ArticleAdvances in therapy2026
Retifanlimab Versus Avelumab for the Treatment of Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison Analysis.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Phase II, Open-Label, Multicenter Trial to Investigate the Clinical Activity and Safety of Avelumab (MSB0010718C) in Subjects With Merkel Cell Carcinoma
A Phase 2 Study of INCMGA00012 in Participants With Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma (POD1UM-201)
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMerkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare and aggressive skin cancer with poor prognosis and low survival rate. Retifanlimab and avelumab are monoclonal immune checkpoint inhibitor antibodies approved for metastatic or recurrent locally advanced MCC. The objective of this study was to analyze clinical outcomes with retifanlimab versus avelumab using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC).
methodsIndividual patient data from the phase 2 POD1UM-201 trial (NCT03599713, data cutoff July 2024) were used for the retifanlimab treatment group, and aggregate data from part B of the phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial (NCT02155647) were used for the avelumab treatment group. Key prognostic factors/effect modifiers identified from published literature (age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, programmed cell death ligand 1 status, and disease characteristics) were selected for adjustment in the base case. Scenario analyses were also conducted, including additional covariates. An unanchored MAIC was conducted for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR).
resultsAfter weighing characteristics, the effective sample size of the adjusted retifanlimab population was approximately 42 patients (47% of original sample size). In the base case analysis, weighted hazard ratio (95% CI) numerically favored retifanlimab versus avelumab for OS (0.800 [0.492, 1.303]) and was statistically significant for PFS (0.590 [0.396, 0.881]), with the latter driven by separation during the first 2 months of treatment. Weighted odds ratio numerically favored retifanlimab for ORR (1.871 [0.896, 3.908)]. Scenario analyses generally confirmed base case analyses.
conclusionResults of this MAIC generally favored retifanlimab compared with avelumab, including a statistically significant difference in PFS and numerical trends in OS and ORR, building on the clinical evidence supporting retifanlimab for the treatment of metastatic MCC. These findings are subject to residual confounding and should be interpreted with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42842181What 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.