ArticleAdvances in therapy2025
Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Osilodrostat Versus Metyrapone for the Treatment of Cushing's Syndrome.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ectopic ACTH-dependent Cushing syndrome in 3 hospitalized patients: lessons learned from management with osilodrostat.JCEM case reports · 2026Article
- Individualized osilodrostat treatment for patients with ACTH-dependent Cushing's syndrome: real-world evidence.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCushing's syndrome (CS) is a rare, chronic condition caused by prolonged exposure to elevated levels of circulating cortisol, and characterized by high morbidity and mortality. The primary treatment option for CS is surgery; however, medical therapy may be useful when surgery is unsuitable, refused, or has not been curative, or a rapid control of hypercortisolism is required. While osilodrostat and metyrapone are two treatments for controlling cortisol levels, they have not been compared directly in a clinical trial. This study evaluated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of osilodrostat versus metyrapone for the treatment of CS using indirect treatment comparison methods.
methodsUnanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison was used to synthesize relative treatment effects by reweighting patient-level data from two clinical trials for osilodrostat to published aggregate data for metyrapone. Efficacy endpoints included complete response (CR), defined as mean urinary free cortisol ≤ 1.0 × the upper limit of normal, at Weeks 12, 24, and 36. Tolerability endpoints included all-cause treatment discontinuation and treatment discontinuation due to lack of efficacy (LoE) or adverse events (AEs).
resultsThe base case analysis demonstrated that osilodrostat provides increased odds of CR versus metyrapone at Week 12 [odds ratio (OR) 2.75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29, 5.88], Week 24 (OR 3.28; 95% CI 1.58, 6.84) and Week 36 (OR 10.50; 95% CI 1.84, 59.96), implying a greater proportion of patients experience normalized cortisol levels at these time-points. Although the base case analysis showed that the odds of all-cause discontinuation and discontinuation due to LoE or AEs were numerically lower for osilodrostat, the evidence was insufficient to show a statistically significant difference.
conclusionThese analyses show that osilodrostat increases the odds of achieving CR at Weeks 12, 24, and 36 versus metyrapone, demonstrating that osilodrostat is a more efficacious treatment option for normalizing cortisol levels in CS patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40439958What OpenQuestion holds
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.