Updated Network Meta-analysis Research Articles

Pulmonary artery denervation versus conventional therapies for PAH: a systematic review and updated network meta-analysis.

A recent guideline presented by the ESC Congress in 2022 had indicated a novel therapy targeted at pulmonary artery hypertension, known as pulmonary artery denervation (PADN), which get inspired from a laboratorial trial that could lowering the pulmonary artery pressure through the intervention on the animals. Our aim is to conduct a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of PADN from six aspects with the current conventional therapies. According to the PRISMA guidance, databases including Ovid, ClinicalTrials.gov, Medline, Embase, and PubMed were searched from inception to 22 August 2023, along with a full assessment of the previous five meta-analyses. Data were extracted and curated for Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the change in the 6-min walking distance (6MWD) from baseline with a secondary outcome called change in mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) from baseline. The four safety outcomes included risk of clinical worsening, hospitalization, mortality and severe adverse events (SAEs). The comparison is structured on a contrast model based on 65 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PADN and the other conventional mainstream drugs. PADN had a better effect in improving 6MWD than Placebo (-77.76m, 95% CI: -102.04 to -54.34m), Macitentan (-65.32m, 95% CI: -95.34 to -36.1m), Bosentan (-64.5m, 95% CI: -94.7 to -35.07m), Iloprost (-62.66m, 95% CI: -99.48 to -27.13m), Oxygen (-62.42m, 95% CI: -100.01 to -25.78m), Treprostinil (-62.01m, 95% CI: -89.04 to -35.61m), Riociguat (-60.59m, 95% CI: -86.11 to -35.98m), Selexipag (-47.2m, 95% CI: -85.61 to -10.19m), Sildenafil (-44.92m, 95% CI: -74.43 to -16.15m), or Sitaxsentan (-39.53m, 95% CI: -78.99 to -0.76m). PADN had a better antihypertensive effect than placebo and showed statistical significant lower risks to induce clinical worsening and re-hospitalization than treprostinil, riociguat, and placebo groups. No statistically significant difference in risk of mortality and severe adverse events was observed between PADN versus the other interventions. Compared with 16 types of conventional therapies and Placebo, PADN has advantage over nine single therapies and Placebo in improving 6MWD and appears to be better than two types of dual-drug combined therapies while with no statistical significance. PADN shows a favourable antihypertensive effect on mPAP and has a lower risk to trigger clinical worsening or hospitalization, while its risk on mortality and severe adverse events is still inconclusive.

Evaluating the economic efficiency of open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.

This study compared the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) distal pancreatectomy (DP). Studies reporting the costs of DP were included in a literature search until August 2023. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for outcomes of interest. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of DP approaches into homogeneous clusters. A decision model-based cost-utility analysis was conducted for the cost-effectiveness analysis of DP strategies. Twenty-six studies with 29,164 patients were included in the analysis. Among the three groups, LDP had the lowest overall costs, while ODP had the highest overall costs (LDP vs. ODP: MD - 3521.36, 95% CrI - 6172.91 to - 1228.59). RDP had the highest procedural costs (ODP vs. RDP: MD - 4311.15, 95% CrI - 6005.40 to - 2599.16; LDP vs. RDP: MD - 3772.25, 95% CrI - 4989.50 to - 2535.16), but incurred the lowest hospitalization costs. Both LDP (MD - 3663.82, 95% CrI - 6906.52 to - 747.69) and RDP (MD - 6678.42, 95% CrI - 11,434.30 to - 2972.89) had significantly reduced hospitalization costs compared to ODP. LDP and RDP demonstrated a superior profile regarding costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, costs-efficacy, and costs-utility compared to ODP. Compared to ODP, LDP and RDP cost $3110 and $817 less per patient, resulting in 0.03 and 0.05 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively, with positive incremental net monetary benefit (NMB). RDP costs $2293 more than LDP with a negative incremental NMB but generates 0.02 additional QALYs with improved postoperative morbidity and spleen preservation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that LDP and RDP are more cost-effective options compared to ODP at various willingness-to-pay thresholds. LDP and RDP are more cost-effective than ODP, with LDP exhibiting better cost savings and RDP demonstrating superior surgical outcomes and improved QALYs.

