Meta-analysis Of Real-world Evidence Research Articles

Clinical outcomes of liposomal irinotecan in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with conventional irinotecan: A meta-analysis of real-world evidence.

Pivotal clinical trials supported survival benefits of liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus fluorouracil/leucovorin in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who previously received gemcitabine-based therapy. There are concerns about the benefits of nal-IRI in patients who received FOLFIRINOX (combined fluorouracil, leucovorin, IRI, and oxaliplatin) because of potential cross-resistance to IRI. The objective of this meta-analysis was to characterize the impact of the previous receipt of IRI on the outcomes of nal-IRI regimens in patients with advanced PDAC. Real-world studies evaluating the outcomes of nal-IRI in patients who had prior IRI exposure published up to April 2023 were searched using electronic databases. The meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model to estimate pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Eight studies (n=1368 patients) were included. The pooled median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.02 months (95% CI, 1.43-2.57 months), and the median overall survival (OS) was 4.26 months (95% CI, 3.03-5.39 months). Patients with prior IRI exposure had PFS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.94-1.47; p=.17) and OS (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.95-1.42; p=.16) comparable to patients without prior IRI exposure. Likewise, patients who had progressive disease on conventional IRI had PFS (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.73-3.08; p=.24) and OS (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.68-4.27; p=.26) with nal-IRI comparable to patients who had no progressive disease. Prior IRI exposure does not affect the survival outcomes of nal-IRI regimens in patients who have advanced PDAC. The selection of later lines of chemotherapy regimens should be based on the differential safety profile, patient status, the cost of treatment, and health-related quality of life.

Efficacy and safety of crizotinib in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with ROS1 gene fusion: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of real-world evidence

BackgroundCrizotinib was approved to treat patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) with ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) gene fusion in 2016. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify real-world evidence (RWE) studies and estimated the efficacy and safety of crizotinib using meta–analyses (MA) for objective response rate (ORR), real-world progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). MethodsWe searched MEDLINE®, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL from January 2016 to March 2023 using Ovid® for published single-arm or comparative RWE studies evaluating patients (N ≥ 20) receiving crizotinib monotherapy for aNSCLC with ROS1 gene fusion. Pooled estimates for ORR and grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were derived using the metafor package in R while pooled estimates for median real-world PFS (rwPFS) and OS were derived using reconstructed individual patient data from published Kaplan-Meier curves. The primary analysis included all studies regardless of crizotinib line of therapy; a subgroup analysis (SA) was conducted using studies evaluating patients receiving first-line crizotinib. ResultsFourteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were considered feasible for MA. For the primary analysis, the pooled ORR (N = 9 studies) was 70.6 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 57.0, 81.3), median rwPFS was 14.5 months (N = 11 studies), and OS was 40.2 months (N = 9 studies). In the SA, the pooled ORR (N = 4 studies) was 81.1 % (95 % CI: 76.1, 85.2) and the median rwPFS (N = 4 studies) and OS (N = 2 studies) were 18.1 and 60 months, respectively. All MAs were associated with significant heterogeneity (I2 > 25 %). Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 18.7 % of patients (pooled estimate). ConclusionThe results from this study are consistent with clinical trial data and, taken collectively, supports crizotinib as a safe and effective treatment across different lines of therapy in patients with ROS1 aNSCLC in the real-world setting.

Incidence, mortality, and risk factors of acute kidney injury after immune checkpoint inhibitors: Systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world evidence

