Back to Authors

Abudayyeh, Ala

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5813-6299

Mayo Clinic

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Citations 10

Glucarpidase for treatment of high-dose methotrexate toxicity
Gupta, Shruti , Kaunfer, Sarah Allison , Chen, Kevin L. , Dias, Julie‐Alexia , Rajasekaran, Arun , Prosek, Jason, Truong, Huong L. , Wood, Anthony C., Bassil, Claude , Renaghan, Amanda D., Carlos, Christopher A., Kelly, Katherine J. , Passero, Christopher J., Abudayyeh, Ala , Shin, Daniel Sanghoon , Yelvington, Bradley, Kanduri, Swetha Rani , Neyra, Javier A. , Shirali, Anushree C. , Bansal, Anip, Geara, Abdallah Sassine , Mithani, Zain, Ziolkowski, Susan , Rashidi, Arash, Jakubowski, Jonathan, Pujari, Ashwini, Dotson, Emily, Wall, Sarah , Patton, John T. , Barreto, Jason N. , Sheikh, M. Salman , Lee, Jamie, Lucchesi, Nicholas, Kolman, Michael David, Rasheed, Muhammad Ahsan, Afzal, Afsheen, Mahesh, Amrita, Hsu, Raymond K. , Nicolaysen, Anthony, Tefera, Kibrewessen, Schretlen, Claire F. , Miller, Ryan M. , Velez, Juan Carlos Q. , Chandrasekhara, Soniya, Donley, Vicki, Patel, Ashka , Krishnamurthy, Shobana, Ali, Rafia, Yilmam, Osman A , Wells, Sophia L., Ortega, Jessica L. , Green‐Lingren, Olivia, Leaf, Rebecca Karp , Sise, Meghan E. , Nayak, Lakshmi , LaCasce, Ann S. , Leaf, David E. , Kaunfer, Sarah A , Rajasekaran, Arun , Shah, Chintan V , Glezerman, Ilya G , Kelly, Katherine , Abudayyeh, Ala , Neyra, Javier A , Edmonston, Daniel , Ziolkowski, Susan L , Bond, David A , Patton, John , Barreto, Jason N , Herrmann, Sandra M , Sheikh, Mohammad S , Hsu, Raymond K , Aklilu, Abinet M , Krishnamurthy, Shobana , Yilmam, Osman A , Ortega, Jessica L , LaCasce, Ann Steward , Leung, Nelson , Leaf, David E , Gupta, Shruti , Dias, Julie-Alexia , Vijayan, Anitha , Zhang, Jingjing , Drappatz, Jan , Sperati, Christopher John , Rashidi, Arash , Bond, David A. , Patton, John T. , Herrmann, Sandra M. , Baz, Rachid , Lee, Jamie, Kolman, M F , Afzal, Afsheen, Kang, Dasol, Mahesh, Amrita, Miller, Ryan M., Flannery, Alexander H , Aklilu, Abinet M. , Anand, Shuchi , Ni, Jian, Wells, Sophia L., Leung, Nelson

