1
|
Why are There not More Bayesian Clinical Trials? Ability to Interpret Bayesian and Conventional Statistics Among Medical Researchers. Ther Innov Regul Sci 2022; 57:426-435. [PMID: 36496452 DOI: 10.1007/s43441-022-00482-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Accepted: 11/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND We assessed current understandings in interpretation of Bayesian and traditional statistical results within the clinical researcher (non-statistician) community. METHODS Within a 22-question survey, including demographics and experience and comfort levels with Bayesian analyses, we included questions on how to interpret both Bayesian and traditional statistical outputs. We also assessed whether Bayesian or traditional interpretations are considered more useful. RESULTS Among the 323 respondent clinicians, 42.4% and 36.5% chose the correct interpretations of the posterior probability and 95% credible interval, respectively. Only 11.5% of respondents interpreted the p-value correctly and 23.5% interpreted the 95% confidence interval correctly. CONCLUSIONS Based on these survey results, we conclude that most of these clinicians face uncertainty when attempting to interpret results from both Bayesian and traditional statistical outputs. When presented with accurate interpretations, clinicians generally conclude that Bayesian results are more useful than conventional ones. We believe there is a need for education of clinicians in statistical interpretation in ways that are customized to this audience.
Collapse
|
2
|
Clark J, Muhlemann N, Natanegara F, Hartley A, Wenkert D, Wang F, Harrell FE, Bray R. Why are not There More Bayesian Clinical Trials? Perceived Barriers and Educational Preferences Among Medical Researchers Involved in Drug Development. Ther Innov Regul Sci 2022; 57:417-425. [PMID: 34978048 PMCID: PMC8720547 DOI: 10.1007/s43441-021-00357-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND The clinical trials community has been hesitant to adopt Bayesian statistical methods, which are often more flexible and efficient with more naturally interpretable results than frequentist methods. We aimed to identify self-reported barriers to implementing Bayesian methods and preferences for becoming comfortable with them. METHODS We developed a 22-question survey submitted to medical researchers (non-statisticians) from industry, academia, and regulatory agencies. Question areas included demographics, experience, comfort levels with Bayesian analyses, perceived barriers to these analyses, and preferences for increasing familiarity with Bayesian methods. RESULTS Of the 323 respondents, most were affiliated with pharmaceutical companies (33.4%), clinical research organizations (29.7%), and regulatory agencies (18.6%). The rest represented academia, medical practice, or other. Over 56% of respondents expressed little to no comfort in interpreting Bayesian analyses. "Insufficient knowledge of Bayesian approaches" was ranked the most important perceived barrier to implementing Bayesian methods by a plurality (48%). Of the approaches listed, in-person training was the most preferred for gaining comfort with Bayesian methods. CONCLUSIONS Based on these survey results, we recommend that introductory level training on Bayesian statistics be presented in an in-person workshop that could also be broadcast online with live Q&A. Other approaches such as online training or collaborative projects may be better suited for higher-level trainings where instructors may assume a baseline understanding of Bayesian statistics. Increased coverage of Bayesian methods at medical conferences and medical school trainings would help improve comfort and overcome the substantial knowledge barriers medical researchers face when implementing these methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Clark
- Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | - Fei Wang
- Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim Am Rhein, Germany
| | - Frank E Harrell
- Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Ross Bray
- Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nikolaidis GF, Woods B, Palmer S, Soares MO. Classifying information-sharing methods. BMC Med Res Methodol 2021; 21:107. [PMID: 34022810 PMCID: PMC8140466 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-021-01292-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2020] [Accepted: 04/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sparse relative effectiveness evidence is a frequent problem in Health Technology Assessment (HTA). Where evidence directly pertaining to the decision problem is sparse, it may be feasible to expand the evidence-base to include studies that relate to the decision problem only indirectly: for instance, when there is no evidence on a comparator, evidence on other treatments of the same molecular class could be used; similarly, a decision on children may borrow-strength from evidence on adults. Usually, in HTA, such indirect evidence is either included by ignoring any differences ('lumping') or not included at all ('splitting'). However, a range of more sophisticated methods exists, primarily in the biostatistics literature. The objective of this study is to identify and classify the breadth of the available information-sharing methods. METHODS Forwards and backwards citation-mining techniques were used on a set of seminal papers on the topic of information-sharing. Papers were included if they specified (network) meta-analytic methods for combining information from distinct populations, interventions, outcomes or study-designs. RESULTS Overall, 89 papers were included. A plethora of evidence synthesis methods have been used for information-sharing. Most papers (n=79) described methods that shared information on relative