%. Int/Poor: 25% vs 9%. Fav: 13%…	Neutral	2,065
Oncology Brothers @OncBrothers	3. Updates for RCC: - CM214: Ipi/Nivo combo continues to show OS benefit in intermediate and poor risk. OS has improved in favorable category over period of time. - CM9ER: Nivo/Cabo ongoing OS benefit (46.5 most and HR: 0.77) - CLEAR: Pe…	Neutral	1,894
Tian Zhang, MD, MHS @TiansterZhang	#NizarTannir & @bmsnews team with true dedication to the study follow-up of #Checkmate214 — 8 year data and moving the needle in favorable risk #kidneycancer. Ipi-nivo should be considered when shooting for durable response and long term su…	Positive	1,542
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	8 years mFU of CheckMate 214 NIVO+IPI is still setting the survival pace against SUN in aRCC, higher response rates, and longer responses, especially among the long-term survivors. Nizar M. Tannir, MD, FACP @MDAndersonNews @ASCO #GU24 @On…	Neutral	1,458
Michael Serzan, MD @MikeSerzanMD	2/ 📚 BACKGROUND 📚 NIVO/IPI has robust landmark PFS, OS, and TFS #CM214 🤔 what mediates resistance to anti-PD1 in RCC? Data from @LabSignoretti shows that Treg in the tumor microenvironment are critical to PD1 resistance https://t.co/…	Neutral	932
Matt Campbell MD, MS @DocMattCampbell	Great to see 8 year follow up of CM214 by mentor, colleague and friend Dr Nizar Tannir. Durable, long term responses are special. #GU24	Positive	931
Zach Klaassen @zklaassen_md	Nivo + Ipi vs Sun for 1L Rx of aRCC: Long-term f/u from the Phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial #GU24 @urotoday Nivo + Ipi vs Sun: 🟢 OS: ITT (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83), int/poor risk (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.81), fav risk (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.60-1.…	Positive	902
Fabio Schutz @FabioSchutz78	Dr. Nizar Tannir presented updated results of CM214 with 80 months median FU. Ipi-Nivo continues to benefit intermediate and poor risk mRCC patients. Interesting to see that the OS curves for the favorable risk subgroup seem to be crossing,…	Neutral	741
Alan Tan @alantanmd	Couldn’t agree more, of course there can be upfront toxicity concerns, patients that desire cure and a chance to be off tx may consider benefits > risks. Primary PD in this population leading to death less of concern. They will get subseq…	Negative	726
Daniel Heng @DrDanielHeng	I agree. Now we need to know how to distinguish favourable risk patients: who benefits and who doesn’t as there are more early deaths in the first couple years. Identifying up front who those patients are that make the curves cross is cruci…	Neutral	714
Katy Beckermann @katy_beckermann	gives great talk on Kim-1 from Checkmate-214 shows patients with 30% decline in kim-1 at 3 weeks had 3x longer mOS. #GU25 #rcc #biomarker	Positive	678
Maria Nirvana Formiga, MD, PhD @nirvanaformiga	Always it’s a honor watching Dr. Tannir talk: Updated data on #CM214 trial #Gu24 @MDAndersonNews @NazliDizman @acccancercenter	Positive	345
Pavlos Msaouel @PavlosMsaouel	Yup. And “prognostic” scores typically have stronger impact on oncologic outcomes than “predictive” scores. IMDC can definitely be improved but it already does a fairly good job being a prognostic score that can inform patient-specific deci…	Nuanced	275
Alessandro Samuelly @DrSamuelly	CheckMate214: Nivo+Ipi in 1st line tx for ccRCC shows improved benefit in the favorable risk group at the 8 year follow up, highlighting the long term responders from immunotherapy. This year updates remark the need for better biomarkers to…	Neutral	216
Vishal Navani, MD @navstruck	OS curves in fav risk overlap now with sunitinib in all IO/TKI and IpiNivo studies.But how to reconcile the statistical plan differences of IO/TKI (ITT population and so approved & reimbursed across @IMDConline risk)vs INT/POOR risk in IO/I…	Nuanced	35
Ippokratis Korantzis, Medical Oncologist, MD, PhD @newsincancer	CheckMate-9ER and CheckMate-214 Updates Show Continued Benefits With Combination Regimens Over Sunitinib in Advanced RCC	Positive	10

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 6 · NCT03141177

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-9ER trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-9ER — 1L advanced renal cell carcinoma (nivolumab + cabozantinib)

FDA APPROVED · Jan 2021FDA-approved January 22, 2021, in combination with cabozantinib for the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-9ER: 33% of 24 verified physician voices positive, 4% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 63% neutral, 0% critical.

33%

63%

Positive 33% Nuanced 4% Neutral 63% Critical 0%

Denominator: 24 distinct verified physician voices across 40 oncologist posts, 2024-01-22 to 2026-03-03. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT03141177 · NEJM 2021 — CheckMate-9ER primary publication

Choueiri TK, Powles T, Burotto M, et al. Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(9):829-841.

Physician voices — verbatim

Ab#362 @ASCO #GU24 by @BourlonMaite👉https://t.co/erNsHAaztT👉55 mos f/u of CheckMate 9ER ph3 mRCC #kidneycancer 👉continued benefit w/ Nivo+Cabo vs Sunitinib ➡️ mOS 43.9 vs 29.3 mos in int/poor risk pts👇@drchoueiri @OncoAlert @urotoday @Uromigos @KidneyCancer @tompowles1