Blood | January 6, 2025 | Volume: 145 | Issue: 17 | Pages: 1858-1869

10.1182/blood.2024026211 Get It

Abstract High-dose methotrexate (MTX) results in high rates of acute kidney injury (AKI), neutropenia, and hepatotoxicity. Glucarpidase is a recombinant enzyme that cleaves MTX, but clinical data supporting its use are scarce. We examined the association between glucarpidase administration and outcomes in adults with MTX-AKI from 28 cancer centers across the United States using a sequential target trial emulation framework. The primary end point was kidney recovery at hospital discharge, defined as survival to discharge with serum creatinine <1.5-fold baseline and without dialysis dependence. Key secondary end points were time to kidney recovery, neutropenia, and transaminitis on day 7, and time to death. Using multivariable logistic and Cox regression models, we compared outcomes in patients who received glucarpidase within 4 days following MTX initiation with those in patients who did not. Among 708 patients with MTX-AKI, 209 (29.5%) received glucarpidase. Overall, 183 (25.8%) had a primary end point event. Glucarpidase receipt was associated with a 2.70-fold higher adjusted odds of kidney recovery (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69–4.31) compared with no glucarpidase receipt. Patients treated with glucarpidase also had faster time to kidney recovery (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.18–3.33) and lower risks of grade ≥2 neutropenia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28–0.91) and grade ≥2 transaminitis (aOR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28–0.91) on day 7. There was no difference in time to death (aHR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.49–1.18). These data suggest glucarpidase may improve both renal and extrarenal outcomes in patients with MTX-AKI.
Assessment of GFR in Patients with Cancer
Kitchlu, Abhijat , Silva, Verônica T. Costa e , Anand, Shuchi , Kala, Jaya , Abudayyeh, Ala , Inker, Lesley A. , Rosner, Mitchell H. , Karam, Sabine , Gudsoorkar, Prakash , Gupta, Shruti , Chen, Sheldon , Klomjit, Nattawat , Milanez, Tomaž, Motwani, Shveta S. , Khalid, Sheikh B. , Srinivasan, Vinay , Wanchoo, Rimda, Liu, Geoffrey , Geng, Yimin , Leung, Nelson , Motwani, Shveta S , Khalid, Sheikh B , Srinivasan, Vinay , Beumer, Jan Hendrik , Liu, Geoffrey , Orchanian-Cheff, Ani , Geng, Yimin , Herrmann, Sandra M , Gupta, Shruti , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Klomjit, Nattawat , Leung, Nelson , Tannir, Nizar , Herrmann, Sandra M.

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology | June 7, 2024 | Volume: 19 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1061-1072

10.2215/cjn.0000000000000508 Get It

Accurate assessment of GFR is crucial to guiding drug eligibility, dosing of systemic therapy, and minimizing the risks of both undertreatment and toxicity in patients with cancer. Up to 32% of patients with cancer have baseline CKD, and both malignancy and treatment may cause kidney injury and subsequent CKD. To date, there has been lack of guidance to standardize approaches to GFR estimation in the cancer population. In this two-part statement from the American Society of Onco-Nephrology, we present key messages for estimation of GFR in patients with cancer, including the choice of GFR estimating equation, use of race and body surface area adjustment, and anticancer drug dose-adjustment in the setting of CKD. These key messages are based on a systematic review of studies assessing GFR estimating equations using serum creatinine and cystatin C in patients with cancer, against a measured GFR comparator. The preponderance of current data involving validated GFR estimating equations involves the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations, with 2508 patients in whom CKD-EPI using serum creatinine and cystatin C was assessed (eight studies) and 15,349 in whom CKD-EPI with serum creatinine was assessed (22 studies). The former may have improved performance metrics and be less susceptible to shortfalls of eGFR using serum creatinine alone. Since included studies were moderate quality or lower, the American Society of Onco-Nephrology Position Committee rated the certainty of evidence as low. Additional studies are needed to assess the accuracy of other validated eGFR equations in patients with cancer. Given the importance of accurate and timely eGFR assessment, we advocate for the use of validated GFR estimating equations incorporating both serum creatinine and cystatin C in patients with cancer. Measurement of GFR via exogenous filtration markers should be considered in patients with cancer for whom eGFR results in borderline eligibility for therapies or clinical trials.
Recommendations for the assessment of glomerular filtration rate in patients with cancer: A position statement and systematic review on behalf of the American Society of Onco-Nephrology (ASON).
Abudayyeh, Ala , Khalid, Sheikh B. , Khalid, Sheikh B , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Silva, Verônica T. Costa e , Anand, Shuchi , Kala, Jaya , Inker, Lesley A. , Liu, Geoffrey , Leung, Nelson , Herrmann, Sandra M.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2024 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: e24143-e24143

10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e24143 Get It

e24143 Background: Accurate assessment of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is crucial to guiding drug eligibility, dose-adjusting systemic therapy, and minimizing the risks of both undertreatment and toxicity in patients with cancer. To date, there has been a lack of guidance to standardize approaches to GFR estimation in the cancer population based on the available evidence. We aim to present data on the first systematic review (SR) of GFR estimating equations in patients with cancer. Methods: We conducted a SR on behalf of the American Society of Onco-Nephrology (ASON) on the accuracy of equations to estimate GFR in adult patients with cancer, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We required that studies use a reference methodology as comparator involving measured GFR via urinary or plasma clearance of an exogenous filtration marker or carboplatin. Two search strategies focusing on studies using serum creatinine (Cr) and cystatin C (Cys) were developed. Risk of bias and quality assessment was performed for all studies. Results: A total of 39 studies (21,949 patients in total, 19,025 with solid cancers) were included. Studies assessing populations in Europe were most frequent (50%), followed by Asia (27%) and the remaining from Australia/New Zealand and North and South America. Risk of bias and quality assessment allocated 15 studies (38%) as low or very low quality, and 24 (62%) as low-moderate or moderate quality. The most commonly assessed GFR estimating equations included Cockroft-Gault (32 studies), Modification of Diet Renal Disease (MDRD) (24 studies), Chronic Kidney Disese Epidemiology Collaboration Study (CKD-EPI)Cr (22 studies), Wright (13 studies), CKD-EPICys (8 studies), CKD-EPICr-Cys (8 studies), and Jeliffe (8 studies). Given the importance of accurate and timely eGFR assessment and the evidence supporting the performance (i.e., accuracy) of the CKD-EPI incorporating both Cr and Cys, we suggest the use of this equation in patients with cancer (grade 2C). Where Cys is unavailable, CKD-EPICr is the next preferred equation given the supporting data for its performance and widespread availability. Since included studies were moderate quality or lower, the ASON rated the certainty of evidence as low. Also, additional data on clinical outcomes related to the selection of eGFR equations is needed. We suggest measurement of GFR via an exogenous filtration marker in patients with cancer for whom eGFR results in borderline eligibility for therapies or clinical trials (ungraded). Conclusions: Based on the results of this SR, we suggest use of contemporary methods for estimation of GFR (CKD-EPICr-Cys and CKD-EPICr-Cr) and avoidance of older and less accurate formulae such as Cockcroft-Gault.
Selective immune suppression using interleukin-6 receptor inhibitors for management of immune-related adverse events
Fa’ak, Faisal , Buni, Maryam, Falohun, Adewunmi, Song, Juhee , Trinh, Van Anh, Tahon, Nourel Hoda , Elsayes, Khaled M. , Ludford, Kaysia , Montazari, Emma J., Chernis, Julia , Dimitrova, Maya , Sandigursky, Sabina, Sparks, Jeffrey A. , Abu-Shawer, Osama , Rahma, Osama E. , Thanarajasingam, Uma , Zeman, Ashley M., Talukder, Rafee , Chung, Sarah H. , Grivas, Petros , Daher, May , Abudayyeh, Ala , Osman, Iman , Suarez‐Almazor, María E. , Abdel‐Wahab, Noha , Diab, Adi , Grivas, Petros , Weber, Jeffrey , Diab, Adi , Sparks, Jeffrey A , Lu, Huifang , Johnson, Daniel Hartman , Zobniw, Chrystia M. , Awiwi, Muhammad O. , Singh, Namrata , Weber, Jeffrey S. , Tayar, Jean H.

