Pembrolizumab+chemotherapy versus atezolizumab+chemotherapy+/-bevacizumab for the first-line treatment of non-squamous NSCLC: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison.
Atezolizumab
Comparative effectiveness
Indirect treatment comparison
Matching-adjusted indirect comparison
Non-small cell lung cancer
Pembrolizumab
Journal
Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
ISSN: 1872-8332
Titre abrégé: Lung Cancer
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8800805
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2021
05 2021
Historique:
received:
23
10
2020
revised:
05
03
2021
accepted:
25
03
2021
pubmed:
12
4
2021
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
11
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Multiple immunotherapy and chemotherapy combinations are approved for the management of advanced NSCLC which have not been directly compared in randomized clinical trials. This study indirectly compared the effectiveness of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus atezolizumab + chemotherapy+/-bevacizumab for previously untreated non-squamous NSCLC patients without EGFR/ALK aberrations. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted using individual patient data (IPD) from KEYNOTE-021 Cohort G (KN021 G) (pembrolizumab + carboplatin + pemetrexed; N = 59) and KEYNOTE-189 (KN189) (pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum chemotherapy; N = 410) and published aggregate data from IMpower 130 (atezolizumab + carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel; N = 451) and IMpower 150 (atezolizumab + carboplatin + paclitaxel + bevacizumab; N = 356). To adjust for cross-trial differences in baseline characteristics, data from patients randomized to pembrolizumab + chemotherapy in KN021 G/KN189 were reweighted to match the baseline characteristics of patients randomized to atezolizumab + chemotherapy from IMpower 130 or atezolizumab + chemotherapy + bevacizumab from IMpower 150. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), blinded independent review-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). OS and PFS follow-up were truncated to the trial with shorter follow-up. Sensitivity analyses were conducted without truncation of follow-up of OS and PFS. After matching for cross-trial differences, the effective sample size of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy was 428 and 389 for the IMpower 130 and IMpower 150 comparisons, respectively. The estimated HRs (95 % CIs) of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus atezolizumab + chemotherapy were 0.80 (0.67,0.95) and 0.79 (0.67,0.93) with regard to OS and PFS, respectively. For pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus atezolizumab + chemotherapy + bevacizumab, the estimated HR (95 % CIs) was 0.86 (0.72,1.03) for OS and 0.81 (0.68,0.96) for PFS. For ORR, the estimated risk ratio (95 % CI) and the risk difference (95 % CI) was 0.9 (0.8,1.1) and -3.5 % (-10.0,3.1) for pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus atezolizumab + chemotherapy, respectively, and 0.8 (0.7,0.9) and -12.2 % (-19.6,-4.8) for pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus atezolizumab + chemotherapy + bevacizumab, respectively. Findings were consistent across sensitivity analyses for both outcomes. MAIC results showed a significantly better OS and PFS for pembrolizumab + chemotherapy compared with atezolizumab + chemotherapy and a significantly better PFS for pembrolizumab + chemotherapy compared with atezolizumab + chemotherapy + bevacizumab.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33839603
pii: S0169-5002(21)00127-6
doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.03.020
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
0
Bevacizumab
2S9ZZM9Q9V
atezolizumab
52CMI0WC3Y
Carboplatin
BG3F62OND5
pembrolizumab
DPT0O3T46P
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
175-182Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.