1
|
Azizi M, Sharp ASP, Fisher NDL, Weber MA, Lobo MD, Daemen J, Lurz P, Mahfoud F, Schmieder RE, Basile J, Bloch MJ, Saxena M, Wang Y, Sanghvi K, Jenkins JS, Devireddy C, Rader F, Gosse P, Claude L, Augustin DA, McClure CK, Kirtane AJ. Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of Endovascular Ultrasound Renal Denervation or a Sham Procedure 6 Months After Medication Escalation: The RADIANCE Clinical Trial Program. Circulation 2024; 149:747-759. [PMID: 37883784 DOI: 10.1161/circulationaha.123.066941] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2023] [Accepted: 10/24/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The randomized, sham-controlled RADIANCE-HTN (A Study of the Recor Medical Paradise System in Clinical Hypertension) SOLO, RADIANCE-HTN TRIO, and RADIANCE II (A Study of the Recor Medical Paradise System in Stage II Hypertension) trials independently met their primary end point of a greater reduction in daytime ambulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP) 2 months after ultrasound renal denervation (uRDN) in patients with hypertension. To characterize the longer-term effectiveness and safety of uRDN versus sham at 6 months, after the blinded addition of antihypertensive treatments (AHTs), we pooled individual patient data across these 3 similarly designed trials. METHODS Patients with mild to moderate hypertension who were not on AHT or with hypertension resistant to a standardized combination triple AHT were randomized to uRDN (n=293) versus sham (n=213); they were to remain off of added AHT throughout 2 months of follow-up unless specified blood pressure (BP) criteria were exceeded. In each trial, if monthly home BP was ≥135/85 mm Hg from 2 to 5 months, standardized AHT was sequentially added to target home BP <135/85 mm Hg under blinding to initial treatment assignment. Six-month outcomes included baseline- and AHT-adjusted change in daytime ambulatory, home, and office SBP; change in AHT; and safety. Linear mixed regression models using all BP measurements and change in AHT from baseline through 6 months were used. RESULTS Patients (70% men) were 54.1±9.3 years of age with a baseline daytime ambulatory/home/office SBP of 150.5±9.8/151.0±12.4/155.5±14.4 mm Hg, respectively. From 2 to 6 months, BP decreased in both groups with AHT titration, but fewer uRDN patients were prescribed AHT (P=0.004), and fewer additional AHT were prescribed to uRDN patients versus sham patients (P=0.001). Whereas the unadjusted between-group difference in daytime ambulatory SBP was similar at 6 months, the baseline and medication-adjusted between-group difference at 6 months was -3.0 mm Hg (95% CI, -5.7, -0.2; P=0.033), in favor of uRDN+AHT. For home and office SBP, the adjusted between-group differences in favor of uRDN+AHT over 6 months were -5.4 mm Hg (-6.8, -4.0; P<0.001) and -5.2 mm Hg (-7.1, -3.3; P<0.001), respectively. There was no heterogeneity between trials. Safety outcomes were few and did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS This individual patient-data analysis of 506 patients included in the RADIANCE trials demonstrates the maintenance of BP-lowering efficacy of uRDN versus sham at 6 months, with fewer added AHTs. REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02649426 and NCT03614260.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michel Azizi
- Université Paris Cité, France (M.A.)
- AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Hypertension Department and DMU CARTE, Paris, France (M.A.)
- INSERM, Paris, France (M.A.)
| | - Andrew S P Sharp
- University Hospital of Wales and Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK (A.S.P.S.)
| | | | - Michael A Weber
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, State University of New York, Downstate Medical Center, New York (M.A.W., M.S.)
| | - Melvin D Lobo
- Barts NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, UK (M.D.L.)
| | - Joost Daemen
- Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands (J.D.)
| | - Philipp Lurz
- Zentrum für Kardiologie, Universitätsmedizin Mainz, Germany (P.L.)
| | - Felix Mahfoud
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany (F.M.)
- Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (F.M.)
| | - Roland E Schmieder
- Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich Alexander University, Erlangen, Germany (R.E.S.)
| | - Jan Basile
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston (J.B.)
| | - Michael J Bloch
- Department of Medicine, University of Nevada School of Medicine, Vascular Care, Renown Institute of Heart and Vascular Health, Reno (M.J.B.)
| | - Manish Saxena
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, State University of New York, Downstate Medical Center, New York (M.A.W., M.S.)
| | - Yale Wang
- Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, MN (Y.W.)
| | | | | | - Chandan Devireddy
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA (C.D.)
| | - Florian Rader
- Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, CA (F.R.)
| | | | - Lisa Claude
- Recor Medical, Inc., Palo Alto, CA (L.C., D.A.A.)
| | | | | | - Ajay J Kirtane
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital and the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY (A.J.K.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Godolphin PJ, Marlin N, Cornett C, Fisher DJ, Tierney JF, White IR, Rogozińska E. Use of multiple covariates in assessing treatment-effect modifiers: A methodological review of individual participant data meta-analyses. Res Synth Methods 2024; 15:107-116. [PMID: 37771175 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2023] [Revised: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 09/18/2023] [Indexed: 09/30/2023]
Abstract
Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses of randomised trials are considered a reliable way to assess participant-level treatment effect modifiers but may not make the best use of the available data. Traditionally, effect modifiers are explored one covariate at a time, which gives rise to the possibility that evidence of treatment-covariate interaction may be due to confounding from a different, related covariate. We aimed to evaluate current practice when estimating treatment-covariate interactions in IPD meta-analysis, specifically focusing on involvement of additional covariates in the models. We reviewed 100 IPD meta-analyses of randomised trials, published between 2015 and 2020, that assessed at least one treatment-covariate interaction. We identified four approaches to handling additional covariates: (1) Single interaction model (unadjusted): No additional covariates included (57/100 IPD meta-analyses); (2) Single interaction model (adjusted): Adjustment for the main effect of at least one additional covariate (35/100); (3) Multiple interactions model: Adjustment for at least one two-way interaction between treatment and an additional covariate (3/100); and (4) Three-way interaction model: Three-way interaction formed between treatment, the additional covariate and the potential effect modifier (5/100). IPD is not being utilised to its fullest extent. In an exemplar dataset, we demonstrate how these approaches lead to different conclusions. Researchers should adjust for additional covariates when estimating interactions in IPD meta-analysis providing they adjust their main effects, which is already widely recommended. Further, they should consider whether more complex approaches could provide better information on who might benefit most from treatments, improving patient choice and treatment policy and practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter J Godolphin
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London, UK
| | - Nadine Marlin
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Chantelle Cornett
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London, UK
| | - David J Fisher
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London, UK
| | - Jayne F Tierney
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London, UK
| | - Ian R White
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London, UK
| | - Ewelina Rogozińska
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Parikh SA, Schneider PA, Mullin CM, Rogers T, Gray WA. Mortality in randomised controlled trials using paclitaxel-coated devices for femoropopliteal interventional procedures: an updated patient-level meta-analysis. Lancet 2023; 402:1848-1856. [PMID: 37890499 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(23)02189-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Revised: 09/22/2023] [Accepted: 09/27/2023] [Indexed: 10/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Numerous randomised clinical trials and real-world studies have supported the safety of paclitaxel-coated devices for the treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease. However, a 2018 summary-level meta-analysis suggested an increased mortality risk for paclitaxel-coated devices compared with uncoated control devices. This study presents an updated analysis of deaths using the most complete and current data available from pivotal trials of paclitaxel-coated versus control devices. METHODS Ten trials comparing paclitaxel-coated versus control devices were included in a patient-level pooled analysis. Cox regression models were used to evaluate the effect of paclitaxel exposure on risk of death in both intention-to-treat (ITT; primary analysis) and three as-treated analysis sets accounting for treatment group