6533b859fe1ef96bd12b817b
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Network meta-analysis of randomized trials in multiple myeloma: Efficacy and safety in frontline therapy for patients not eligible for transplant
Ciro BottaEmilia GigliottaBruno PaivaRita AnselmoMarco SantoroPaula Rodriguez OteroMelania CarlisiConcetta ConticelloAlessandra RomanoAntonio Giovanni SolimandoClaudio CerchioneMatteo Da ViàNiccolò BolliPierpaolo CorrealeFrancesco Di RaimondoMassimo GentileJesus F. San MiguelSergio Siragusasubject
multiple myelomaCancer ResearchOncologyprincipal component analysisnon-transplant eligibleI line treatment multiple myeloma network meta-analysis non-transplant eligible principal component analysisHematologyGeneral MedicineSettore MED/15 - Malattie del SangueI line treatmentnetwork meta-analysisI line treatment; multiple myeloma; network meta-analysis; non-transplant eligible; principal component analysis;description
The treatment scenario for newly-diagnosed transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma patients (NEMM) is quickly evolving. Currently, combinations of proteasome inhibitors (PI) and/or immunomodulatory drugs (IMiD) +/- the monoclonal antibody Daratumumab are used for first-line treatment, even if head-to-head comparisons are lacking. To compare efficacy and safety of these regimens, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of 27 phase 2/3 randomized trials including a total of 12935 patients and 23 different schedules. Four efficacy/outcome and one safety indicators were extracted and integrated to obtain (for each treatment) the surface under the cumulative ranking-curve (SUCRA), a metric used to build a ranking chart. With a mean SUCRA of 83.8 and 80.08 respectively, VMP+Daratumumab (DrVMP) and Rd+Daratumumab (DrRd) reached the top of the chart. However, SUCRA is designed to work for single outcomes. To overcome this limitation, we undertook a dimensionality reduction approach through a principal component analysis, that unbiasedly grouped the 23 regimens into 3 different subgroups. On the bases of our results, we demonstrated that first line treatment for NEMM should be based on DrRd (most active, but continuous treatment), DrVMP (quite "fixed-time" treatment), or, alternatively, VRD and that, surprisingly, melphalan as well as Rd doublets still deserve a role in this setting. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2022-01-01 |