BackgroundTo precisely quantify the incidence, mortality, and risk factors for acute kidney injury (AKI) following immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment for cancer in real-world scenarios. MethodsComprehensive searches were performed on PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. Real-world observational studies reporting incidence, mortality and/or factors for AKI in ICI-treated patients were eligible. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for potential predictors and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI for mortality risk associated with AKI were calculated using the random-effect model. ResultsEighteen articles comprising 12,111 patients receiving ICI were finally eligible. The pooled incidence was 16.0% (95% CI 11.2%-20.8%; n = 15) for AKI following ICI therapies overall and 3.5% (95% CI 2.1%-4.9%; n = 8) for ICI-induced AKI. Patients who developed AKI during ICI therapies had 51% increased risk of death compared with those without (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.07–2.14). Regarding risk factors, statistically increased risk for AKI during ICI therapies was observed with preexisting chronic kidney diseases (OR 1.86, 1.25–2.78), diabetes (OR 1.26, 1.04–1.53), and concomitant extrarenal immune-related adverse events (OR 2.53, 1.79–3.56). Ipilimumab (OR 2.18, 1.43–3.32), combined ICI therapies (OR 1.80, 1.14–2.83) and concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (OR 1.97, 1.56–2.49), renin‐angiotensin system inhibitors (OR 1.50, 1.05–2.14), diuretics (OR 1.69, 1.27–2.26) also significantly predicted the incident AKI. ConclusionsAKI episode is frequently observed during ICI exposure for cancer treatment, but ICI induced nephrotoxicity is only occasionally. Higher risk of AKI during ICI therapies was significantly associated with specific comorbidities, concomitant of certain drugs, ipilimumab and ICI combination therapies.

Can Axillary Lymph Node Dissection be Omitted in Breast Cancer Patients with Metastatic Sentinel Lymph Nodes Undergoing Mastectomy? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Evidence.

The omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with breast cancer who have metastatic sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) undergoing mastectomy remains controversial. This meta-analysis explored the clinicopathological factors affecting the selection of ALND and the influences of ALND on survival outcomes in patients receiving mastectomy with positive SLNs. Eligible studies published prior to 31 December 2022 were selected by searching the Embase, Web of Science and PubMed databases. Pooled analyses were performed using the number of events for clinicopathological parameters and HRs with 95% CIs for survival outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS). A total of 10 retrospective studies enrolling only breast cancer patients with limited SLN metastases (no more than 3 positive SLNs or micrometastatic SLNs) undergoing mastectomy were included. Performing ALND in mastectomy patients who had limited SLN metastases was significantly correlated with invasive ductal carcinomas, larger tumors, lymphovascular invasion, higher tumor grade, macrometastatic SLNs, more positive SLNs, extranodal extension, positive surgical margins, negative ER, administration of adjuvant chemotherapy and nonwhite race (P < 0.05). However, performing ALND did not result in significantly longer OS, DFS, LRFS or DRFS (P > 0.05) in these patients. The present meta-analysis indicated that ALND may be safely avoided in patients with breast cancer who had limited SLN metastases undergoing mastectomy. Further well-designed randomized clinical trials are warranted to validate our results.

Fascia defect closure versus non-closure in minimal invasive direct inguinal hernia mesh repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world evidence.

Laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia mesh repair are both common surgical procedures worldwide. Postoperative hernia recurrence and seroma formation are important concerns. In ventral hernia, primary defect closure in laparoscopic surgery reduces the recurrence rate. However, there is no synthetic evidence of direct inguinal hernia defect closure versus non-closure in minimal invasive surgery. Therefore, this study investigated the efficacy of defect closure in patients undergoing minimal invasive direct inguinal hernia mesh repair. Eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from their inception until March 2022. Studies examining defect closure in laparoscopic direct inguinal hernia repair were included, and a meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model. Sensitivity analyses were performed by removing one study at a time. The primary outcomes were hernia recurrence and seroma formation. Acute and chronic postoperative pain, operation time, and length of hospital stay were the secondary outcomes. Five nonrandomized studies and one randomized controlled trial were included. Pooled analysis revealed defect closure might reduce the hernia recurrence rate (risk difference, -0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.04 to -0.00; p = 0.02). The result of seroma formation (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% CI 0.17-1.46; p = 0.20) showed no significant difference. Moreover, no significant differences were observed in acute postoperative pain, chronic pain, length of hospital stay, and operation time. Our study indicated defect closure seems to be an option to reduce the direct inguinal hernia recurrence rate. No significant benefits were shown in seroma formation and other secondary outcomes. Our study was mostly based on nonrandomized studies and underestimated the effect of defect closure; thus, further high-quality studies are required to draw definitive conclusions.

