Yao, Yuan

e15003 Background: Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have shown substantial promise as therapies for metastatic breast cancer (mBC). However, direct comparisons of different ADC-based regimens are limited. We assessed survival outcomes in mBC patients treated with ADCs. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before October 2024 were searched in Medline, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall surcvival (OS) outcomes were extracted from the most updated publications. Participants were stratified based on molecular subtypes, hormone receptor (HR) status, duration of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) treatment, and sensitivity to endocrine therapy (ET). Bayesian frameworks were deployed, presenting the synthesized outcomes of indirect comparisons using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% credible interval (Crl). This study was prospectively registered on the International Platform of Registered Systemic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) (INPLASY2024110021). Results: A total of 6449 patients from 12 RCTs of ADCs ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), sacituzumab govitecan (SG), trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd), and datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) were included in the analysis. Compared to chemotherapy, T-DXd significantly improved PFS (HR 0.35, 95% Crl 0.15-0.84) and OS (HR 0.56, 95% Crl 0.32-1.0). SG also significantly extended OS (HR 0.65, 95% Crl 0.43-0.97) but not PFS. In HER2+ mBC, pooled analyses revealed T-DXd was the most effective treatment in terms of PFS, with a SUCRA of 94.2%, followed by T-DM1 (58.9%), and chemotherapy with HER2-directed therapy (34.2%). Synthesized outcomes of OS mirrored the PFS outcomes. In HR+/HER2- mBC (some of which was HER2-low), Dato-DXd (76.1%) showed slightly superior efficacy over SG (67.4%) for PFS, while SG (85.1%) was advantageous over Dato-DXd (49.1%) in terms of OS. Among patients with HR+/HER2+ mBC, T-DXd (80.0%), SG (55.5%), and chemotherapy with HER2-directed therapy (53.1%) were the most effective therapies for prolonging PFS. Regarding OS, SG (70.3%) and T-DM1 (60.3%) were the most effective, with comparable efficacy observed between chemotherapy with HER2-directed therapy (52.1%) and T-DXd (52.0%). In HR-/HER2+ mBC, T-DXd (78.1%), SG (56.1%), and T-DM1 (51.5%) significantly prolonged PFS, while SG (69.4%) had the most substantial benefit for OS, followed by T-DXd (62.8%) and chemotherapy with HER2-directed therapy (57.6%). Dato-DXd showed an advantage over SG in mBC patients received CDK4/6i for > 12 months. Conclusions: This network meta-analysis showed prominent survival benefits with ADC-containing regimens for mBC. Our results provide valuable insights into personalized treatment strategies for mBC patients.

335 Background: Systematic reviews are outdated quickly when the evidence is rapidly evolving as the process is laborious and there is little incentive for primary author team of an index SRMA to update the evidence. Consequently, there is an epidemic of redundant SRMAs performed by different teams—sometimes with conflicted results—for treatment of first line mRCC. Methods: We have created a living, interactive systematic review (LISR)and network meta-analysis(LINMA) for the treatment of first line mRCC using an Artificial intelligence (AI) assisted framework for evidence synthesis (Living, Interactive evidence synthesis framework) (LIvE) . The framework is implemented in five-layered architecture (application layer, shared module layer, core service layer, middleware layer, and storage layer) which work together to automate the identification of new studies and analysis and semi-automate the screening and data extraction. Dynamic features such as interactive tables, figures and evidence maps are enabled using Python and JavaScript programming languages. Results: We have maintained a living, interactive evidence profile for the first line treatment mRCC since September 2019 ( LIVING WEBSITE) . Living search strategy identifies new studies as they become available. As of October 13, 2020 LISR, includes data 14 clinical trials ( PRISMA ). Baseline characteristics are summarized in an interactive table ( TABLE) . Cabozantinib& Nivolumab (Cabo-Nivo) is the highest ranked drug for improving Overall Response (OR), Progression Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) whereas Ipilimumab in combination with Nivolumab (Ipi-Nivo) is highest ranked drug for achieving complete response (CR). Ipi-Nivo and Atezolizumab & Bevacizumab (Ate-Bev) ranked highest and Cabo-Nivo ranked lowest for treatment related Adverse events (TRAEs). Results of network meta-analysis are summarized as interactive tables and plots ( NMA ), summary of findings tables ( MULTIPLE COMAPRISONS ) and evidence maps ( MAP ). Conclusions: LISRs can potentially reduce redundancy, increase transparency, reproducibility, enable shared-decision making (at a guideline level, or in a patient-clinician dyad) and support living guidelines.

