A matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (MAIC) of daratumumab–bortezomib–melphalan–prednisone (D-VMP) versus lenalidomide–dexamethasone continuous (Rd continuous), lenalidomide–dexamethasone 18 months (Rd 18), and melphalan–prednisone–thalidomide (MPT)

Matching‐adjusted indirect comparison of efficacy and safety of bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) as per label compared with modified VTd dosing schedules in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are transplant eligible

“…This lower‐dose regimen was administered to NDMM patients before and after ASCT in the NCT00531453 study and the phase III CASSIOPEIA study [ 6 , 7 ], but no direct comparisons between the higher‐ and lower‐dose thalidomide regimens have been conducted in randomized, controlled clinical trials. In order to compare the efficacy and safety of these regimens in the absence of a direct, comparative trial, indirect analysis methods such as MAIC may be employed, which apply weighting factors to alleviate heterogeneity within analysis groups that may adversely skew interpretation of outcomes and hinder clinical decision‐making [ 4 , 5 ]. Here, MAIC estimated efficacy and safety for VTd‐mod versus VTd‐label by comparing outcomes.…”

“…Despite routine clinical use, a clinical trial assessing efficacy and safety of VTd‐label versus VTd‐mod has not been performed. In the absence of head‐to‐head trials, indirect treatment comparisons may be done to assess the relative effectiveness of both regimens [ 4 , 5 ]. Our objective was to use the matching‐adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), which adjusts for heterogeneity in the baseline prognostic variables, to determine relative effectiveness of VTd‐mod versus VTd‐label treatment regimens in transplant‐eligible patients with NDMM [ 6 , 7 , 8 ].…”

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons Applied for Comparative Efficacy of Haematologic Cancer Drugs within Health Economic Analysis

“…A Google search including all hits has returned 40 unique manuscripts and conference proceedings that were published between 2011 -February 2022 (excluding the three MAICs conducted and published for the purpose of this thesis), with half of them being published from 2020 onwards [71,73,. Of these, three were anchored MAICs [71,75,80], 16 were unanchored MAICs [78,79,84,85,90,91,[94][95][96][97]102,[107][108][109][110]112], and for 21 anchoring was not specified [73,76,77,[81][82][83][86][87][88][89]92,93,[98][99][100][101][103][104][105][106]111].…”

“…Most of the published MAICs were in relapsed/refractory [105][106][107][108][109][110][111][112] multiple myeloma [84][85][86][87][88][89][90][91], followed by chronic myeloid leukaemia [73,[80][81][82][83], relapsed/refractory diffuse large Bcell lymphoma [93][94][95][96][97][98], and relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma [99][100][101][102]. The fewest MAICs were published in relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukaemia [71], and relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma [92], with one publication for each.…”

“…Of these, 21 publications have reported a form of prior feasibility assessment and/or comparability of the underlying clinical trial data [71,73,77,78,80,81,[83][84][85][86]89,[94][95][96][97]99,101,104,105,107,108] and two studies have also reported the results of associated naïve comparisons [84,97].…”