Effect of vitamin D, calcium, or combined supplementation on fall prevention: a systematic review and updated network meta-analysis

BackgroundThe association between vitamin D supplementation and the risk of falls in older adults has been controversial. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy of vitamin D, calcium, and combined supplementation in the prevention of falls.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of vitamin D in fall prevention were systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to May 9, 2023. The network meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model in R4.1.3 and Stata15.0. Heterogeneity was evaluated by the I2 statistic, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots, Begg’s test, and Egger’s tests. Data were pooled and expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 35 RCTs involving 58,937 participants were included in this study, among which 11 RCTs (31.4%) applied calcium combined with vitamin D. There was low heterogeneity (I2 = 11%) among the included studies. Vitamin D supplementation at 800–1000 International Unit (IU)/d resulted in a lower risk of falls than placebo or no treatment (RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.74–0.95). In addition, 800–1000 IU/d of vitamin D with or without calcium were more effective in preventing falls than calcium alone. High-dose vitamin D (> 1000 IU/day) increased the risk of falls compared with 800–1000 IU/d of vitamin D. According to the subgroup analysis, daily administration of 800–1000 IU/d vitamin D was associated with a 22% reduction in the risk of falls (RR = 0.78, 95%CI:0.64–0.92), whereas intermittent vitamin D administration had no preventive effect. Furthermore, 800–1000 IU/d of vitamin D also significantly decreased the risk of falls in old adults with ≤ 50 nmol/L 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] (RR = 0.69, 95%CI:0.52–0.86) but not in individuals with > 50 nmol/L 25(OH)D.ConclusionVitamin D supplementation at 800–1000 IU/d is associated with a lower risk of falls among older adults. 800-1000IU/d of vitamin D has a benefit on prevention of falls in population received daily dose regimens and in population with vitamin D deficiency.

D-56 | Clinical Outcomes Following Interventions by Different Modalities of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI): An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

D-56 | Clinical Outcomes Following Interventions by Different Modalities of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI): An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

First-line immunotherapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an updated network meta-analysis including triplet therapy.

To compare the differential efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combined therapies among patients with intermediate- and poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), as recently, the efficacy of triplet therapy comprising nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus cabozantinib has been published. Three databases were searched in December 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) analysing oncological outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with first-line ICI-based combined therapies. We performed network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rates (ORRs), in patients with intermediate- and poor-risk mRCC; we also assessed treatment-related adverse events. Overall, seven RCTs were included in the meta-analyses and NMAs. Treatment ranking analysis revealed that pembrolizumab + lenvatinib (99%) had the highest likelihood of improved PFS, followed by nivolumab + cabozantinib (79%), and nivolumab + ipilimumab + cabozantinib (77%). Notably, compared to nivolumab + cabozantinib, adding ipilimumab to nivolumab + cabozantinib did not improve PFS (hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.43). Regarding ORRs, treatment ranking analysis also revealed that pembrolizumab + lenvatinib had the highest likelihood of providing better ORRs (99.7%). The likelihoods of improved PFS and ORRs of pembrolizumab + lenvatinib were true in both International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups. Our analyses confirmed the robust efficacy of pembrolizumab + lenvatinib as first-line treatment for patients with intermediate or poor IMDC risk mRCC. Triplet therapy did not result in superior efficacy. Considering both toxicity and the lack of mature overall survival data, triplet therapy should only be considered in selected patients.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapy in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors has led to an increase in randomized controlled trials exploring various first-line combination treatment regimens. With the introduction of new PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, there are now more clinical options available. For the first time, the AK105 monoclonal antibody Penpulimab, developed in China, was included. The AK105-302 Phase III trial studied the efficacy and safety of Penpulimab combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC. To determine the optimal treatment options, we conducted an updated network meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of these regimens. The system retrieves data from Chinese and English electronic databases, Clinical Trials, and the gov Clinical Trial Registration website up to September 6, 2023. The study indirectly compared the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination regimens, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), all-grade adverse events, and above-grade III adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) level, histological type, ECOG score, sex, and smoking history. Nineteen RCTS were included, with a total of ten thousand eight hundred patients. Penpulimab plus chemotherapy (Pen + CT) provided the best OS (HR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.81) for PD-L1 patients with non-selective advanced NSCLC. Except Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab (Niv + Ipi), other PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapies significantly extended PFS compared with CT, and Nivolumab plus Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (Niv + Bev + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.26-0.74) provided the best PFS benefit and was comparable to Pen + CT (HR = 1.0) for PFS prolongation. For ORR, except Niv + Ipi, all the other regimens significantly improved ORR compared with CT. In terms of safety, except Tor + CT, the incidence of any-grade AEs or grade ≥ 3 adverse events may be higher than those of chemotherapy. The subgroup analysis revealed that for patients with PD-L1 levels below 1%, treatment with Tor + CT resulted in the best progression-free survival (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.25-0.86). For patients with PD-L1 levels of 1% or higher, Sintilimab plus chemotherapy (Sin + CT) (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-0.99) and Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy (Cam + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.64) were associated with the best overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. For patients with SqNSCLC, combined immunotherapy may provide greater survival benefits. For patients with Non-sqNSCLC, Niv + Bev + CT and Tor + CT were associated with optimal PFS and OS, respectively. Cam + CT provided the best PFS in male patients with a history of smoking and an ECOG score of 0. In both female and non-smoking patient subgroups, Pem + CT was associated with the best PFS and OS benefits. For patients with advanced non-selective PD-L1 NSCLC, two effective regimens are Pen + CT and Niv + Bev + CT, which rank first in OS and PFS among all patients. Cam + CT and Tor + CT have advantages for OS in patients with SqNSCLC and Non-sqNSCLC, respectively. Niv + Ipi + CT provided the best OS benefit for patients with an ECOG score of 0, while Pem + CT may be the most effective treatment for patients with an ECOG score of 1. Pem + CT has a better effect on female patients and non-smokers. Sin + CT was found to be the most effective treatment for male patients and the smoking subgroup, while Cam + CT was found to be the most effective for PFS. In addition, Tor + CT was associated with the best PFS for patients with negative PD-L1 expression. Pem + CT was found to significantly improve both PFS and OS compared to CT alone. For patients with positive PD-L1 expression, Sin + CT and Cam + CT were found to be optimal for OS and PFS, respectively. It is important to note that, with the exception of Tor + CT, the toxicity of the other combinations was higher than that of CT alone.