treatment effects. Amongst these, there was a strong emphasis on methods for information-sharing across multiple outcomes (n=42) and treatments (n=25), with fewer papers focusing on study-designs (n=23) or populations (n=8). We categorise and discuss the methods under four 'core' relationships of information-sharing: functional, exchangeability-based, prior-based and multivariate relationships, and explain the assumptions made within each of these core approaches. CONCLUSIONS This study highlights the range of information-sharing methods available. These methods often impose more moderate assumptions than lumping or splitting. Hence, the degree of information-sharing that they impose could potentially be considered more appropriate. Our identification of four 'core' methods of information-sharing allows for an improved understanding of the assumptions underpinning the different methods. Further research is required to understand how the methods differ in terms of the strength of sharing they impose and the implications of this for health care decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios F. Nikolaidis
- The University of York, Centre for Health Economics, Alcuin A Block, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
- IQVIA, 210 Pentonville Road, London, N1 9JY UK
| | - Beth Woods
- The University of York, Centre for Health Economics, Alcuin A Block, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Stephen Palmer
- The University of York, Centre for Health Economics, Alcuin A Block, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| | - Marta O. Soares
- The University of York, Centre for Health Economics, Alcuin A Block, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Change Point Analysis for Detecting Vaccine Safety Signals. Vaccines (Basel) 2021; 9:vaccines9030206. [PMID: 33801188 PMCID: PMC8001699 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines9030206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2021] [Revised: 02/14/2021] [Accepted: 02/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
It is important to detect signals of abrupt changes in adverse event reporting in order to notice public safety concerns and take prompt action, especially for vaccines under national immunization programs. In this study, we assessed the applicability of change point analysis (CPA) for signal detection in vaccine safety surveillance. The performances of three CPA methods, namely Bayesian change point analysis, Taylor’s change point analysis (Taylor-CPA), and environmental time series change point detection (EnvCpt), were assessed via simulated data with assumptions for the baseline number of events and degrees of change. The analysis was validated using the Korea Adverse Event Reporting System (KAERS) database. In the simulation study, the Taylor-CPA method exhibited better results for the detection of a change point (accuracy of 96% to 100%, sensitivity of 7% to 100%, specificity of 98% to 100%, positive predictive value of 25% to 85%, negative predictive value of 96% to 100%, and balanced accuracy of 53% to 100%) than the other two CPA methods. When the CPA methods were applied to reports of syncope or dizziness following human papillomavirus (HPV) immunization in the KAERS database, Taylor-CPA and EnvCpt detected a change point (Q2/2013), which was consistent with actual public safety concerns. CPA can be applied as an efficient tool for the early detection of vaccine safety signals.
Collapse
|
5
|
Shen Y, Jia Y, Zhou J, Ji J, Xun P. Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis for Assessing Adverse Effects of Anti-hepatitis B Drugs. Clin Drug Investig 2020; 39:835-846. [PMID: 31228017 DOI: 10.1007/s40261-019-00802-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Oral nucleoside/nucleotide analogues (NAs) have been advocated for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment with good efficacy. However, less attention has been put on their adverse events. Therefore, a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to evaluate the relative safety of five NAs (lamivudine, adefovir dipivoxil, entecavir, telbivudine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) in CHB treatment among adults. METHODS Eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies were systematically and thoroughly searched until May 1, 2019. Poisson-prior-based Bayesian NMA was performed to synthesize both direct and indirect evidence with reporting hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) for serious adverse events (SAEs) and hepatic/renal impairments. RESULTS Thirty-three RCTs and 11 prospective cohort studies were identified. As to SAEs, no statistically significant difference was found of any comparison among five NAs. In terms of hepatotoxicity, lamivudine was safer than telbivudine (HR 0.45; 95% CrI 0.21, 0.85), and entecavir increased the risk by 102% (entecavir vs lamivudine: HR 2.02; 95% CrI 1.19, 3.27). CONCLUSIONS The findings from this large NMA could influence clinical practice, and the methodological framework of this study could provide evidence-based support to analyze sparse safety data in the field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Shen
- Department of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, School of Public Health, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Yulong Jia
- Department of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, School of Public Health, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Jie Zhou
- Department of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, School of Public Health, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Juling Ji
- Department of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, School of Public Health, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China.