SA47 Clinical Effectiveness of Osimertinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients With EGFR Mutation Between Plasma and Tissue Re-Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Evidence

SA47 Clinical Effectiveness of Osimertinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients With EGFR Mutation Between Plasma and Tissue Re-Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Real-World Evidence

Non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation: a systematic literature review and pooled analysis of patient outcomes

Introduction EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is rare, has a poor prognosis, and outcomes are not fully established. We describe and evaluate outcomes from real-world and clinical evidence in these patients. Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) identified interventional and real-world evidence (RWE) studies reporting clinical outcomes for EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC. Meta-analyses were conducted by line of therapy to synthesize pooled survival and response outcomes across RWE. Published evidence from interventional studies was summarized individually. Results: The SLR identified 23 RWE and 19 original interventional studies. In the meta-analysis of RWE, pooled response and survival outcomes were low for first-line EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immuno-oncology (IO) agents. First-line chemotherapy resulted in a pooled ORR 25.7%, pooled PFS 5.6 months, and pooled OS 18.3 months. Pooled outcomes were further reduced in second or later lines (≥2L): pooled ORR was 5.0%, 3.3%, and 13.9%; pooled PFS was 2.1 months, 2.3 months, and 4.4 months; and pooled OS was 14.1 months, 8.8 months, and 17.1 months (not a pooled result) for EGFR-TKIs, IO agents, and chemotherapy, respectively. Interventional studies reported outcomes for TKIs (mobocertinib, poziotinib, osimertinib, afatinib, CLN-081, DZD9008), a monoclonal antibody (amivantamab), and a heat shock protein 90 inhibitor (luminespib). While there is limited RWE for the recently approved agents mobocertinib and amivantamab, which specifically target exon 20 insertion mutations, interventional evidence supports their potential as effective treatment options. Conclusions: Conventional treatments used in patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC have limited efficacy, though chemotherapy appeared to be associated with better response and survival outcomes than non-exon 20 targeting EGFR-TKIs and IO agents. This supports the need to identify EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations as the availability of new targeted treatments may offer additional therapeutic options to these patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Afatinib in the Treatment of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Mutations: A Meta-Analysis of Real-World Evidence

Introduction The purpose of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of afatinib in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations based on real-world evidence. Materials and Methods Eligible real-world studies were identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Cochrane guidelines were used to assess the quality of included studies. Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics were used for the heterogeneity analysis. Results Twenty-five studies were included in this meta-analysis; nine studies were included in the qualitative descriptive analysis. The summarized disease control rate (DCR) was 87.6% (81.5%, 92.7%), and the overall response rate (ORR) was 58.9% (48.8%, 68.7%). The pooled median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.4 (10.3, 14.5) months, mean time to failure (TTF) was 15.4 (13.6, 17.2) months, and median overall survival (OS) was 31.6 (26.7, 36.5) months. The total incidences of adverse events (AEs) for skin rashes, diarrhea, paronychia, and mucositis were 71.4% (64.4%, 77.9%), 70.4% (60.1%, 79.8%), 52.1% (41.9, 62.3%), and 36.5% (29.5%, 43.8%), respectively. The incidences of severe adverse events (SAEs, Grade ≥3) for diarrhea, skin rashes, paronychia, and mucositis were 9.7% (6.8%, 13.1%), 5.8% (4.5%, 7.2%), 3.8% (2.0%, 6.2%), and 2.1% (1.0%, 3.6%), respectively. Differences in PFS and OS between the afatinib non-full-dose (<40 mg) and full-dose (>40 mg) groups were not significant (P > 0.05). However, the ORR in the full-dose group was 78.5% (66.7%, 88.4%), which was significantly higher than that in the non-full-dose group (67.8% [56.8%, 77.9%]). Conclusion The efficacy and safety of afatinib has been confirmed by real-world evidence in advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutation, consistent with randomized controlled trial results. In real-world setting, tolerability-guided dose adjustment might not affect the afatinib efficacy.

