Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Since direct comparisons of long-acting growth hormones (LAGHs) are lacking, analyses were performed to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of somapacitan versus somatrogon and lonapegsomatropin in children with growth hormone deficiency (GHD). METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) identified studies of once-weekly LAGHs for the treatment of pediatric GHD. Indirect comparisons (ICs) using a Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis and a random effects model were performed using daily growth hormone (GH) 0.034 mg/kg/day (base case) or 0.024-0.034 mg/kg/day (alternative analyses) as the common comparator to compare height outcomes to 52 weeks [annualized height velocity, height velocity standard deviation score (SDS), and height SDS]. Identified evidence did not allow IC of safety or longer-term efficacy outcomes so these were qualitatively described. RESULTS: The SLR identified two somapacitan trials, three somatrogon trials (one included in alternative analyses only), and one lonapegsomatropin trial comparing the LAGH with daily GH in treatment-naïve pre-pubertal children for IC. ICs revealed no differences at 52 weeks between somapacitan versus somatrogon and lonapegsomatropin, as well as daily GH, with respect to all growth outcomes considered in children with GHD. All three LAGHs had sustained efficacy and were generally well tolerated, with comparable efficacy and safety to daily GH, with the exception of observed injection site pain for somatrogon. CONCLUSION: No efficacy and safety differences were identified in comparisons of once weekly somapacitan versus somatrogon and lonapegsomatropin, as well as daily GH. All treatments were generally well tolerated, with the exception of observed injection site pain for somatrogon.