Anticoagulation for Patients With Concomitant Atrial Fibrillation and End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Concomitant atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease is common and associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Although oral anticoagulants have been well established to prevent thromboembolism, the applicability in patients under long-term dialysis remains debatable. The study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in the dialysis-dependent population. An updated network meta-analysis based on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Studies published up to December 2022 were included. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban 2.5/5 mg twice daily), vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), and no anticoagulation were compared on safety and efficacy outcomes. The outcomes of interest were major bleeding, thromboembolism, and all-cause death. A total of 42 studies, including 3 randomized controlled trials, with 185 864 subjects were pooled. VKAs were associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than either no anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.34-1.61) or DOACs (DOACs versus VKAs; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.64-0.84]). For the prevention of thromboembolism, the efficacies of VKAs, DOACs, and no anticoagulation were equivalent. Nevertheless, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with fewer embolic events. There were no differences in all-cause death with the administration of VKAs, DOACs, or no anticoagulation. For dialysis-dependent populations, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with better efficacy, while dabigatran and apixaban demonstrated better safety. No anticoagulation was a noninferior alterative, and VKAs were associated with the worst outcomes.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of add-on third-generation antiseizure medications in treating focal seizures worldwide: a network meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled trials

Adjunctive newer antiseizure medications (ASMs) are being used in patients with treatment-resistant focal-onset seizures (FOS). An updated network meta-analysis (NMA) was necessary to compile evidence in this critical area. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus from their inception until 17 January 2024, evaluating the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of rufinamide (RUF), brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine (ESL), lacosamide (LCM), retigabine (RTG), and perampanel (PER) as adjunctive treatments for FOS. Efficacy outcomes included seizure response and seizure freedom. Tolerability was assessed by discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs). Safety outcomes were evaluated based on the number of patients experiencing at least one AE and serious adverse events (SAEs). This review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023485130). A total of 29 studies involving 11,750 participants were included. For seizure response, all ASMs were significantly superior to placebo, with RTG ranking highest, followed by CNB. Considering dosage, CNB 400mg/d was top-ranked, followed by RTG 1200mg/d. For seizure freedom, BRV was highest-ranked, followed by CNB, with BRV 100mg/d leading, followed by CNB 400mg/d. Regarding tolerability, LCM 600mg/d had the lowest ranking, followed by CNB 400mg/d. For the safety outcome of AEs, ESL 1200mg/d was ranked lowest, followed by CNB 400mg/d. Regarding SAEs, LCM 400mg/d was ranked lowest, followed by RTG 1200mg/d. ASMs at different dosages have varying efficacy and tolerability profiles. We have provided hierarchical rankings of ASMs for efficacy and safety outcomes. Our findings offer the most comprehensive evidence available to inform patients, families, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers about the choice of ASMs in patients with treatment-resistant FOS. None.