crossover at the index procedure and over time. The effect of paclitaxel dose and baseline covariates were also evaluated. FINDINGS A total of 2666 participants were included with a median follow-up of 4·9 years. No significant increase in deaths was observed for patients treated with paclitaxel-coated devices. This was true in the ITT analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 1·14, 95% CI 0·93-1·40), the as-treated analysis (HR 1·13, 95% CI 0·92-1·39), and in two crossover analyses: 1·07 (0·87-1·31) when late crossovers were censored and 1·04 (0·84-1·28) when crossovers were analysed from the date of paclitaxel exposure. There was no significant effect of paclitaxel dose on mortality risk. INTERPRETATION This meta-analysis found no association between paclitaxel-coated device exposure and risk of death, providing reassurance to patients, physicians, and regulators on the safety of paclitaxel-coated devices. FUNDING Becton Dickinson, Boston Scientific, Cook, Medtronic, Philips, Surmodics, and TriReme Medical.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sahil A Parikh
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Peter A Schneider
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Tyson Rogers
- North American Science Associates, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - William A Gray
- Division of Cardiology, Lankenau Heart Institute, Main Line Health, Wynnewood, PA, USA; Department of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel School of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Brantner CL, Chang TH, Nguyen TQ, Hong H, Stefano LD, Stuart EA. Methods for Integrating Trials and Non-experimental Data to Examine Treatment Effect Heterogeneity. Stat Sci 2023; 38:640-654. [PMID: 38638306 PMCID: PMC11025720 DOI: 10.1214/23-sts890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
Estimating treatment effects conditional on observed covariates can improve the ability to tailor treatments to particular individuals. Doing so effectively requires dealing with potential confounding, and also enough data to adequately estimate effect moderation. A recent influx of work has looked into estimating treatment effect heterogeneity using data from multiple randomized controlled trials and/or observational datasets. With many new methods available for assessing treatment effect heterogeneity using multiple studies, it is important to understand which methods are best used in which setting, how the methods compare to one another, and what needs to be done to continue progress in this field. This paper reviews these methods broken down by data setting: aggregate-level data, federated learning, and individual participant-level data. We define the conditional average treatment effect and discuss differences between parametric and nonparametric estimators, and we list key assumptions, both those that are required within a single study and those that are necessary for data combination. After describing existing approaches, we compare and contrast them and reveal open areas for future research. This review demonstrates that there are many possible approaches for estimating treatment effect heterogeneity through the combination of datasets, but that there is substantial work to be done to compare these methods through case studies and simulations, extend them to different settings, and refine them to account for various challenges present in real data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carly Lupton Brantner
- Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA
| | - Ting-Hsuan Chang
- Department of Biostatistics, Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York 10032, USA
| | - Trang Quynh Nguyen
- Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA
| | - Hwanhee Hong
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA
| | - Leon Di Stefano
- Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA
| | - Elizabeth A Stuart
- Departments of Biostatistics, Mental Health, and Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Riley RD, Ensor J, Hattle M, Papadimitropoulou K, Morris TP. Two-stage or not two-stage? That is the question for IPD meta-analysis projects. Res Synth Methods 2023; 14:903-910. [PMID: 37606180 PMCID: PMC7615283 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2023] [Revised: 06/27/2023] [Accepted: 07/22/2023] [Indexed: 08/23/2023]
Abstract
Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) projects obtain, check, harmonise and synthesise raw data from multiple studies. When undertaking the meta-analysis, researchers must decide between a two-stage or a one-stage approach. In a two-stage approach, the IPD are first analysed separately within each study to obtain aggregate data (e.g., treatment effect estimates and standard errors); then, in the second stage, these aggregate data are combined in a standard meta-analysis model (e.g., common-effect or random-effects). In a one-stage approach, the IPD from all studies are analysed in a single step using an appropriate model that accounts for clustering of participants within studies and, potentially, between-study heterogeneity (e.g., a general or generalised linear mixed model). The best approach to take is debated in the literature, and so here we provide clearer guidance for a broad audience. Both approaches are important tools for IPDMA researchers and neither are a panacea. If most studies in the IPDMA are small (few participants or events), a one-stage approach is recommended due to using a more exact likelihood. However, in other situations, researchers can choose either approach, carefully following best practice. Some previous claims recommending to always use a one-stage approach are misleading, and the two-stage approach will often suffice for most researchers. When differences do arise between the two approaches, often it is caused by researchers using different modelling assumptions or estimation methods, rather than using one or two stages per se.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard D. Riley
