Fawsitt Christopher G, Pan Janice, Orishaba Philip, Jackson Christopher H, Thom Howard
Clifton Insight, Bristol, UK.
Eisai, Nutley, NJ, 07110, USA.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Jan 30;25(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02480-x.
Population-adjusted indirect comparison using parametric Simulated Treatment Comparison (STC) has had limited application to survival outcomes in unanchored settings. Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison (MAIC) is commonly used but does not account for violation of proportional hazards or enable extrapolations of survival. We developed and applied a novel methodology for STC in unanchored settings. We compared overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (LEN + PEM) against nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI), pembrolizumab plus axitinib (PEM + AXI), avelumab plus axitinib (AVE + AXI), and nivolumab plus cabozontanib (NIVO + CABO) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Unanchored comparison was necessitated as the control groups differed in their use of PD-1/PD-L1 rescue therapy.
We fit covariate-adjusted survival models to individual patient data from phase 3 trial of LEN + PEM, including standard parametric distributions and Royston-Parmar spline models with up to 3 knots. We used these models to predict OS and PFS in the population of comparator treatments. The base case model was selected by minimum Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Treatment effects were measured using difference in restricted mean survival time (RMST), over shortest follow-up of input trials, and hazard ratios at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.
The survival model with the lowest AIC was 1-knot spline odds for OS and log-logistic for PFS. Difference in RMST OS was 6.90 months (95% CI: 1.95, 11.36), 5.31 (3.58, 7.28), 5.99 (1.82, 9.42), and 11.59 (8.41, 15.38) versus NIVO + IPI (over 64.8 months follow-up), AVE + AXI (46.7 months), PEM + AXI (64.8 months), NIVO + CABO (53.0 months), respectively. Difference in RMST PFS was 4.50 months (95% CI: 0.92, 8.26), 8.23 (5.60, 10.57), 5.38 (2.06, 9.09), and 4.58 (0.09, 9.44) versus NIVO + IPI (over 57.8 months), AVE + AXI (44.9 months), PEM + AXI (57.8 months), NIVO + CABO (23.8 months), respectively. Hazard ratios indicated strong evidence of greater OS and PFS on LEN + PEM at most timepoints.
We developed and applied a novel methodology for comparing survival outcomes in unanchored settings using STC. Pending investigation with a simulation study or further examples, this methodology could be used for clinical decision-making and, if long-term data are available, inform economic models designed to extrapolate outcomes for the evaluation of lifetime cost-effectiveness.
NCT02811861 (registered: 23/06/2016).
使用参数化模拟治疗比较(STC)进行人群调整间接比较在无锚定环境下对生存结局的应用有限。匹配调整间接比较(MAIC)是常用方法,但未考虑比例风险的违反情况,也无法进行生存外推。我们开发并应用了一种在无锚定环境下进行STC的新方法。我们比较了乐伐替尼联合帕博利珠单抗(LEN+PEM)与纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹木单抗(NIVO+IPI)、帕博利珠单抗联合阿昔替尼(PEM+AXI)、阿维鲁单抗联合阿昔替尼(AVE+AXI)以及纳武利尤单抗联合卡博替尼(NIVO+CABO)在晚期肾细胞癌(RCC)患者中的总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)。由于对照组在使用PD-1/PD-L1挽救治疗方面存在差异,因此需要进行无锚定比较。
我们将协变量调整生存模型应用于LEN+PEM 3期试验的个体患者数据,包括标准参数分布和最多3个节点的Royston-Parmar样条模型。我们使用这些模型预测对照治疗人群的OS和PFS。通过最小赤池信息准则(AIC)选择基础病例模型。使用受限平均生存时间(RMST)差异来衡量治疗效果,RMST差异基于输入试验的最短随访时间,以及6、12、18和24个月时的风险比。
OS的最低AIC生存模型是1节点样条优势模型,PFS是对数逻辑模型。与NIVO+IPI(随访64.8个月)、AVE+AXI(46.7个月)、PEM+AXI(64.8个月)、NIVO+CABO(53.0个月)相比,RMST OS差异分别为6.90个月(95%CI:1.95,11.36)、5.31(3.58,7.28)、5.99(1.82,9.42)和11.59(8.41,15.38)。与NIVO+IPI(随访57.8个月)、AVE+AXI(44.9个月)、PEM+AXI(57.8个月)、NIVO+CABO(23.8个月)相比,RMST PFS差异分别为4.50个月(95%CI:0.92,8.26)、8.23(5.60,10.57)、5.38(2.06,9.09)和4.58(0.09,9.44)。风险比表明在大多数时间点,LEN+PEM有更强的证据显示具有更好的OS和PFS。
我们开发并应用了一种使用STC在无锚定环境下比较生存结局的新方法。在通过模拟研究或更多实例进行调查之前,该方法可用于临床决策,并且如果有长期数据,可为旨在外推结局以评估终身成本效益的经济模型提供信息。
NCT02811861(注册时间:2016年6月23日)