Selective Internal Radiation Therapy Using Y-90 Resin Microspheres for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

This literature review and exploratory network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 (Y-90) resin microspheres, regorafenib (REG), trifluridine-tipiracil (TFD/TPI), and best supportive care (BSC) in adult patients with chemotherapy-refractory or chemotherapy-intolerant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In light of recently published data, the literature was searched to complement and update a review published in 2018. Studies up to December 2022 comparing two or more of the treatments and reporting overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), or incidence of adverse events (AE) were included. The NMA compared hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and PFS using Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques. Fifteen studies were included, with eight studies added (none addressing SIRT). All active treatments improved OS in relation to BSC. SIRT had the longest OS among all treatments, although without statistically significant differences (HR [95% credible interval] for SIRT, 0.48 [0.27, 0.87]; TFD/TPI, 0.62 [0.46, 0.83]; REG, 0.78 [0.57, 1.05]) in a fixed effects model. Information regarding SIRT was insufficient for PFS analysis, and TFD/TPI was the best intervention (HR 2.26 [1.6, 3.18]). One SIRT study reported radioembolization-induced liver disease in > 10% of the sample; this was symptomatically managed. Non-haematological AEs (hand-foot skin reaction, fatigue, diarrhoea, hypertension, rash or desquamation) were more common with REG, while haematological events (neutropoenia, leukopenia, and anaemia) were more common with TFD/TPI. Current evidence supports SIRT treatment in patients with chemotherapy-refractory or chemotherapy-intolerant mCRC compared to newer oral agents, with comparable OS and low incidence of AEs.

Different Chemotherapy Regimens and Pathologic Complete Response in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis of Phase 3 Trials.

Background and Objectives: Currently, the standard treatment for non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) consists of a systemic neoadjuvant (or perioperative) anthracycline plus taxane-based chemotherapy, delivered either sequentially or concomitantly. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative efficacy of different neoadjuvant treatments for TNBC in terms of pathologic complete response (pCR). Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from database inception to 1 November 2023. Randomized clinical trials were used that enrolled adults with stage I-III TNBC and provided data on pCR defined as residual ypT0/TisN0M0. Between-group comparisons were estimated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). The primary outcome was the pCR rate. Results: 1129 citations were screened, and 12 randomized clinical trials were included. In Bayesian comparisons, all regimens, except anthracycline/taxanes plus gemcitabine or capecitabine, resulted in a higher pCR than the standard regimen in both direct and indirect comparisons. In particular, immunotherapy-based regimens resulted in more than double the pCR compared to historical regimens (RR = 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.9) and ranked as being the optimal regimen with a probability of 97%. Disease-free survival was better for immune checkpoint inhibitor-based chemotherapy (HR = 0.36, 95% 1.21-2.09) than for historical regimens. Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirmed that incorporating immunotherapy with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy is the best option to guarantee remarkable pathologic downstaging and improve clinical outcomes.

Laparoscopic Management of Inguinal Hernia: A Systematic Review and Updated Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Various surgical approaches for inguinal hernia repair have been outlined in medical literature. In most cases, these lesions are repaired by general surgeons. A variety of surgical techniques for the treatment of inguinal hernias have been documented in the medical literature. In 2018, the European Hernia Society (EHS) recommended laparo-endoscopic repair as a preferred approach for adults. This method involves a combination of laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques for hernia repair. The goal of this systematic review is to conduct a thorough examination of the total extraperitoneal vs. transabdominal preperitoneal comparison in inguinal hernia repair, with an emphasis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). It also intends to conduct a trial sequential analysis (TSA)in order to determine whether more trials and investigations are required or whether there is sufficient evidence to draw a firm conclusion. The study's systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We used the PubMed and Google Scholar databases to conduct a thorough web search for articles published between January 2019 and December 2023. The meta-analysis was carried out using Resource Manager Revmanversion 5.4.1 (Revman International, Inc., New York City, New York). After a review of the studies was done, ten studies were selected to be used in conducting the systematic review and meta-analysis. The recurrence rate of TEP treatment was found to be slightly lower than transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP). The two techniques did not differ in terms of postoperative complications; however, TEP had a marginally lower rate of postoperative pain. Further, the study revealed that there was a decreased risk of wound infections, seromas, and hematomas with total extraperitoneal (TEP) as opposed to transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP). TEPalso reduced the amount of recovery time needed. After conducting successful hernia treatments, total extraperitoneal and transabdominal preperitoneal both had low rates of complications and recurrence. Based on the information obtained from the study analysis, this meta-analysis provides evidence for the efficacy of TAPPand TEP techniques in the management of inguinal hernias. Though there was a statistically significant difference while applying both methods in the treatment of hernia (p=0.001), TEPs have been shown to have a lower recurrence rate than TAPPs. Similarly, the TEP method has been revealed to have a slight reduction in postoperative pain compared to transabdominal preperitoneal. However, the two techniques have been shown to have no significant difference in postoperative complications. Further, laparoscopic procedures have proved to be a little bit safer and more effective than open procedures. This has been shown by reduced risk of wound infection, hematoma, seroma, and decreased sensibility while using this method. It accelerated the healing process as well. Thus, depending on the needs of the patients and the experience level of the surgeons responsible for the treatments, inguinal hernias can be repaired using either transabdominal preperitonealor total extraperitoneal techniques since both treatment techniques have generally minimal chance of complications or recurrence as both have proved to safer method.

