Back to Browse Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 3

Indirect treatment comparison of bevacizumab + interferon-α-2a vs tyrosine kinase inhibitors in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma therapy

Authors Gerald HJ Mickisch, Björn Schwander, Bernard Escudier, et al

Published Date January 2011 Volume 2011:3 Pages 19—27

DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S16118

Published 25 January 2011

Gerald HJ Mickisch1, Björn Schwander2, Bernard Escudier3, Joaquim Bellmunt4, José P Maroto5, Camillo Porta6, Stefan Walzer7, Uwe Siebert8,9
1Department of Urology, Center of Operative Urology Bremen, Bremen, Germany; 2Department of Outcomes Research, AiM GmbH Assessment-in-Medicine, Lörrach, Germany; 3Immunotherapy Unit, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France; 4Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital del Mar UPF, Barcelona, Spain; 5Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain; 6Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Matteo University Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy; 7Global Health Economics, F Hoffmann-La Roche Pharmaceuticals AG, Basel, Switzerland; 8Department of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall i.T., Austria; 9Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA

Background: The vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor bevacizumab (BEV) given in combination with interferon-α-2a (IFN), and the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sunitinib (SUN) and pazopanib (PAZ), have all shown significant increase in progression-free survival (PFS) in first-line metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapy. These targeted therapies are currently competing to be primary choice; hence, in the absence of direct head-to-head comparison, there is a need for valid indirect comparison assessment.
Methods: Standard indirect comparison methods were applied to independent review PFS data of the pivotal Phase III trials, to determine indirect treatment comparison hazard-ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). As BEV+IFN and SUN have been compared to IFN, indirect comparison was enabled by the common IFN comparator arms. As PAZ was compared to placebo (PLA), a connector trial (IFN vs PLA) was required for the indirect comparison to BEV+IFN. Sensitivity analyses taking into account real-life influence of patient compliance on clinical outcomes were performed.
Results: The indirect efficacy comparison resulted in a statistically nonsignificant PFS difference of BEV+IFN vs SUN (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.78–1.45; P = 0.73) and of BEV+IFN vs PAZ (range based on different connector trials; HR: 0.74–1.03; P = 0.34–0.92). Simulating real-life patient compliance and its effectiveness impact showed an increased tendency towards BEV+IFN without reaching statistical significance.
Conclusions: There is no statistically significant PFS difference between BEV+IFN and TKIs in first-line mRCC. These findings imply that additional treatment decision criteria such as tolerability and therapy sequencing need to be considered to guide treatment decisions.

Keywords: indirect treatment comparison, progression-free survival, renal cell carcinoma, bevacizumab, sunitinib, pazopanib

Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML] 

Creative Commons License This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. Permissions beyond the scope of the License are administered by Dove Medical Press Limited. Information on how to request permission may be found at: http://www.dovepress.com/permissions.php

Readers of this article also read:

Tips for charting the course of a successful health research career

Mbuagbaw L, Morfaw F, Kunda JE, Mukonzo JK, Kastner J, Zhang S, Kokolo M, Thabane L

Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare 2013, 6:163-168

Published Date: 24 April 2013

Increased healthy osteoblast to osteosarcoma density ratios on specific PLGA nanopatterns

Wang Y, Zhang L, Sun L, Webster TJ

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2013, 8:159-166

Published Date: 7 January 2013

The role of galenic innovation in improving treatment compliance and persistence: three case studies

Zoellner Y, Balp MM, Gili Marco A

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2011, 3:109-116

Published Date: 4 August 2011

Retrospective drug utilization review: impact of pharmacist interventions on physician prescribing

Angalakuditi M, Gomes J

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2011, 3:105-108

Published Date: 27 June 2011

Minimally invasive surgery for Achilles tendon pathologies

Nicola Maffulli, Umile Giuseppe Longo, Filippo Spiezia, et al

Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine 2010, 1:95-103

Published Date: 5 July 2010

Economic considerations for bariatric surgery and morbid obesity

Eldo E Frezza, Mitchell Wacthell, Bradley Ewing

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2009, 1:79-83

Published Date: 10 December 2009