Neeraj Agarwal, MD, FASCO

@neerajaiims

Sumanta K. Pal, MD, FASCO

@montypal

Full physician voice list (24)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Neeraj Agarwal, MD, FASCO @neerajaiims	Ab#362 @ASCO #GU24 by @BourlonMaite👉https://t.co/erNsHAaztT👉55 mos f/u of CheckMate 9ER ph3 mRCC #kidneycancer 👉continued benefit w/ Nivo+Cabo vs Sunitinib ➡️ mOS 43.9 vs 29.3 mos in int/poor risk pts👇@drchoueiri @OncoAlert @urotoday @Urom…	Positive	11,983
Toni Choueiri, MD @DrChoueiri	Final #CheckMate9ER results (5+ yr FU: N+C > S in 1L #aRCC PFS HR 0.58, OS HR 0.79, ORR 55.7% vs 27.4%. No new safety signals. N+C remains a SOC for untreated aRCC. @ASCO #GU25 @motzermd @tompowles1 @MSKCancerCenter @OncoAlert	Neutral	9,781
Maite Bourlon @BourlonMaite	Happy to present the CheckMate9ER study @ASCO #gu2024 👩🏻‍⚕️🇲🇽🦀 🔹 A P3 trial of cabo+nivolumab vs sunitinib in previously untreated advanced kidney cancer. 🔸@ 55m folow-up efficacy of the combo is maintained in OS, PFS and ORR 🔹Thanks for t…	Positive	9,611
Brian Rini, MD @brian_rini	Updated table of IO combos (ITT population) in front line mRCC after #ASCOGU24. Has anything changed for you based on these data?	Neutral	9,312
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	Abstract #362 Update from CheckMate 9ER in #aRCC: With 55.6 months follow-up, N+C still leads over S in PFS, OS, and ORR for untreated aRCC. 🌟 Consistent benefits across IMDC risk groups & sustained safety profile. N+C reaffirms its plac…	Neutral	6,426
Sumanta K. Pal, MD, FASCO @montypal	Always so useful to hear updates on pivotal P3 trials in #kidneycancer. Congrats to @BourlonMaite, Tannir & Grunwald on terrific talks updated #CM9ER, #CM214 & #CLEAR datasets. The #CM214 favorable risk data is particularly intriguing, but …	Nuanced	4,064
Dra. María Natalia Gandur Quiroga @nataliagandur	💫🌟👏🔝 Kudos!! to 👩‍🎓@BourlonMaite for a crystal-clear presentation! at #GU24 @ASCO 🔥 New #CheckMate9ER 55-Month Update! 📊 Nivolumab + Cabozantinib vs Sunitinib in aRCC 📈 Superior PFS, OS, ORR with N+C 🕒 Median PFS: 16.4 vs 8.4 months ⏳ M…	Positive	3,878
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	5 year update of checkmate 9ER. Nivo plus Cabo vs Sunitinib for advanced clear cell RCC. Note that Sunitinib arm is not doing bad either. 35.4 % are alive on Sunitinib arm also at the end of 5 years. ( vs 40.9 % on nivo plus Cabo arm ) …	Neutral	3,780
Aly-Khan Lalani @lalaniMD	Noteworthy to see where dust settles for @IMDConline favourable risk disease for doublet options — particularly in jurisdictions where doublet IO restricted to Int/Poor risk currently 👀 @TiansterZhang @ERPlimackMD @PBarataMD @nbasappaCCI @…	Neutral	2,906
Tian Zhang, MD, MHS @TiansterZhang	Checkmate 9ER follow up — important OS benefit for cabo-nivo. Looking forward to @BourlonMaite presenting! #GU24 @ASCO	Positive	2,512
Emre Yekedüz @yekeduz_emre	⏩ @ASCO #GU25: ✅ CheckMate 9ER (5+ year follow-up): Nivolumab + Cabozantinib continues to show durable efficacy in 1L advanced RCC vs. Sunitinib. ✅ No new safety signal! @motzermd @ASCOPost @ASCOTECAG @OncoAlert @ConquerCancerFd @MikeSerzan…	Neutral	1,285
Shilpa Gupta @shilpaonc	#GU24 @BourlonMaite presenting the 55 month of Checkmate 9ER. Consistent safety and efficacy. @DrChoueiri @montypal @neerajaiims @MosheOrnsteinMD @TiansterZhang	Neutral	1,195
Zach Klaassen @zklaassen_md	Nivo + Cabo vs Sun for previously untreated aRCC: Results from 55-mo f/u of the CheckMate 9ER trial #GU24 @urotoday Nivo + Cabo vs Sun: 🟢ITT: PFS (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.49-0.70), OS (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.95), ORR (55.7% vs 27.7%) 🟢Fav-Risk:…	Neutral	1,109
Jordan Ciuro, MD @jordanciuro	Final updates of #CheckMate 9ER trial? nivolumab + cabozantinib vs sunitinib in 1L advanced RCC @ASCO #GU25 Key Takeaways, nivolumab with cabozantinib: ✅Improved PFS in ITT 16.4m vs 8.3m HR 0.58 ✅Improved OS in ITT 46.5m vs 35.5m HR 0.79 ✅…	Positive	992
Bárbara Melão, MD, PhD @bavilima	#GU25 #RCC ✨CheckMate 9ER Final Results: 5-Year Follow-Up @motzermd @DrChoueiri ▶️Nivo + cabo maintained long-term efficacy benefits over sunitinib in previously untreated aRCC 🔹 PFS: 16.4 vs. 8.3 months (HR 0.58) 🔹 OS: 46.5 vs. 35.5 mont…	Neutral	974
David Braun @BraunMDPhD	with an important update of CheckMate-9ER, showing continued benefits of nivo+cabo over suntinib. IMDC favorable risk remains an area that needs more investigation. Nivo+cabo with very good activity in high risk sites, including bone @ASCO …	Positive	830
Rana McKay, MD, FASCO @DrRanaMcKay	presenting updated analysis from CM9ER demonstrating persistent PFS and OS benefit. @DrChoueiri @OncoAlert #GU25	Neutral	786
Heber Reyes, MD @heberolimus	Last week my colleague @ZarbaMartin1 presented the following poster regarding RWD on NivoCabo per @IMDConline in ASCO #GU26 https://t.co/Yb31FgtqJR Always advancing our decision-making with patients, twith data that truly represent 'em. Ku…	Neutral	409
Pavlos Msaouel @PavlosMsaouel	Ouch. Restricting to int/poor and excluding favorable is based on implicit assumptions unsupported by data or established RCT methodology literature. Regulators making such decisions should start with digesting this open access overview 👉	Neutral	238
Thomas Flaig @TomFlaigMD	Congratulations on the presentation, @BourlonMaite !	Positive	178
Urbano Anido @urbano_anido	Checkmate 9ER	Neutral	87
Alessandro Samuelly @DrSamuelly	Grouped updates for first line RCC for favorable risk diseases - more might not be better in some patients.	Neutral	46
Maroun Bou Zerdan, MD @MarounBouZerdan	📢 Final 5-yr results from CheckMate 9ER: Nivo+Cabo > Sunitinib in aRCC: ✅ PFS: 16.4 vs. 8.3m (HR 0.58) ✅ ORR: 55.7% vs. 27.4% (CR: 13.9% vs. 4.6%) ✅ 60-mo OS: 40.9% (N+C) vs. 35.4% (S) 🔬Benefit seen in lung, bone, & liver mets. Checkmate …	Neutral	25
Ippokratis Korantzis, Medical Oncologist, MD, PhD @newsincancer	CheckMate-9ER and CheckMate-214 Updates Show Continued Benefits With Combination Regimens Over Sunitinib in Advanced RCC	Positive	10

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 7 · NCT03138512

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-914 trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-914 — Adjuvant localized RCC at high risk after nephrectomy (nivolumab + ipilimumab) — INVESTIGATIONAL

INVESTIGATIONAL · DID NOT MEET PRIMARY ENDPOINTInvestigational. CheckMate-914 tested adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab (Part A) against placebo in localized RCC at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy and did NOT meet its primary disease-free-survival endpoint. Adjuvant nivolumab is not FDA-approved for RCC.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-914: 17% of 18 verified physician voices positive, 11% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 61% neutral, 11% critical.