Comparing Endovascular Approaches in Lower Extremity Artery Disease: Insights from a Network Meta-Analysis.

Endovascular therapy offers an alternative for treating femoropopliteal (FP) and infrapopliteal (IP) lesions related to occlusive lower extremity artery disease. Despite numerous trials, the effectiveness of restenosis prevention using local drug delivery devices remains a topic of debate. An updated systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted. Our overall aim was to summarize the most recent clinical evidence regarding endovascular approaches for FP and IP atherosclerotic lesions. We conducted a search for randomized trials in the MEDLINE database, and extracted data related to clinical endpoints. Our primary focus was on the rate of major adverse events (MAEs), including mortality, amputation, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). A multiple treatment network meta-analysis supplemented with component network analyses was performed to examine the impact of combined treatment. Our search yielded 33 randomized controlled trials encompassing 5766 patients. This included 19 studies focused on femoropopliteal and 14 on IP lesions, accounting for 3565 and 2201 patients, respectively. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and drug-eluting stents (DESs) displayed a reduced MAE risk in comparison to plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA)-RR for DCB: 0.64 (95% CI: 0.52-0.77) and for DES: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.51-0.99). The bare-metal stent (BMS) group manifested the most substantial MAE risk, being 59% higher relative to the DCB cohort (BMS vs. DCB RR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.03-2.47). For FP lesions, DES was the standout performer, curtailing MAE risk by 55% relative to POBA. Within IP lesions, DES mitigated the MAE risk by 25% versus POBA. DCB did not exhibit any notable MAE reduction when pitted against POBA. In FP arteries, both DESs and DCBs yielded significantly diminished MAEs, thus outpacing other techniques. Regarding IP arteries, only DESs resulted in significantly fewer MAEs. In alignment with contemporary research, our findings revealed no signs of elevated mortality in patients undergoing treatment with drug-eluting apparatuses.

516 - Comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies with topical corticosteroids for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: an updated network meta-analysis