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental SciencesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
| | - Joie Ensor
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental SciencesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
| | - Miriam Hattle
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental SciencesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
- School of MedicineKeele UniversityKeeleStaffordshireUK
| | | | - Tim P. Morris
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCLInstitute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, UCLLondonUK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Marlin N, Godolphin PJ, Hooper RL, Riley RD, Rogozińska E. Nonlinear effects and effect modification at the participant-level in IPD meta-analysis part 2: methodological guidance is available. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 159:319-329. [PMID: 37146657 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2023] [Revised: 03/20/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To review methodological guidance for nonlinear covariate-outcome associations (NL), and linear effect modification and nonlinear effect modification (LEM and NLEM) at the participant level in individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) and their power requirements. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library to identify methodology publications on IPDMA of LEM, NL or NLEM (PROSPERO CRD42019126768). RESULTS Through screening 6,466 records we identified 54 potential articles of which 23 full texts were relevant. Nine further relevant publications were published before or after the literature search and were added. Of these 32 references, 21 articles considered LEM, 6 articles NL or NLEM and 6 articles described sample size calculations. A book described all four. Sample size may be calculated through simulation or closed form. Assessments of LEM or NLEM at the participant level need to be based on within-trial information alone. Nonlinearity (NL or NLEM) can be modeled using polynomials or splines to avoid categorization. CONCLUSION Detailed methodological guidance on IPDMA of effect modification at participant-level is available. However, methodology papers for sample size and nonlinearity are rarer and may not cover all scenarios. On these aspects, further guidance is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadine Marlin
- Methodology Research Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London E1 2AB, UK.
| | - Peter J Godolphin
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK
| | - Richard L Hooper
- Methodology Research Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London E1 2AB, UK
| | - Richard D Riley
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
| | - Ewelina Rogozińska
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Marlin N, Godolphin PJ, Hooper RL, Riley RD, Rogozińska E. Nonlinear effects and effect modification at the participant-level in IPD meta-analysis part 1: analysis methods are often substandard. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 159:309-318. [PMID: 37146661 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2023] [Revised: 03/20/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To review analysis methods used for linear effect modification (LEM), nonlinear covariate-outcome associations (NL) and nonlinear effect modification (NLEM) at the participant-level in individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library to identify IPDMA of randomized controlled trials (PROSPERO CRD42019126768). We investigated if and how IPDMA examined LEM, NL and NLEM, including whether aggregation bias was addressed and if power was considered. RESULTS We screened 6,466 records, randomly sampled 207 and identified 100 IPDMA of LEM, NL or NLEM. Power for LEM was calculated a priori in 3 IPDMA. Of 100 IPDMA, 94 analyzed LEM, 4 NLEM and 8 NL. One-stage models were favoured for all three (56%, 100%, 50%, respectively). Two-stage models were used in 15%, 0% and 25% of IPDMA with unclear descriptions in 30%, 0% and 25%, respectively. Only 12% of one-stage LEM and NLEM IPDMA provided sufficient detail to confirm they had addressed aggregation bias. CONCLUSION Investigation of effect modification at the participant-level is common in IPDMA projects, but methods are often open to bias or lack detailed descriptions. Nonlinearity of continuous covariates and power of IPDMA are rarely assessed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadine Marlin
- Methodology Research Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London E1 2AB, UK.