- Medical School of Nantong University, No. 19, Qixiu Rd, Nantong, Jiangsu, 226001, China.
| | - Pengcheng Xun
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health-Bloomington, Indiana University, 1025 E 7th Street C103, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Comparative efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions on agitation in people with dementia: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2019; 102:103489. [PMID: 31862527 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2019] [Revised: 09/17/2019] [Accepted: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Agitation in people with dementia is common and distressing and can lead to increased caregiver burden. However, medications often have adverse reactions and limited effectiveness. Thus, non-pharmacological interventions are being increasingly implemented. OBJECTIVES To compare and rank the efficacy of different non-pharmacological interventions in the management of agitation in people with dementia. DESIGN Bayesian network meta-analysis. METHODS A comprehensive electronic literature search was performed in five English databases and three Chinese databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were published up to January 2019. A random-effects model was selected to conduct traditional meta-analysis to directly examine the efficacy of different non-pharmacological interventions. The consistency model was selected to conduct a network meta-analysis to evaluate the relative effects and rank probability of different non-pharmacological interventions. RESULTS A total of 65 RCTs were included in this network meta-analysis involving 11 different non-pharmacological interventions. Network meta-analysis showed that massage therapy, animal-assisted intervention, and personally tailored intervention were associated with more substantial reductions in agitation compared with other interventions and controls. CONCLUSIONS Our study confirmed the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for ameliorating agitation in people with dementia and recommended several interventions for clinical practice. Healthcare professionals should be encouraged to apply promising non-pharmacological interventions (e.g. massage therapy, animal-assisted intervention and personally tailored intervention) for people with dementia during routine care.
Collapse
|
7
|
Hoyer A, Kuss O. Contribution to the discussion of "When should meta-analysis avoid making hidden normality assumptions?". Biom J 2018; 60:1073-1074. [PMID: 30069906 DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201800183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2018] [Revised: 07/02/2018] [Accepted: 07/02/2018] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Annika Hoyer
- German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University Duesseldorf, Institute for Biometrics and Epidemiology, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Oliver Kuss
- German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University Duesseldorf, Institute for Biometrics and Epidemiology, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Morgan D. Bayesian applications in pharmaceutical statistics. Pharm Stat 2018; 17:298-300. [PMID: 29943434 DOI: 10.1002/pst.1876] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/06/2018] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- David Morgan
- Department of Pharmaceutical Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tonin FS, Rotta I, Mendes AM, Pontarolo R. Network meta-analysis: a technique to gather evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Pharm Pract (Granada) 2017; 15:943. [PMID: 28503228 PMCID: PMC5386629 DOI: 10.18549/pharmpract.2017.01.943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 229] [Impact Index Per Article: 32.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2017] [Accepted: 03/07/2017] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Systematic reviews and pairwise meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, at
the intersection of clinical medicine, epidemiology and statistics, are
positioned at the top of evidence-based practice hierarchy. These are important
tools to base drugs approval, clinical protocols and guidelines formulation and
for decision-making. However, this traditional technique only partially yield
information that clinicians, patients and policy-makers need to make informed
decisions, since it usually compares only two interventions at the time. In the
market, regardless the clinical condition under evaluation, usually many
interventions are available and few of them have been studied in head-to-head
studies. This scenario precludes conclusions to be drawn from comparisons of all
interventions profile (e.g. efficacy and safety). The recent development and
introduction of a new technique – usually referred as network
meta-analysis, indirect meta-analysis, multiple or mixed treatment comparisons
– has allowed the estimation of metrics for all possible comparisons in
the same model, simultaneously gathering direct and indirect evidence. Over the
last years this statistical tool has matured as technique with models available
for all types of raw data, producing different pooled effect measures, using
both Frequentist and Bayesian frameworks, with different software packages.
