Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31555967›Full record

SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2020

Network indirect comparison of 3 BRAF + MEK inhibitors for the treatment of advanced BRAF mutated melanoma.

F Consoli, M Bersanelli, G Perego, S Grisanti, B Merelli, A Berruti, F Petrelli

Abstract readComparative StudyNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Clinical Implications of Acquired BRAF Inhibitors Resistance in Melanoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

F ConsoliDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences, and Public Health, Medical Oncology, University of Brescia at ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
M BersanelliOncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.
G PeregoUniversità Degli Studi Di Milano, Facoltà Di Farmacia, Pharmacy Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Treviglio, BG, Italy.
S GrisantiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences, and Public Health, Medical Oncology, University of Brescia at ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
B MerelliOncology Unit, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.
A BerrutiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences, and Public Health, Medical Oncology, University of Brescia at ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.
F PetrelliOncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy. faupe@libero.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9639-4486
University of Brescia · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Treviglio · ITOspedale Papa Giovanni XXIII · ITUniversity of Milan · ITUniversity of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroudSynergistic combinations between BRAF and MEK inhibitors, such as dabrafenib plus trametinib, vemurafenib plus cobimetinib or encorafenib plus binimetinib, represent the current standard of care in metastatic or locally advanced BRAF V600 mutated malignant melanomas (MM). However, no studies explored the direct head-to-head comparison between the three different combinations. In this paper, we performed a network meta-analysis to evaluate their efficacy in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety profile.

methodWe performed a systematic review of the literature about published first line trials of BRAF and MEK inhibitors doublets in advanced mutated malignant melanoma. We compared then the results with an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Our primary survival outcome was OS. Secondary endpoints were PFS, ORR, G3-4 toxicities described in at least 5% of patients in experimental arms.

resultsWe identified three phase-3 trials: coBRIM (vemurafenib and cobimetinib), COMBI-v (dabrafenib and trametinib) and Columbus study (encorafenib and binimetinib) for a total of 1230 included patients. The control arm was vemurafenib in all studies. The indirect comparison revealed no statistically differences for OS, PFS and ORR across trials, while safety profile differed between the three couples of agents.

conclusionThis indirect adjusted meta-analysis suggests a similar efficacy and a slightly different safety profile, related to specific molecular properties of the three different BRAF and MEK inhibitors currently approved in the management of advanced MM.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsMelanomaMitogen-Activated Protein Kinase KinasesProtein Kinase InhibitorsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafAntineoplastic AgentsHumansMutationTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic AgentsBRAF protein, humanMitogen-Activated Protein Kinase KinasesProtein Kinase InhibitorsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafBRAF inhibitorsMalignant melanomaMEK inhibitorsNetwork meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID31555967
OpenAlexW2975964438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.