Treatment of male breast cancer: meta-analysis of real-world evidence.

Breast cancer is rare in men and managed by extrapolating from breast cancer in women. The clinicopathological features of male breast cancer, however, differ from those of female breast cancer. Because clinical trials are rare, the synthesis of real-world data is one method of integrating sufficient evidence on the optimal treatment for this patient population. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Clinical studies were included if they evaluated the treatments of interest in male breast cancer; these evaluations included breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus mastectomy, postmastectomy radiation therapy versus no radiation, the accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), and a comparison of various endocrine therapies. Forty studies were retrieved. The pooled estimate of overall survival (OS) revealed no difference between BCS and mastectomy groups. Postmastectomy radiation to the chest wall significantly increased OS relative to no postmastectomy radiation (hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.54 to 0.84). The pooled estimates of identification and false-negative rates of SLNB were 97.4 and 7.4 per cent respectively. Tamoxifen treatment was associated with significantly increased OS compared with no tamoxifen intake (HR 0.62, 0.41 to 0.95). Identification and false-negative rates for SLNB were comparable to those in female breast cancer. Breast-conserving surgery can be effective and safe; postmastectomy radiation to the chest wall and 5-year tamoxifen treatment improves survival.

Effectiveness and safety of dolutegravir two-drug regimens in virologically suppressed people living with HIV: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of real-world evidence.

ObjectivesDolutegravir (DTG) is widely recommended within three‐drug regimens. However, similar efficacy and tolerability have also been achieved with DTG within two‐drug regimens in clinical trials. This study evaluated the real‐world effectiveness and discontinuations in people living with HIV‐1 (PLHIV) switching to DTG with lamivudine (3TC) or rilpivirine (RPV).MethodsThis was a one‐arm meta‐analysis utilizing data from a systematic literature review. Data from real‐world evidence studies of DTG + RPV and DTG + 3TC were extracted, pooled and analysed. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with viral failure (VF; ≥ 50 copies/mL in two consecutive measurements and/or ≥ 1000 copies/mL in a single measurement) at week 48 (W48) and week 96 (W96). Other outcomes included virological suppression (VS; < 50 copies/mL) and discontinuations (W48 and W96). Estimates were calculated for VF, VS as per snapshot (VSS) and on treatment analysis (VSOT), and discontinuations.ResultsPooled mean estimates of VF for DTG + 3TC and DTG + RPV were 0.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.4–1.3] and 0.6% (95% CI: 0.0–1.6), respectively, at W48. VSS rate at W48 was 85.0% (95% CI: 82.3–87.5) for DTG + 3TC regimen and 92.4% (95% CI: 85.0–97.7) in the DTG + RPV regimen. The DTG + 3TC and DTG + RPV regimens led to discontinuations in 13.6% (95% CI: 11.1–16.2) and 7.2% (95% CI: 2.1–14.4) of patients, respectively, at W48. Similar results were observed at W96.ConclusionsTreatment with DTG + 3TC or DTG + RPV in clinical practice provides a low rate of VF and a high rate of VS when initiated in virologically suppressed PLHIV with diverse backgrounds.

Burden of diabetes mellitus and its impact on COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis of real-world evidence

Background & aimsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads rapidly and within no time, it has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. Evidence suggests diabetes to be a risk factor for the progression and poor prognosis of COVID-19. Therefore, we aimed to understand the pooled prevalence of diabetes in patients infected with COVID-19. We also aimed to compute the risk of mortality and ICU admissions in COVID-19 patients with and without diabetes. MethodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed to identify the articles reporting the diabetes prevalence and risk of mortality or ICU admission in COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was to compute the pooled prevalence of diabetes in COVID-19 patients. Secondary outcomes included risk of mortality and ICU admissions in COVID-19 patients with diabetes compared to patients without diabetes. ResultsThis meta-analysis was based on a total of 23007 patients from 43 studies. The pooled prevalence of diabetes in patients infected with COVID-19 was found to be 15% (95% CI: 12%–18%), p = <0.0001. Mortality risk was found to be significantly higher in COVID-19 patients with diabetes as compared to COVID-19 patients without diabetes with a pooled risk ratio of 1.61 (95% CI: 1.16–2.25%), p = 0.005. Likewise, risk of ICU admission rate was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients with diabetes as compared to COVID-19 patients without diabetes with a pooled risk ratio of 1.88 (1.20%–2.93%), p = 0.006. ConclusionThis meta-analysis found a high prevalence of diabetes and higher mortality and ICU admission risk in COVID-19 patients with diabetes.