17%

11%

61%

11%

Positive 17% Nuanced 11% Neutral 61% Critical 11%

Denominator: 18 distinct verified physician voices across 26 oncologist posts, 2024-01-27 to 2024-01-28. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT03138512

Physician voices — verbatim

❌CheckMate 914 update: NIVO monotherapy's bid for reducing kidney cancer relapse post-surgery doesn't hit the mark. While safe, it didn't show the DFS! 🤔Trend for benefit in patients with sarcomatoid features, PD-L1 positive, and anemia? @motzermd @MSKCancerCenter @ASCO #GU24… https://t.co/RJHeilmD2w

Yüksel Ürün

@DrYukselUrun

Big problem of IO access in control arm as trial was performed in countries lacking access. 40% of patients in control arm who got systemic therapy at relapse didn’t get IO. Censoring also an issue. The “positive” OS isn’t real. More info here…..https://t.co/gPi4pwUhCf

Daniel Goldstein MD

@drdgoldstein

👇 The low signal-to-noise ratio here compromises all inferences regardless of p-value significance. This is widespread in oncology costing millions of $$$ and derailing progress. Thankfully, the infrastructure for stakeholders to see & correct this problem is becoming available.

Pavlos Msaouel

@PavlosMsaouel

Full physician voice list (18)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Tom Powles @tompowles1	It’s not immediately obvious why adjuvant pembro in RCC achieves DFS and OS while nivo and ipi/nivo doesn’t. 914 & 564 are well conducted R3s. I feel the 6 vs 12 month of therapy is the best single explanation. In advanced disease nivo and …	Neutral	11,418
Daniel Goldstein MD @drdgoldstein	Big problem of IO access in control arm as trial was performed in countries lacking access. 40% of patients in control arm who got systemic therapy at relapse didn’t get IO. Censoring also an issue. The “positive” OS isn’t real. More info h…	Nuanced	5,725
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	❌CheckMate 914 update: NIVO monotherapy's bid for reducing kidney cancer relapse post-surgery doesn't hit the mark. While safe, it didn't show the DFS! 🤔Trend for benefit in patients with sarcomatoid features, PD-L1 positive, and anemia? @…	Positive	4,248
David Braun @BraunMDPhD	Really interesting results from CheckMate 914 part B from @motzermd . NIVO only did not significantly improve DFS in adjuvant setting. Compared to KN564, slightly lower risk population (some T2 any grade, no M1 NED).	Positive	1,976
Daniel Heng @DrDanielHeng	This is Checkmate 914 presented by the eminent @motzermd. Nivolumab vs placebo in part B of this trial was not different. This trial does not include M1 NED patients. This continues to complicate the adjuvant field. @ASCO @GU24 @oncoalert.	Neutral	1,931
Pavlos Msaouel @PavlosMsaouel	👇 The low signal-to-noise ratio here compromises all inferences regardless of p-value significance. This is widespread in oncology costing millions of $$$ and derailing progress. Thankfully, the infrastructure for stakeholders to see & corr…	Negative	1,720
Tian Zhang, MD, MHS @TiansterZhang	with a thorough overview of the #Checkmate914 data, nivolumab without signif disease free survival effect vs placebo. <10% T4 or N1 and no M1NED pops may be a clue? @ASCO #GU24 @OncoAlert	Neutral	1,495
Zach Klaassen @zklaassen_md	Adjv Nivo monoRx vs PBO for localized RCC at high risk of relapse after nephrectomy: Results from Part B of the Ph 3 CheckMate 914 RCT #GU24 @motzermd @urotoday 🟢n=408 Nivo vs n=207 PBO 🟢1 EP was DFS per BICR: HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.62–1.21 🟢A…	Neutral	1,174
Roberto Iacovelli @DrIacovelli	Different results from 2 phase 3 studies (CM914 and KN564) on adjuvant IO for mRCC in similar but not equal populations at #GU24. What's the reason? @DrChoueiri @tompowles1 @drenriquegrande @gippo27 @montypal @ciccarese_c @OncoAlert @onco…	Nuanced	1,001
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	If pembrolizumab works then why not adjuvant nivo for RCC ? Part B of checkmate 914 Unfortunately Negative. PFS Benifit by BICR . HR - 0.87 ( 0.62 to 1.21 ) p value of 0.3962 Why pembrolizumab worked and nivo did not ? What's your theor…	Neutral	946
Sergio Vázquez @OncoLucus	Why CheckMate 914 is a negative trial and KEYNOTE-564 is a positive one? Histology, drug, duration of treatment, risk, sarcomatoid histology, discontinuation rates…excellent discussion by @PBarataMD #RenalCancer #GU24	Negative	911
Martin ZapataLaguado @zapatalaguadomd	#GU24 like an appetizer, a great one presented by @motzermd CM914 negative result in DFS adjuvant with nivolumab monoagent, let’s wait data on KN564…. Very exciting discussion 🦾🦾🦾 @OncoAlert @UroTarget @urotoday @Uromigos @EurUrolFocus @SC…	Positive	870
Álvaro Pinto @dralvaropinto	Adjuvant nivolumab monotherapy vs placebo for localized renal cell carcinoma at high risk of relapse after nephrectomy: Results from Part B of the randomized, phase 3 CheckMate 914 trial. #GU24	Neutral	583
Carlos Alvarez @duemed	Discussion of CheckMate-914 (part B) and KEYNOTE-564 @PBarataMD #GU24 Some history from adjuvant RCTs in RCC to put in context the results of KEYNOTE-564	Neutral	516
Brian Ramnaraign, MD FACP @RamnaraignMD	Checkmate 914 part B results of adjuvant nivolumab monotherapy vs placebo in kidney cancer. No difference in DFS. #GU24 @ASCO	Neutral	447
Giuseppe Procopio @gippo27	In my opinion duration of therapy is one of the reason.Nivo and pembro are so different in activity?I dont'think so.	Neutral	65
Michiel Strijbos @StrijbosMichiel	Poor power of the nivo trial. Only 60%.	Neutral	57
Jose C. Tapia @TapiaJC1	Three possible reasons: duration of IO, NED, and T2-AnyGrade. The last two involve only 6% and 15% of the population, respectively. While duration of IO affects the entire population. The 4yOS diff in KN564 is 5%. If time is that relevan…	Neutral	25

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 8 · NCT03036098

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-901 trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-901 — 1L unresectable/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (nivolumab + gemcitabine-cisplatin)

FDA APPROVED · Mar 2024FDA-approved March 6, 2024, in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-901: 32% of 19 verified physician voices positive, 21% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 42% neutral, 5% critical.

32%

21%

42%

Positive 32% Nuanced 21% Neutral 42% Critical 5%

Denominator: 19 distinct verified physician voices across 34 oncologist posts, 2024-04-26 to 2025-06-02. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT03036098 · NEJM 2023 — CheckMate-901 primary publication

van der Heijden MS, Sonpavde G, Powles T, et al. Nivolumab plus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(19):1778-1789.

Physician voices — verbatim

Interesting results from #CheckMate901 by @MattGalsky ⚪️ Pts with LN only mUC have higher CR with NIVO+GC (63% vs 34% w/ GC) ⚪️ Durable responses persisting after treatment were observed ⚪️ Improvement in OS and PFS is consistent @MSKCancerCenter @ASCO #ASCO24 @OncoAlert

Toni Choueiri, MD

@DrChoueiri

A +ve CHMP opinion for gem/cis + nivolumab (CheckMate -901 trial) today @MichvdHeijden @MattGalsky #APCCC24 Likely to result in EMA approval. This will compete with maintenance avelumab due to ⬆️ RR & CR rate, but EV/pembro will follow soon I hope .

