Background: Guselkumab is an interleukin-23 inhibitor indicated for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Objective: The objective was to determine the relative efficacy and safety of guselkumab compared to other biologics. Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted using meta-regression analyses that adjusted for cross-trial differences and risk differences. The primary outcome was Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response. Other efficacy and safety outcomes were considered. Several meta-regressions were performed to account for variations in patient and study characteristics: baseline risk adjustment (ie, control group response), prior biologic use, duration of psoriasis, weight, age, race, and baseline PASI/dermatology life quality index scores. The best-fitting model using predefined criteria was selected. Results: Forty-five RCTs were identified. Patient and study characteristics differed between RCTs as reflected in variations in control group response. Both the baseline risk-adjusted NMA and the risk-difference NMA fit the data best and suggested guselkumab has one of the highest PASI 90 responses. Pairwise comparisons from the baseline risk-adjusted PASI 90 NMA suggested guselkumab has comparable efficacy with ixekizumab (relative risk [RR]: 0.999, 95% credible intervals [CrIs]: 0.89-1.13) and brodalumab (RR: 1.04, 95% CrIs: 0.91-1.17) and superior efficacy versus all other treatments in the network (RR range, 1.20 to 43.22). Guselkumab was superior or comparable to other therapies for other efficacy outcomes and had a more favorable safety profile than most. Conclusions: Guselkumab has one of the highest PASI 90 responses among psoriasis treatments; similar findings were observed for other efficacy outcomes. Guselkumab has a favorable benefit-risk balance compared to moderate-to-severe psoriasis therapies.

PurposeTo compare palbociclib + letrozole and palbociclib + fulvestrant with chemotherapy agents in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (ABC/MBC) who had no prior systemic treatment for advanced disease (first line) or whose disease progressed after prior endocrine therapy or chemotherapy (second line).MethodsA systematic search identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 2000 to January 2016 that compared endocrine-based therapies, chemotherapy agents, and/or chemotherapy agents + biological therapies in the first- and second-line treatment of postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2− ABC/MBC. The main outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS)/time to progression (TTP). Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) and pairwise meta-analyses were conducted. Heterogeneity and inconsistency were assessed.ResultsSixty RCTs met eligibility criteria and were stratified by line of therapy. In the first line, palbociclib + letrozole showed statistically significant improvements in PFS/TTP versus capecitabine [intermittent: HR 0.28 (95% CrI 0.11–0.72)] and mitoxantrone [HR 0.28 (0.13–0.61)], and trended toward improvements versus paclitaxel [HR 0.59 (0.19–1.96)], docetaxel [HR 0.51 (0.14–2.03)] and other monotherapy or combination agents (HRs ranging from 0.24 to 0.99). In the second line, palbociclib + fulvestrant showed statistically significant improvements in PFS/TTP versus capecitabine [intermittent: HR 0.28 (0.13–0.65)], mitoxantrone [HR 0.26 (0.12–0.53)], and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [HR 0.19 (0.07–0.50)], and trended toward improvements versus paclitaxel [HR 0.48 (0.16–1.44)], docetaxel [HR 0.71 (0.24–2.13)] and other monotherapy or combination agents (HRs ranging from 0.23–0.89). NMA findings aligned with direct evidence and were robust to sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsPalbociclib + letrozole and palbociclib + fulvestrant demonstrate trends in incremental efficacy compared with chemotherapy agents for the first- and second-line treatment of HR +/HER2− ABC/MBC.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10549-017-4404-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Aim: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity when conducting network meta-analyses (NMAs) was demonstrated using a case study of biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods: Bayesian NMAs were conducted for Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 response. Several covariates were considered to account for cross-trial differences: baseline risk (i.e., placebo response), prior biologic use, body weight, psoriasis duration, age, race and baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score. Model fit was evaluated. Results: The baseline risk-adjusted NMA, which adjusts for multiple observed and unobserved effect modifiers, was associated with the best model fit. Lack of adjustment for cross-trial differences led to different clinical interpretations of findings. Conclusion: Failure to adjust for cross-trial differences in NMA can have important implications for clinical interpretations when studying the comparative efficacy of healthcare interventions.

BackgroundOriginator trastuzumab (Herceptin®; H) is an antibody-targeted therapy to treat patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) early breast cancer (EBC). We investigated the overall survival (OS) advantage conferred by the addition of H to chemotherapy for HER2+ EBC patients and how the OS advantage changed over time.MethodsA systematic literature review (SLR) identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) published from January 1, 1990 to January 19, 2017, comparing systemic therapies used in the neoadjuvant/adjuvant settings to treat HER2+ EBC patients. Bayesian cumulative network meta-analyses (cNMAs) of OS were conducted to assess the published literature over time. Heterogeneity was assessed through sensitivity and subgroup analyses.ResultsThe SLR identified 31 unique studies (28 RCTs, 3 NRSs) included in the OS analyses from 2008 to 2016. In the reference case cNMA (RCTs alone), initial evidence demonstrated an OS advantage for H/chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in HER2+ EBC patients. As additional OS data were published, the precision around this survival benefit strengthened over time. Both H/anthracycline-containing chemotherapy and H/non-anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens provided similar OS advantages for HER2+ EBC patients.ConclusionThis analysis represents the most comprehensive SLR/cNMA to date of published OS data in HER2+ EBC studies. These findings demonstrate why H/chemotherapy is now the established standard of care in HER2+ EBC. In the case of H, the benefits of early patient access far outweighed the risk of waiting for more precise information.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017055763Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-018-0854-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective: Several biologic therapies are available for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Crohn's disease (CD). This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of ustekinumab, adalimumab, vedolizumab and infliximab in the maintenance of clinical response and remission after 1 year of treatment. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Key outcomes of interest were clinical response (CD activity index [CDAI] reduction of 100 points; CDAI-100) and remission (CDAI score under 150 points; CDAI < 150). A treatment sequence Bayesian NMA was conducted to account for the re-randomization of patients based on different clinical definitions, the lack of similarity of the common comparator for each trial and the full treatment pathway from the induction phase onwards. Results: Thirteen RCTs were identified. Ustekinumab 90 mg q8w was associated with statistically significant improvement in clinical response relative to placebo and vedolizumab 300 mg. For clinical remission, ustekinumab 90 mg q8w was associated with statistically significant improvement relative to placebo and vedolizumab 300 mg q8w. Findings from sub-population analyses had similar results but were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The NMA suggest that ustekinumab is associated with the highest likelihood of reaching response or remission at 1 year compared with placebo, adalimumab and vedolizumab. Results should be interpreted with caution because this is a novel methodology; however, the treatment sequence analysis may be the most methodologically sound analysis to derive estimates of comparative efficacy in CD in the absence of head-to-head evidence.