Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33402121›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2021

Comparative efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab versus other treatments in adults with resected melanoma: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.

Kabirraaj Toor, Mark R Middleton, Keith Chan, Adenike Amadi, Andriy Moshyk, Srividya Kotapati

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudySystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Kabirraaj ToorPrecision HEOR, 1505 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3Y4, Canada. kabirraaj.toor@precisionvh.com.
Mark R MiddletonUniversity of Oxford, Old Road Campus Research Building, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7DQ, UK.
Keith ChanPrecision HEOR, 1505 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3Y4, Canada.
Adenike AmadiBristol Myers Squibb, Unit 2 Uxbridge Business Park, Uxbridge, UB8 1DH, UK.
Andriy MoshykBristol Myers Squibb, Route 206 and Province Line Road, Princeton, NJ, 08543, USA.
Srividya KotapatiBristol Myers Squibb, Route 206 and Province Line Road, Princeton, NJ, 08543, USA.
Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States) · USMD Precision (Canada) · CABristol-Myers Squibb (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies are approved for adjuvant treatment of patients with resected melanoma; however, they have not been compared in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab with other approved treatments using available evidence from RCTs in a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted through May 2019 to identify relevant RCTs evaluating approved adjuvant treatments. Outcomes of interest included recurrence-free survival (RFS)/disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), all-cause grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), discontinuations, and discontinuations due to AEs. Time-to-event outcomes (RFS/DFS and DMFS) were analyzed both assuming that hazard ratios (HRs) are constant over time and that they vary.

resultsOf 26 identified RCTs, 19 were included in the NMA following a feasibility assessment. Based on HRs for RFS/DFS, the risk of recurrence with nivolumab was similar to that of pembrolizumab and lower than that of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, ipilimumab 10 mg/kg, or interferon. Risk of recurrence with nivolumab was similar to that of dabrafenib plus trametinib at 12 months, however, was lower beyond 12 months (HR [95% credible interval] at 24 months, 0.46 [0.27-0.78]; at 36 months, 0.28 [0.14-0.59]). Based on HRs for DMFS, the risk of developing distant metastases was lower with nivolumab than with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or interferon and was similar to dabrafenib plus trametinib.

conclusionAdjuvant therapy with nivolumab provides an effective treatment option with a promising risk-benefit profile.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBayes TheoremDisease-Free SurvivalHumansImidazolesIpilimumabMelanomaNivolumabOximesPatient SafetyPyridonesPyrimidinonesAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizeddabrafenibImidazolesIpilimumabNivolumabOximespembrolizumabPyridonesPyrimidinonestrametinibAdjuvant treatmentEfficacyNetwork meta-analysisNivolumabSafetySystematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID33402121
PMCPMC7784366
OpenAlexW3119100447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.