Article
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Anticancer Medication Assessed by Analysis Group Researchers
Nivolumab plus relatlimab and nivolumab plus ipilimumab are dual immune checkpoint inhibitor regimens that have been recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network as first-line therapies to treat patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. However, no randomized, head-to-head comparison studies exist to assess which of these two treatment regimens could be more effective or safer for those patients. Therefore, there was a need for robust indirect treatment comparisons that could account for differences between patient populations across clinical trials.
To remedy this gap in evidence, an Analysis Group team led by Vice Presidents Viviana García-Horton and Jenny Zhou and Manager Yiqiao Xin collaborated with researchers from Bristol Myers Squibb and several prominent international medical research institutions on a study comparing the efficacy and safety of these two treatments among patients with advanced melanoma and selected subgroups. In an article reporting their findings, the authors describe the data underlying the analysis (patient-level RELATIVITY-047 and CheckMate 067 clinical trial data) and the method for assessing those data (an inverse probability of treatment weighting approach). Their conclusion that “nivolumab plus relatlimab demonstrated similar efficacy to nivolumab plus ipilimumab in the overall population, including most – but not all – subgroups, and improved safety in patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma” suggests that nivolumab plus relatlimab could represent a reasonable alternative in the treatment of the examined population of patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma.
The article, “First-Line Nivolumab Plus Relatlimab Versus Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma: An Indirect Treatment Comparison Using RELATIVITY-047 and CheckMate 067 Trial Data,” was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
Meet Our People
Yiqiao Xin
ManagerDr. Xin specializes in health economics and outcomes research (HEOR). She provides expertise in decision-analytic modeling methods for health technology appraisals (HTA) and has led the design and implementation of cost-effectiveness and budget impact models in multiple countries. Dr. Xin’s work has also involved evidence synthesis such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons, indirect treatment comparisons with individual-level patient data, clinical trial analyses, survey development, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) studies. Her work spans a broad range of disease areas, including oncology, immunology, dermatology, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and neurology. Prior to joining Analysis Group, Dr. Xin was a research associate at an academic institution, where she focused on trial- and model-based economic evaluations and PROs, as well as providing expertise on complex literature reviews and developing R Shiny applications for conducting network meta-analysis. Her work has been presented at clinical and economic research conferences and published in various peer-reviewed journals.