Comparative efficacy of ravulizumab and eculizumab in the treatment of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: An indirect comparison using clinical trial data.
Journal
Clinical nephrology
ISSN: 0301-0430
Titre abrégé: Clin Nephrol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0364441
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2022
May 2022
Historique:
accepted:
07
04
2022
pubmed:
22
12
2021
medline:
27
4
2022
entrez:
21
12
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Ravulizumab and eculizumab are approved terminal complement inhibitor treatments for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS). Ravulizumab was engineered from eculizumab to have an increased half-life allowing for reduced dosing frequency (8-weekly vs. 2-weekly). To account for differences in respective clinical trials, a validated balancing technique was used to enable an indirect comparison of ravulizumab and eculizumab treatment efficacy in aHUS. Patient-level data from four eculizumab clinical trials were available for pooling and comparison with data from two ravulizumab trials. In the primary analysis, adult native kidney data were compared. Propensity scores were calculated from baseline characteristics (dialysis status, estimated glomerular filtration rate, platelet count, serum lactate dehydrogenase). Stabilized inverse probability weighting was used to balance groups. Changes in outcomes from baseline to 26 weeks were compared between treatment groups. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Overall, 85 patients (46 ravulizumab, 39 eculizumab) were included in the primary analysis. Demographic and clinical characteristics were well balanced after weighting at baseline. At 26 weeks, clinical outcomes (including renal function, hematological markers, and dialysis prevalence), and fatigue and quality of life measures were improved with eculizumab and ravulizumab treatment. No differences between treatment groups reached statistical significance, although confidence intervals were wide. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis results were consistent with those of the primary analysis. Using appropriate methodology for indirect comparison of studies, no differences in outcomes were seen between ravulizumab and eculizumab, although, owing to small sample sizes, confidence intervals were wide.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34931610
pii: 189027
doi: 10.5414/CN110516
pmc: PMC9040196
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
0
eculizumab
A3ULP0F556
ravulizumab
C3VX249T6L
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
261-272Références
Pharm Stat. 2011 Mar-Apr;10(2):150-61
pubmed: 20925139
Lancet. 2017 Aug 12;390(10095):681-696
pubmed: 28242109
Blood. 2019 Feb 7;133(6):530-539
pubmed: 30510080
Biomedicines. 2020 Sep 16;8(9):
pubmed: 32948059
J Med Econ. 2020 Dec;23(12):1503-1515
pubmed: 33001704
Kidney Int. 2020 Jun;97(6):1106-1108
pubmed: 32444092
Value Health. 2010 Mar-Apr;13(2):273-7
pubmed: 19912596
Pediatr Nephrol. 2021 Apr;36(4):889-898
pubmed: 33048203
Kidney Int Rep. 2018 Dec 03;4(3):434-446
pubmed: 30899871
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019 Dec;30(12):2449-2463
pubmed: 31575699
J Nephrol. 2017 Feb;30(1):127-134
pubmed: 26995002
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Apr;8(4):554-62
pubmed: 23307876
Kidney Int Rep. 2020 May 19;5(8):1161-1171
pubmed: 32775815
J Nephrol. 2015 Jun;28(3):361-7
pubmed: 25491936
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 12;13(4):e0195909
pubmed: 29649283
Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2016 Dec 2;2016(1):208-216
pubmed: 27913482
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Oct;5(10):1844-59
pubmed: 20595690
Kidney Int Rep. 2019 Aug 02;4(11):1568-1576
pubmed: 31890998
Kidney Int. 2015 May;87(5):1061-73
pubmed: 25651368
Kidney Int. 2021 Jul;100(1):225-237
pubmed: 33307104
Kidney Int. 2016 Mar;89(3):701-11
pubmed: 26880462
Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Mar 12;12:295-305
pubmed: 32210633
Am J Kidney Dis. 2016 Jul;68(1):84-93
pubmed: 27012908
Kidney Int. 2020 Jun;97(6):1287-1296
pubmed: 32299680
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jun 6;368(23):2169-81
pubmed: 23738544