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer | June 16, 2023 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 6 | Pages: e006814

10.1136/jitc-2023-006814 Get It

Background Management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is important as they cause treatment interruption or discontinuation, more often seen with combination immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Here, we retrospectively evaluated the safety and effectiveness of anti-interleukin-6 receptor (anti-IL-6R) as therapy for irAEs. Methods We performed a retrospective multicenter study evaluating patients diagnosed with de novo irAEs or flare of pre-existing autoimmune disease following ICI and were treated with anti-IL-6R. Our objectives were to assess the improvement of irAEs as well as the overall tumor response rate (ORR) before and after anti-IL-6R treatment. Results We identified a total of 92 patients who received therapeutic anti-IL-6R antibodies (tocilizumab or sarilumab). Median age was 61 years, 63% were men, 69% received anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) antibodies alone, and 26% patients were treated with the combination of anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies. Cancer types were primarily melanoma (46%), genitourinary cancer (35%), and lung cancer (8%). Indications for using anti-IL-6R antibodies included inflammatory arthritis (73%), hepatitis/cholangitis (7%), myositis/myocarditis/myasthenia gravis (5%), polymyalgia rheumatica (4%), and one patient each with autoimmune scleroderma, nephritis, colitis, pneumonitis and central nervous system vasculitis. Notably, 88% of patients had received corticosteroids, and 36% received other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as first-line therapies, but without adequate improvement. After initiation of anti-IL-6R (as first-line or post-corticosteroids and DMARDs), 73% of patients showed resolution or change to ≤grade 1 of irAEs after a median of 2.0 months from initiation of anti-IL-6R therapy. Six patients (7%) stopped anti-IL-6R due to adverse events. Of 70 evaluable patients by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) V.1.1 criteria; the ORR was 66% prior versus 66% after anti-IL-6R (95% CI, 54% to 77%), with 8% higher complete response rate. Of 34 evaluable patients with melanoma, the ORR was 56% prior and increased to 68% after anti-IL-6R (p=0.04). Conclusion Targeting IL-6R could be an effective approach to treat several irAE types without hindering antitumor immunity. This study supports ongoing clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of tocilizumab (anti-IL-6R antibody) in combination with ICIs ( NCT04940299 , NCT03999749 ).
Shorter versus longer corticosteroid duration and recurrent immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated AKI
García-Carro, Clara , Prosek, Jason, Garcia, Pablo, Abudayyeh, Ala , Lumlertgul, Nuttha , Malik, Abhinav , Loew, Sebastian, Beckerman, Pazit , Renaghan, Amanda DeMauro , Carlos, Christopher A., Rashidi, Arash , Mithani, Zain, Deshpande, Priya , Rangarajan, Sunil , Seigneux, Sophie de , Campedel, Luca , Shin, Daniel Sanghoon , Coppock, Gaia, Ortiz-Melo, David I. , Aggarwal, Vikram , Benesova, Karolina, Wanchoo, Rimda, Murakami, Naoka , Cortazar, Frank B. , Reynolds, Kerry L. , Sise, Meghan E. , Soler, María José , Leaf, David E. , Bermejo, Sheila , Salem, Joe‐Elie , Gupta, Shruti , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Reynolds, Kerry L , Soler, Maria Jose , Leaf, David E , Murakami, Naoka , Salem, Joe-Elie , Koessler, Thibaud , Gupta, Shruti , Glezerman, Ilya G , Herrmann, Sandra M. , Malik, A Bilal, Shah, Chintan V , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Sprangers, Ben

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer | September 22, 2022 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 9 | Pages: e005646

