# Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of CPX- 351 in secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia between the registrative trial and a real-life study

## TL;DR

This study compares the effectiveness and safety of CPX-351 versus standard treatment in a real-life setting for a type of leukemia with poor outcomes.

## Contribution

The study demonstrates the potential of MAIC to compare trials with significant differences in real-world settings.

## Key findings

- CPX-351 significantly improves survival and remission rates compared to '7 + 3'.
- CPX-351 has a good safety profile in high-risk leukemia patients.
- MAIC is a viable method for comparing studies with strong differences.

## Abstract

A real-life study on CPX-351 and the standard arm (‘7 + 3’) of the CPX-351 registrative trial in adults with secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia were compared by an unanchored Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), in order to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of CPX-351. Results of this study are important to confirm the role of CPX-351 in significantly improving survival and remission rates compared with ‘7 + 3’ with a good safety profile in AML patients with high-risk features, a target group traditionally with a very poor prognosis. Moreover, this pilot analysis underlines the potentiality of the statistical method to compare studies with strong differences.