Skip to main content
. 2021 Nov 9;16:5–13. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcsup.2021.06.002

Table 4.

Hazard ratios estimated from matching-adjusted indirect comparisons for PFS in GI-NETs.

[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (reweighted ERASMUS) vs. everolimus (RADIANT 4 GI-NET subgroup)
Hazard ratio PFS
(95% CI)		 [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (reweighted ERASMUS) vs. BSC (RADIANT 4 GI-NET subgroup)
Hazard ratio PFS
(95% CI)
Main analysis 0.38 [0.25, 0.58] 0.35 [0.21, 0.59]
Sensitivity analysis 1:
 Incl. non-Dutch ERASMUS patients		 0.37 [0.24, 0.55] 0.33 [0.20, 0.55]
Sensitivity analysis 2:
 Adjusting for all available covariates		 0.61 [0.42, 0.91] 0.39 [0.24, 0.65]
Sensitivity analysis 3:
 Matching to the full comparator population		 0.41 [0.27, 0.62] 0.32 [0.20, 0.54]

PFS, progression-free survival; GI-NETs, gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumours; CI, confidence interval.