Indirect treatment comparison of bevacizumab + interferon-α-2a vs tyrosine kinase inhibitors in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma therapy
Open Access
- 1 January 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Informa UK Limited in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research
- Vol. 3, 19-27
- https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S16118
Abstract
Background: The vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor bevacizumab (BEV) given in combination with interferon-α-2a (IFN), and the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sunitinib (SUN) and pazopanib (PAZ), have all shown significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) in first-line metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapy. These targeted therapies are currently competing to be primary choice; hence, in the absence of direct head-to-head comparison, there is a need for valid indirect comparison assessment. Methods: Standard indirect comparison methods were applied to independent review PFS data of the pivotal Phase III trials, to determine indirect treatment comparison hazard-ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). As BEV+IFN and SUN have been compared to IFN, indirect comparison was enabled by the common IFN comparator arms. As PAZ was compared to placebo (PLA), a connector trial (IFN vs PLA) was required for the indirect comparison to BEV+IFN. Sensitivity analyses taking into account real-life influence of patient compliance on clinical outcomes were performed. Results: The indirect efficacy comparison resulted in a statistically nonsignificant PFS difference of BEV+IFN vs SUN (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.78–1.45; P = 0.73) and of BEV+IFN vs PAZ (range based on different connector trials; HR: 0.74–1.03; P = 0.34–0.92). Simulating real-life patient compliance and its effectiveness impact showed an increased tendency towards BEV+IFN without reaching statistical significance. Conclusions: There is no statistically significant PFS difference between BEV+IFN and TKIs in first-line mRCC. These findings imply that additional treatment decision criteria such as tolerability and therapy sequencing need to be considered to guide treatment decisions.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Network meta-analysis on the log-hazard scale, combining count and hazard ratio statistics accounting for multi-arm trials: A tutorialBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2010
- Pazopanib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase III TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2010
- Overall Survival and Updated Results for Sunitinib Compared With Interferon Alfa in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell CarcinomaJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2009
- Renal cell carcinoma: assessment of key pathologic prognostic parameters and patient characteristics in 47 909 cases using the National Cancer Data BaseAnnals of Diagnostic Pathology, 2009
- Bevacizumab plus interferon alfa-2a for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, double-blind phase III trialThe Lancet, 2007
- Response of Intracranial Metastases to Erlotinib TherapyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2007
- Recent progress in the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma.CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2007
- Rational Selection of a Control Arm for Randomised Trials in Metastatic Renal Cell CarcinomaEuropean Urology, 2003
- Immunotherapy for advanced renal cell cancerPublished by Wiley ,2000
- The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1997