Background: During the last decade several novel treatment options including TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been developed for the treatment of mRCC patients. However, results from direct comparisons (head-to-head RCTs) to determine the optimal treatment are lacking for most of these agents. In this network meta-analysis we attempted to indirectly compare efficacy and safety of first-line TKIs in patients with mRCC. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched (English language only). Abstracts of conferences of relevant medical societies were also included from database inception (January 1, 2007) to January 15, 2019. A systematic manual search (including data requests from the publication authors) was also performed. For the purpose of this network meta-analysis only phase II/III RCTs assessing approved first-line TKI therapy for mRCC were analysed. The analysis was done using the software R with the netmeta package. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint; grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) were secondary endpoints. Results: A database search identified 12 studies meeting the eligibility criteria reporting on 4,460 patients. For PFS cabozantinib and sunitinib were found to be superior to sorafenib, however, when compared to tivozanib, PFS did not significantly differ between the TKIs. Furthermore, tivozanib was found to have the highest probability of being the safest drug as first-line treatment in terms of grade 3 and 4 AEs (ranking safety, p score 0.9344). Conclusions: No significant PFS differences for all TKIs currently used for first-line treatment of mRCC have been found when compared with tivozanib. Compared with all approved TKIs tivozanib appears to be the best choice for first-line treatment of these patients because it has demonstrated the most favourable safety profile. These results may provide guidance to oncologists when making treatment decisions for mRCC patients.