However, the conduction, report and interpretation of network meta-analysis
still poses multiple challenges that should be carefully considered, especially
because this technique inherits all assumptions from pairwise meta-analysis but
with increased complexity. Thus, we aim to provide a basic explanation of
network meta-analysis conduction, highlighting its risks and benefits for
evidence-based practice, including information on statistical methods evolution,
assumptions and steps for performing the analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fernanda S Tonin
- MSc. (Pharm). Pharmaceutical Sciences Postgraduate Programme, Federal University of Paraná. Curitiba (Brazil).
| | - Inajara Rotta
- PhD. Pharmacy Service, Hospital de Clínicas, Federal University of Paraná. Curitiba (Brazil).
| | - Antonio M Mendes
- MSc. (Pharm). Pharmaceutical Sciences Postgraduate Programme, Federal University of Paraná. Curitiba (Brazil).
| | - Roberto Pontarolo
- PhD. Department of Pharmacy, Federal University of Paraná. Curitiba (Brazil).
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Odani M, Fukimbara S, Sato T. A Bayesian meta-analytic approach for safety signal detection in randomized clinical trials. Clin Trials 2017; 14:192-200. [DOI: 10.1177/1740774516683920] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
Background/Aim: Meta-analyses are frequently performed on adverse event data and are primarily used for improving statistical power to detect safety signals. However, in the evaluation of drug safety for New Drug Applications, simple pooling of adverse event data from multiple clinical trials is still commonly used. We sought to propose a new Bayesian hierarchical meta-analytic approach based on consideration of a hierarchical structure of reported individual adverse event data from multiple randomized clinical trials. Methods: To develop our meta-analysis model, we extended an existing three-stage Bayesian hierarchical model by including an additional stage of the clinical trial level in the hierarchical model; this generated a four-stage Bayesian hierarchical model. We applied the proposed Bayesian meta-analysis models to published adverse event data from three premarketing randomized clinical trials of tadalafil and to a simulation study motivated by the case example to evaluate the characteristics of three alternative models. Results: Comparison of the results from the Bayesian meta-analysis model with those from Fisher’s exact test after simple pooling showed that 6 out of 10 adverse events were the same within a top 10 ranking of individual adverse events with regard to association with treatment. However, more individual adverse events were detected in the Bayesian meta-analysis model than in Fisher’s exact test under the body system “Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders.” Moreover, comparison of the overall trend of estimates between the Bayesian model and the standard approach (odds ratios after simple pooling methods) revealed that the posterior median odds ratios for the Bayesian model for most adverse events shrank toward values for no association. Based on the simulation results, the Bayesian meta-analysis model could balance the false detection rate and power to a better extent than Fisher’s exact test. For example, when the threshold value of the posterior probability for signal detection was set to 0.8, the false detection rate was 41% and power was 88% in the Bayesian meta-analysis model, whereas the false detection rate was 56% and power was 86% in Fisher’s exact test. Limitations: Adverse events under the same body system were not necessarily positively related when we used “system organ class” and “preferred term” in the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities as a hierarchical structure of adverse events. For the Bayesian meta-analysis models to be effective, the validity of the hierarchical structure of adverse events and the grouping of adverse events are critical. Conclusion: Our proposed meta-analysis models considered trial effects to avoid confounding by trial and borrowed strength from both within and across body systems to obtain reasonable and stable estimates of an effect measure by considering a hierarchical structure of adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Motoi Odani
