MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414565022 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfaf191

Practice patterns and outcomes in cancer patients developing immune checkpoint inhibitors–related AKI

2025· article· en· W4414565022 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Phillip Blanchette, Jennifer Reid, Lucie Richard, Salimah Z. Shariff, Jacques Raphael, Craig C. Earle, Amit X. Garg, Abhijat Kitchlu

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoLondon Health Sciences CentreLawson Health Research InstituteSunnybrook Health Science CentreWestern University
FundersSchulich School of Medicine and DentistryOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareAcademic Medical Organization of Southwestern OntarioLawson Health Research Institute
KeywordsCancerImmune checkpointMEDLINERisk assessmentKidney cancerImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a known immune-related adverse event of cancer immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Further population-based data on AKI incidence, risk factors and practice patterns post-ICI therapy are needed. METHODS: We measured the cumulative incidence of AKI among advanced cancer patients while receiving ICI therapy and non-ICI systemic therapy in Ontario, Canada (2012-18). An increase in serum creatinine was used to define AKI and graded according to event severity. Time to event modeling was used to compare the risk of developing AKI, pre-disposing factors and survival outcomes. RESULTS: We studied 16 425 patients with advanced cancer receiving either ICI or non-ICI systemic therapy. Among 4380 patients receiving ICI therapy, the overall crude 4-year incidence of AKI (any stage) was 29% and severe AKI (stage ≥2) was 7%. Characteristics associated with a higher risk of AKI included male sex, genitourinary (versus other) malignancy, the presence of hypertension, diabetes or chronic kidney disease, and prescription of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. The risk of experiencing AKI was significantly lower among patients treated with ICI versus non-ICI systemic therapy [adjusted hazards ratio (aHR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74-0.86, P-value <.0001]. Among the 587 patients who experienced an AKI and were both alive and discontinued ICI therapy within 30 days, 54 (9%) were re-challenged with ICI in the following 6 months and 24 (44%) had a recurrent AKI event. Patients who were re-challenged with ICI therapy had improved overall survival as compared with patients that received other non-ICI systemic therapy (aHR 0.38, 95% CI 0.22-0.67, P-value <.001). CONCLUSION: Our real-world study demonstrates a modest risk for severe AKI among cancer patients receiving ICI therapy, lower than with exposure to other systemic cancer therapies. Among patients who developed AKI and stopped ICI therapy, re-challenge was uncommon but may warrant consideration for select patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207