Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) vs adjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab): Adverse events,
- Population
- stage III cutaneous melanoma
- Intervention
- Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab)
- Comparison
- adjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab)
- Outcome
- Adverse events,
Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) showed no clear difference in adverse events, compared with adjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) vs adjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) Adverse events, · stage III cutaneous melanoma Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) showed no clear difference in adverse events, compared with adjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) (low certainty). Neoadjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1 [0.75, 1.34] | 1 study · 20 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neoadjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) vs neoadjuvant immunotherapy (sequential treatment with ipilimumab then nivolumab) · stage III cutaneous melanoma · 1 review
- Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) vs neoadjuvant immunotherapy (nivolumab) · stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.