A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of PET-Guided BrECADD Versus PET-Guided ABVD, BEACOPP, and eBEACOPP in Advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma.

Alexa Molinari¹, Fjoralba Kristo², Victoria Paly³, Zhiyi Lan⁴, Athanasios Zomas⁵, Vanessa Stache⁵, Zijiao Yuan⁴, Abbey Poirier⁴, Christian Jaworek⁶, Hishan Tharmaseelan⁶, Hoora Moradian⁴, Thomas Melchardt⁷

¹Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA. alexa.molinari@takeda.com.

²Takeda Development Center, Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.

³Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.

⁴Cytel Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.

⁵Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG, Zurich, Switzerland.

⁶Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD), German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

⁷Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.

PubMed DOI

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In the absence of head-to-head trial data, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to compare the effectiveness, with respect to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), of PET-guided BrECADD versus PET-guided ABVD, BEACOPP, and eBEACOPP in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS: Individual patient data (IPD) from patients in HD21 and aggregate dat…

Create a free account to keep reading

Free members get 10 full research views every month across publications, clinical trials, FDA clearances, adverse events, and NIH grants. No credit card required.

Create Free Account Sign In

Want unlimited research access? See Pro plans

Data Accuracy Notice: Research intelligence on Health AI Central is aggregated from public sources (PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, NIH, CMS, and others) and refreshed nightly. Classifications and derived metrics are produced by automated methods described in our Methodology. We recommend verifying critical data points against the primary sources before making decisions.