Dinutuximab Beta Versus Naxitamab in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Neuroblastoma in Patients with Stable Disease, Minor Response or Partial Response and Disease in Bone or Bone Marrow: Systematic Review and Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison

  • Holger N. Lode*
  • , Przemysław Holko
  • , Aleksandra Wieczorek
  • , Nikolai Siebert
  • , Dominique Valteau-Couanet
  • , Alberto Garaventa
  • , Adela Cañete
  • , John Anderson
  • , Isaac Yaniv
  • , Shifra Ash
  • , Juliet Gray
  • , Roberto Luksch
  • , Carla Manzitti
  • , Sascha Troschke-Meurer
  • , Torsten Ebeling
  • , Paweł Kawalec
  • , Katarzyna Śladowska
  • , Ruth L. Ladenstein
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective: Dinutuximab beta (DB) and naxitamab (NAXI) with GM-CSF are used for maintenance treatment of relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma. The objective of this study was to systematically assess comparative efficacy of the two therapies within their designated indications in accordance with established clinical guidelines. Methods: Relevant evidence was identified in systematic literature review. Individual patient data (IPD) from prospective clinical trials of DB were assessed and data on patients with disease in bone or bone marrow, as assessed in MRI, CT, mIBG or biopsy, with incomplete response to previous therapy were included. Patients with complete response, progressive disease and/or soft tissue disease were excluded. DB population was adjusted for sex, MYCN amplification, disease type (relapsed, refractory), and disease site (bone marrow and/or bone) to balance aggregated characteristics of NAXI population. More characteristics were included in sensitivity analyses, including DB treatment without interleukin-2, as currently recommended. Overall response rate (ORR) was assessed as best response. Results: Aggregated data for NAXI from Study 201 (n = 52) and Study 230 (n = 38) and IPD from DB studies (APN311-202, APN311-304, c = 77) met the inclusion criteria. Compared to NAXI, DB significantly extended progression-free survival (PFS): hazard ratio, DB vs. NAXI of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.26 to 0.87, p = 0.015). ORR was 60.1% (95% CI: 48.5% to 71.6%) for DB vs. 43.3% (33.1% to 53.6%) for NAXI (ORR odds ratio, DB vs. NAXI was 1.97, 95% CI: 1.02 to 3.80, p = 0.044). Sensitivity analyses and unadjusted comparisons supported the results. Conclusion: In the indirect comparison, dinutuximab beta significantly extended PFS and increased ORR compared to naxitamab.

Original languageEnglish
Article number2723
JournalCancers
Volume17
Issue number17
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2025

Funding

FundersFunder number
European Commission
Recordati UK Ltd.
Children’s Cancer Centre in the Euroregion Pomerania
European Regional Development Fund
Interreg
Recordati Rare DiseasesINT0100016

    Keywords

    • dinutuximab beta
    • matching-adjusted indirect comparison
    • naxitamab
    • relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma
    • systematic review

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Dinutuximab Beta Versus Naxitamab in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Neuroblastoma in Patients with Stable Disease, Minor Response or Partial Response and Disease in Bone or Bone Marrow: Systematic Review and Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this