Table 2

Results of the network meta-analyses for the primary outcomes (OS and PFS) and grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events

Primary NMA of RCTsSensitivity NMA of RCTs and observational studies
Overall survivalProbability most effective (%)HR versus everolimus (95% credible interval)
 Lenvatinib+everolimus61 0.61 (0.36 to 0.96) 0.61 (0.36 to 0.96)
 Cabozantinib28 0.66 (0.53 to 0.82) 0.66 (0.53 to 0.83)
 Nivolumab10 0.74 (0.57 to 0.93) 0.74 (0.57 to 0.93)
 Axitinib1.14 (0.95 to 1.37)
 Sorafenib1.38 (1.12 to 1.68)
 BSC21.90 (0.61 to 4.53)1.90 (0.60 to 4.56)
Progression-free survivalProbability most effective (%)HR versus everolimus (95% credible interval)
 Lenvatinib+everolimus67 0.47 (0.26 to 0.77) 0.47 (0.26 to 0.77)
 Cabozantinib34 0.51 (0.41 to 0.63) 0.51 (0.41 to 0.63)
 Axitinib0.84 (0.70 to 1.00)
 Sorafenib1.17 (0.95 to 1.43)
 BSC0 3.06 (2.31 to 3.97) 3.06 (2.31 to 3.97)
Grade 3 or four adverse eventsProbability least harmful (%)OR versus everolimus (95% credible interval)
 Lenvatinib+everolimus0 2.67 (1.05 to 5.68)
 Cabozantinib0 1.66 (1.18 to 2.27)
 Nivolumab1000.40 (0.29 to 0.55)
  • SC, best supportive care; NMA, network meta-analysis; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; RCT, randomised controlled trial.

  • Numbers in bold are statistically significant.