- Data Science, Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan
- Department of Biostatistics, Kyoto University School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan
| | | | - Tosiya Sato
- Department of Biostatistics, Kyoto University School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Bennetts M, Whalen E, Ahadieh S, Cappelleri JC. An appraisal of meta-analysis guidelines: how do they relate to safety outcomes? Res Synth Methods 2016; 8:64-78. [PMID: 27612447 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2015] [Revised: 06/10/2016] [Accepted: 06/22/2016] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Although well developed to assess efficacy questions, meta-analyses and, more generally, systematic reviews, have received less attention in application to safety-related questions. As a result, many open questions remain on how best to apply meta-analyses in the safety setting. This appraisal attempts to: (i) summarize the current guidelines for assessing individual studies, systematic reviews, and network meta-analyses; (ii) describe several publications on safety meta-analytic approaches; and (iii) present some of the questions and issues that arise with safety data. A number of gaps in the current quality guidelines are identified along with issues to consider when performing a safety meta-analysis. While some work is ongoing to provide guidance to improve the quality of safety meta-analyses, this review emphasizes the critical need for better reporting and increased transparency regarding safety data in the systematic review guidelines. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meg Bennetts
- Global Pharmacometrics, Pfizer Limited, Sandwich, Kent, UK
| | - Ed Whalen
- Statistics, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA
| | - Sima Ahadieh
- Global Pharmacometrics, Pfizer Inc., Groton, CT, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Singh JA, Hossain A, Kotb A, Oliveira A, Mudano AS, Grossman J, Winthrop K, Wells GA. Treatments for Lupus Nephritis: A Systematic Review and Network Metaanalysis. J Rheumatol 2016; 43:1801-1815. [PMID: 27585688 DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.160041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/20/2016] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare benefits and harms of lupus nephritis (LN) induction and maintenance treatments. METHODS We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network metaanalyses of randomized controlled trials (RCT) of immunosuppressive drugs or corticosteroids (CS) in LN. OR and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were calculated. RESULTS There were 65 RCT that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Significantly lower risk of endstage renal disease (ESRD; 17 studies) was seen with cyclophosphamide (CYC; OR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.25-0.92) or CYC + azathioprine (AZA; OR 0.18, 95% CrI 0.05-0.57) compared with standard-dose CS, and with high-dose (HD) CYC (OR 0.16, 95% CrI 0.03-0.61) or CYC + AZA (OR 0.10, 95% CrI 0.03-0.34) compared with HD CS. HD CS was associated with higher risk of ESRD compared with CYC (OR 3.59, 95% CrI 1.30-9.86), AZA (OR 2.93, 95% CrI 1.08-8.10), or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; OR 7.05, 95% CrI 1.66-31.91). Compared with CS, a significantly higher proportion of patients had renal response (14 studies) when treated with CYC (OR 1.98, 95% CrI 1.13-3.52), MMF (OR 2.42, 95% CrI 1.27-4.74), or tacrolimus (TAC; OR 4.20, 95% CrI 1.29-13.68). No differences were noted for the risk of malignancy (15 studies). The risk of herpes zoster (17 studies) was as follows: OR (95% CrI) MMF versus CS 4.38 (1.02-23.87), CYC versus CS 6.64 (1.97-25.71), TAC versus CS 9.11 (1.13-70.99), and CYC + AZA versus CS 8.46 (1.99-43.61). CONCLUSION Renal benefits and the risk of herpes zoster were higher for immunosuppressive drugs versus CS. Data on relative and absolute differences are now available, which can be incorporated into patient-physician discussions related to systemic lupus erythematosus medication use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jasvinder A Singh
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa.