Abstract Introduction Network meta-analysis (NMA) provides useful information for medical decision makers via comprehensive indirect comparisons across therapies. As the targeted systemic therapy options for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) continue to grow, it is critical to update NMAs as well. Objectives To assess the comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS) in moderate-to-severe AD by including the latest Phase 3 combination therapy data for abrocitinib, lebrikizumab, and dupilumab in the NMA presented in Thyssen et al, 2021.1 Methods Data from the Phase 3 combination therapy trial for lebrikizumab in moderate-to-severe AD (ADhere [NCT04250337]) as well as an additional abrocitinib-dupilumab head-to-head Phase 3 trial (JADE DARE [NCT04345367]) were included in the analyses along with other eligible trials for abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib identified through a systematic literature review in Thyssen et al., 2021. Outcomes included ≥90% and ≥75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 90, EASI 75) from baseline, ≥4-point improvement in Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline (ΔNRS ≥4), and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) with a ≥2-point reduction from baseline (IGA 0/1), at the week 16 timepoint of each study. Bayesian NMA was performed with fixed and random effects models, with and without baseline risk-adjustment; fit statistics were assessed. Inconsistency was assessed via unrelated mean relative effects models. Odds ratio (OR), number needed to treat (NNT), placebo-unadjusted absolute response rate (ARR), and Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve (SUCRA) scores were estimated. Statistical significance was assessed by OR 95% credible intervals excluding 1. Results The updated NMA analyzed 8 unique placebo-controlled trials and 1 active-controlled trial involving 4391 patients in 23 arms across 6 targeted therapies. Fit statistics supported fixed effects models across outcomes. All therapies were statistically more efficacious than placebo across all outcomes except baricitinib 2 mg for EASI-90. For EASI-90, upadacitinib 30 mg had the most favorable response estimates (ARR=63.2%, OR=11.3, NNT=2.0, SUCRA=98.3%), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR=55.8%, OR=8.3, NNT=2.4, SUCRA=90.0%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR=44.8%, OR=5.3, NNT=3.2, SUCRA=68.3%), abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR=44.0%, OR=5.2, NNT=3.3, SUCRA=65.8%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR=42.9%, OR=4.9, NNT=3.4, SUCRA=64.3%), and the newly added lebrikizumab 250 mg (ARR=28.9%, OR=2.7, NNT=6.6, SUCRA=39.9%). The rank order for EASI-75 was similar (upadacitinib 30 mg [ARR=78.3%, OR=9.5, NNT=2.0, SUCRA=98.5%], abrocitinib 200 mg [ARR=73.0%,OR=7.1, NNT=2.3, SUCRA=89.1%], upadacitinib 15 mg [ARR=66.1%, OR=5.1, NNT=2.7, SUCRA=71.0%], dupilumab 300 mg [ARR=65.3%, OR=5.0, NNT=2.7, SUCRA=69.2%], abrocitinib 100 mg [ARR=60.3%, OR=4.0, NNT=3.2, SUCRA=54.0%], and lebrikizumab 250 mg [ARR=54.5%, OR=3.1, NNT=3.8, SUCRA=41.2%]). For ΔNRS ≥4, upadacitinib 30 mg had the most favorable response (ARR=68.9%, OR=10.0, NNT=2.1, SUCRA=99.9%), followed by upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR=56.6%, OR=5.9, NNT=2.7, SUCRA=84.0%), abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR=51.6%, OR=4.8, NNT=3.1, SUCRA=75.6%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR=49.3%, OR=4.4, NNT=3.3, SUCRA=67.0%), baricitinib 4 mg (ARR=44.4%, OR=3.6, NNT=4.0, SUCRA=57.7%), and abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR=35.9%, OR=2.5, NNT=5.9, SUCRA=36.1%); lebrikizumab 250 mg ranked eighth (ARR=33.4%, OR=2.3, NNT=7.0, SUCRA=31.3%). For IGA 0/1, upadacitinib 30 mg (ARR=66.5%,OR=11.7, NNT=2.0, SUCRA=99.6%) had the most favorable estimates, followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR=53.5%, OR=6.8, NNT=2.6, SUCRA=86.6%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR=48.0%, OR=5.4, NNT=3.0, SUCRA=76.2%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR=42.1%, OR=4.3, NNT=3.7, SUCRA=64.7%), abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR=39.1%, OR=3.8, NNT=4.1, SUCRA=56.1%), and baricitinib 4 mg (ARR=30.6%, OR=2.6, NNT=6.4, SUCRA=39.9%); lebrikizumab 250 mg ranked seventh (ARR=29.2%, OR=2.4, NNT=7.0, SUCRA=35.8%). Baricitinib 2 mg and tralokinumab 300 mg were generally ranked lower across outcomes. Conclusions Among targeted therapies for moderate-to-severe AD used with concomitant TCS for 16 weeks, upadacitinib 30 mg remained the most efficacious therapy in this NMA, generally followed by abrocitinib 200 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg or dupilumab 300 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, and baricitinib 4 mg or lebrikizumab 250 mg.

P623 Network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative efficacy of advanced therapies as first line for maintenance treatment of adult patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease

