OBJECTIVES: In the past, interferon (IFN) has proven to be effective in extending the survival of patients with RCC. New TT, drugs such as Sunitinib (SU), Sorafenib (SO) and Bevacizumab (BE) have been tested against IFN. Recently, a new study was published, comparing a new TT, Pazopanib (PZ) versus placebo (PLA) but not interferon.  An important question arose about the relative efficacy of PZ versus other TT and IFN, given that the control group used was not an active one in the PZ trial. When head-to-head studies are lacking; an ICMA can help solving the problem of relative efficacy. Our aim was to perform an ICMA comparing TT. METHODS: We performed a systematic review, searching for randomized controlled trials that compared TT against IFN or PLA, or those that compared PLA versus IFN. We conducted an indirect comparison meta-analysis that used PLA as a bridge to compare the different TT. The end point of interest was progression free survival (PFS). The results are expressed as Hazard Ratio (HR), with the corresponding confidence interval of 95% (CI). RESULTS: We found 8 randomized controlled trials that fit our inclusion criteria. The results of the ICMA for PFS were: PZ versus SU [HR= 1.19; CI = 0.37 to 3.85]; PZ versus IFN [HR=0.59; CI = 0.23 to 1.55]; PZ versus SO [HR=0.75; CI = 0.22 to 2.54]; PZ X BE [HR=0.83; CI=0.31 to 2.24] CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that PZ was superior to placebo but not to IFN. The confidence intervals obtained from the analysis were very wide precluding a definitive conclusion regarding the relative efficacy of TT, although there was a trend to confirm the superiority of SU.