Everolimus and sunitinib for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison

29Citations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Everolimus and sunitinib have been approved for the treatment advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, but have not been compared to each other in a randomized trial and have not demonstrated prolonged overall survival compared to placebo. This study aimed to indirectly compare overall and progression-free among everolimus, sunitinib and placebo across separate randomized trials.Methods: A matching adjusted indirect comparison was conducted in which individual patient data from the pivotal trial of everolimus (n = 410) were adjusted to match the inclusion criteria and average baseline characteristics reported for the pivotal trial of sunitinib (n = 171). Prior to matching, trial populations differed in baseline performance status and prior treatments. After matching, these and all other available baseline characteristics were balanced between trials.Results: Compared to the placebo arm in the sunitinib trial, everolimus was associated with significantly prolonged overall survival (HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.38-0.98, p = 0.042).Compared to sunitinib, everolimus was associated with similar progression-free (hazard ratio for death (HR) = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.46-1.53, p = 0.578) and overall survival (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.49-1.31, p = 0.383).Conclusion: After adjusting for observed cross-trial differences, everolimus treatment was associated with longer overall survival than the placebo arm in the sunitinib trial for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. © 2013 Signorovitch et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Signorovitch, J., Swallow, E., Kantor, E., Wang, X., Klimovsky, J., Haas, T., … Metrakos, P. (2013). Everolimus and sunitinib for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Experimental Hematology and Oncology, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/2162-3619-2-32

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free