Evidence Hub

Comparative real-world safety of nivolumab versus pembrolizumab in malignant melanoma: A propensity-matched cohort study

Unsa Arif, Madho Mal, N. Tummala, Rithish Nimmagadda, Love Kumar

Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2026

6,028 participants

Abstract

e21587

Background:

Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are widely used programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors approved for the treatment of malignant melanoma. Although both agents demonstrate comparable efficacy, real-world comparative safety data between these two therapies remain limited. We conducted a real-world cohort study to compare immune-related adverse events between nivolumab and pembrolizumab in patients with melanoma.

Methods:

We performed a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, including adult patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with malignant melanoma treated with either nivolumab or pembrolizumab between January 2015 and December 2025. Patients receiving other immune checkpoint inhibitors were excluded. Propensity score matching (1:1) was used to balance baseline demographics and comorbidities, yielding 6,028 patients in each cohort. Outcomes assessed within three years after treatment initiation included pneumonia, inflammatory liver disease, autoimmune thyroiditis, type 1 diabetes mellitus, colitis, myocarditis, and dermatitis/eczema. Risk ratios, hazard ratios, Kaplan–Meier survival analyses, and number of event instances were evaluated.

Results:

After matching, baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were well balanced between the two cohorts. Nivolumab was associated with a significantly lower risk of pneumonia compared with pembrolizumab (risk ratio [RR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.81–0.99; hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, 95% CI…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 6,028 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free