Kerigo Ndirangu, Abby Paine, Hollie Pilkington, David Trueman
{"title":"伦伐替尼用于无法切除的肝细胞癌患者一线治疗的间接治疗比较。","authors":"Kerigo Ndirangu, Abby Paine, Hollie Pilkington, David Trueman","doi":"10.1007/s12325-024-03068-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study compared the relative efficacy of first-line lenvatinib, a standard-of-care treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), vs licensed/license in-progress comparators. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and network meta-analysis (NMA), updated evidence for lenvatinib monotherapy from LEAP-002, in addition to evidence from REFLECT, was included in the analyses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified via systematic review. REFLECT and LEAP-002 investigated lenvatinib in uHCC, with patient-level data available for each; however, only REFLECT included a comparator arm of interest (sorafenib). The lenvatinib arm from LEAP-002 was adjusted to match aggregate data for confounding factors from REFLECT using IPTW. Weighted Cox regressions, including matching variables as covariates, were used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). These HR estimates were included in Bayesian NMAs to compare lenvatinib with comparators; survival was significantly improved if the 95% credible interval for the HR did not include 1.0. Scenario analyses explored alternative choices for IPTW estimators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight RCTs (including REFLECT) and the single-arm adjusted lenvatinib data from LEAP-002 were included in the NMA base case. Lenvatinib demonstrated significant improvement in OS compared with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (BID) and significant improvement in PFS compared with sorafenib 400 mg BID, tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), and durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results suggest that patients with uHCC treated with lenvatinib have similar or significantly improved OS and PFS compared with licensed/license in-progress therapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Indirect Treatment Comparison of Lenvatinib for the First-Line Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Kerigo Ndirangu, Abby Paine, Hollie Pilkington, David Trueman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12325-024-03068-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study compared the relative efficacy of first-line lenvatinib, a standard-of-care treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), vs licensed/license in-progress comparators. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and network meta-analysis (NMA), updated evidence for lenvatinib monotherapy from LEAP-002, in addition to evidence from REFLECT, was included in the analyses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified via systematic review. REFLECT and LEAP-002 investigated lenvatinib in uHCC, with patient-level data available for each; however, only REFLECT included a comparator arm of interest (sorafenib). The lenvatinib arm from LEAP-002 was adjusted to match aggregate data for confounding factors from REFLECT using IPTW. Weighted Cox regressions, including matching variables as covariates, were used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). These HR estimates were included in Bayesian NMAs to compare lenvatinib with comparators; survival was significantly improved if the 95% credible interval for the HR did not include 1.0. Scenario analyses explored alternative choices for IPTW estimators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight RCTs (including REFLECT) and the single-arm adjusted lenvatinib data from LEAP-002 were included in the NMA base case. Lenvatinib demonstrated significant improvement in OS compared with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (BID) and significant improvement in PFS compared with sorafenib 400 mg BID, tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), and durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results suggest that patients with uHCC treated with lenvatinib have similar or significantly improved OS and PFS compared with licensed/license in-progress therapies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-024-03068-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-024-03068-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
An Indirect Treatment Comparison of Lenvatinib for the First-Line Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Introduction: This study compared the relative efficacy of first-line lenvatinib, a standard-of-care treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), vs licensed/license in-progress comparators. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and network meta-analysis (NMA), updated evidence for lenvatinib monotherapy from LEAP-002, in addition to evidence from REFLECT, was included in the analyses.
Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified via systematic review. REFLECT and LEAP-002 investigated lenvatinib in uHCC, with patient-level data available for each; however, only REFLECT included a comparator arm of interest (sorafenib). The lenvatinib arm from LEAP-002 was adjusted to match aggregate data for confounding factors from REFLECT using IPTW. Weighted Cox regressions, including matching variables as covariates, were used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). These HR estimates were included in Bayesian NMAs to compare lenvatinib with comparators; survival was significantly improved if the 95% credible interval for the HR did not include 1.0. Scenario analyses explored alternative choices for IPTW estimators.
Results: Eight RCTs (including REFLECT) and the single-arm adjusted lenvatinib data from LEAP-002 were included in the NMA base case. Lenvatinib demonstrated significant improvement in OS compared with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (BID) and significant improvement in PFS compared with sorafenib 400 mg BID, tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), and durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W.
Conclusions: These results suggest that patients with uHCC treated with lenvatinib have similar or significantly improved OS and PFS compared with licensed/license in-progress therapies.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Therapy is an international, peer reviewed, rapid-publication (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance) journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of therapeutics and interventions (including devices) across all therapeutic areas. Studies relating to diagnostics and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged.
The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Advances in Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.