Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Sonidegib and Vismodegib in Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma.
Odom, Dawn; Mladsi, Deirdre; Purser, Molly; Kaye, James A; Palaka, Eirini; Charter, Alina; Jensen, Jo Annah; Sellami, Dalila.
Afiliação
  • Odom D; RTI Health Solutions, 200 Park Offices Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Mladsi D; RTI Health Solutions, 200 Park Offices Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Purser M; RTI Health Solutions, 200 Park Offices Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Kaye JA; RTI Health Solutions, 200 Park Offices Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Palaka E; Novartis Pharma AG, Forum 1, Novartis Campus, 4056 Basel, Switzerland.
  • Charter A; Novartis Pharma AG, Forum 1, Novartis Campus, 4056 Basel, Switzerland.
  • Jensen JA; Novartis Pharma AG, Forum 1, Novartis Campus, 4056 Basel, Switzerland.
  • Sellami D; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, One Health Plaza, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
J Skin Cancer ; 2017: 6121760, 2017.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28607774
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Based on single-arm trial data (BOLT), sonidegib was approved in the US and EU to treat locally advanced basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) ineligible for curative surgery or radiotherapy. Vismodegib, the other approved targeted therapy, also was assessed in a single-arm trial (ERIVANCE). We examined the comparative effectiveness of the two drugs using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) versus an unadjusted indirect comparison.

METHODS:

After comparing trials and identifying potential prognostic factors, an MAIC was conducted to adjust for differences in key patient baseline characteristics. Due to BOLT's small sample size, the number of matching variables was restricted to two. Efficacy results for sonidegib were generated so that selected baseline characteristics matched those from ERIVANCE and were compared with published ERIVANCE results.

RESULTS:

Matching variables were baseline percentages of patients receiving prior radiotherapy and surgery. After weighting, sonidegib objective response rate (ORR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were effectively unchanged (prematched versus postmatched ORR and PFS, 56.1% versus 56.7% and 22.1 versus 22.1 months, resp.). Vismodegib's ORR and PFS were 47.6% and 9.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS:

Comparative effectiveness of sonidegib versus vismodegib remains unchanged after adjusting BOLT patient-level data to match published ERIVANCE baseline percentages of patients receiving prior surgery and radiotherapy.

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Geral Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Skin Cancer Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Geral Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Skin Cancer Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos