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

Table 7.

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

	[¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (reweighted ERASMUS) vs. NCT00428597 (sunitinib) Hazard ratio PFS (95% CI)	[¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (reweighted ERASMUS) vs. NCT00428597 (BSC) Hazard ratio PFS (95% CI)	[¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (reweighted ERASMUS) vs. RADIANT-3 (everolimus) Hazard ratio PFS (95% CI)	[¹⁷⁷Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (reweighted ERASMUS) vs. RADIANT-3 (BSC) Hazard ratio PFS (95% CI)
Main analysis	0.36 [0.18, 0.70]	0.13 [0.08, 0.22]	0.46 [0.30, 0.71]	0.21 [0.13, 0.32]
Sensitivity analysis 1: Incl. non-Dutch ERASMUS patients	0.47 [0.26, 0.83]	0.27 [0.18, 0.40]	0.47 [0.31, 0.70]	0.48 [0.33, 0.69]
Sensitivity analysis 2: Adjusting for all available covariates	NR	NR	NR	NR
Sensitivity analysis 3: Matching to the full comparator population	0.38 [0.191, 0.73]	0.12 [0.07, 0.21]	0.46 [0.30, 0.71]	0.18 [0.11, 0.28]

PFS, progression-free survival; P-NETs, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours; CI, confidence interval; BSC, best supportive care.

NR: not reported as lack of overlap in populations across all covariates resulted in unreliable results.