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
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

175-182

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Balazs Halmos (B)

Department of Oncology, Montefiore/Albert Einstein Cancer Center, 2nd Floor, 1695 Eastchester Rd, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA. Electronic address: bahalmos@montefiore.org.

Thomas Burke (T)

Center for Observational & Real World Evidence (CORE), Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, 07033, USA. Electronic address: thomas_burke2@merck.com.

Chrysostomos Kalyvas (C)

Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, MSD Europe, Inc., Brussels, 1200, Belgium. Electronic address: chrysostomos.kalyvas@merck.com.

Kristel Vandormael (K)

Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences, MSD Europe, Inc., Brussels, 1200, Belgium. Electronic address: kristel_vandormael@merck.com.

Andrew Frederickson (A)

precisionHEOR, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA. Electronic address: andrew.frederickson@precisionvh.com.

Bilal Piperdi (B)

Oncology Clinical Development, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, 07033, USA. Electronic address: bilal.piperdi@merck.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH