Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Cabozantinib Versus Standard-of-Care Comparators in the Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Treatment-naïve Patients: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Cabozantinib Versus Standard-of-Care Comparators in the Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic Renal... Background Cabozantinib has recently been evaluated as a first-line treatment in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Objective To indirectly assess efficacy of cabozantinib versus standard-of-care (SoC) comparators in the first-line treatment of aRCC. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify randomized controlled studies in the first-line setting for aRCC. The outcomes analyzed were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted comparing OS and PFS hazard ratios (HRs). Results Thirteen studies were identified in the SLR to be eligible for inclusion in the NMA. The overall study populations were heterogeneous in terms of risk groups; some studies included favorable risk patients. In intermediate-risk patients, HRs (95% confidence interval) for PFS were 0.52 (0.33, 0.82), 0.46 (0.26, 0.80), 0.20 (0.12, 0.36), and 0.37 (0.20, 0.68) when cabozantinib was compared with sunitinib, sorafenib, interferon (IFN), or bevacizumab plus IFN, respectively. In poor-risk patients, the NMA also demonstrated significant superiority in terms of PFS for cabozantinib; HRs were 0.31 (0.11, 0.90), 0.22 (0.06, 0.87), 0.16 (0.04, 0.64), and 0.20 (0.05, 0.88), when cabozantinib was compared with sunitinib, temsirolimus, IFN, or bevacizumab plus IFN, respectively. When the overall study populations were compared, the results were http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Targeted Oncology Springer Journals

Cabozantinib Versus Standard-of-Care Comparators in the Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Treatment-naïve Patients: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Download PDF
12 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/cabozantinib-versus-standard-of-care-comparators-in-the-treatment-of-OXM66SjUY0

References (58)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by The Author(s)
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Oncology; Biomedicine, general
ISSN
1776-2596
eISSN
1776-260X
DOI
10.1007/s11523-018-0559-0
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Background Cabozantinib has recently been evaluated as a first-line treatment in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Objective To indirectly assess efficacy of cabozantinib versus standard-of-care (SoC) comparators in the first-line treatment of aRCC. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify randomized controlled studies in the first-line setting for aRCC. The outcomes analyzed were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted comparing OS and PFS hazard ratios (HRs). Results Thirteen studies were identified in the SLR to be eligible for inclusion in the NMA. The overall study populations were heterogeneous in terms of risk groups; some studies included favorable risk patients. In intermediate-risk patients, HRs (95% confidence interval) for PFS were 0.52 (0.33, 0.82), 0.46 (0.26, 0.80), 0.20 (0.12, 0.36), and 0.37 (0.20, 0.68) when cabozantinib was compared with sunitinib, sorafenib, interferon (IFN), or bevacizumab plus IFN, respectively. In poor-risk patients, the NMA also demonstrated significant superiority in terms of PFS for cabozantinib; HRs were 0.31 (0.11, 0.90), 0.22 (0.06, 0.87), 0.16 (0.04, 0.64), and 0.20 (0.05, 0.88), when cabozantinib was compared with sunitinib, temsirolimus, IFN, or bevacizumab plus IFN, respectively. When the overall study populations were compared, the results were

Journal

Targeted Oncology – Springer Journals

Published: Feb 28, 2018

There are no references for this article.