The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

How does risdiplam compare with other treatments for Types 1-3 spinal muscular atrophy: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison

How does risdiplam compare with other treatments for Types 1-3 spinal muscular atrophy: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison
How does risdiplam compare with other treatments for Types 1-3 spinal muscular atrophy: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison

Aim: To conduct indirect treatment comparisons between risdiplam and other approved treatments for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Patients & methods: Individual patient data from risdiplam trials were compared with aggregated data from published studies of nusinersen and onasemnogene abeparvovec, accounting for heterogeneity across studies. Results: In Type 1 SMA, studies of risdiplam and nusinersen included similar populations. Indirect comparison results found improved survival and motor function with risdiplam versus nusinersen. Comparison with onasemnogene abeparvovec in Type 1 SMA and with nusinersen in Types 2/3 SMA was challenging due to substantial differences in study populations; no concrete conclusions could be drawn from the indirect comparison analyses. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons support risdiplam as a superior alternative to nusinersen in Type 1 SMA.

MAIC, SMA, STC, indirect treatment comparison, nusinersen, onasemnogene abeparvovec, risdiplam, spinal muscular atrophy
2042-6305
347-370
Ribero, Valerie Aponte
3d9ae6e1-a858-4feb-97d3-dc7f3ed6a058
Daigl, Monica
17a040ab-59d1-4045-9ce7-bd629adbe7d2
Martí, Yasmina
45ae9f66-b25f-4417-8c49-48e1907973fd
Gorni, Ksenija
5a5c36eb-fd4d-48e9-b987-a1419ff79434
Evans, Rachel
a61a4bac-e744-45c2-aca2-59a1fbedb37b
Scott, David Alexander
19b5fd34-9974-4ae4-8be0-27a693639e20
Mahajan, Anadi
cb32dc9e-026e-42b3-9f3a-9a1459914c9e
Abrams, Keith R
6db24e9a-24bb-4f34-8d32-a97352af4e09
Hawkins, Neil
1aa8112d-606d-4176-b306-9c22158c556d
Ribero, Valerie Aponte
3d9ae6e1-a858-4feb-97d3-dc7f3ed6a058
Daigl, Monica
17a040ab-59d1-4045-9ce7-bd629adbe7d2
Martí, Yasmina
45ae9f66-b25f-4417-8c49-48e1907973fd
Gorni, Ksenija
5a5c36eb-fd4d-48e9-b987-a1419ff79434
Evans, Rachel
a61a4bac-e744-45c2-aca2-59a1fbedb37b
Scott, David Alexander
19b5fd34-9974-4ae4-8be0-27a693639e20
Mahajan, Anadi
cb32dc9e-026e-42b3-9f3a-9a1459914c9e
Abrams, Keith R
6db24e9a-24bb-4f34-8d32-a97352af4e09
Hawkins, Neil
1aa8112d-606d-4176-b306-9c22158c556d

Ribero, Valerie Aponte, Daigl, Monica, Martí, Yasmina, Gorni, Ksenija, Evans, Rachel, Scott, David Alexander, Mahajan, Anadi, Abrams, Keith R and Hawkins, Neil (2022) How does risdiplam compare with other treatments for Types 1-3 spinal muscular atrophy: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison. Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 11 (5), 347-370. (doi:10.2217/cer-2021-0216).

Record type: Review

Abstract

Aim: To conduct indirect treatment comparisons between risdiplam and other approved treatments for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Patients & methods: Individual patient data from risdiplam trials were compared with aggregated data from published studies of nusinersen and onasemnogene abeparvovec, accounting for heterogeneity across studies. Results: In Type 1 SMA, studies of risdiplam and nusinersen included similar populations. Indirect comparison results found improved survival and motor function with risdiplam versus nusinersen. Comparison with onasemnogene abeparvovec in Type 1 SMA and with nusinersen in Types 2/3 SMA was challenging due to substantial differences in study populations; no concrete conclusions could be drawn from the indirect comparison analyses. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons support risdiplam as a superior alternative to nusinersen in Type 1 SMA.

Text
cer-2021-0216 - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 14 December 2021
e-pub ahead of print date: 18 January 2022
Published date: April 2022
Additional Information: Funding Information: The systematic literature review and data extraction were conducted by Bridge Medical Consulting Ltd., London, UK and funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland. Indirect treatment comparison analyses were designed by Visible Analytics, UK, funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. V Aponte Ribero, M Daigl, Y Martí and K Gorni are employees of and are stockholders in F. Hoffmann La Roche Ltd. R Evans, DA Scott, KR Abrams and N Hawkins are partners/employees of Visible Analytics Ltd., which designed the analysis and received consultancy fees and expenses from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. A Mahajan is an employee of Bridge Medical Consulting Ltd., which conducted this review and received consultancy fees and expenses from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. Funding Information: The systematic literature review and data extraction were conducted by Bridge Medical Consulting Ltd., London, UK and funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland. Indirect treatment comparison analyses were designed by Visible Analytics, UK, funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. V Aponte Ribero, M Daigl, Y Mart? and K Gorni are employees of and are stockholders in F. Hoffmann La Roche Ltd. R Evans, DA Scott, KR Abrams and N Hawkins are partners/employees of Visible Analytics Ltd., which designed the analysis and received consultancy fees and expenses from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. A Mahajan is an employee of Bridge Medical Consulting Ltd., which conducted this review and received consultancy fees and expenses from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Keywords: MAIC, SMA, STC, indirect treatment comparison, nusinersen, onasemnogene abeparvovec, risdiplam, spinal muscular atrophy

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 454926
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/454926
ISSN: 2042-6305
PURE UUID: bfb02d9e-b97a-443f-a0c3-7f2a79f6124a
ORCID for David Alexander Scott: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6475-8046

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Mar 2022 17:50
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 04:02

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Valerie Aponte Ribero
Author: Monica Daigl
Author: Yasmina Martí
Author: Ksenija Gorni
Author: Rachel Evans
Author: David Alexander Scott ORCID iD
Author: Anadi Mahajan
Author: Keith R Abrams
Author: Neil Hawkins

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×