| | - Alomgir Hossain
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| | - Ahmed Kotb
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| | - Ana Oliveira
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| | - Amy S Mudano
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| | - Jennifer Grossman
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| | - Kevin Winthrop
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| | - George A Wells
- From the Medicine Service, Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center; Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California; University of Oregon, Portland, Oregon, USA; Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.J.A. Singh, MBBS, MPH, Medicine Service, VA Medical Center, and Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; A. Hossain, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Kotb, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa; A. Oliveira, PhD, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; A.S. Mudano, MPH, Department of Medicine at the School of Medicine, and Division of Epidemiology at the School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham; J. Grossman, MD, University of California at San Francisco; K. Winthrop, MD, MPH, University of Oregon; G.A. Wells, PhD, Ottawa Heart Institute and the University of Ottawa
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Madden LV, Piepho HP, Paul PA. Statistical Models and Methods for Network Meta-Analysis. PHYTOPATHOLOGY 2016; 106:792-806. [PMID: 27111798 DOI: 10.1094/phyto-12-15-0342-rvw] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/14/2023]
Abstract
Meta-analysis, the methodology for analyzing the results from multiple independent studies, has grown tremendously in popularity over the last four decades. Although most meta-analyses involve a single effect size (summary result, such as a treatment difference) from each study, there are often multiple treatments of interest across the network of studies in the analysis. Multi-treatment (or network) meta-analysis can be used for simultaneously analyzing the results from all the treatments. However, the methodology is considerably more complicated than for the analysis of a single effect size, and there have not been adequate explanations of the approach for agricultural investigations. We review the methods and models for conducting a network meta-analysis based on frequentist statistical principles, and demonstrate the procedures using a published multi-treatment plant pathology data set. A major advantage of network meta-analysis is that correlations of estimated treatment effects are automatically taken into account when an appropriate model is used. Moreover, treatment comparisons may be possible in a network meta-analysis that are not possible in a single study because all treatments of interest may not be included in any given study. We review several models that consider the study effect as either fixed or random, and show how to interpret model-fitting output. We further show how to model the effect of moderator variables (study-level characteristics) on treatment effects, and present one approach to test for the consistency of treatment effects across the network. Online supplemental files give explanations on fitting the network meta-analytical models using SAS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L V Madden
- First and third authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Ohio State University, Wooster 44691; second author: Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Crop Science, University of Hohenheim, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
| | - H-P Piepho
- First and third authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Ohio State University, Wooster 44691; second author: Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Crop Science, University of Hohenheim, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
| | - P A Paul
- First and third authors: Department of Plant Pathology, Ohio State University, Wooster 44691; second author: Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Crop Science, University of Hohenheim, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Weaver J, Ohlssen D, Li JX. Strategies on Using Prior Information When Assessing Adverse Events. Stat Biopharm Res 2016. [DOI: 10.1080/19466315.2015.1067252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
15
|
Dias S, Ades AE. Absolute or relative effects? Arm-based synthesis of trial data. Res Synth Methods 2016; 7:23-8. [PMID: 26461457 PMCID: PMC5102631 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2015] [Revised: 07/28/2015] [Accepted: 08/13/2015] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- S Dias
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, USA
| | - A E Ades
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Efthimiou O, Debray TPA, van Valkenhoef G, Trelle S, Panayidou K, Moons KGM, Reitsma JB, Shang A, Salanti G. GetReal in network meta-analysis: a review of the methodology. Res Synth Methods 2016; 7:236-63. [PMID: 26754852 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 202] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2014] [Revised: 09/30/2015] [Accepted: 11/06/2015] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Pairwise meta-analysis is an established statistical tool for synthesizing evidence from multiple trials, but it is informative only about the relative efficacy of two specific interventions. The usefulness of pairwise meta-analysis is thus limited in real-life medical practice, where many competing interventions may be available for a certain condition and studies informing some of the pairwise comparisons may be lacking. This commonly encountered scenario has led to the development of network meta-analysis (NMA). In the last decade, several applications, methodological developments, and empirical studies in NMA have been published, and the area is thriving as its relevance to public health is increasingly recognized. This article presents a review of the relevant literature on NMA methodology aiming to pinpoint the developments that have appeared in the field. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Orestis Efthimiou
- Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece.