Tom Powles

@tompowles1

⚡️Oral Abstract⚡️ CheckMate-901: Nivo + Ipi vs Gem + Carbo in 1L mUC @urotoday #ASCO25 📌OS: HR 0.79, 98.27% CI, 0.61–1.01 📌PFS: HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72-1.12 📌ORR: 35.3% vs 38.8% Negative trial, but OS rates at 60 months: 23.0% vs 14.4%

Zach Klaassen

@zklaassen_md

Full physician voice list (19)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Toni Choueiri, MD @DrChoueiri	Interesting results from #CheckMate901 by @MattGalsky ⚪️ Pts with LN only mUC have higher CR with NIVO+GC (63% vs 34% w/ GC) ⚪️ Durable responses persisting after treatment were observed ⚪️ Improvement in OS and PFS is consistent @MSK…	Positive	6,978
Neeraj Agarwal, MD, FASCO @neerajaiims	Ab#4509 @ASCO #ASCO24 by @MattGalsky 👉https://t.co/k7XxS9NypF👉GC+NIVO vs. GC in ph 3 Checkmate 901 in pts w/ mUC #bladdercancer 👉Remarkable improvement in PFS & OS w/ GC+NIVO in pts w/ lymph-node only disease 👇@MichvdHeijden @OncoAlert @uro…	Positive	6,408
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	CheckMate 901 trial shows that NIVO+GC significantly improves overall and progression-free survival in LN-only metastatic urothelial carcinoma compared to GC alone, with higher response rates and deeper complete responses. 🇹🇷Happy to be pa…	Neutral	5,820
Tom Powles @tompowles1	A +ve CHMP opinion for gem/cis + nivolumab (CheckMate -901 trial) today @MichvdHeijden @MattGalsky #APCCC24 Likely to result in EMA approval. This will compete with maintenance avelumab due to ⬆️ RR & CR rate, but EV/pembro will follow …	Nuanced	4,809
Guru P. Sonpavde, MD @sonpavde	#AUA24 -CHECKMATE901 Phase III trial of first-line therapy for advanced #urothelialcarcinoma #bladdercancer: 1) Nivolumab + GC showed significant benefits in overall survival OS, PFS, and response over GC alone; 2) CR rate approximately dou…	Positive	3,693
Maite Bourlon @BourlonMaite	Tnks for attending rhe session!! Important data presented! 🔹PROs for 1st line EV+pembro for mUC @shilpaonc 🔸Biomarkers in pembro+lenva & pembro+axi trials in mRCC @DrChoueiri @brian_rini 🔹CheckMate 901 subgroup analysis for LN only di…	Neutral	3,600
Sabine D. Brookman-May @brookmans76	Excellent coverage on lymph-node only metastatic #UrothelialCancer as a distinct entity among complete responders to Nivo/GC #CheckMate901 ➡️Med OS in LN-only mUC: 46.3 (Nivo+GC) vs 24.9 months with GC (HR 0.58) 👉https://t.co/VDly5TeVsy @Ma…	Neutral	2,421
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	For low volume disease with lymph node only mets , Nivo plus GC shows median OS of 46.3 months. Subset analysis. Small numbers . Check mate 901 update . Better Doesn't than Javelin 100 ? additional 6 cycles of Io make difference ? @dr_ya…	Neutral	1,603
Martín Angel @Martin_AngelMD	We are starting to idententify those patients who beneffit more with all the altwrnatives in mUC. @MattGalsky.... Lymph node only benefit the most with chemo +Nivo (CheckMate 901) #ASCO24	Neutral	1,343
Dra. María Natalia Gandur Quiroga @nataliagandur	🌟🎓👏👏👏Clear and data-rich presentation by Michiel Simon Van Der Heijden CheckMate 901: NIVO+IPI vs gem-carbo in cis-ineligible mUC #ASCO25 @OncoAlert 🟠 mOS: 19.1 vs 13.2 mo \| HR 0.79, P = 0.0245 (not statistically significant) 🟠 36-mo OS ra…	Positive	1,255
Emre Yekedüz @yekeduz_emre	#ASCO24 ⭐️📣 🎯In the CheckMate 901 trial, the combination of nivolumab + gemcitabine-cisplatin showcased efficacy in previously untreated unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. 🎯A notable subset of patients achieved complete remi…	Neutral	1,111
Jason Brown @JasonBrownMDPhD	Patients with lymph node metastatic disease more likely to get CR with Nivo/Gem/Cis in CheckMate901 presented by @MattGalsky. Addition of Nivo led to more durable treatment free interval, better PFS (HR 0.38) and OS (HR 0.58) in this popula…	Neutral	914
Zach Klaassen @zklaassen_md	⚡️Oral Abstract⚡️ CheckMate-901: Nivo + Ipi vs Gem + Carbo in 1L mUC @urotoday #ASCO25 📌OS: HR 0.79, 98.27% CI, 0.61–1.01 📌PFS: HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72-1.12 📌ORR: 35.3% vs 38.8% Negative trial, but OS rates at 60 months: 23.0% vs 14.4%	Negative	648
Enrique Grande @drenriquegrande	1. #CHECKMATE-901 main study: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) vs gemcitabine-carboplatin did not impact in OS in 1L #metastatic urothelial cancer https://t.co/i7d5Ofv9CL	Neutral	614
Dr. Iván R. González @Dr_Ivanoncologo	CheckMate 901: Nivo + GC experienced meaningful improvements in OS and PFS vs GC alone, plus represents a standard first-line treatment option. Thank you, @MattGalsky, for the insightful conference. It was truly enriching to learn from your…	Positive	572
Yakup Ergün @dr_yakupergun	Compared to Javelin 100, approximately 1 year longer survival is impressive data. Moreover, this difference is noteworthy despite the fact that patients with progression in the Javelin trial were not included. Does EV-302 have data for this…	Positive	320
Matt Galsky @MattGalsky	Our contemporary "negative" RCTs in metastatic UC are just not the same as our "negative" RCTs of the past. Granted a small subset -- but this is durable disease free survival OFF treatment after Ipi + Nivo #CM901. #MedIQASCO25 #ASCO25 #bl…	Nuanced	173
Martin ZapataLaguado @zapatalaguadomd	#ASCO25 CM901 in mUC, shows the arm of IO IO in inelegible cisplatin patients and the combo doesn’t improve OS compared to carbo gem, however interesting data on the responders @oncodaily @OncoAlert @achoHematoYOnco @SCUColombia @urotoday @…	Nuanced	107
Dillon Cockrell, MD @DCockrellMD	Response rates for gem/cis/nivo were not as impressive as EV/pembro in EV-302, however given possible toxicity experienced with EV (particularly neuropathy, rashes, hyperglycemia, ocular) this may still be a good option for certain patients…	Nuanced	83

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 9 · NCT02632409

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-274 trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-274 — Adjuvant high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma after surgery (nivolumab)

FDA APPROVED · Aug 2021FDA-approved August 19, 2021, for the adjuvant treatment of urothelial carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after radical resection.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-274: 23% of 26 verified physician voices positive, 15% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 58% neutral, 4% critical.

