Back to Archived Journals » Comparative Effectiveness Research » Volume 6

Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison in patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer

Authors Tremblay G, Holbrook T, Milligan G, Pelletier C, Rietschel P

Received 10 December 2015

Accepted for publication 12 January 2016

Published 20 April 2016 Volume 2016:6 Pages 13—21

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CER.S97885

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Professor Bik-Wai Bilvick Tai

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Corrine I. Voils


Gabriel Tremblay,1 Tim Holbrook,2 Gary Milligan,2 Corey L Pelletier,1 Petra Rietschel1

1Eisai Inc, Woodcliff Lake, NJ, USA; 2Adelphi Real World, Manchester, UK

Aims: Lenvatinib and sorafenib have been evaluated in separate Phase III placebo-controlled trials in patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer; however, no head-to-head comparative studies are available. We performed an indirect comparison of these agents using matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics, a technique allowing comparison of two studies with patient-level data available for one but only aggregate data available for the other.
Patients and methods: Individual patient data were available for the SELECT trial (lenvatinib versus placebo) whereas only published summary data were available for the DECISION trial (sorafenib versus placebo); therefore the SELECT data were adjusted to closely match the DECISION data. Data for patients in SELECT were assigned weights so that weighted mean baseline characteristics of the SELECT population matched those reported for DECISION. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS; corrected for crossover using rank-preserving structural failure time models) were calculated using weighted Cox regression models. Adjusted HRs were used to calculate indirect HRs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: Indirect treatment comparison using unadjusted clinical trial data resulted in an HR for PFS of 0.36 (95% CI 0.22–0.57) for lenvatinib versus sorafenib; MAIC resulted in an HR of 0.33 (95% CI 0.20–0.53), suggesting a statistically significantly superior PFS for lenvatinib. The HR for crossover-corrected OS for lenvatinib versus sorafenib was 0.77 (95% CI 0.44–1.35); MAIC resulted in an OS HR of 0.73 (95% CI 0.40–1.35).
Conclusion: After adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics using MAIC, lenvatinib was associated with statistically significantly superior PFS compared with sorafenib in patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer. This suggests lenvatinib may provide superior efficacy compared with sorafenib for patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer.

Keywords: indirect comparison, lenvatinib, overall survival, progression-free survival, radioiodine-refractory, sorafenib

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]