Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam
Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht.
Haematologica. 2019 May;104(5):1026-1035. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.206912. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
Decision making for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) not transplant eligible (NTE) is complicated by a lack of head-to-head comparisons of standards of care, the increase in the choice of treatment modalities, and the promising results that are rapidly evolving from studies with novel regimens. To support evidence-based decision making, we performed a network meta-analysis for NTE MM patients that synthesizes direct and indirect evidence and enables a comparison of all treatments. Relevant randomized clinical trials were identified by a systematic literature review in EMBASE®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE®-in-Process and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for January 1999 to March 2016. Efficacy outcomes [i.e. the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) for progression-free survival] were extracted and synthesized in a random effects network-meta analysis. In total, 24 studies were identified including 21 treatments. According to the network-meta analysis, the HR for progression-free survival was favorable for all NTE MM treatments compared to dexamethasone (HR: 0.19-0.90). Daratumumab-bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone and bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide with bortezomib-thalidomide maintenance were identified as the most effective treatments (HR: 0.19, 95%CI: 0.08-0.45 and HR: 0.22, 95%CI: 0.10-0.51, respectively). HR and 95%CI for currently recommended treatments, bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, and lenalidomide-dexamethasone compared to dexamethasone, were 0.31 (0.16-0.59), 0.39 (0.20-0.75), and 0.44 (0.29-0.65), respectively. In addition to identifying the most effective treatment options, we illustrate the additional value and evidence of network meta-analysis in clinical practice. In the current treatment landscape, the results of network meta-analysis may support evidence-based decisions and ultimately help to optimize treatment and outcomes of NTE MM patients.
对于不符合移植条件(NTE)的多发性骨髓瘤(MM)患者,由于缺乏标准治疗方法的头对头比较、治疗方式选择的增加以及新型方案研究中快速发展的有前途的结果,决策变得复杂。为了支持循证决策,我们对 NTE MM 患者进行了网络荟萃分析,综合了直接和间接证据,并能够对所有治疗方法进行比较。通过在 EMBASE®、MEDLINE®、MEDLINE®-in-Process 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库中进行系统文献检索,确定了相关的随机临床试验,检索时间为 1999 年 1 月至 2016 年 3 月。提取并在随机效应网络荟萃分析中综合了疗效结局(即无进展生存的风险比(HR)和 95%置信区间(95%CI))。共确定了 24 项研究,包括 21 种治疗方法。根据网络荟萃分析,与地塞米松相比,所有 NTE MM 治疗方法的无进展生存 HR 均有利(HR:0.19-0.90)。达雷妥尤单抗-硼替佐米-马法兰-泼尼松和硼替佐米-马法兰-泼尼松-沙利度胺联合硼替佐米-沙利度胺维持治疗被确定为最有效的治疗方法(HR:0.19,95%CI:0.08-0.45 和 HR:0.22,95%CI:0.10-0.51)。与地塞米松相比,目前推荐的治疗方法硼替佐米-来那度胺-地塞米松、硼替佐米-马法兰-泼尼松和来那度胺-地塞米松的 HR 和 95%CI 分别为 0.31(0.16-0.59)、0.39(0.20-0.75)和 0.44(0.29-0.65)。除了确定最有效的治疗选择外,我们还说明了网络荟萃分析在临床实践中的附加价值和证据。在当前的治疗环境下,网络荟萃分析的结果可能支持循证决策,并最终有助于优化 NTE MM 患者的治疗和结局。