Literature DB >> 35520275

Indirect Comparisons via Sorafenib for the Comparative Effectiveness of Two PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors to Treat Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients without Prior Systemic Therapies.

Yawen Jiang1, Dan Cai1, Si Shi1.   

Abstract

Introduction: Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents a major public health threat. Several emerging combination therapies have shown promising results for the first-line treatment of advanced HCC. The present study compared the efficacy of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (AB) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (LP), which were two of the leading combination therapies.
Methods: The outcomes of the present analysis were overall survival (OS) time and progression-free survival (PFS) time. Two matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were first conducted using the individual-level patient data (IPD) of the sorafenib arm from a previous clinical trial and the aggregate data (AgD) of the AB and LP arms from the corresponding published trials. From the MAICs, the hazard ratios (HRs) of AB and LP vs sorafenib were estimated by conducting weighted Cox regressions. The HRs from the two MAICs were then pooled to conduct a second-order indirect comparison of AB vs LP.
Results: In the MAIC analyses, AB had better efficacy on both OS (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.42-0.79) and PFS (HR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.76) than sorafenib, whereas LP had significantly better efficacy on PFS (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.41-0.94) but not OS (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.52-1.32). In the second-order comparison, AB was insignificantly more efficacious on OS (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.42-1.23) than and similarly efficacious on PFS (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.60-1.51) as the LP regimen.
Conclusion: LP regimen may be a potential first-line immunotherapy option for advanced HCC given its comparative effectiveness in relation to AB.
© 2022 Jiang et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PD-1; PD-L1; adjusted; balancing; first-line; matching; overall; progression-free; survival; unresectable

Year:  2022        PMID: 35520275      PMCID: PMC9064682          DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S352045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 1179-1349            Impact factor:   5.814


  23 in total

1.  Updated treatment recommendations for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  A Vogel; E Martinelli
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 32.976

2.  AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Julie K Heimbach; Laura M Kulik; Richard S Finn; Claude B Sirlin; Michael M Abecassis; Lewis R Roberts; Andrew X Zhu; M Hassan Murad; Jorge A Marrero
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 17.425

3.  Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons: a new tool for timely comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  James E Signorovitch; Vanja Sikirica; M Haim Erder; Jipan Xie; Mei Lu; Paul S Hodgkins; Keith A Betts; Eric Q Wu
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.725

4.  Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors administered alone or in combination with anti-VEGF agents in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Zhichao Feng; Pengfei Rong; Wei Wang
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 5.  2019 Chinese clinical guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: updates and insights.

Authors:  Di-Yang Xie; Zheng-Gang Ren; Jian Zhou; Jia Fan; Qiang Gao
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 7.293

6.  Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab versus Sorafenib in the Chinese Subpopulation with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Phase 3 Randomized, Open-Label IMbrave150 Study.

Authors:  Shukui Qin; Zhenggang Ren; Yin-Hsun Feng; Thomas Yau; Baocheng Wang; Haitao Zhao; Yuxian Bai; Shanzhi Gu; Lindong Li; Sairy Hernandez; Derek-Zhen Xu; Sohail Mulla; Yifan Wang; Hui Shao; Ann Lii Cheng
Journal:  Liver Cancer       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 11.740

7.  Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

Authors:  Patricia Guyot; A E Ades; Mario J N M Ouwens; Nicky J Welton
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  Methods for Population-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons in Health Technology Appraisal.

Authors:  David M Phillippo; Anthony E Ades; Sofia Dias; Stephen Palmer; Keith R Abrams; Nicky J Welton
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Reconstructing time-to-event data from published Kaplan-Meier curves.

Authors:  Yinghui Wei; Patrick Royston
Journal:  Stata J       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.637

10.  Performance of unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) for the evidence synthesis of single-arm trials with time-to-event outcomes.

Authors:  Yawen Jiang; Weiyi Ni
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.