Everolimus and sunitinib for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a matching-adjusted indirect comparison.
Ontology highlight
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.
SUBMITTER: Signorovitch J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4175512 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy of treatments for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs) have not yet been reported. This study used a series of matching-adjusted indirect comparisons to indirectly compare the effectiveness of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE to everolimus, sunitinib and best supportive care (BSC) for extending progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced, unresectable gastrointestinal (GI)-NETs and P-NETs. The results of the main analysis suggest that after accounting for differences in key prognostic variables, the hazard of progression was 62% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; confidence interval [CI]95 0.25-0.58) and 65% (HR 0.35 CI95 0.21-0.59) lower in patients with GI-NETs treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with everolimus and BSC, respectively. Similarly, the hazard of progression was 64% (HR 0.36 CI95 0.18-0.70), 54% (HR 0.46 CI95 0.30-0.71) and 79-87% (HR 0.21 CI95 0.13-0.32; HR 0.13 CI95 0.08-0.22) lower in patients with P-NET treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. The hazard of death was 58% (HR 0.42 CI95 0.25-0.72), 47% (HR 0.53 CI95 0.33-0.87) and 44-64% (HR 0.56 CI95 0.36-0.90; HR 0.34 CI95 0.20-0.57) lower in P-patients with NET treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE than in those treated with sunitinib, everolimus and BSC, respectively. While our results must be interpreted with caution given the non-randomised nature of the comparisons and the potential for residual confounding, the magnitude of the effect sizes we observe and their consistency across comparators suggest that [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE may be a more effective treatment option than everolimus, sunitinib and BSC in advanced, unresectable GEP-NETs.
| S-EPMC8591206 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEverolimus, an oral inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), has shown antitumor activity in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, in two phase 2 studies. We evaluated the agent in a prospective, randomized, phase 3 study.MethodsWe randomly assigned 410 patients who had advanced, low-grade or intermediate-grade pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with radiologic progression within the previous 12 months to receive everolimus, at a dose of 10 mg once daily (207 patients), or placebo (203 patients), both in conjunction with best supportive care. The primary end point was progression-free survival in an intention-to-treat analysis. In the case of patients in whom radiologic progression occurred during the study, the treatment assignments could be revealed, and patients who had been randomly assigned to placebo were offered open-label everolimus.ResultsThe median progression-free survival was 11.0 months with everolimus as compared with 4.6 months with placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death from any cause with everolimus, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.45; P<0.001), representing a 65% reduction in the estimated risk of progression or death. Estimates of the proportion of patients who were alive and progression-free at 18 months were 34% (95% CI, 26 to 43) with everolimus as compared with 9% (95% CI, 4 to 16) with placebo. Drug-related adverse events were mostly grade 1 or 2 and included stomatitis (in 64% of patients in the everolimus group vs. 17% in the placebo group), rash (49% vs. 10%), diarrhea (34% vs. 10%), fatigue (31% vs. 14%), and infections (23% vs. 6%), which were primarily upper respiratory. Grade 3 or 4 events that were more frequent with everolimus than with placebo included anemia (6% vs. 0%) and hyperglycemia (5% vs. 2%). The median exposure to everolimus was longer than exposure to placebo by a factor of 2.3 (38 weeks vs. 16 weeks).ConclusionsEverolimus, as compared with placebo, significantly prolonged progression-free survival among patients with progressive advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and was associated with a low rate of severe adverse events. (Funded by Novartis Oncology; RADIANT-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00510068.).
