[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE、依维莫司和舒尼替尼在晚期不可切除的胃肠胰神经内分泌肿瘤中的间接治疗比较:[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE在胃肠胰神经内分泌肿瘤中的相对疗效

Q3 Medicine
Mohid S. Khan , Elaine Stamp , Cormac Sammon , Tessa Brabander , Wouter W. de Herder , Marianne E. Pavel
{"title":"[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE、依维莫司和舒尼替尼在晚期不可切除的胃肠胰神经内分泌肿瘤中的间接治疗比较:[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE在胃肠胰神经内分泌肿瘤中的相对疗效","authors":"Mohid S. Khan ,&nbsp;Elaine Stamp ,&nbsp;Cormac Sammon ,&nbsp;Tessa Brabander ,&nbsp;Wouter W. de Herder ,&nbsp;Marianne E. Pavel","doi":"10.1016/j.ejcsup.2021.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy of treatments for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs) have not yet been reported. This study used a series of matching-adjusted indirect comparisons to indirectly compare the effectiveness of [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE to everolimus, sunitinib and best supportive care (BSC) for extending progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced, unresectable gastrointestinal (GI)-NETs and P-NETs. The results of the main analysis suggest that after accounting for differences in key prognostic variables, the hazard of progression was 62% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; confidence interval [CI]<sub>95</sub> 0.25–0.58) and 65% (HR 0.35 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.21–0.59) lower in patients with GI-NETs treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with everolimus and BSC, respectively. Similarly, the hazard of progression was 64% (HR 0.36 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.18–0.70), 54% (HR 0.46 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.30–0.71) and 79–87% (HR 0.21 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.13–0.32; HR 0.13 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.08–0.22) lower in patients with P-NET treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. The hazard of death was 58% (HR 0.42 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.25–0.72), 47% (HR 0.53 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.33–0.87) and 44–64% (HR 0.56 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.36–0.90; HR 0.34 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.20–0.57) lower in P-patients with NET treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. While our results must be interpreted with caution given the non-randomised nature of the comparisons and the potential for residual confounding, the magnitude of the effect sizes we observe and their consistency across comparators suggest that [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE may be a more effective treatment option than everolimus, sunitinib and BSC in advanced, unresectable GEP-NETs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11675,"journal":{"name":"Ejc Supplements","volume":"16 ","pages":"Pages 5-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a1/94/main.PMC8591206.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE, everolimus and sunitinib in advanced, unresectable gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: Relative effectiveness of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours\",\"authors\":\"Mohid S. Khan ,&nbsp;Elaine Stamp ,&nbsp;Cormac Sammon ,&nbsp;Tessa Brabander ,&nbsp;Wouter W. de Herder ,&nbsp;Marianne E. Pavel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejcsup.2021.06.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy of treatments for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs) have not yet been reported. This study used a series of matching-adjusted indirect comparisons to indirectly compare the effectiveness of [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE to everolimus, sunitinib and best supportive care (BSC) for extending progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced, unresectable gastrointestinal (GI)-NETs and P-NETs. The results of the main analysis suggest that after accounting for differences in key prognostic variables, the hazard of progression was 62% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; confidence interval [CI]<sub>95</sub> 0.25–0.58) and 65% (HR 0.35 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.21–0.59) lower in patients with GI-NETs treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with everolimus and BSC, respectively. Similarly, the hazard of progression was 64% (HR 0.36 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.18–0.70), 54% (HR 0.46 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.30–0.71) and 79–87% (HR 0.21 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.13–0.32; HR 0.13 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.08–0.22) lower in patients with P-NET treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. The hazard of death was 58% (HR 0.42 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.25–0.72), 47% (HR 0.53 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.33–0.87) and 44–64% (HR 0.56 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.36–0.90; HR 0.34 CI<sub>95</sub> 0.20–0.57) lower in P-patients with NET treated with [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. While our results must be interpreted with caution given the non-randomised nature of the comparisons and the potential for residual confounding, the magnitude of the effect sizes we observe and their consistency across comparators suggest that [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE may be a more effective treatment option than everolimus, sunitinib and BSC in advanced, unresectable GEP-NETs.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ejc Supplements\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 5-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a1/94/main.PMC8591206.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ejc Supplements\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359634921000021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ejc Supplements","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359634921000021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