23%

15%

58%

Positive 23% Nuanced 15% Neutral 58% Critical 4%

Denominator: 26 distinct verified physician voices across 30 oncologist posts, 2025-02-10 to 2025-02-15. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

See full CheckMate-274 conference coverage & trial data →

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT02632409 · NEJM 2021 — CheckMate-274 primary publication

Bajorin DF, Witjes JA, Gschwend JE, et al. Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Placebo in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(22):2102-2114.

Physician voices — verbatim

Excellent discussion of CheckMate 274 & NIAGARA by @ERPlimackMD always! 🔥 Great insights into the evolving landscape of perioperative & adjuvant immunotherapy in bladder cancer! 💡 @asco @oncoalert #cancer #oncology #GU25 @MikeSerzanMD @drenriquegrande @crisbergerot… https://t.co/2JTUAZ0ODK

Yüksel Ürün

@DrYukselUrun

Excellent discussion by @ERPlimackMD on #CM274 which continues to show OS benefit with caveats: ➡️how can we avoid over treatment -> use of biomarkers - ctDNA, PDL1? ➡️only 50% got SOC NAC ➡️pts wouldn’t have received EV/P upon progression ➡️use of subQ nivo in future? #GU25

Karine Tawagi MD

@DrKarineTawagi

CM274 is a negative trial, even in the #MIBC pts 1. Statistically negative in ITT and MIBC 2. Around 50% of pts did not received chemo and only 26% of them received ICI in the progression 3. The remaining pts received GC x 4 3. Higher cost and acute and chronic tx #GU25

Andrey Soares

@SoaresAndrey

Full physician voice list (26)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	Excellent discussion of CheckMate 274 & NIAGARA by @ERPlimackMD always! 🔥 Great insights into the evolving landscape of perioperative & adjuvant immunotherapy in bladder cancer! 💡 @asco @oncoalert #cancer #oncology #GU25 @MikeSerzanMD @dre…	Positive	5,244
Dra. María Natalia Gandur Quiroga @nataliagandur	🌟📢 @ASCO #GU25 \| Abstract #658 🔬 Adjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) improves DFS & OS in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) in CheckMate 274. @MattGalsky 📊 Key Findings (N=560, FU: 36.1 months) ✅ DFS (NIVO vs. PBO) All MIBC: 25.6 vs. 8.5 month…	Neutral	4,998
MikaLion @MichalisLiontos	Best Q&A session ever in #GU25. @MattGalsky @tompowles1 @ERPlimackMD @cnsternberg arguing over best treatment approach in localized Bladder cancer upon presentation of NIAGARA and CM274 updated results!! Excellent discussion from @ERPlimac…	Positive	4,396
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	Updated OS for checkmate 274. 3 year median follow up. HR for OS in all comers - 0.70 ( CI 0.55 to 0.90 ) HR for OS in PdL1 more than 1 % - 0.48 ( CI -0.29 to 0.77 ) HR for OS With NAC - 0.74 ( CI 0.53 to 1.03 ) Hr for OS Without pri…	Neutral	4,315
Elizabeth Plimack MD @ERPlimackMD	Comparison of Adjuvant regimens for cancer across tumor types #GU25. Nivolumab per Checkmate 274 for #bladdercancer rises to the top. https://t.co/d5owZb03ga...	Neutral	3,762
Karine Tawagi MD @DrKarineTawagi	Excellent discussion by @ERPlimackMD on #CM274 which continues to show OS benefit with caveats: ➡️how can we avoid over treatment -> use of biomarkers - ctDNA, PDL1? ➡️only 50% got SOC NAC ➡️pts wouldn’t have received EV/P upon progression…	Nuanced	3,609
Neeraj Agarwal, MD, FASCO @neerajaiims	Ab#658 @ASCO #GU25 by @MattMilowsky 👉 https://t.co/7r9KXGvDEK 👉Ph3 CheckMate 274 trial of adj nivo vs. placebo in MIUC #bladdercancer👉DFS & OS analyses favored nivo regardless of prior neo-adj chemo & in pts w/ PD-L1 ≥ 1%👇#DeanMajorin @Onco…	Neutral	2,766
Nazli Dizman @NazliDizman	⏰Urothelial Carcinoma Oral Abstracts session happening now 🔸CheckMate 274: OS data with Adj nivo vs pbo in high Rick MIBC 🔸pCR and EFS OS in NIAGARA neoadj cis/gem+/- periop durva 🔸Neoadj Durvalumab + Chemo in high-risk UTUC 🔸Disitamab ved…	Neutral	2,465
Michael Serzan, MD @MikeSerzanMD	🗣️Bladder Cancer Oral Abstracts #GU25 Dr @MattMilowsky presenting Abs658 Adjuvant NIVO for MIBC: efficacy and OS #CM274 N = 709 560 (79%) MIBC (NIVO = 279; PBO = 281); 284 (51%) MIBC w/ prior NAC Median FU 36.1mo ♦️NIVO ♦️PLACEBO IT…	Neutral	1,705
Enrique Grande @drenriquegrande	Just Happened at #GU25 @ASCO CheckMate274 is updated after median follow up of more than 3 years. Survival goes in the right direction pending final data. Benefit is higher in PDL1+ tumors. Use of prior neoadjuvant chemo does not seem to i…	Neutral	1,668
Jordan Ciuro, MD @jordanciuro	Adjuvant nivolumab vs placebo for high risk #MIBC? OS in CheckMate 274 @ASCO #GU25 Addition of adjuvant nivolumab: ✅Continued DFS compared to placebo regardless of prior NAC (25.6m vs 8.5m HR 0.63) ✅Interim OS favor adjuvant nivolumab ov…	Neutral	1,065
Tian Zhang, MD, MHS @TiansterZhang	with updated #Checkmate274 trial - adjuvant nivolumab after cystectomy improves time to recurrence & overall survival in #bladdercancer. Sets up ongoing @ALLIANCE_org #MODERN trial! @ASCO #GU25	Neutral	1,028
Zach Klaassen @zklaassen_md	⚡️UC Oral Abstract Session⚡️ CheckMate 274 - Adj NIVO vs PBO for HR-MIUC: Additional efficacy outcomes in pts with MIBC @MattMilowsky @urotoday #GU25 NIVO vs PBO (mFU 36.1 mos): 📌DFS: HR 0.63, 95%CI 0.51-0.78 📌DFS: w/ NAC (HR 0.58, 95%CI…	Neutral	879
Matt Campbell MD, MS @DocMattCampbell	Fantastic oral abstract session at #GU25 @ERPlimackMD with a masterclass discussion of putting the CM274 and NIAGRA studies into context in both bladder but also looking across the solid tumor spectrum. Great work by @MattGalsky and @MattM…	Positive	795
Jason Brown @JasonBrownMDPhD	#GU25 Updates on checkmate 274 trial for adjuvant nivolumab presented by @MattMilowsky 🚨 OS benefit in patients with MIBC (even greater with PD-L1 >= 1% 🧪 Better DFS in patients without prior NAC 🧬 Greater magnitude of DFS benefit w pri…	Neutral	616
Constance Thibault @laconss	Indeed ! Amazing discussion from @ERPlimackMD raising tow major the questions : 1/ Is GemCisDurva a better option than ddMVAC followed by adj Nivo for non responder patients 2/ Do patients with ypT0 after GemCisDurva need adj Durva ?	Positive	526
Zayd Tippu @ZaydTippu	Fantastic discussant session from @ERPlimackMD this morning at #GU25 🔍 Role of peri-op IO in MIBC: #CM274 & #NIAGRA 🧬 Biomarker need to optimise stratification and minimise risk of over-treatment ➡️ Emerging risk adapted integrated bi…	Positive	464
Stephanie Berg @bergsa83	What a discussion! By @ERPlimackMD ageee, enrolling on A032103/MODERN using ctDNA stratification is KEY @ALLIANCE_org @SWOG @eaonc @CDNCancerTrials and an NCTN effort!	Neutral	373
Yakup Ergün @dr_yakupergun	We know that neoadjuvant therapy improves survival, but it seems this isn't quite the case in the placebo arms. What am I missing?	Nuanced	313
Yuji Miura @YujiMiura5	I am curious about the similarity of 2 yr OS rate between the non-PCR group in NIAGARA trial and MIBC with prior NAC in CheckMate 274. #GU25	Neutral	206
Francesco Massari @fmassari79	CheckMate 274 updated at #GU25 a strange data.. the placebo arm performed the same regardless of NAC 🤔 What do you think about it @tompowles1 ?	Neutral	174
Andrey Soares @SoaresAndrey	CM274 is a negative trial, even in the #MIBC pts 1. Statistically negative in ITT and MIBC 2. Around 50% of pts did not received chemo and only 26% of them received ICI in the progression 3. The remaining pts received GC x 4 3. Higher cost …	Negative	166
Dillon Cockrell, MD @DCockrellMD	Checkmate 274 update for adjuvant nivolumab also showed improvement in OS. ctDNA trial #MODERN will hopefully help tailor adjuvant treatment. Note that adjuvant nivo is SOC now but was not included in #NIAGARA control arm. Crowded space wit…	Nuanced	134
Noah Richardson @Noah_Onc	Rates of post-progression treatment in the control arm with PD-1 inhibitors will be vital for proper context of trial	Neutral	90
Fuat Bicer MD, PhD @fuatbcr	Excellent discussion! Many thanks to Dr. @ERPlimackMD for this insightful discussion, which greatly is going to help me make the right decisions for my patients.	Positive	65
Hakan Önder @onder_haka2124	💡 Key point: If PD-1 occupancy was assessed post-neoadjuvant IO, the need for adjuvant therapy could be clearer. 📌 ddMVAC is strong, but in 32% pCR patients, adjuvant nivo may have been unnecessary. Better patient selection is needed!	Nuanced	58

