Cargando…

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy of Apalutamide and Enzalutamide with ADT in the Treatment of Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION: Apalutamide and enzalutamide are next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors that demonstrated efficacy in placebo-controlled studies (SPARTAN for apalutamide; PROSPER for enzalutamide) when used in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for treatment of non-metastatic ca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chowdhury, Simon, Oudard, Stéphane, Uemura, Hiroji, Joniau, Steven, Pilon, Dominic, Ladouceur, Martin, Behl, Ajay S., Liu, Jinan, Dearden, Lindsay, Sermon, Jan, Van Sanden, Suzy, Diels, Joris, Hadaschik, Boris A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6979453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31813086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01156-5
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Apalutamide and enzalutamide are next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors that demonstrated efficacy in placebo-controlled studies (SPARTAN for apalutamide; PROSPER for enzalutamide) when used in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for treatment of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In the absence of comparative studies between these agents, the present study sought to indirectly compare metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with nmCRPC who received these therapies. METHODS: Individual patient-level data from SPARTAN (apalutamide plus ADT) and published data from PROSPER (enzalutamide plus ADT) were utilized. An anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted by weighting the patients from the SPARTAN study to match baseline characteristics reported for PROSPER. Hazard ratios (HRs) for MFS and OS were re-estimated for SPARTAN using weighted Cox proportional hazards models and indirectly compared with those of PROSPER using a Bayesian network meta-analysis. RESULTS: From the SPARTAN population (N = 1207), a total of 1171 patients were matched to the PROSPER population (N = 1401). The recalculated HRs (95% confidence interval) for apalutamide versus ADT based on the reweighted SPARTAN data to mimic the PROSPER patient population were 0.26 (0.21; 0.33) for MFS and 0.62 (0.41; 0.94) for OS. MAIC-based HRs (95% credible interval) for apalutamide versus enzalutamide were 0.91 (0.68; 1.22) for MFS and 0.77 (0.46; 1.30) for OS. The Bayesian probabilities of apalutamide being more effective than enzalutamide were 73.6% for MFS and 83.5% for OS. CONCLUSIONS: MAIC results suggest that nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide have a higher probability of a more favorable MFS and OS compared with those treated with enzalutamide. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01156-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.