| | - Peter J Godolphin
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK
| | - Richard L Hooper
- Methodology Research Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London E1 2AB, UK
| | - Richard D Riley
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
| | - Ewelina Rogozińska
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, 90 High Holborn, London WC1V 6LJ, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Rocha T, Allotey J, Palacios A, Vogel JP, Smits L, Carroli G, Mistry H, Young T, Qureshi ZP, Cormick G, Snell KIE, Abalos E, Pena-Rosas JP, Khan KS, Larbi KK, Thorson A, Singata-Madliki M, Hofmeyr GJ, Bohren M, Riley R, Betran AP, Thangaratinam S. Calcium supplementation to prevent pre-eclampsia: protocol for an individual participant data meta-analysis, network meta-analysis and health economic evaluation. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e065538. [PMID: 37169508 PMCID: PMC10186423 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065538] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 05/13/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Low dietary calcium intake is a risk factor for pre-eclampsia, a major contributor to maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity worldwide. Calcium supplementation can prevent pre-eclampsia in women with low dietary calcium. However, the optimal dose and timing of calcium supplementation are not known. We plan to undertake an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised trials to determine the effects of various calcium supplementation regimens in preventing pre-eclampsia and its complications and rank these by effectiveness. We also aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of calcium supplementation to prevent pre-eclampsia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will identify randomised trials on calcium supplementation before and during pregnancy by searching major electronic databases including Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PubMed, Scopus, AMED, LILACS, POPLINE, AIM, IMSEAR, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, without language restrictions, from inception to February 2022. Primary researchers of the identified trials will be invited to join the International Calcium in Pregnancy Collaborative Network and share their IPD. We will check each study's IPD for consistency with the original authors before standardising and harmonising the data. We will perform a series of one-stage and two-stage IPD random-effect meta-analyses to obtain the summary intervention effects on pre-eclampsia with 95% CIs and summary treatment-covariate interactions (maternal risk status, dietary intake, timing of intervention, daily dose of calcium prescribed and total intake of calcium). Heterogeneity will be summarised using tau2, I2 and 95% prediction intervals for effect in a new study. Sensitivity analysis to explore robustness of statistical and clinical assumptions will be carried out. Minor study effects (potential publication bias) will be investigated using funnel plots. A decision analytical model for use in low-income and middle-income countries will assess the cost-effectiveness of calcium supplementation to prevent pre-eclampsia. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION No ethical approvals are required. We will store the data in a secure repository in an anonymised format. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42021231276.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thaís Rocha
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - John Allotey
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Alfredo Palacios
- Health Economics, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Joshua Peter Vogel
- Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Luc Smits
- Department of Epidemiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Hema Mistry
- Warwick Evidence, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Taryn Young
- Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
- South African Cochrane Centre, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Zahida P Qureshi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Gabriela Cormick
- Department of Health Technology Assessment and Health Economics, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Kym I E Snell
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Edgardo Abalos
- Centro Rosarino de Estudios Perinatales (CREP), Rosario, Argentina
| | | | - Khalid Saeed Khan
- Public Health, University of Granada Faculty of Medicine, Granada, Spain
| | | | - Anna Thorson
- Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Mandisa Singata-Madliki
- Effective Care Research Unit (ECRU), East London Hospital Complex, East London, South Africa
| | | | - Meghan Bohren
- Centre for Health Equity, University of Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Carlton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Ana Pilar Betran
- Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Shakila Thangaratinam
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK
- Birmingham Women's and Children's Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kirtane AJ, Sharp ASP, Mahfoud F, Fisher NDL, Schmieder RE, Daemen J, Lobo MD, Lurz P, Basile J, Bloch MJ, Weber MA, Saxena M, Wang Y, Sanghvi K, Jenkins JS, Devireddy C, Rader F, Gosse P, Sapoval M, Barman NC, Claude L, Augustin D, Thackeray L, Mullin CM, Azizi M. Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of Ultrasound Renal Denervation in the Sham-Controlled RADIANCE II, RADIANCE-HTN SOLO, and RADIANCE-HTN TRIO Trials. JAMA Cardiol 2023; 8:464-473. [PMID: 36853627 PMCID: PMC9975919 DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2023.0338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 02/06/2023] [Indexed: 03/01/2023]
Abstract