See full CheckMate-274 conference coverage & trial data →

Trial 10 · NCT04008030

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-8HW trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-8HW — MSI-H/dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer (nivolumab + ipilimumab)

FDA APPROVED · Apr 2025FDA-approved April 8, 2025, the nivolumab plus ipilimumab regimen for unresectable or metastatic microsatellite-instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch-repair-deficient (dMMR) colorectal cancer (not restricted to first line).

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-8HW: 37% of 24 verified physician voices positive, 17% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 46% neutral, 0% critical.

37%

17%

46%

Positive 37% Nuanced 17% Neutral 46% Critical 0%

Denominator: 24 distinct verified physician voices across 53 oncologist posts, 2024-01-21 to 2025-10-20. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT04008030

Physician voices — verbatim

NIVO/IPI vs CTx in 1st line for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC #ASCO24 🔎CheckMate 8HW, 202 pts 👉PFS: nr vs 5.9mo, HR 0.21 👉Subsequent Tx: 12% vs 68%, in CTx arm: 67% ICI 👉mPFS2: nr vs 29.9, HR 0.27 👉24-mo PFS2: 83 vs 52% 🧐Impressive data -> SOC for MSI CRC @myESMO

Arndt Vogel

@ArndtVogel

I know it has probably made its way into clinical practice (at least it has for me), but Ipi-Nivo now has FDA approval based on CheckMate8HW for dMMR mCRC! Excited to have this for our patients! Key Points: Ipi (1mg/kg) + Nivo (240mg) Q3W for 4 cycles then Nivo alone Massive

