To the Editor In a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), Wang and colleagues1 pulled together 7 randomized clinical trials with a total of 7287 patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), suggesting that apalutamide and abiraterone acetate reported the most consistent survival benefits with an overall manageable safety profile. Interestingly, the authors used Bayesian NMA to optimize data extrapolation and to compare different treatments when no direct comparative trial exists; to try to compare evidence across trials, Wang et al used rigorous and well-accepted methods when conducting their study, also acknowledging several important limitations (eg, different follow-up durations and inconsistency in outcome measures). However, we believe some methodological aspects deserve specific discussion.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Rizzo A, Mollica V, Massari F. Considerations Regarding a Network Meta-analysis of Systemic Treatments for Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(7):1068. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.0960
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.