| | - Thomas P A Debray
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gert van Valkenhoef
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sven Trelle
- Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.,CTU Bern, Department of Clinical Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Klea Panayidou
- Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Karel G M Moons
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes B Reitsma
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Georgia Salanti
- Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Chen JJ, Lu TP, Chen YC, Lin WJ. Predictive biomarkers for treatment selection: statistical considerations. Biomark Med 2015; 9:1121-35. [DOI: 10.2217/bmm.15.84] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Predictive biomarkers are developed for treatment selection to identify patients who are likely to benefit from a particular therapy. This review describes statistical methods and discusses issues in the development of predictive biomarkers to enhance study efficiency for detection of treatment effect on the selected responder patients in clinical studies. The statistical procedure for treatment selection consists of three components: biomarker identification, subgroup selection and clinical utility assessment. Major statistical issues discussed include biomarker designs, procedures to identify predictive biomarkers, classification models for subgroup selection, subgroup analysis and multiple testing for clinical utility assessment and evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James J Chen
- Division of Bioinformatics & Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food & Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR 72079, USA
- Graduate Institute of Biostatistics, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
| | - Tzu-Pin Lu
- Department of Public Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Preventive Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Yu-Chuan Chen
- Division of Bioinformatics & Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food & Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR 72079, USA
| | - Wei-Jiun Lin
- Department of Applied Mathematics, Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Zhang J, Fu H, Carlin BP. Detecting outlying trials in network meta-analysis. Stat Med 2015; 34:2695-707. [PMID: 25851533 PMCID: PMC4496319 DOI: 10.1002/sim.6509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2014] [Revised: 03/06/2015] [Accepted: 03/24/2015] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Network meta-analysis (NMA) expands the scope of a conventional pairwise meta-analysis to simultaneously handle multiple treatment comparisons. However, some trials may appear to deviate markedly from the others and thus be inappropriate to be synthesized in the NMA. In addition, the inclusion of these trials in evidence synthesis may lead to bias in estimation. We call such trials trial-level outliers. To the best of our knowledge, while heterogeneity and inconsistency in NMA have been extensively discussed and well addressed, few previous papers have considered the proper detection and handling of trial-level outliers. In this paper, we propose several Bayesian outlier detection measures, which are then applied to a diabetes data set. Simulation studies comparing our approaches in both arm-based and contrast-based model settings are provided in two supporting appendices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Zhang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740 USA
| | - Haoda Fu
- Eli Lilly and Company, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA
| | - Bradley P. Carlin
- Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Bellanti F, van Wijk RC, Danhof M, Della Pasqua O. Integration of PKPD relationships into benefit-risk analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2015; 80:979-91. [PMID: 25940398 DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2014] [Revised: 04/10/2015] [Accepted: 04/17/2015] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
AIM Despite the continuous endeavour to achieve high standards in medical care through effectiveness measures, a quantitative framework for the assessment of the benefit-risk balance of new medicines is lacking prior to regulatory approval. The aim of this short review is to summarise the approaches currently available for benefit-risk assessment. In addition, we propose the use of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modelling as the pharmacological basis for evidence synthesis and evaluation of novel therapeutic agents. METHODS A comprehensive literature search has been performed using MESH terms in PubMed, in which articles describing benefit-risk assessment and modelling and simulation were identified. In parallel, a critical review of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is presented as a tool for characterising a drug's safety and efficacy profile. RESULTS A definition of benefits and risks has been proposed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in which qualitative and quantitative elements are included. However, in spite of the value of MCDA as a quantitative method, decisions about benefit-risk balance continue to rely on subjective expert opinion. By contrast, a model-informed approach offers the opportunity for a more comprehensive evaluation of benefit-risk balance before extensive evidence is generated in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS Benefit-risk balance should be an integral part of the risk management plan and as such considered before marketing authorisation. Modelling and simulation can be incorporated into MCDA to support the evidence synthesis as well evidence generation taking into account the underlying correlations between favourable and unfavourable effects. In addition, it represents a valuable tool for the optimization of protocol design in effectiveness trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Bellanti
- Division of Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, the Netherlands
| | - Rob C van Wijk
- Division of Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, the Netherlands
| | - Meindert Danhof
- Division of Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, the Netherlands
| | - Oscar Della Pasqua
