Department of Haematology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France.
Clínica Universidad de Navarra-CIMA, IDISNA, CIBERONC, Pamplona, Spain.
Adv Ther. 2022 May;39(5):1976-1992. doi: 10.1007/s12325-022-02083-8. Epub 2022 Mar 5.
INTRODUCTION: Many treatment regimens have been evaluated in transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of relevant therapies for the treatment of TIE patients with NDMM. METHODS: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating different treatment options for TIE patients with NDMM were compared in a network meta-analysis (NMA). The NMA includes recent primary and long-term OS readouts from SWOG S0777, ENDURANCE, MAIA, and ALCYONE. Relevant trials were identified through a systematic literature review. Relative efficacy measures (i.e., hazard ratios [HRs] for PFS and OS) were extracted and synthesised in random-effects NMAs. RESULTS: A total of 122 publications describing 45 unique RCTs was identified. Continuous lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) was selected as the referent comparator. Daratumumab-containing treatments (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd], daratumumab/bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [D-VMP]) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd) had the highest probabilities of being more effective than Rd continuous for PFS (HR: D-Rd, 0.53; D-VMP, 0.57, VRd, 0.77) and OS (HR: D-Rd, 0.68; VRd, 0.77, D-VMP, 0.78). D-Rd had the highest chance of being ranked as the most effective treatment with respect to PFS and OS. Results using a smaller network focusing on only those regimens that are relevant in Europe were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These comparative effectiveness data may help inform treatment selection in TIE patients with NDMM.
简介:许多治疗方案已在不适合移植(TIE)的新发多发性骨髓瘤(NDMM)患者中进行了评估。本研究的目的是比较治疗 TIE 患者 NDMM 的相关治疗的疗效。
方法:通过网络荟萃分析(NMA)比较评估 TIE 患者 NDMM 不同治疗方案的大型随机对照试验(RCT)的无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)。NMA 包括 SWOG S0777、ENDURANCE、MAIA 和 ALCYONE 的最新主要和长期 OS 结果。通过系统文献回顾确定相关试验。提取并以随机效应 NMA 综合相对疗效指标(即 PFS 和 OS 的风险比 [HR])。
结果:共确定了 122 篇描述 45 项独特 RCT 的出版物。连续来那度胺/地塞米松(Rd)被选为参考对照。含达雷妥尤单抗的治疗方案(达雷妥尤单抗/来那度胺/地塞米松[D-Rd]、达雷妥尤单抗/硼替佐米/马法兰/泼尼松[D-VMP])和硼替佐米/来那度胺/地塞米松(VRd)与 Rd 连续治疗相比,PFS(HR:D-Rd,0.53;D-VMP,0.57,VRd,0.77)和 OS(HR:D-Rd,0.68;VRd,0.77,D-VMP,0.78)的有效性更高的可能性最大。D-Rd 最有可能被评为最有效的治疗方案,在 PFS 和 OS 方面。仅关注在欧洲相关的方案的较小网络的分析结果与主要分析一致。
结论:这些比较有效性数据可能有助于为 TIE 患者 NDMM 的治疗选择提供信息。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-5-4
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-10-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-4-19
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2020-12-2