| S-EPMC4208619 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAnchored covariate-adjusted indirect comparisons inform reimbursement decisions where there are no head-to-head trials between the treatments of interest, there is a common comparator arm shared by the studies, and there are patient-level data limitations. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), based on propensity score weighting, is the most widely used covariate-adjusted indirect comparison method in health technology assessment. MAIC has poor precision and is inefficient when the effective sample size after weighting is small.MethodsA modular extension to MAIC, termed two-stage matching-adjusted indirect comparison (2SMAIC), is proposed. This uses two parametric models. One estimates the treatment assignment mechanism in the study with individual patient data (IPD), the other estimates the trial assignment mechanism. The first model produces inverse probability weights that are combined with the odds weights produced by the second model. The resulting weights seek to balance covariates between treatment arms and across studies. A simulation study provides proof-of-principle in an indirect comparison performed across two randomized trials. Nevertheless, 2SMAIC can be applied in situations where the IPD trial is observational, by including potential confounders in the treatment assignment model. The simulation study also explores the use of weight truncation in combination with MAIC for the first time.ResultsDespite enforcing randomization and knowing the true treatment assignment mechanism in the IPD trial, 2SMAIC yields improved precision and efficiency with respect to MAIC in all scenarios, while maintaining similarly low levels of bias. The two-stage approach is effective when sample sizes in the IPD trial are low, as it controls for chance imbalances in prognostic baseline covariates between study arms. It is not as effective when overlap between the trials' target populations is poor and the extremity of the weights is high. In these scenarios, truncation leads to substantial precision and efficiency gains but induces considerable bias. The combination of a two-stage approach with truncation produces the highest precision and efficiency improvements.ConclusionsTwo-stage approaches to MAIC can increase precision and efficiency with respect to the standard approach by adjusting for empirical imbalances in prognostic covariates in the IPD trial. Further modules could be incorporated for additional variance reduction or to account for missingness and non-compliance in the IPD trial.
| S-EPMC9358807 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Several circulating biomarkers and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been correlated with efficacy and tolerability to antiangiogenic agents. These associations remain unexplored in well-differentiated, metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors treated with the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib. We have assessed the effect on tumor response at 6 months, overall survival, progression-free survival and safety of 14 SNPs, and 6 soluble proteins. Forty-three patients were recruited. Two SNPs in the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 3 (VEGFR-3) gene predicted lower overall survival: rs307826 with hazard ratio (HR) 3.67 (confidence interval [CI] 95%, 1.35-10.00) and rs307821 with HR 3.84 (CI 95%, 1.47-10.0). Interleukin-6 was associated with increased mortality: HR 1.06 (CI 95%, 1.01-1.12), and osteopontin was associated with shorter PFS: HR 1.087 (1.01-1.16), independently of Ki-67. Furthermore, levels of osteopontin remained higher at the end of the study in patients considered non-responders: 38.5 ng/mL vs. responders: 18.7 ng/mL, p-value=0.039. Dynamic upward variations were also observed with respect to IL-8 levels in sunitinib-refractory individuals: 28.5 pg/mL at baseline vs. 38.3 pg/mL at 3 months, p-value=0.024. In conclusion, two VEGFR-3 SNPs as well as various serum biomarkers were associated with diverse clinical outcomes in patients with well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors treated with sunitinib.
| S-EPMC6319342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) ruxolitinib, fedratinib, and pacritinib are the current standard of care in symptomatic myelofibrosis (MF). However, progressive disease and toxicities frequently lead to JAKi discontinuation. Preclinical data indicate that combining JAK and bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) domain inhibition leads to overlapping effects in MF. Pelabresib (CPI-0610), an oral, small-molecule BET1,2 inhibitor (BETi), in combination with ruxolitinib showed improvements in spleen volume reduction (SVR35) and total symptom score reduction (TSS50) from baseline in the phase 2 MANIFEST study (NCT02158858) in patients with MF. Given the absence of a head-to-head clinical comparison between JAKi monotherapy and JAKi with BETi combination therapy, we performed an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison analysis to adjust for differences between studies and allow for the comparison of SVR35, TSS50, and TSS measured at several timepoints in arm 3 of MANIFEST (pelabresib with ruxolitinib in JAKi treatment-naive patients with MF), with data from the following JAKi monotherapy studies in JAKi treatment-naive patients: COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II (ruxolitinib), SIMPLIFY-1 (ruxolitinib and momelotinib), and JAKARTA (fedratinib). Response rate ratios >1 were observed for pelabresib with ruxolitinib vs all comparators for SVR35 and TSS50 at week 24. Improvements in TSS were observed as early as week 12 and were durable. These results indicate that pelabresib with ruxolitinib may have a potentially higher efficacy than JAKi monotherapy in JAKi treatment-naive MF.