10.1136/jitc-2022-005646 Get It

Background Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment for immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute kidney injury (ICPi-AKI), but the optimal duration of therapy has not been established. Prolonged use of corticosteroids can cause numerous adverse effects and may decrease progression-free survival among patients treated with ICPis. We sought to determine whether a shorter duration of corticosteroids was equally efficacious and safe as compared with a longer duration. Methods We used data from an international multicenter cohort study of patients diagnosed with ICPi-AKI from 29 centers across nine countries. We examined whether a shorter duration of corticosteroids (28 days or less) was associated with a higher rate of recurrent ICPi-AKI or death within 30 days following completion of corticosteroid treatment as compared with a longer duration (29–84 days). Results Of 165 patients treated with corticosteroids, 56 (34%) received a shorter duration of treatment and 109 (66%) received a longer duration. Patients in the shorter versus longer duration groups were similar with respect to baseline and ICPi-AKI characteristics. Five of 56 patients (8.9%) in the shorter duration group and 12 of 109 (11%) in the longer duration group developed recurrent ICPi-AKI or died (p=0.90). Nadir serum creatinine in the first 14, 28, and 90 days following completion of corticosteroid treatment was similar between groups (p=0.40, p=0.56, and p=0.89, respectively). Conclusion A shorter duration of corticosteroids (28 days or less) may be safe for patients with ICPi-AKI. However, the findings may be susceptible to unmeasured confounding and further research from randomized clinical trials is needed.
Acute kidney injury in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors
Short, Samuel , Sise, Meghan E. , Prosek, Jason, Madhavan, Sethu M. , Soler, María José , Ostermann, Marlies , Abudayyeh, Ala , Anand, Shuchi , Motwani, Shveta S. , Murakami, Naoka , Wanchoo, Rimda, Ortiz-Melo, David I. , Rashidi, Arash , Aggarwal, Vikram , Malik, Abhinav , Loew, Sebastian, Carlos, Christopher A., Chang, Wei‐Ting , Beckerman, Pazit , Mithani, Zain, Renaghan, Amanda DeMauro , Seigneux, Sophie de , Campedel, Luca , Shin, Daniel Sanghoon , Rangarajan, Sunil , Deshpande, Priya , Coppock, Gaia, Eijgelsheim, Mark, Lee, Meghan , Husain, Marium , García-Carro, Clara , Bermejo, Sheila , Lumlertgul, Nuttha , Seylanova, Nina , Flanders, Lucy , Isik, Busra , Mamlouk, Omar , García, Pablo , Kaghazchi, Aydin , Khanin, Yuriy, Kansal, Sheru, Wauters, Els , Chandra, Sunandana , Hsu, Raymond K. , Tio, Maria Clarissa , Mothi, Suraj Sarvode, Singh, Harkarandeep , Reynolds, Kerry L. , Cortazar, Frank B. , Leaf, David E. , Salem, Joe‐Elie , Gupta, Shruti , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Lee, Meghan D , Mamlouk, Omar , Lin, Jamie S , Leaf, David E , Murakami, Naoka , Soler, Maria Jose , Salem, Joe-Elie , Hsu, Raymond K , Ostermann, Marlies , Koessler, Thibaud , Gupta, Shruti , Herrmann, Sandra M. , Glezerman, Ilya G , Sprangers, Ben , Malik, A Bilal, Shah, Chintan V , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Seethapathy, Harish Shanthanu , Strohbehn, Ian A. , Owen, Dwight H , Schmidt-Ott, Kai Martin , Schrag, Deborah , Jhaveri, Kenar D.

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer | October 10, 2021 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 10 | Pages: e003467