Importance Ultrasound renal denervation (uRDN) was shown to lower blood pressure (BP) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension (HTN). Establishing the magnitude and consistency of the uRDN effect across the HTN spectrum is clinically important. Objective To characterize the effectiveness and safety of uRDN vs a sham procedure from individual patient-level pooled data across uRDN trials including either patients with mild to moderate HTN on a background of no medications or with HTN resistant to standardized triple-combination therapy. Data Sources A Study of the ReCor Medical Paradise System in Clinical Hypertension (RADIANCE-HTN SOLO and TRIO) and A Study of the ReCor Medical Paradise System in Stage II Hypertension (RADIANCE II) trials. Study Selection Trials with similar designs, standardized operational implementation (medication standardization and blinding of both patients and physicians to treatment assignment), and follow-up. Data Extraction and Synthesis Pooled analysis using individual patient-level data using linear regression models to compare uRDN with sham across the trials. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was baseline-adjusted change in 2-month daytime ambulatory systolic BP (dASBP) between groups. Results A total of 506 patients were randomized in the 3 studies (uRDN, 293; sham, 213; mean [SD] age, 54.1 [9.3]; 354 male [70.0%]). After a 1-month medication stabilization period, dASBP was similar between the groups (mean [SD], uRDN, 150.3 [9.2] mm Hg; sham, 150.8 [10.5] mm Hg). At 2 months, dASBP decreased by 8.5 mm Hg to mean (SD) 141.8 (13.8) mm Hg among patients treated with uRDN and by 2.9 mm Hg to 147.9 (14.6) mm Hg among patients treated with a sham procedure (mean difference, -5.9; 95% CI, -8.1 to -3.8 mm Hg; P < .001 in favor of uRDN). BP decreases from baseline with uRDN vs sham were consistent across trials and across BP parameters (office SBP: -10.4 mm Hg vs -3.4 mm Hg; mean difference, -6.4 mm Hg; 95% CI, -9.1 to -3.6 mm Hg; home SBP: -8.4 mm Hg vs -1.4 mm Hg; mean difference, -6.8 mm Hg; 95% CI, -8.7 to -4.9 mm Hg, respectively). The BP reductions with uRDN vs sham were consistent across prespecified subgroups. Independent predictors of a larger BP response to uRDN were higher baseline BP and heart rate and the presence of orthostatic hypertension. No differences in early safety end points were observed between groups. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this patient-level pooled analysis suggest that BP reductions with uRDN were consistent across HTN severity in sham-controlled trials designed with a 2-month primary end point to standardize medications across randomized groups. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02649426 and NCT03614260.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ajay J. Kirtane
- Columbia University Medical Center/NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York
- Associate Editor, JAMA Cardiology
| | - Andrew S. P. Sharp
- University Hospital of Wales and Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
| | - Felix Mahfoud
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany
- Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
| | | | - Roland E. Schmieder
- Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich Alexander University, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Joost Daemen
- Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Melvin D. Lobo
- Barts NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Philipp Lurz
- Heart Center Leipzig, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Jan Basile
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston
| | - Michael J. Bloch
- Vascular Care, Renown Institute of Heart and Vascular Health, Department of Medicine, University of Nevada School of Medicine, Reno
| | - Michael A. Weber
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, State University of New York, Downstate Medical Center, New York
| | - Manish Saxena
- Barts NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Yale Wang
- Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Chandan Devireddy
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Florian Rader
- Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California
| | | | - Marc Sapoval
- Université Paris Cité, Paris, France
- AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Hypertension Department and DMU CARTE, Paris, France
- INSERM, CIC1418, Paris, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Michel Azizi
- Université Paris Cité, Paris, France
- AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Hypertension Department and DMU CARTE, Paris, France
- INSERM, CIC1418, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Sørensen AL, Marschner IC. Linear mixed models for investigating effect modification in subgroup meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 2023:9622802231163330. [PMID: 36924263 DOI: 10.1177/09622802231163330] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/18/2023]
Abstract
Subgroup meta-analysis can be used for comparing treatment effects between subgroups using information from multiple trials. If the effect of treatment is differential depending on subgroup, the results could enable personalization of the treatment. We propose using linear mixed models for estimating treatment effect modification in aggregate data meta-analysis. The linear mixed models capture existing subgroup meta-analysis methods while allowing for additional features such as flexibility in modeling heterogeneity, handling studies with missing subgroups and more. Reviews and simulation studies of the best suited models for estimating possible differential effect of treatment depending on subgroups have been studied mostly within individual participant data meta-analysis. While individual participant data meta-analysis in general is recommended over aggregate data meta-analysis, conducting an aggregate data subgroup meta-analysis could be valuable for exploring treatment effect modifiers before committing to an individual participant data subgroup meta-analysis. Additionally, using solely individual participant data for subgroup meta-analysis requires collecting sufficient individual participant data which may not always be possible. In this article, we compared existing methods with linear mixed models for aggregate data subgroup meta-analysis under a broad selection of scenarios using simulation and two case studies. Both the case studies and simulation studies presented here demonstrate the advantages of the linear mixed model approach in aggregate data subgroup meta-analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Lyngholm Sørensen