Abstract Background Subcutaneous (SC) CT-P13 provides patients and physicians with a new opportunity for maintenance treatment of Crohn’s disease (CD).1 Given the rapidly expanding therapeutic armamentarium for CD and lack of direct comparative evidence,2 an updated network meta-analysis (NMA) of data from Phase 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to evaluate the comparative efficacy of advanced CD therapies licensed in Europe or the US. Methods Eligible studies, identified by systematic literature review (PROSPERO no.: CRD42023413752), evaluated the efficacy of maintenance therapy using intravenous (IV) or SC infliximab, SC adalimumab, IV or SC vedolizumab, SC ustekinumab, SC risankizumab or oral upadacitinib, in patients with moderate-to-severe CD who responded to induction therapy. Head-to-head studies (including with treat-through designs) comparing licensed advanced therapies were also eligible. Studies were placebo- (PBO) or active-controlled and included 52–64 weeks of follow-up. Patients had not received prior tumour necrosis factor inhibitors, other biologics or Janus kinase inhibitors, thus each drug was received as first-line advanced therapy. Clinical remission and endoscopic response rates achieved with maintenance treatment were synthesised and analysed in a frequentist NMA random-effects model. Results There were 9 eligible RCTs (ACCENT I, LIBERTY-CD, CHARM, SEAVUE, GEMINI 2, VISIBLE 2, IM-UNITI, FORTIFY, U-ENDURE). Among 14 compared treatment arms, SC infliximab 120 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) showed the highest risk difference (RD) versus PBO for achieving clinical remission during the maintenance phase (0.38 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23, 0.53]), followed by SC adalimumab 40 mg QW (0.32 [0.17, 0.48]) and oral upadacitinib 30 mg once daily (0.30 [0.08, 0.53]) (Figure A). Endoscopic response data were available from LIBERTY-CD, FORTIFY and U-ENDURE: among 5 treatment arms, SC infliximab 120 mg Q2W showed the highest RD (95% CI) versus PBO for achieving endoscopic response (0.39 [0.29, 0.49]), followed by SC risankizumab 180 mg Q8W (0.37 [0.17, 0.56]) and SC risankizumab 360 mg Q8W (0.27 [0.06, 0.48]) (Figure B). Conclusion In this updated NMA, SC infliximab 120 mg Q2W demonstrated a favourable efficacy profile in terms of achieving clinical remission and endoscopic response, when administered as a first-line advanced therapy for maintenance treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe CD. 1Remsima summary of product characteristics (https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/remsima-epar-product-information_en.pdf). Accessed 1 November 2023. 2Barberio B et al. Gut 2023;72:264–74.

Optimal reconstruction methods after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis update

BackgroundDistal gastrectomy (DG) is a commonly used surgical procedure for gastric cancer (GC), with three reconstruction methods available: Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en-Y. In 2018, our team published a systematic review to provide guidance for clinical practice on the optimal reconstruction method after DG for GC. However, since then, new evidence from several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has emerged, prompting us to conduct an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide the latest comparative estimates of the efficacy and safety of the three reconstruction methods after DG for GC.MethodThis systematic review and network meta-analysis update followed the PRISMA-P guidelines and will include a search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs comparing the outcomes of Billroth I, Billroth II, or Roux-en-Y reconstruction after DG for patients with GC. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts based on predefined eligibility criteria, and two reviewers will assess the full texts of relevant studies. The Bayesian network meta-analysis will evaluate various outcomes, including quality of life after surgery, anastomotic leakage within 30 days after surgery, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, major postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery, incidence and severity of bile reflux, and loss of body weight from baseline.Ethics and disseminationThe review does not require ethical approval. The findings of the review will be disseminated through publication in an academic journal, presentations at conferences, and various media outlets.INPLASY registration numberINPLASY2021100060.

Comparing the Efficacy and Adverse Events of Available COVID-19 Vaccines Through Randomized Controlled Trials: Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Different vaccines have so far been developed and approved to cope with COVID-19 in the world. The aim of this updated network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare and rank all available vaccines in terms of efficacy and complications simultaneously. Study Design: A systematic review. Three major international databases, including Web of Science, Medline via PubMed, and Scopus, were searched through September 2023. The transitivity assumption was evaluated qualitatively in terms of epidemiologic effect modifiers. The exposure of interest in this study was receiving any available COVID-19 vaccine, and the primary outcome of interest was the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19. In this NMA, the relative risk of symptomatic COVID-19 was used to summarize the efficacy of vaccines in preventing COVID-19. The data were analyzed using the frequentist-based approach, and the results were reported using a random-effects model. Finally, the vaccines were ranked using a P-score. In total, 34 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review and NMA out of 3682 retrieved references. Based on the results of the NMA, mRNA-1273 was the most effective vaccine in preventing COVID-19 and demonstrated the highest P-score (0.93). The relative risk (RR) for mRNA-1273 versus placebo was 0.07 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03, 0.17). The second and third-ranked vaccines were BNT-162b2 (RR=0.08; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.15; P-score=0.93) and Gam-COVID-Vac (0.09; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.25; 0.88). Based on the results of this NMA, it seems that all available vaccines were effective in COVID-19 prevention. However, the top three ranked vaccines were mRNA-1273, BNT-162b2, and Gam-COVID-Vac, respectively.

