Ipilimumab in advanced melanoma: Added benefit for non-pretreated patients not proven

March 18, 2014, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care

The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) already assessed the added benefit of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma in 2012. A considerable added benefit was found for patients who had already received previous treatment. In the new dossier compiled by the drug manufacturer, the drug was now compared with the appropriate comparator therapy dacarbazine specified by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) also for non-pretreated patients.

Again, the manufacturer claimed a noticeable gain in survival time and thus an added benefit. This time, IQWiG did not concur with the interpretation: The effect was estimated on the basis of an indirect comparison of individual patient data. The data were very uncertain and, moreover, by unilaterally excluding patients with particularly unfavourable prognosis, the effect was biased in favour of . Hence an added benefit of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma for non-pretreated patients is not proven.

Approval expanded

Ipilimumab is a monoclonal antibody used in melanoma if the disease is so advanced that the melanoma can no longer be surgically removed or has formed metastases. In 2012, the manufacturer presented informative data from a randomized controlled trial for pretreated patients. These data indicated a major advantage of ipilimumab in survival time, which was associated with major risk of harm, however.

After the European approval was expanded in 2013 to include patients who have not been treated for their advanced melanoma, the manufacturer now claimed an added benefit versus the appropriate comparator therapy dacarbazine specified by the G-BA also for this group.

Indirect comparison of low quality

However, the manufacturer neither presented a direct comparison nor a so-called adjusted indirect comparison between the study participants who received ipilimumab or the appropriate comparator therapy. Instead, it based its assessment on an indirect comparison of individual patient data from different studies on ipilimumab and on one single study on dacarbazine, from which it chose those patients who had not received previous treatment of advanced melanoma.

It can be assumed in these unadjusted indirect comparisons that patients on both sides of the comparison differ from each other with regards to important confounders, which can entail a systematic bias of the treatment effect. The manufacturer tried to account for these differences with a statistical method.

Results biased in favour of ipilimumab

However, the manufacturer only included those patients in its comparison for whom data on all confounders considered were available. Because of this, considerably more patients were excluded from the comparison on the ipilimumab side than on the dacarbazine side – e.g. 40% compared to not even 1% in the outcome "overall survival". In the outcome "side effects", the numbers were even further apart. Many patients with particularly poor prognosis were apparently excluded from the analysis on the ipilimumab side. The effects were therefore highly biased in favour of ipilimumab.

Analysis did not consider all confounding variables

Furthermore, the manufacturer did not consider known confounders like the presence of visceral metastases, i.e. metastases in internal organs, or the time since the diagnosis of the melanoma in the analysis presented. The certainty of results, which was already low, was further downgraded because of this.

Since the treatment effects presented by the manufacturer were therefore not interpretable, an added benefit of ipilimumab in non-pretreated with advanced melanoma is not proven.

G-BA decides on the extent of added benefit

The dossier assessment is part of the overall procedure for early benefit assessments supervised by the G-BA. After publication of the manufacturer's dossier and IQWiG's assessment, the G-BA conducts a commenting procedure, which may provide further information and result in a change to the benefit assessment. The G BA then decides on the extent of the added benefit, thus completing the early benefit assessment.

Explore further: Vemurafenib: Result unchanged despite new data

Related Stories

Vemurafenib: Result unchanged despite new data

December 18, 2013
Pursuant to the Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal Products (AMNOG), the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) reassessed vemurafenib (trade name: Zelboraf), a drug for the treatment ...

Enzalutamide: IQWiG assessed data subsequently submitted by the manufacturer

February 21, 2014
Enzalutamide (trade name: Xtandi) has been approved since June 2013 for men with metastatic prostate cancer in whom the commonly used hormone blockade is no longer effective and who have already been treated with the cytostatic ...

Added benefit of saxagliptin as monotherapy is not proven

December 5, 2013
The drug saxagliptin (trade name: Onglyza) has been approved also as monotherapy in Germany since July 2013 for certain adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. It is an option when drug treatment is needed, but the drug metformin ...

Dabrafenib in melanoma: Added benefit not proven

January 7, 2014
Dabrafenib (trade name: Tafinlar) has been approved in Germany since August 2013 for the treatment of advanced melanoma.In an early benefit assessment pursuant to the Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal Products ...

Considerable added benefit of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma

November 9, 2012
The humanized antibody ipilimumab (trade name Yervoy) has been approved since August 2011 for the treatment of adult patients with advanced melanoma (black skin cancer) who have already been treated. The term "advanced" means ...

Aflibercept in AMD: No proof of added benefit

June 5, 2013
It is not proven that patients with wet age-related macular degeneration benefit from the new drug aflibercept, as the drug manufacturer did not present any suitable data for a comparison with the current standard therapy ...

Recommended for you

How cancer metastasis happens: Researchers reveal a key mechanism

January 18, 2018
Cancer metastasis, the migration of cells from a primary tumor to form distant tumors in the body, can be triggered by a chronic leakage of DNA within tumor cells, according to a team led by Weill Cornell Medicine and Memorial ...

Modular gene enhancer promotes leukemia and regulates effectiveness of chemotherapy

January 18, 2018
Every day, billions of new blood cells are generated in the bone marrow. The gene Myc is known to play an important role in this process, and is also known to play a role in cancer. Scientists from the German Cancer Research ...

These foods may up your odds for colon cancer

January 18, 2018
(HealthDay)—Chowing down on red meat, white bread and sugar-laden drinks might increase your long-term risk of colon cancer, a new study suggests.

The pill lowers ovarian cancer risk, even for smokers

January 18, 2018
(HealthDay)—It's known that use of the birth control pill is tied to lower odds for ovarian cancer, but new research shows the benefit extends to smokers or women who are obese.

Researchers develop swallowable test to detect pre-cancerous Barrett's esophagus

January 17, 2018
Investigators at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center have developed a simple, swallowable test for early detection of Barrett's esophagus that offers promise ...

Scientists zoom in to watch DNA code being read

January 17, 2018
Scientists have unveiled incredible images of how the DNA code is read and interpreted—revealing new detail about one of the fundamental processes of life.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.