Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36124638›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2022

An Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Dostarlimab and Doxorubicin for the Treatment of Advanced and Recurrent Endometrial Cancer.

Cara Mathews, Domenica Lorusso, Robert L Coleman, Susan Boklage, Jamie Garside

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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.

NCT01767155 phase3completednot on this map

Randomized Controlled Study Comparing AEZS-108 With Doxorubicin as Second Line Therapy for Locally Advanced, Recurrent or Metastatic Endometrial Cancer.

TypeinterventionalSponsorAEterna ZentarisRan2013 to 2017Enrolled511ConditionsEndometrial CancerArmsAEZS-108 / zoptarelin doxorubicin, doxorubicin
NCT02715284 phase1active not recruitingnot on this map

A Phase 1 Dose Escalation and Cohort Expansion Study of TSR-042, an Anti-PD-1 Monoclonal Antibody, in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors

TypeinterventionalSponsorTesaro, Inc.Ran2016 to 2028Enrolled729ConditionsNeoplasmsArmsDostarlimab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Cara MathewsBrown University, Providence, Providence, RI, USA.
Domenica LorussoFondazione Policlinico Gemelli of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Robert L ColemanTexas Oncology, US Oncology Research, TX, USA.
Susan BoklageGSK, Collegeville, PA, USA.
Jamie GarsideGSK, London, UK.
Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITBrown University · USGlaxoSmithKline (United States) · USTexas Oncology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is no clear standard of care for advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) following platinum-based therapy. Dostarlimab is approved for patients with mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) advanced/recurrent EC. This indirect treatment comparison (ITC) assessed dostarlimab efficacy and safety from the single-arm GARNET (NCT02715284) trial compared with doxorubicin from ZoptEC (NCT01767155). PATIENTS AND

methodsPatient-level data and study variables from GARNET Cohort A1 (dMMR/MSI-H EC) and the ZoptEC doxorubicin control arm were merged. Patients were matched based on eligibility criteria (main analysis population). Safety population included all patients who received treatment. The primary efficacy comparison outcome, overall survival (OS), was calculated using a Cox proportional hazards model, with adjusted stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting. Modified assessment-scheduled matching Kaplan--Meier analysis was used for progression-free survival (PFS) and time to deterioration (TTD) in quality of life (QoL).

resultsIn the main analysis population, median (95% CI) OS was not reached (NR; 18.0 months--NR) for dostarlimab (n = 92) and was 11.2 (10.0-13.1) months for doxorubicin (n = 233; HR: 0.41 [95% CI: 0.28-0.61]); median PFS was 12.2 (3.3-NR) and 4.9 (4.1-6.6) months, respectively. Median TTD in QoL was NR (2.5-NR; n = 61) and 4.5 (4.1-5.4; n = 188) months, respectively. Similar rates of adverse events (AEs, 11.6% vs 15.3%) and serious AEs (34.1% vs 30.1%) were observed with dostarlimab (n = 129) and doxorubicin (n = 249). Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 48.1% vs 78.3%, respectively.

conclusionThis ITC suggests a favorable benefit:risk profile for dostarlimab in patients with dMMR/MSI-H advanced/recurrent EC.

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsQuality of LifeDoxorubicinFemaleHumansDoxorubicinDNA mismatch repairdoxorubicinendometrial neoplasmsimmune checkpoint inhibitorsmicrosatellite instabilityuterine neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID36124638
PMCPMC9732237
OpenAlexW4296778357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.