胃肠胰神经内分泌肿瘤(GEP-NETs)治疗效果的正面比较尚未有报道。本研究采用了一系列匹配调整的间接比较,间接比较了[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE与依维莫司、舒尼替尼和最佳支持治疗(BSC)在延长晚期不可切除胃肠道(GI)-NETs和P-NETs患者的无进展生存期和总生存期方面的有效性。主分析结果显示,在考虑关键预后变量的差异后,进展的风险为62%(风险比[HR], 0.38;[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE治疗GI-NETs患者比依维莫司和BSC治疗GI-NETs患者分别降低65% (HR 0.35 CI95 0.21-0.59)和可信区间[CI]95 0.25-0.58)。同样,进展风险为64% (HR 0.36 CI95 0.18-0.70), 54% (HR 0.46 CI95 0.30-0.71)和79-87% (HR 0.21 CI95 0.13-0.32;[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE治疗P-NET患者的HR 0.13 CI95 0.08-0.22,分别低于舒尼替尼、依维莫司和BSC治疗P-NET患者。死亡风险分别为58% (HR 0.42 CI95 0.25 ~ 0.72)、47% (HR 0.53 CI95 0.33 ~ 0.87)和44 ~ 64% (HR 0.56 CI95 0.36 ~ 0.90);[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE治疗p - NET患者的HR 0.34 CI95 0.20-0.57)分别低于舒尼替尼、依维莫司和BSC治疗的p - NET患者。虽然我们的结果必须谨慎解释,因为比较的非随机性质和潜在的残留混淆,但我们观察到的效应大小的大小及其在比较者之间的一致性表明[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE可能比依维莫司、舒尼替尼和BSC在晚期不可切除的GEP-NETs中更有效的治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE, everolimus and sunitinib in advanced, unresectable gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: Relative effectiveness of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours

Head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy of treatments for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs) have not yet been reported. This study used a series of matching-adjusted indirect comparisons to indirectly compare the effectiveness of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE to everolimus, sunitinib and best supportive care (BSC) for extending progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced, unresectable gastrointestinal (GI)-NETs and P-NETs. The results of the main analysis suggest that after accounting for differences in key prognostic variables, the hazard of progression was 62% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; confidence interval [CI]95 0.25–0.58) and 65% (HR 0.35 CI95 0.21–0.59) lower in patients with GI-NETs treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with everolimus and BSC, respectively. Similarly, the hazard of progression was 64% (HR 0.36 CI95 0.18–0.70), 54% (HR 0.46 CI95 0.30–0.71) and 79–87% (HR 0.21 CI95 0.13–0.32; HR 0.13 CI95 0.08–0.22) lower in patients with P-NET treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. The hazard of death was 58% (HR 0.42 CI95 0.25–0.72), 47% (HR 0.53 CI95 0.33–0.87) and 44–64% (HR 0.56 CI95 0.36–0.90; HR 0.34 CI95 0.20–0.57) lower in P-patients with NET treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. While our results must be interpreted with caution given the non-randomised nature of the comparisons and the potential for residual confounding, the magnitude of the effect sizes we observe and their consistency across comparators suggest that [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE may be a more effective treatment option than everolimus, sunitinib and BSC in advanced, unresectable GEP-NETs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ejc Supplements
Ejc Supplements 医学-肿瘤学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: EJC Supplements is an open access companion journal to the European Journal of Cancer. As an open access journal, all published articles are subject to an Article Publication Fee. Immediately upon publication, all articles in EJC Supplements are made openly available through the journal''s websites. EJC Supplements will consider for publication the proceedings of scientific symposia, commissioned thematic issues, and collections of invited articles on preclinical and basic cancer research, translational oncology, clinical oncology and cancer epidemiology and prevention. Authors considering the publication of a supplement in EJC Supplements are requested to contact the Editorial Office of the EJC to discuss their proposal with the Editor-in-Chief. EJC Supplements is an official journal of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), the European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) and the European Society of Mastology (EUSOMA).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信