Axillary Management in Women with Early Breast Cancer and Limited Sentinel Node Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of Real-World Evidence in the Post-ACOSOG Z0011 Era.

After the publication of the Z0011 trial, the American Society of Clinical Oncology published an updated clinical practice guideline stating that clinicians should not recommend axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for early-stage breast cancer patients with the involvement of one or two sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs). However, these recommendations have been challenged because they were mainly based on data from limited studies. The aim of the current study is to systematically compare the real-world outcomes of SLN biopsy (SLNB) alone and SLNB + ALND in patients with early-stage breast cancers and limited positive SLN metastasis in the post-Z0011 era PATIENTS AND METHODS: We searched articles in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary endpoints were recurrence rate and the incidence of lymphedema. One randomized controlled trial and six retrospective studies with 8864 patients were retrieved. For patients with early-stage breast cancer with one or two SLN metastases, receiving SLNB alone showed no significant difference in OS, DFS, and recurrence rate compared with receiving SLNB + ALND. The incidence of lymphedema in patients who received SLNB alone was significantly lower than those who received SLNB + ALND (odds ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.02-3.71). Current real-world evidence proved that the Z0011 strategy is safe with respect to survival outcomes and effective in reducing the incidence of lymphedema. ALND should be avoided in patients with early-stage breast cancer with one or two SLN metastases in the post-Z0011 era.

Thiazolidinedione use is associated with reduced risk of Parkinson's disease in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of real-world evidence.

The thiazolidinedione (TZD) class of oral antidiabetic agents are used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). This meta-analysis aimed to understand the protective effect of TZD on Parkinson's disease (PD) in people with diabetes. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane central from inception to until 30 September 2019. We included all real-world evidence studies assessing the use of TZD class of drugs and the risk of PD in people with diabetes. Quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The primary outcome was the pooled hazard ratio (HR) of PD among type 2 DM TZD users as compared with TZD non-users in people with diabetes. The secondary outcome was the HR of PD among type 2 DM TZD users as compared with non-users (include both diabetic and nondiabetic population). Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software. Out of five studies selected for inclusion, four studies fulfilled the criteria for primary outcomes. The participants' mean age and follow-up duration were 66.23 ± 9.59years and 5.25years (2.97-7.9years), respectively. There was a significant reduction in the risk of PD (pooled adjusted HR of 0.81 [95% CI 0.70-0.93, p = 0.004]) in TZD users compared with non-TZD users in people with diabetes. A significant protective effect of TZD was observed in Caucasian population (3 studies) (HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.66-0.92), p = 0.003). This meta-analysis demonstrates a potential neuroprotective effect of TZD for PD risk in the population with DM.

P632 Vedolizumab dose escalation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease experiencing loss of response: A systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world evidence