5583 Background: FDA has approved three novel AAs [Apalutamide(A), Darolutamide(D) and Enzalutamide(E)] in combination with Androgen deprivation therapy ( ADT) for treatment of (nmCRPC) patients (pts). We report the cost-effectiveness of these drugs from the US perspective to help facilitate the choice of these agents for clinical practice. Methods: A life time Markov state-transition model was constructed with three health states (Metastasis-Free Survival[MFS], Metastatic disease, and Death) to compare cost-effectiveness of AA therapies for treatment of nmCRPC based on US healthcare payer perspective. A network meta-analysis of MFS and OS was conducted due to the lack of head to head trials. An approximation of the original individual-level patient time-to-event data were derived from digitized Kaplan-Meier curves for OS and MFS. Weibull distributions was selected as the best fitted model fitted and extrapolated as per the NICE decision support unit recommendations. Medication costs were based on wholesale acquisition cost. Adverse event (AE) grades 3/4 management costs were incorporated in the model. Discount rate of 3% per year was applied to costs and effects. Life years (LYs) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) for each treatment as well as the incremental cost effectiveness (ICER) and cost utility (ICUR) ratios were estimated. Base case analyses (BCA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were estimated. Results: The table summarizes the results form BCA analyses. A+ADT offers best gain in LYs (8.37yrs) and QALYs (5.30 yrs) but at higher cost. Conclusions: Apalutamide was associated with gains in LYs and QALYs traded off with higher lifetime cost relative to other AA alternatives. ADT was associated with lower gains in LYs and QALYs traded off with lower lifetime cost relative to other alternatives. Based on a $150,000/QALY threshold pay off, A+ADT is likely more cost effective compared to E+ADT or ADT alone; while E+ ADT may be more cost effective compared to D+ ADT. [Table: see text]

709 Background: Several immunotherapy (IMT) combinations either as an IMT doublet or IMT in combination with TKIs are now available for first-line therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). In the absence of head-to-head clinical trials, we performed an indirect comparison of frontline treatment options to provide clinical guidance. Methods: Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant trials. Hazard ratios (HR) and confidence interval (CI) for primary outcome of progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary outcome of overall survival (OS) were abstracted. Network meta-analysis was performed using a multivariate, consistency model, random-effects meta-regression. Data on Grade 3 or higher AEs was abstracted and meta-analyzed. Pre-specified subgroup analyses were performed based on risk categories (high risk vs low and intermediate vs), history of prior nephrectomy, PD-L1 positivity, age and sex. Risk for bias(RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Results: Nine studies were included for PFS analysis, and 6 studies for OS analysis. Avelumab-axitinib (AA) (HR 0.69, 0.48-0.96), and Pembrolizumab-Axitinib (PA) (HR 0.89, 0.50-0.96) significantly improved PFS, while there was no significant PFS benefit with atezolizumab-bevacizumab (AB) (HR 0.83, 0.62-1.13) and nivolumab-ipilimumab (NI) (HR 0.85, 0.63-1.15) as compared to Sunitinib. PA (HR 0.53, 0.38-0.75) and NI (HR 0.63, 0.44-0.90) significantly improved OS, while AB (HR 0.93, 0.75-1.12) showed no significant OS benefit as compared to Sunitinib. NI and AB had significantly fewer grade ≥3 AE than sunitinib. No significant interaction was found by risk group, age, sex or prior nephrectomy. Significant interaction was found by PD-L1 expression(p<0.001), with significant PFS improvement in PD-L1 positive (HR 0.62, 0.53-0.73) but not in PD-L1 negative patients (HR 0.92, 0.81-1.05). Overall, RoB was low amongst included studies. Conclusions: AA improved PFS, NI improved OS, whereas PA improve both PFS and OS as compared to sunitinib monotherapy. However, no IMT combination was superior to other combinations. Cost effectiveness analysis will be reported separately.