- School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 7788Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.,Section of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health, 4321University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Ian C Marschner
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Behrendt CE, Villalona-Calero MA, Newman EM, Frankel PH. Order of patient entry and outcomes in phase II clinical trials: A meta-analysis of individual patient data. Contemp Clin Trials 2023; 125:107083. [PMID: 36638911 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2022] [Revised: 12/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/08/2023] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prior meta-analysis of stem-cell transplantation trials for renal-cell carcinoma observed that clinical outcomes vary by subjects' order of entry, specifically their quartile of accrual. We test this hypothesis using meta-analysis of individual patient data from diverse Phase II trials conducted by an oncology consortium. METHODS Eligible were all Phase II trials in hematologic or solid tumors opened and closed by California Cancer Consortium during 2005-2020. Excluded were trials closed in first quartile or currently embargoed pending publication and subjects ineligible per protocol or untreated on study. The primary risk factor was entry by quartile of planned sample size. As a cross-protocol endpoint, primary outcome was time to discontinuation of intervention. One-stage meta-analysis used a shared frailty model with trial as random effect. As covariates, stepwise selection retained tumor type, obesity, their interaction, calendar year, entry at least 3 years post-diagnosis, and performance status but rejected age, sex, randomized design, and class of drug. RESULTS Twenty trials (including 8 terminated early, 2 not published) included n = 923 subjects. Most (90.6%) subjects discontinued intervention, usually for disease progression or toxicity. Independently of covariates, risk of discontinuation increased (p < 0.0001) with each quartile of entry (Hazards Ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.22), culminating at Quartile 4 (HR 1.46, 1.36-1.57). The 95% prediction interval for the Hazards Ratio in future trials was (1.04-1.24). Progression-free survival similarly worsened by quartile of entry. CONCLUSION In Phase II trials, clinical outcome worsens with quartile of entry. This finding merits independent replication, and the cause of this phenomenon merits investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolyn E Behrendt
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Computational and Quantitative Medicine, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
| | - Miguel A Villalona-Calero
- Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
| | - Edward M Newman
- Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
| | - Paul H Frankel
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Computational and Quantitative Medicine, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Wijn SRW, Hannink G, Østerås H, Risberg MA, Roos EM, Hare KB, van de Graaf VA, Poolman RW, Ahn HW, Seon JK, Englund M, Rovers MM. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy vs non-surgical or sham treatment in patients with MRI-confirmed degenerative meniscus tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis with individual participant data from 605 randomised patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2023; 31:557-566. [PMID: 36646304 DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2023.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify subgroups of patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed degenerative meniscus tears who may benefit from arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) in comparison with non-surgical or sham treatment. METHODS Individual participant data (IPD) from four RCTs were pooled (605 patients, mean age: 55 (SD: 7.5), 52.4% female) as to investigate the effectiveness of APM in patients with MRI-confirmed degenerative meniscus tears compared to non-surgical or sham treatment. Primary outcomes were knee pain, overall knee function, and health-related quality of life, at 24 months follow-up (0-100). The IPD were analysed in a one- and two-stage meta-analyses. Identification of potential subgroups was performed by testing interaction effects of predefined patient characteristics (e.g., age, gender, mechanical symptoms) and APM for each outcome. Additionally, generalized linear mixed-model trees were used for subgroup detection. RESULTS The APM group showed a small improvement over the non-surgical or sham group on knee pain at 24 months follow-up (2.5 points (95% CI: 0.8-4.2) and 2.2 points (95% CI: 0.9-3.6), one- and two-stage analysis, respectively). Overall knee function and health-related quality of life did not differ between the two groups. Across all outcomes, no relevant subgroup of patients who benefitted from APM was detected. The generalized linear mixed-model trees did also not identify a subgroup. CONCLUSIONS No relevant subgroup of patients was identified that benefitted from APM compared to non-surgical or sham treatment. Since we were not able to identify any subgroup that benefitted from APM, we recommend a restrained policy regarding meniscectomy in patients with degenerative meniscus tears.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S R W Wijn
- Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Medical Imaging, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - G Hannink
- Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Medical Imaging, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - H Østerås
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Trondheim, Norway.