| S-EPMC10509667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aim: To compare the efficacy of erenumab versus rimegepant as preventive treatment for patients with episodic and chronic migraine using an anchor-based matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Methods: Patients from two phase II/III trials for erenumab (NCT02066415 and NCT02456740) were pooled and weighted to match on the baseline effect modifiers (age, sex, race, baseline monthly migraine days [MMDs], and history of chronic migraine [CM]) reported in the phase II/III trial for rimegepant (NCT03732638). Four efficacy outcomes were compared between the two erenumab regimens (70 mg and 140 mg) and rimegepant, including changes in MMDs from baseline to month 1 and month 3, changes in Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire role function - restrictive domain score from baseline to month 3, and change in disability from baseline to Month 3. Results: Compared with rimegepant, erenumab 70 mg was associated with a statistically significant reduction in MMDs at month 3 (-0.90 [-1.76, -0.03]; p = 0.042) and erenumab 140 mg was associated with statistically significant reductions in MMDs at month 1 (-0.94 [-1.70, -0.19]; p = 0.014) and month 3 (-1.28 [-2.17, -0.40]; p = 0.005). The erenumab regimens also had numerical advantages over rimegepant for other efficacy outcomes. Conclusion: In the present study, we found that erenumab had a more favorable efficacy profile than rimegepant in reducing MMDs at month 1 and month 3 for migraine prevention. These results may help with decision-making in clinical practice and can be further validated in future clinical trials or real-world studies.
| S-EPMC10945420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:LESSONS LEARNED:Treatment with BEZ235 has not been shown to demonstrate increased efficacy compared with everolimus and may be associated with a poorer tolerability profile.The hypothesis of dual targeting of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors may warrant further study using other agents. BACKGROUND:This phase II study investigated whether targeting the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway via PI3K, mTOR complex 1 (mTORC1) and mTOR complex 2 (mTORC2) inhibition using BEZ235 may be more effective than mTORC1 inhibition with everolimus in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) who are naïve to mTOR inhibitor therapy. METHODS:Patients with advanced pNET were randomized (1:1) to oral BEZ235 400 mg twice daily or oral everolimus 10 mg once daily on a continuous dosing schedule. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included safety, overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure. RESULTS:Enrollment in this study was terminated early (62 enrolled of the 140 planned). The median PFS was 8.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.3 to not evaluable [NE]) with BEZ235 versus 10.8 months (95% CI: 8.1-NE) with everolimus (hazard ratio 1.53; 95% CI: 0.72-3.25). The most commonly reported all-grade adverse events (>50% of patients regardless of study treatment relationship) with BEZ235 were diarrhea (90.3%), stomatitis (74.2%), and nausea (54.8%). CONCLUSION:BEZ235 treatment in mTOR inhibitor-naïve patients with advanced pNET did not demonstrate increased efficacy compared with everolimus and may be associated with a poorer tolerability profile.
| S-EPMC6058330 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), 3 drugs under patent protection-apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide-were approved based on randomized, placebo-controlled trials; 1 drug with generic availability, abiraterone acetate, showed efficacy in a single-arm trial and is commonly prescribed. Lacking head-to-head trials, the optimal treatment for nmCRPC is unknown, despite widely varied treatment costs. We compared the efficacy and safety of nmCRPC treatments.MethodsWe searched bibliographic databases, regulatory documents, and trial registries for nmCRPC trials. We included published results and, when available, original data. We performed matching-adjusted indirect comparison and network meta-analysis and compared treatments regarding metastasis-free survival, overall survival, and serious adverse events.ResultsWe analyzed 5 trials with 4360 participants. Compared with placebo, abiraterone acetate engendered the lowest hazard of metastasis and death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.22, 95% credible interval [CrI] = 0.12-0.41), followed by apalutamide (HR = 0.28, 95% CrI = 0.23-0.34), enzalutamide (HR = 0.30, 95% CrI = 0.25-0.36), and darolutamide (HR = 0.41, 95% CrI = 0.34-0.49); darolutamide led to the lowest hazard of death (HR = 0.69, 95% CrI = 0.53-0.90), followed by enzalutamide (HR = 0.73, 95% CrI = 0.61-0.87) and apalutamide (HR = 0.75, 95% CrI = 0.59-0.95); darolutamide resulted in the lowest odds of serious adverse events (odds ratio [OR] = 1.32, 95% CrI = 1.02-1.70), followed by enzalutamide (OR =1.43, 95% CrI = 1.08-1.89), apalutamide (OR = 1.58, 95% CrI = 1.23-2.03), and abiraterone acetate (OR = 1.94, 95% CrI = 1.17-3.22).ConclusionsFor nmCRPC, darolutamide offered optimal efficacy and safety among approved drugs, and abiraterone acetate may offer comparable metastasis-free survival benefit with cost savings from generic availability. Future research is needed to more fully examine the benefit of abiraterone acetate.