- Division of Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, the Netherlands.,Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University College London, London.,Clinical Pharmacology Modelling & Simulation, GlaxoSmithKline, Stockley Park, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Agapova M, Devine EB, Nguyen H, Wolf FM, Inoue LYT. Using indirect comparisons to compare interventions within a Cochrane review: a tool for comparative effectiveness research. J Comp Eff Res 2015; 3:345-57. [PMID: 25275232 DOI: 10.2217/cer.14.29] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
AIM Assessing relative performance among competing interventions is an important part of comparative effectiveness research. Bayesian indirect comparisons add information to existing Cochrane reviews, such as which intervention is likely to perform best. However, heterogeneity variance priors may influence results and, potentially, clinical guidance. METHODS We highlight the features of Bayesian indirect comparisons using a case study of a Cochrane review update in asthma care. The probability that one self-management educational intervention outperforms others is estimated. Simulation studies investigate the effect of heterogeneity variance prior distributions. RESULTS Results suggest a 55% probability that individual education is best, followed by combination (39%) and group (6%). The intervention with few trials was sensitive to prior distributions. CONCLUSION Bayesian indirect comparisons updates of Cochrane reviews are valuable comparative effectiveness research tools.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Agapova
- Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research & Policy Program, University of Washington, Box 357630, Seattle, WA 98195-7630, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Pechlivanoglou P, Abegaz F, Postma MJ, Wit E. An alternative parameterization of Bayesian logistic hierarchical models for mixed treatment comparisons. Pharm Stat 2015; 14:322-31. [DOI: 10.1002/pst.1688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2013] [Revised: 02/23/2015] [Accepted: 04/12/2015] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Petros Pechlivanoglou
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative; University of Toronto; 144 College St Toronto Ontario Canada
- Unit of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Pharmacy; University of Groningen; A. Deusinglaan 1, 9713AV Groningen The Netherlands
| | - Fentaw Abegaz
- Johann Bernoulli Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science; University of Groningen; Nijenborgh 9, 9747AG Groningen The Netherlands
| | - Maarten J Postma
- Unit of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Pharmacy; University of Groningen; A. Deusinglaan 1, 9713AV Groningen The Netherlands
| | - Ernst Wit
- Johann Bernoulli Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science; University of Groningen; Nijenborgh 9, 9747AG Groningen The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Hutton B, Salanti G, Chaimani A, Caldwell DM, Schmid C, Thorlund K, Mills E, Catalá-López F, Turner L, Altman DG, Moher D. The quality of reporting methods and results in network meta-analyses: an overview of reviews and suggestions for improvement. PLoS One 2014; 9:e92508. [PMID: 24671099 PMCID: PMC3966807 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2014] [Accepted: 02/21/2014] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Some have suggested the quality of reporting of network meta-analyses (a technique used to synthesize information to compare multiple interventions) is sub-optimal. We sought to review information addressing this claim. OBJECTIVE To conduct an overview of existing evaluations of quality of reporting in network meta-analyses and indirect treatment comparisons, and to compile a list of topics which may require detailed reporting guidance to enhance future reporting quality. METHODS An electronic search of Medline and the Cochrane Registry of methodologic studies (January 2004-August 2013) was performed by an information specialist. Studies describing findings from quality of reporting assessments were sought. Screening of abstracts and full texts was performed by two team members. Descriptors related to all aspects of reporting a network meta-analysis were summarized. RESULTS We included eight reports exploring the quality of reporting of network meta-analyses. From past reviews, authors found several aspects of network meta-analyses were inadequately reported, including primary information about literature searching, study selection, and risk of bias evaluations; statement of the underlying assumptions for network meta-analysis, as well as efforts to verify their validity; details of statistical models used for analyses (including information for both Bayesian and Frequentist approaches); completeness of reporting of findings; and approaches for summarizing probability measures as additional important considerations. CONCLUSIONS While few studies were identified, several deficiencies in the current reporting of network meta-analyses were observed. These findings reinforce the need to develop reporting guidance for network meta-analyses. Findings from this review will be used to guide next steps in the development of reporting guidance for network meta-analysis in the format of an extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis) Statement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian Hutton
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Georgia Salanti
- Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Anna Chaimani
- Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Deborah M. Caldwell
- School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Chris Schmid
- Center for Evidence-based Medicine, Program in Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America
| | - Kristian Thorlund
- Standard Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Edward Mills
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Standard Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America
| | - Ferrán Catalá-López
- Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance, Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Products Agency (AEMPS), Madrid, Spain
| | - Lucy Turner
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Douglas G. Altman
- Oxford Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United States of America
| | - David Moher
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|