10.1136/jitc-2021-003467 Get It

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute kidney injury (ICPi-AKI) has emerged as an important toxicity among patients with cancer. Methods We collected data on 429 patients with ICPi-AKI and 429 control patients who received ICPis contemporaneously but who did not develop ICPi-AKI from 30 sites in 10 countries. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ICPi-AKI and its recovery. A multivariable Cox model was used to estimate the effect of ICPi rechallenge versus no rechallenge on survival following ICPi-AKI. Results ICPi-AKI occurred at a median of 16 weeks (IQR 8–32) following ICPi initiation. Lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and extrarenal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were each associated with a higher risk of ICPi-AKI. Acute tubulointerstitial nephritis was the most common lesion on kidney biopsy (125/151 biopsied patients [82.7%]). Renal recovery occurred in 276 patients (64.3%) at a median of 7 weeks (IQR 3–10) following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids within 14 days following ICPi-AKI diagnosis was associated with higher odds of renal recovery (adjusted OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.58 to 4.41). Among patients treated with corticosteroids, early initiation of corticosteroids (within 3 days of ICPi-AKI) was associated with a higher odds of renal recovery compared with later initiation (more than 3 days following ICPi-AKI) (adjusted OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.16 to 3.79). Of 121 patients rechallenged, 20 (16.5%) developed recurrent ICPi-AKI. There was no difference in survival among patients rechallenged versus those not rechallenged following ICPi-AKI. Conclusions Patients who developed ICPi-AKI were more likely to have impaired renal function at baseline, use a PPI, and have extrarenal irAEs. Two-thirds of patients had renal recovery following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids was associated with improved renal recovery.
Clinical Features and Outcomes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor–Associated AKI: A Multicenter Study
Cortazar, Frank B. , Kibbelaar, Zoé A. , Abudayyeh, Ala , Mamlouk, Omar , Motwani, Shveta S. , Murakami, Naoka , Manohar, Sandhya , Shirali, Anushree C. , Shirazian, Shayan , Renaghan, Amanda DeMauro , Ortiz-Melo, David I. , Rangarajan, Sunil , Malik, Abhinav , Hogan, Jonathan J. , Dinh, Alex , Shin, Daniel Sanghoon , Marrone, Kristen A. , Mithani, Zain, Johnson, Douglas B. , Hosseini, Afrooz, Uprety, Deekchha, Sharma, Shreyak , Reynolds, Kerry L. , Sise, Meghan E. , Leaf, David E. , Glezerman, Ilya G , Murakami, Naoka , Manohar, Sandhya , Assal, Amer , Sharma, Shreyak , Gupta, Shruti , Leaf, David E , Herrmann, Sandra M. , Kitchlu, Abhijat , Assal, Amer , Vijayan, Anitha , Malik, A. Bilal, Gupta, Shruti

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology | January 2, 2020 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 435-446

10.1681/asn.2019070676 Get It

Significance Statement Kidney toxicity from use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is being recognized as an increasingly frequent complication of treatment. However, existing data on immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI have been limited to small, mostly single-center studies. In this multicenter study of 138 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI and 276 controls, the authors characterize the clinical features of this complication and identify risk factors associated with its development, clinicopathologic features, and determinants of kidney recovery after an episode. Failure to achieve kidney recovery was associated with worse overall survival, and a minority (23%) of patients who were retreated with immune checkpoint inhibitors had a recurrence of AKI. The study provides insights into immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI, although further study is needed to inform the care of affected patients. Background Despite increasing recognition of the importance of immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI, data on this complication of immunotherapy are sparse. Methods We conducted a multicenter study of 138 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI, defined as a ≥2-fold increase in serum creatinine or new dialysis requirement directly attributed to an immune checkpoint inhibitor. We also collected data on 276 control patients who received these drugs but did not develop AKI. Results Lower baseline eGFR, proton pump inhibitor use, and combination immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy were each independently associated with an increased risk of immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI. Median (interquartile range) time from immune checkpoint inhibitor initiation to AKI was 14 (6–37) weeks. Most patients had subnephrotic proteinuria, and approximately half had pyuria. Extrarenal immune-related adverse events occurred in 43% of patients; 69% were concurrently receiving a potential tubulointerstitial nephritis–causing medication. Tubulointerstitial nephritis was the dominant lesion in 93% of the 60 patients biopsied. Most patients (86%) were treated with steroids. Complete, partial, or no kidney recovery occurred in 40%, 45%, and 15% of patients, respectively. Concomitant extrarenal immune-related adverse events were associated with worse renal prognosis, whereas concomitant tubulointerstitial nephritis–causing medications and treatment with steroids were each associated with improved renal prognosis. Failure to achieve kidney recovery after immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI was independently associated with higher mortality. Immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge occurred in 22% of patients, of whom 23% developed recurrent associated AKI. Conclusions This multicenter study identifies insights into the risk factors, clinical features, histopathologic findings, and renal and overall outcomes in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor–associated AKI.