An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib for the treatment of relapsed/refractory mantle-cell lymphoma.

What was studied

No head-to-head trials have compared zanubrutinib with ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. So this study compared them indirectly. It used patient data from zanubrutinib trials, with 118 patients. It used summary data from pooled ibrutinib trials, with 370 patients. It used an adjusted indirect method. It first adjusted for some traits.

What they found

After adjusting, zanubrutinib was linked to longer time without progression. The hazard ratio was 0.63. The confidence range was 0.46 to 0.87. Zanubrutinib was also linked to longer overall survival. That hazard ratio was 0.46. The confidence range was 0.30 to 0.71. Both differences were statistically significant.

What it means for patients

The authors say zanubrutinib may work better than ibrutinib. They say it may delay progression and death in these patients. They say this holds for relapsed or refractory disease.

Why it is not certain yet

This was an indirect comparison, not a head-to-head trial. Patients were not randomized between the drugs. Only selected traits were adjusted for. Hidden differences between the groups could remain. The ibrutinib data were pooled. The abstract gives no side effect data.

Source

An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib for the treatment of relapsed/refractory mantle-cell lymphoma.

We restate facts from the source record in our own words. The original wording belongs to its publisher.