Nicholas Hornstein

@GIMedOnc

Full physician voice list (24)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Arndt Vogel @ArndtVogel	NIVO/IPI vs CTx in 1st line for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC #ASCO24 🔎CheckMate 8HW, 202 pts 👉PFS: nr vs 5.9mo, HR 0.21 👉Subsequent Tx: 12% vs 68%, in CTx arm: 67% ICI 👉mPFS2: nr vs 29.9, HR 0.27 👉24-mo PFS2: 83 vs 52% 🧐Impressive data -> SOC for MSI C…	Positive	18,146
Yakup Ergün @dr_yakupergun	The New Standard of Care in MSI-H CRC: Nivolumab + Ipilimumab The CM-8HW trial has provided us with some important insights: 1. Discrepancy between local and central MSI testing: In the CM-8HW study, 14% of patients who were initially cla…	Positive	15,377
Oncology Brothers @OncBrothers	One page takeaway from #CheckMate8HW study that resulted in Ipi + Nivo @FDAOncology approval on April 8, 2025 for dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer. More data on MSI-H in adj at #ASCO25! #OncTwitter #MedTwitter #gism @GIMedOnc https…	Neutral	7,525
Duilio Rocha @duiliorocha_onc	Comments on my personal top 5 #GI24 abstracts (2/4): 2. CHECKMATE 8HW Ipi + Nivo versus Chemotherapy as 1L treatment of MSI-H/dMMR colorectal cancer: ⬆️PFS (5.9 mo vs NR, HR 0.21) AMAZING PFS graphic @OncoAlert 1/	Positive	6,259
Toni Choueiri, MD @DrChoueiri	JUST IN: The @US_FDA approves nivolumab with ipilimumab for unresectable or metastatic MSI-H or dMMR colorectal cancer! News reported by @ASCO #FDAalerts	Neutral	5,824
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	Another trial data with WIDE gap between PFS and PFS 2 curves . Checkmate 8HW And Role of IO ( double vs Single IO ) in MSI high colon cancer, both metastatic and localized. @asco #asco24	Neutral	5,635
Yüksel Ürün @DrYukselUrun	✅Dual Immunotherapy Gets the Green Light FDA fully approved nivolumab + ipilimumab for MSI-H/dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer — in adults and teens ≥12. @US_FDA @OncoAlert @OncBrothers https://t.co/FHxp9aOb5z	Neutral	3,622
Dr. Cathy Eng @CathyEngMD	👏 Checkmate 8HW: Nivo +/- ipi in metastatic dMMR (MSI-H) w/superior PFS vs. nivo alone (39.3M vs. NR, HR = 0.62, p-value = 0.0003) creating a NEW standard of care; RR = 71% vs. 58% (p = 0.0011). Med f/U~4yrs. #colorectal #cancer @asco #AS…	Positive	3,597
Sharlene Gill, MD, MPH, MBA, FASCO @GillSharlene	#GI25 @ASCO #LBA🌟 🚨CM8HW in dMMR #mCRC - the awaited nivo/ipi1 vs nivo PFS 🙌 📌 N=707 across all lines, 55% 1L, centrally confirmed 📌 PFS HR 0.62, p0.0003 👉3 yr PFS 68% v 51% 📌 ORR 71% vs 58% - PD 10% w/ combo 📌 safely reassuring🤙 ➡️nivo/…	Positive	2,961
Krishan Jethwa @KrishanJethwa	🚨🚨CheckMate 8HW🚨🚨 🔥NEW SOC🔥 dMMR/MSI-H mCRC Ph3 RCT 🔍 Nivo vs Ipi + Nivo Ipi + Nivo offers: ✅⬆️ Early and sustained PFS ✅favorable safety profile 👏🏼👏🏼 #GI25 #crc @ASCO @OncoAlert	Positive	2,836
Pashtoon Kasi MD, MS @pashtoonkasi	#ASCO25 More followup on IPI/NIVO 🆚 NIVO immunotherapy showing robust durable efficacy translating to “cures” for the patients with colorectal cancer whose tumors are mismatch repair deficient (🔴dMMR/MSI-High). @OncoAlert ❓Hard to tease o…	Positive	2,655
Oscar Tahuahua @OscarTahuahua	#ESMO25 CheckMate 8HW In MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC, nivo + ipi ↑ PFS (NR vs 60.8 mo; HR 0.69) & with OS trend (HR 0.61) vs nivolumab alone, with ↑ ORR (73% vs 61%) & good safety. Confirms dual ICI as SoC in this population Absolutely impr…	Positive	2,554
Kristen Ciombor @KristenCiombor	Much awaited nivo/ipi vs nivo data from CheckMate 8HW in 1L MSI-H mCRC - nivo/ipi better in PFS and ORR across all lines of therapy with expected increase in toxicity #GI25 Concomitant publication in the Lancet today for more details!	Neutral	2,532
Thor Halfdanarson @OncoThor	I would agree. ipi/nivo seems like a new SOC in dMMR CRC and indeed, we have been using it increasingly and more than pembro alone.	Neutral	2,230
Nieves Martinez Lago MD PhD @DraMartinezLago	📣FDA approves nivolumab with ipilimumab for unresectable or metastatic MSI-H or dMMR colorectal cancer https://t.co/bFdDWXjeuM	Neutral	2,170
Richard Dunne, MD @DrR_DUNNE	There remains a steep drop off in survival during the first three months for a subset of MSI-H patients receiving immunotherapy. There remains a lane for chemo+IO in this setting. Waiting on you COMMIT trial #GI25	Neutral	1,597
Erman Akkus @Erman_Akkus	Thanks for the great comments! For early progression, I have some questions in my mind. 1) Is there a tumor heterogeneity in terms of being MSI-H/dMMR among primary and metastatic sites? 2) Could we measure MSI-H burden via ctDNA?	Neutral	1,108
Nicholas Hornstein @GIMedOnc	I know it has probably made its way into clinical practice (at least it has for me), but Ipi-Nivo now has FDA approval based on CheckMate8HW for dMMR mCRC! Excited to have this for our patients! Key Points: Ipi (1mg/kg) + Nivo (240mg) Q…	Nuanced	1,092
Jun Gong @jgong15	Dr. Lenz @KeckMedicineUSC updated results of CM-8HW in #MSI-H #mCRC (57-77% #1L) ➡️ #1L nivo/ipi w/superior PFS1 and PFS2 over chemo despite 71% in chemo arm receiving subsequent #IO ?sequence matters. G3/4 AEs associated w/38% CR rate with…	Neutral	1,021
Bijoy Telivala @BijoyTelivala	With this data & approval we should discuss the doublet with majority of our pts who meet the criteria It will become SOC for management but there will be a subset who you feel can’t tolerate doublet , & for them single agent I/O is reasona…	Nuanced	1,012
Tanios Bekaii-Saab, MD @GIcancerDoc	Looking forward to 1L comparative data which has not been publicly disclosed - as such my conclusion remains the same : the doublet represents an additional standard but at this time is not the standard approach to MSIH CRC!	Nuanced	893
Ryan Huey, MD, MS @ryanhuey	CheckMate-8HW update from Dr. Sara Lonardi: Nivo/Ipi vs Nivo in 1L MSI-H mCRC, PFS NR vs 60.8 months, HR 0.69 (statistical significance not met), curves split early and are consistent. OS HR 0.61, data immature but curves look awfully goo…	Nuanced	809
Roger Velasco @rooogerthat	Is IHC acceptable in determing MSI status? Thank you very much.	Neutral	361
Udhayvir Grewal @UGrewalMD	Great discussion on #CM8HW Ipi+Nivo in unresectable/advanced dMMR/MSI-H colorectal cancer by @GIMedOnc and @OncBrothers 👏🏻 Must watch 👇 Ipi+Nivo is a new SOC option for these patients. Single-agent IO still remains a standard option for …	Positive	60

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Trial 11 · NCT04039607

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-9DW trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-9DW — 1L unresectable/advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (nivolumab + ipilimumab)

FDA APPROVED · Apr 2025FDA-approved April 11, 2025, the nivolumab plus ipilimumab regimen for the first-line treatment of unresectable or advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Physicians are measured on CheckMate-9DW: 35% of 23 verified physician voices positive, 4% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 52% neutral, 9% critical.

35%

52%

Positive 35% Nuanced 4% Neutral 52% Critical 9%

Denominator: 23 distinct verified physician voices across 34 oncologist posts, 2019-09-20 to 2026-01-10. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

See full CheckMate-9DW conference coverage & trial data →

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT04039607

Physician voices — verbatim

Ipi/nivo in 1L #HCC is positive! (CheckMate-9DW study). Excited to see the full data soon...

Mark Yarchoan

@MarkYarchoan

if SOR was the only TKI allowed many would not enrol, & most have realized that SOR is just more toxic! this kept the trial relevant! we likely do not ever need to see SOR as the control arm!!!

Brandon Meyers

@BrandonMeyersMD

When will mHCC trials outgrow their fixation with Sorafenib? To find better treatment options, you must be able to beat the best rather than beat the oldest.

