Lenalidomide or Thalidomide for Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma? An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

OBJECTIVES: To present an overview of evidence of efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life of lenalidomide or thalidomide for transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma. METHODS: A literature search was performed in 5 databases until July 2022. We included systematic reviews with network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials on the use of lenalidomide compared with thalidomide for transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma. The A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 was used to appraise the quality of included reviews. The results were focused on the lenalidomide + dexamethasone until disease progression (RDc) versus thalidomide + dexamethasone until disease progression (TDc) and induction with melphalan + prednisone + lenalidomide, followed by maintenance with lenalidomide (MPR-R) versus induction with melphalan + prednisone + thalidomide, followed by maintenance with thalidomide (MPT-T) regimens. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. Only 1 study did not show any weakness in critical domains of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. For overall survival, RDc proved to be superior to TDc; however, no study showed significant difference between MPR-R and MPT-T. For progression-free survival, 2 of 3 studies showed that RDc is better than TDc; however, no difference between MPR-R and MPT-T was found. Regarding safety, these lenalidomide-based regimens had a lower risk for neurologic adverse events, with an increased risk of hematologic adverse events. No health-related quality of life meta-analyses were found. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that, in terms of efficacy and safety, lenalidomide-based regimen is a good option for treatment of transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma in the public health system of Brazil, especially for those patients who develop severe neuropathy with thalidomide.

Eficácia e segurança de romosozumabe para o tratamento de osteoporose grave em mulheres na pós-menopausa: revisão sistemática e meta-análise em rede / Efficacy and safety of romosozumab for the treatment of severe osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: systematic and network meta-analysis

Introdução: A osteoporose é uma das principais causas de morbimortalidade, principalmente em idosos e mulheres na pós-menopausa, devido ao aumento da fragilidade óssea e maior suscetibilidade a fraturas. Objetivo: Avaliar a eficácia e segurança do romosozumabe, comparado aos tratamentos farmacológicos atualmente disponíveis no Sistema Único de Saúde para o manejo de mulheres na pós-menopausa com osteoporose grave e alto risco de fraturas. Métodos: Foi realizada uma busca seguida por meta-análises indiretas, por ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECR) nas bases PubMed Central e Medline, Embase e Cochrane Library e por busca manual. O risco de viés (RoB 2.0) e a qualidade da evidência (GRADE) foram analisados. Meta-análises indiretas foram realizadas para desfechos de fraturas, densidade mineral óssea e eventos adversos. Resultados: Sete ECR (n= 19.951 mulheres) foram incluídos nesta revisão. Romosozumabe seguido de alendronato reduziu risco de fraturas não vertebrais em 12 meses (RR: 0,64, IC 95%: 0,49-0,84; alta certeza de evidência) e em 24 meses (RR: 0,52, IC 95%: 0,43-0,64; (alta certeza de evidência) na comparação ao alendronato. Achados semelhantes foram identificados para outros desfechos. Ácido zoledrônico foi associada a maior risco de descontinuação por evento adverso que placebo (RR: 1,02, IC 95%: 1,01-1,03). Conclusão: Foi identificado que romosozumabe ou romosozumabe seguido por alendronato são eficazes e seguros na comparação com alendronato.

Background: Osteoporosis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in the elderly and postmenopausal women, due to increased bone fragility and greater susceptibility to fractures. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, compared to pharmacological treatments currently available in the Unified Health System of Brazil for the management of postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis and high risk of fractures. Methods: A search was carried out followed by indirect meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed Central and Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and manual search. Risk of bias (RoB 2.0) and quality of evidence (GRADE) were assessed. Indirect frequentist meta-analyses were carried out for outcomes related to fractures, bone mineral density, and adverse events. Results: Seven RCTs (n= 19,951 woman) were included in this review. Romosozumab followed by alendronate reduced the risk of non-vertebral fractures at 12 months (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.49-0.84; high certainty of evidence) and at 24 months (RR: 0.52, CI 95 %: 0.43-0.64; (high certainty of evidence) in comparison to alendronate. Similar findings were identified for other outcomes. Zoledronic acid was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation due to adverse events than placebo (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03). Conclusion: This review identified that romosozumab or romosozumab followed by alendronate are effective and safe compared to alendronate.