Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) results confirmed by head-to-head trials: a case study in psoriasis

Head-to-head comparisons through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide high-quality evidence to inform healthcare decisions. In their absence, indirect comparisons are often performed; however, evidence is limited on how valid matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC)-based comparative effi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of dermatological treatment 2023-12, Vol.34 (1), p.2169574-2169574
Main Authors: Signorovitch, James, Diels, Joris, Van Sanden, Suzy, Schubert, Agata, Hassan, Fareen, Thilakarathne, Pushpike, Ozturk, Bulent, Barthelmes, Norma, Reich, Kristian
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
guselkumab
Humans
indirect comparison
interleukin inhibitor
ixekizumab
Mycobacterium avium Complex
Psoriasis
randomized control trial
secukinumab
Severity of Illness Index
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Head-to-head comparisons through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide high-quality evidence to inform healthcare decisions. In their absence, indirect comparisons are often performed; however, evidence is limited on how valid matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC)-based comparative efficacy estimates are vs. RCT-based estimates. Compare MAIC and RCT results of guselkumab vs. secukinumab and ixekizumab to provide insight into the validity of results generated using MAIC methods. Previously reported results from MAICs of guselkumab vs. secukinumab and ixekizumab were compared with results from ECLIPSE and IXORA-R RCTs based on risk differences between Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response rates. Risk difference (95% confidence interval) in PASI 90 response rates at week 48 for guselkumab vs. secukinumab was 14.4% (9.4%; 19.4%) in ECLIPSE and 9.4% (4.7%; 14.0%) in the MAIC. The risk difference at week 24 for guselkumab vs. ixekizumab was 0.0% (−5.4%; 5.4%) in IXORA-R and 0.7% (−5.1%; 6.4%) in the MAIC. Comparative efficacy results were consistent between MAICs and RCTs of guselkumab vs. secukinumab and ixekizumab. This analysis demonstrates that MAIC methods can provide valid relative treatment effect estimates when direct comparisons are lacking, particularly when trials with similar designs and patient populations inform the analysis.
ISSN:0954-6634
1471-1753
DOI:10.1080/09546634.2023.2169574