Do we know enough about the effect of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer on mortality to act? An updated systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials 2017 to 2021

BackgroundFor people at high risk of lung cancer, low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is proposed as a method to reduce mortality.MethodsOur objective was to estimate the effect of LDCT lung cancer screening on mortality in high-risk populations.A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDCT screening programmes with usual care (no screening) or other imaging screening programme (such as chest X-ray (CXR)) was conducted. RCTs of CXR screening were additionally included in the network meta-analyses. Bibliographic sources including MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched to January 2017, and then further extended to November 2021. All key review steps were done by two persons. Quality assessment used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analyses were performed.ResultsNine RCTs, with up to 12.3 years of follow-up from randomisation, were included in the direct meta-analysis, which showed that LDCT screening was associated with a statistically significant decrease in lung cancer mortality (pooled relative risk (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77 to 0.96). There was a statistically non-significant decrease in all-cause mortality (pooled RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.01). The statistical heterogeneity for both outcomes was minimal. Network meta-analysis including the nine RCTs in the direct meta-analysis plus two further RCTs comparing CXR with usual care confirmed the size of the effect of LDCT on lung cancer mortality and that this was very similar irrespective of whether the comparator was usual care or CXR screening.ConclusionsLDCT screening is effective in reducing lung cancer mortality in high-risk populations. The uncertainty of its effect on lung cancer mortality observed in 2018 has been much reduced with new trial results and updates to existing trials, emphasising the importance of updating systematic reviews. Although there are still a number of RCTs unreported or in progress, we predict that further evolution of summary mortality estimates is unlikely. The focus for debate now moves to resolving uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening taking into account the balance between benefits and harms which occur in all screening programmes.

CO1 Comparative Efficacy of Non-Statin Lipid-Lowering Therapies in Patients With Hypercholesterolemia at Increased Cardiovascular Risk: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis

CO1 Comparative Efficacy of Non-Statin Lipid-Lowering Therapies in Patients With Hypercholesterolemia at Increased Cardiovascular Risk: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis

Comparative efficacy on outcomes of C-CABG, OPCAB, and ONBEAT in coronary heart disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the gold standard for the treatment of multivessel and left main coronary heart disease. However, the current evidence about the optimal surgical revascularization strategy is inconsistent and is not sufficient to allow for definite conclusions. Thus, this topic needs to be extensively discussed. The aim of this present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of off-pump CABG (OPCAB), conventional on-pump CABG (C-CABG), and on-pump beating heart (ONBEAT) CABG via an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Registry were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials that were published in English before 1 December 2021. Published trials that included patients who received OPCAB, C-CABG, and ONBEAT CABG were selected. Two authors independently screened the search results, assessed the full texts to identify eligible studies and the risk of bias of the included studies, and extracted data. All processes followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data. The primary outcome was postoperative mortality in patients who underwent C-CABG, OPCAB, or ONBEAT CABG. The secondary outcomes were postoperative myocardial infarction, stroke, and renal impairment in the three groups. The time point for analysis of outcomes was all time periods during the postoperative follow-up. A total of 39385 patients (83496.2 person-years) in 65 studies who fulfilled the prespecified criteria were included. In the network meta-analysis, OPCAB was associated with an increase of 12% in the risk of all-cause mortality when compared with C-CABG [odds ratio (OR): 1.12; 95% CI: 1.04-1.21], a reduction of 49% in the risk of myocardial infarction when compared with ONBEAT (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.26-0.99), a reduction of 16% in the risk of stroke when compared with C-CABG (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72-0.99) and a similar risk of renal impairment when compared with C-CABG and ONBEAT. OPCAB was associated with higher all-cause mortality but lower postoperative stroke compared with C-CABG. OPCAB was associated with a lower postoperative myocardial infarction than that of ONBEAT. Early mortality was comparable among OPCAB, ONBEAT, and C-CABG.

P2.10-14 First-line (1L) Lorlatinib in Patients with ALK-Positive aNSCLC: Updated Network Meta-Analysis (NMA) and Review of Ten NMAs

P2.10-14 First-line (1L) Lorlatinib in Patients with ALK-Positive aNSCLC: Updated Network Meta-Analysis (NMA) and Review of Ten NMAs