| S-EPMC8826526 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Comparisons between everolimus and sunitinib regarding their efficacy and safety in neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are scarce. We retrospectively analysed the clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes in 92 patients with well-differentiated (WD) NEN of different origin (57 pancreatic NENs (PanNENs)), treated with molecular targeted therapy (MTT) with everolimus or sunitinib, first- (73:19) or second-line (sequential; 12:22) for progressive disease. Disease control rates (DCR: partial response or stable disease) at first-line were higher in all patients treated with everolimus than sunitinib (64/73 vs 12/19, P = 0.012). In PanNENs, DCR at first-line everolimus was 36/42 versus 9/15 with sunitinib (P = 0.062). Progression-free survival (PFS) at first-line everolimus was longer than sunitinib (31 months (95% CI: 23.1-38.9) vs 9 months (95% CI: 0-18.5); log-rank P < 0.0001) in the whole cohort and the subset of PanNENs (log-rank P < 0.0001). Median PFS at second-line MTT was 12 months with everolimus (95% CI: 4.1-19.9) vs 13 months with sunitinib (95% CI: 9.3-16.7; log-rank P = 0.951). Treatment with sunitinib (HR: 3.47; 95% CI: 1.5-8.3; P value: 0.005), KI67 >20% (HR: 6.38; 95% CI: 1.3-31.3; P = 0.022) and prior chemotherapy (HR: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.2-6.3; P = 0.021) were negative predictors for PFS at first line in multivariable and also confirmed at multi-state modelling analyses. Side effect (SE) analysis indicated events of serious toxicities (Grades 3 and 4: n = 13/85 for everolimus and n = 4/41 for sunitinib). Discontinuation rate due to SEs was 20/85 for everolimus versus 4/41 for sunitinib (P = 0.065). No additive toxicity of second-line MTT was confirmed. Based on these findings, and until reliable predictors of response become available, everolimus may be preferable to sunitinib when initiating MTT in progressive NENs.
| S-EPMC6528409 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) comprise a heterogeneous group of tumors with growing incidence. Recent molecular analyses provided a precise picture of their genomic and epigenomic landscape. Splicing dysregulation is increasingly regarded as a novel cancer hallmark influencing key tumor features. We have previously demonstrated that splicing machinery is markedly dysregulated in PanNETs. Here, we aimed to elucidate the molecular and functional implications of CUGBP ELAV-like family member 4 (CELF4), one of the most altered splicing factors in PanNETs. CELF4 expression was determined in 20 PanNETs, comparing tumor and non-tumoral adjacent tissue. An RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) dataset was analyzed to explore CELF4-linked interrelations among clinical features, gene expression, and splicing events. Two PanNET cell lines were employed to assess CELF4 function in vitro and in vivo. PanNETs display markedly upregulated CELF4 expression, which is closely associated with malignancy features, altered expression of key tumor players, and distinct splicing event profiles. Modulation of CELF4 influenced proliferation in vitro and reduced in vivo xenograft tumor growth. Interestingly, functional assays and RNA-seq analysis revealed that CELF4 silencing altered mTOR signaling pathway, enhancing the effect of everolimus. We demonstrate that CELF4 is dysregulated in PanNETs, where it influences tumor development and aggressiveness, likely by modulating the mTOR pathway, suggesting its potential as therapeutic target.
| S-EPMC10767201 | biostudies-literature