Abstract Background Moderately to severely active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), featured as Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) collectively, is commonly treated with biologic therapies. A proportion of patients experience loss of response (LOR) over time. The approved dose of vedolizumab (VDZ), 300 mg every 8-week (Q8W), is known to be safe and effective in the treatment of UC and CD. In an open-label long-term safety study (GEMINI LTS), patients who experienced LOR during maintenance benefitted from dose escalation to an every 4-week (Q4W) regimen. Clinical response and remission were regained in 41% and 28% respectively in UC patients (N=32) and 47% and 32% respectively in CD patients (N=57) through 52 weeks of escalated dosing. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of existing real-world evidences to evaluate the effectiveness of VDZ dose escalation to Q4W in IBD patients experiencing LOR to Q8W dosing. Methods A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed and Embase databases for articles and conference abstracts from January 2014 through January 2019 for real-world studies reporting clinical outcomes to VDZ dose-escalation among adult patients with UC or CD. Relevant congresses were also screened for accepted abstracts through June 2019. Summary estimates for the proportion of regained response and remission were synthesised under a random effect model (given considerable heterogeneity as measured by I2 statistic) using the DerSimonian-Laird approach. Results The search yielded a total of 842 citations from the databases and 12 citations from hand searching. Of these, 5 full-text articles and 1 abstract were included in the meta-analysis. The 6 study cohorts included a total of 297 patients with IBD. The random-effects pooled regained response rate from the 6 studies was 56.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44.9%–67.5%) within 52 weeks (figure). Subgroup analysis showed a regained response rate of 62.7% (95% CI,52.8%–71.6%) when measured within 30 weeks vs. 50.2% (95% CI, 38.3%–62.2%) when measured after 30 weeks. Of the 6 studies, 2 reported remission rates that were included in the pooled analysis among 203 patients experiencing LOR. The random-effects pooled estimate of recaptured remission was 42.4% (95% CI, 25.1%–61.8%) within 52 weeks. Conclusion More than half of IBD patients who experienced LOR during maintenance phase after initial response to VDZ Q8W dosing regained response on the escalated Q4W regimen within 52 weeks. These findings and the data from the open-label clinical trial support the benefits of VDZ dose escalation among patients experiencing LOR to Q8W dosing.

Number needed to treat based on real-world evidence for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Aims: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are used to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This paper aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of NOACs when compared to VKAs by calculating the number needed to treat (NNT) at 2 years using incidence rates and hazard ratios (HRs) derived from a meta-analysis of studies conducted in real-world settings. Materials and methods: HRs were sourced from a published systematic literature review and a meta-analysis of real-world evidence on the use of NOACs vs VKAs. Rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban vs VKAs were investigated. The efficacy outcomes included: a composite of ischaemic stroke and systemic embolism (IS/SE), ischaemic stroke (IS), and all-cause mortality. The safety analysis assessed major bleeding and intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). Results: Superiority of NOACs vs VKAs was observed in 10/15 comparisons. Treating patients with rivaroxaban and dabigatran was associated with a reduced risk of IS and all-cause mortality compared to VKAs, with one death prevented every 22 and 32 patients, respectively, and one IS prevented every 206 and 166 patients, respectively. Rivaroxaban was significantly associated with a reduced risk of IS/SE compared to VKA (NNT: 107). No significant differences were observed between apixaban and VKAs. Dabigatran and apixaban were associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding compared to VKA (NNT: 59 and 38, respectively). No significant difference was observed between rivaroxaban and VKAs regarding major bleeding. Rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban were significantly associated with a reduced risk of ICH (NNT: 205, 115, and 108, respectively). Limitations: Heterogeneity in definitions of major bleeding across studies. Conclusions: The NNT calculation, when approached and interpreted properly, is a practical measure of the effectiveness of a treatment. The calculation based on HRs showed that NOACs are safe and effective alternatives to VKAs in real life.

Systematic review and survival meta-analysis of real world evidence on first-line pazopanib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

A systematic review was conducted to identify real world studies reporting outcomes after first-line pazopanib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Studies had to be observational and report survival data in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival in order to conduct meta-analysis techniques. These real-world data were compared to those obtained in the phase II and III randomized controlled trials of pazopanib. Real world evidence showed that the clinical and safety outcomes were consistent with those observed in the clinical trials despite the inclusion of unselected patients with a wide spectrum of prognostic features and comorbidities. Similarly to the results of the pivotal studies, good prognosis patients had the most benefit from pazopanib. Further investigation is needed to complement evidence from clinical trials, in particular focused on patient-centered outcomes.