Comparative effectiveness from a single-arm trial and real-world data: alectinib versus ceritinib. (26th June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Davies, Jessica; Martinec, Michael; Delmar, Paul; Coudert, Mathieu; Bordogna, Walter; Golding, Sophie; Martina, Reynaldo; Crane, Gracy
• Is Part Of: Journal of comparative effectiveness research. Volume 7:Number 9(2018)
• Page Start: 855
• Page End: 865
• Publication Date: 2018-06-26
• Subjects: comparative effectiveness -- non-small-cell lung cancer -- real-world evidence; Medical care -- Research -- Periodicals; Medical care -- Research -- Evaluation -- Periodicals; Medical care -- Decision making -- Periodicals; Evidence-based medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine, Comparative -- Periodicals; 362.1072
• DOI: 10.2217/cer-2018-0032
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2042-6305

Abstract

Aim: To compare the overall survival of anaplastic lymphoma kinase -positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients who received alectinib with those who received ceritinib.Materials & methods: Two treatment arms (alectinib [n = 183] and ceritinib [n = 67]) were extracted from clinical trials and an electronic health record database, respectively. Propensity scores were applied to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan–Meier and multivariate Cox regression were conducted.Results: After propensity score adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced. Alectinib had a prolonged median overall survival (alectinib = 24.3 months and ceritinib = 15.6 months) and lower risk of death (hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.48–0.88).Conclusion: Alectinib was associated with prolonged overall survival versus ceritinib, which is consistent with efficacy evidence from clinical trials.