A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Pembrolizumab + Chemotherapy vs. Nivolumab + Ipilimumab as First-Line Therapies in Patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% Metastatic NSCLC.

chemotherapy comparative effectiveness matching-adjusted indirect comparison nivolumab non-small cell lung cancer pembrolizumab

Journal

Cancers
ISSN: 2072-6694
Titre abrégé: Cancers (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101526829

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 Dec 2020
Historique:
received: 30 10 2020
revised: 01 12 2020
accepted: 02 12 2020
entrez: 9 12 2020
pubmed: 10 12 2020
medline: 10 12 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In the absence of head-to-head trials, this study indirectly compared the effectiveness of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs nivolumab + ipilimumab for the first-line treatment of metastatic stage IV NSCLC patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥1%. An anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted using pooled individual patient data (IPD) from the ITT population in KEYNOTE-021G, KEYNOTE-189 and KEYNOTE-407 ( The estimated HR (95% CI) of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs nivolumab + ipilimumab was 0.80 (0.59,1.09) and 0.53 (0.41,0.68) for OS and PFS, respectively. For ORR, the estimated risk ratio was 1.8 (1.3,2.4) for pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs nivolumab + ipilimumab and the risk difference was 25.5% (15.0,36.0). PD-L1 TPS ≥50% and 1-49% sub-groups showed an OS HR of 0.89 (0.58,1.36) and 0.68 (0.46,1.01), respectively. These MAIC results suggest that pembrolizumab + chemotherapy leads to a greater clinical benefit vs nivolumab + ipilimumab in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% across multiple endpoints.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In the absence of head-to-head trials, this study indirectly compared the effectiveness of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs nivolumab + ipilimumab for the first-line treatment of metastatic stage IV NSCLC patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥1%.
METHODS METHODS
An anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted using pooled individual patient data (IPD) from the ITT population in KEYNOTE-021G, KEYNOTE-189 and KEYNOTE-407 (
RESULTS RESULTS
The estimated HR (95% CI) of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs nivolumab + ipilimumab was 0.80 (0.59,1.09) and 0.53 (0.41,0.68) for OS and PFS, respectively. For ORR, the estimated risk ratio was 1.8 (1.3,2.4) for pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs nivolumab + ipilimumab and the risk difference was 25.5% (15.0,36.0). PD-L1 TPS ≥50% and 1-49% sub-groups showed an OS HR of 0.89 (0.58,1.36) and 0.68 (0.46,1.01), respectively.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
These MAIC results suggest that pembrolizumab + chemotherapy leads to a greater clinical benefit vs nivolumab + ipilimumab in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% across multiple endpoints.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33291810
pii: cancers12123648
doi: 10.3390/cancers12123648
pmc: PMC7762014
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Subventions

Organisme : Merck
ID : N/A

Références

Lung Cancer Int. 2011;2011:152125
pubmed: 26316930
Curr Med Res Opin. 2019 Sep;35(9):1615-1622
pubmed: 30964361
Respirology. 2011 Nov;16(8):1210-20
pubmed: 21801275
J Immunother Cancer. 2019 Oct 26;7(1):278
pubmed: 31655605
Nature. 2018 Jan 24;553(7689):446-454
pubmed: 29364287
N Engl J Med. 2015 Oct 22;373(17):1627-39
pubmed: 26412456
Exp Hematol Oncol. 2013 Dec 06;2(1):32
pubmed: 24314093
J Thorac Oncol. 2010 May;5(5):620-30
pubmed: 20354456
J Clin Oncol. 2020 May 10;38(14):1505-1517
pubmed: 32150489
Immunotherapy. 2019 Apr;11(5):407-428
pubmed: 30712477
Cancer Manag Res. 2014 Oct 23;6:437-49
pubmed: 25364274
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(10):935-45
pubmed: 20831302
J Thorac Oncol. 2017 Feb;12(2):208-222
pubmed: 27913228
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Feb 01;12:9
pubmed: 22297116
Lancet. 2016 Apr 9;387(10027):1540-1550
pubmed: 26712084
J Thorac Oncol. 2019 Jan;14(1):124-129
pubmed: 30138764
N Engl J Med. 2018 Nov 22;379(21):2040-2051
pubmed: 30280635
J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Jun;50(6):683-91
pubmed: 9250266
Immunotherapy. 2019 May;11(7):617-629
pubmed: 30852924
Oncologist. 2018 Mar;23(3):279-287
pubmed: 29192016
Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2019 Aug 28;11:1758835919870360
pubmed: 31497071
N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 21;381(21):2020-2031
pubmed: 31562796
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 31;378(22):2078-2092
pubmed: 29658856

Auteurs

Balazs Halmos (B)

Department of Oncology, Montefiore/Albert Einstein Cancer Center, 2nd floor, 1695 Eastchester Rd, Bronx, NY 10461, USA.

Thomas Burke (T)

Center for Observational & Real World Evidence (CORE), Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 07033, USA.

Chrysostomos Kalyvas (C)

Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, MSD Europe, Inc., 1200 Brussels, Belgium.

Ralph Insinga (R)

Center for Observational & Real World Evidence (CORE), Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 07033, USA.

Kristel Vandormael (K)

Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, MSD Europe, Inc., 1200 Brussels, Belgium.

Andrew Frederickson (A)

Precision HEOR, Oakland, CA 94612, USA.

Bilal Piperdi (B)

Oncology Clinical Development, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ 07033, USA.

Classifications MeSH