Suhail Qureshi

@DrSuhailQureshi

Full physician voice list (23)

Physician	Comment (verbatim)	Sentiment	Impressions
Mark Yarchoan @MarkYarchoan	Ipi/nivo in 1L #HCC is positive! (CheckMate-9DW study). Excited to see the full data soon...	Positive	11,415
Grainne O'Kane @graokane	CheckMate9DW expanded analyses #HCC #GI25 ➡️ response in HCC predicts OS ➡️ at 24wks med OS not reached in responders ipi/nivo ➡️responses consistent across subgroups ➡️still some toxicity concerns particularly in poor liver fxn	Neutral	7,328
Arndt Vogel @ArndtVogel	CheckMate-9DW Meets Primary Endpoint in 1st line HCC 👉Nivo/Ipi significantly improves OS 👉AtezoBev, DurvaTreme, CamRivo, now Nivo/Ipi... to be continued... 😅Could become an exciting year in HCC, more data in all stages to be reported @myESM…	Positive	6,691
Dr Amol Akhade @SuyogCancer	Nivo plus IPilimumab shows OS benifit in first line metastatic HCC in Checkmate 9DW trial. Control arm got sorafenib or lenvatinib ( don't ask me why ? ) Will this be better than Atezo plus Bev ? New SOC ? Let's wait for full data . @agr…	Neutral	3,893
Dr. Cathy Eng @CathyEngMD	🙏@drlauragoff @VUMC_Cancer for putting things in perspective to close the @asco #asco24 #GI session 👏👏 re: Checkmate 9DW Nivo/Ipi in #HCC. @bmsnews #cancer #cancerresearch @jordanberlin5 @benhopark @KristenCiombor @CardinMD @HeumannThatche…	Positive	3,345
Lorenza Rimassa @LorenzaRimassa	Bristol Myers Squibb - Bristol Myers Squibb Announces CheckMate -9DW Trial Evaluating Opdivo (nivolumab) Plus Yervoy (ipilimumab) Meets Primary Endpoint of Overall Survival for the First-Line Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma	Neutral	1,989
Alan Burguete-Torres M.D. @dralanburguete	Bristol Myers Squibb - Bristol Myers Squibb Announces CheckMate -9DW Trial Evaluating Opdivo (nivolumab) Plus Yervoy (ipilimumab) Meets Primary Endpoint of Overall Survival for the First-Line Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma	Neutral	1,962
Jun Gong @jgong15	Dr. Galle 4-year follow-up of CM9DW of #1L nivo/ipi vs. len/sorafenib in adv #HCC ➡️ sustained OS benefit median 23.7 vs 20.6 mos, ORR 36% (8% CR) vs 13% (2% CR) in favor of nivo/ipi. 4% G5 AEs with nivo/ipi vs <1% control arm @OncoAlert #…	Neutral	1,302
Tsung-Che Wu @TsungCheWu	Positive OS of Checkmate-9DW Nivolumab + Ipilimumab (3mg/kg*4) vs sorafenib/lenvatinib The first positive HCC first line study with lenvatinib as part of control arm Eagerly to see the toxicity profile and the tail of OS #HCC #livertwitter…	Positive	885
Syed A. Ahmad @SyedAAhmad5	CheckMate -9DW Trial Evaluating Opdivo (nivolumab) Plus Yervoy (ipilimumab) Meets Primary Endpoint of Overall Survival ⁦@OncoAlert⁩ ⁦@SWOG⁩ ⁦@FlavioRochaMD⁩ ⁦@HopSTranCao⁩	Neutral	598
Sharlene Gill, MD, MPH, MBA, FASCO @GillSharlene	5/10 – Checkmate 9DW #HCC #ASCO @ASCO phase 3 Nivo1+ipi3 q3w ▶️maint nivo/TKI VS len85%/sor15% in 1L aHCC 📌 n=668, CP-A, PS 0-1 👉ORR 36% (7%CR) vs 13%, durable 👉mOS 23.7m vs 20.6m, HR0.79, p0.018 🌟 - 2nd study to show 20m mOS with len (LEAP…	Neutral	450
Beatriz Mínguez @BMnguez	Looking forward to read all data. So far, great news for therapeutic landscape of HCC. “BMS Announces CheckMate -9DW Trial Evaluating Opdivo (nivolumab) Plus Yervoy (ipilimumab) Meets Primary Endpoint of OS for 1L of Advanced HCC”	Positive	266
Dr Akhil Santhosh @tuttsakhil	Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 9DW): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial @TheLancet	Neutral	230
Tanios Bekaii-Saab, MD @GIcancerDoc	Devil is in the details since no surprise here- Dose of Ipi higher here —> Tox ? Cost? Interesting to see if a more traditional approach with 4 doses of anti-CTLA4 will show better ORR and PFS then the single priming dose of Tremi (Himalaya…	Neutral	180
Willem Lybaert @WLybaert	Traffic jam in first-line: which combination for which patient?😏	Neutral	175
Joshua Levenson, MD @jelevenson	🙌🏼	Positive	173
Suhail Qureshi @DrSuhailQureshi	When will mHCC trials outgrow their fixation with Sorafenib? To find better treatment options, you must be able to beat the best rather than beat the oldest.	Negative	164
Pierre Gholam @pgholam	Checkmate-9DW is (nivo1/ipi3 vs sor or len at PI discretion) is positive in FL per this ⁦@bmsnews⁩ press release. More to come soon. Given prior experience in 2L, safety data will be important. #livertwitter	Positive	162
Brandon Meyers @BrandonMeyersMD	if SOR was the only TKI allowed many would not enrol, & most have realized that SOR is just more toxic! this kept the trial relevant! we likely do not ever need to see SOR as the control arm!!!	Nuanced	150
Dr. Andrew Odhiambo FRCP @iamodhis	This is indeed very good news. How many African countries participated in this trial?. Immunotherapy has been very disappointing for most African HCC😭	Negative	137
Aleix Prat #PrecisionOncology @prat_aleix	TKIs superseded!!!	Positive	132
Santhosh Ambika @RenoHemonc	Keep widening after flipping , long tail of IO benefit	Neutral	110
Amit G Singal @docamitgs	(Anthony El Khoueiry) discussing data at #ILC_19 re: Ipi and Nivo combination in patients with #HCC. Promising data with responses >30%, supporting launch of phase III Checkmate 9DW Trial. @hccconnectinfo @AASLDtweets	Neutral	0

See full CheckMate-9DW conference coverage & trial data →

Trial 12 · NCT02743494

What do oncologists think of the CheckMate-577 trial (OPDIVO®)?

CheckMate-577 — Adjuvant resected esophageal/GEJ cancer with residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nivolumab)

FDA APPROVED · May 2021FDA-approved May 20, 2021, for the adjuvant treatment of completely resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer with residual pathologic disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Physicians are broadly favorable, with real nuance on CheckMate-577: 20% of 5 verified physician voices positive, 0% nuanced (praising the result while flagging a caveat), 80% neutral, 0% critical.

20%

80%

Positive 20% Nuanced 0% Neutral 80% Critical 0%

Denominator: 5 distinct verified physician voices across 7 oncologist posts, 2025-05-23 to 2025-05-31. Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb

Full conference coverage and trial data: KOL Pulse trial profile coming soon.

Primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT02743494 · NEJM 2021 — CheckMate-577 primary publication

Kelly RJ, Ajani JA, Kuzdzal J, et al. Adjuvant Nivolumab in Resected Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(13):1191-1203.

Physician voices — verbatim