| | - M A Risberg
- Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Department of Sport Medicine, and Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
| | - E M Roos
- University of Southern Denmark, Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy and Centre for Muscle and Joint Health, Department of Sports and Clinical Biomechanics, Odense, Denmark.
| | - K B Hare
- University of Southern Denmark, Næstved-Slagelse-Ringsted Hospitals, Department of Orthopedics, Odense, Denmark.
| | - V A van de Graaf
- OLVG, Joint Research, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; LUMC, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - R W Poolman
- OLVG, Joint Research, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; LUMC, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - H-W Ahn
- Chonnam National University Bitgoeul Hospital, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Gwangju, South Korea.
| | - J-K Seon
- Chonnam National University Bitgoeul Hospital, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Gwangju, South Korea.
| | - M Englund
- Lund University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Orthopaedics, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Lund, Sweden.
| | - M M Rovers
- Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Medical Imaging, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Health Evidence, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Godolphin PJ, White IR, Tierney JF, Fisher DJ. Estimating interactions and subgroup-specific treatment effects in meta-analysis without aggregation bias: A within-trial framework. Res Synth Methods 2023; 14:68-78. [PMID: 35833636 PMCID: PMC10087172 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2021] [Revised: 04/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
Estimation of within-trial interactions in meta-analysis is crucial for reliable assessment of how treatment effects vary across participant subgroups. However, current methods have various limitations. Patients, clinicians and policy-makers need reliable estimates of treatment effects within specific covariate subgroups, on relative and absolute scales, in order to target treatments appropriately-which estimation of an interaction effect does not in itself provide. Also, the focus has been on covariates with only two subgroups, and may exclude relevant data if only a single subgroup is reported. Therefore, in this article we further develop the "within-trial" framework by providing practical methods to (1) estimate within-trial interactions across two or more subgroups; (2) estimate subgroup-specific ("floating") treatment effects that are compatible with the within-trial interactions and make maximum use of available data; and (3) clearly present this data using novel implementation of forest plots. We described the steps involved and apply the methods to two examples taken from previously published meta-analyses, and demonstrate a straightforward implementation in Stata based upon existing code for multivariate meta-analysis. We discuss how the within-trial framework and plots can be utilised with aggregate (or "published") source data, as well as with individual participant data, to effectively demonstrate how treatment effects differ across participant subgroups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter J Godolphin
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Ian R White
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jayne F Tierney
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| | - David J Fisher
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Phillippo DM, Dias S, Ades AE, Belger M, Brnabic A, Saure D, Schymura Y, Welton NJ. Validating the Assumptions of Population Adjustment: Application of Multilevel Network Meta-regression to a Network of Treatments for Plaque Psoriasis. Med Decis Making 2023; 43:53-67. [PMID: 35997006 PMCID: PMC9742635 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x221117162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Network meta-analysis (NMA) and indirect comparisons combine aggregate data (AgD) from multiple studies on treatments of interest but may give biased estimates if study populations differ. Population adjustment methods such as multilevel network meta-regression (ML-NMR) aim to reduce bias by adjusting for differences in study populations using individual patient data (IPD) from 1 or more studies under the conditional constancy assumption. A shared effect modifier assumption may also be necessary for identifiability. This article aims to demonstrate how the assumptions made by ML-NMR can be assessed in practice to obtain reliable treatment effect estimates in a target population. METHODS We apply ML-NMR to a network of evidence on treatments for plaque psoriasis with a mix of IPD and AgD trials reporting ordered categorical outcomes. Relative treatment effects are estimated for each trial population and for 3 external target populations represented by a registry and 2 cohort studies. We examine residual heterogeneity and inconsistency and relax the shared effect modifier assumption for each covariate in turn. RESULTS Estimated population-average treatment effects were similar across study populations, as differences in the distributions of effect modifiers were small. Better fit was achieved with ML-NMR than with NMA, and uncertainty was reduced by explaining within- and between-study variation. We found little evidence that the conditional constancy or shared effect modifier assumptions were invalid. CONCLUSIONS ML-NMR extends the NMA framework and addresses issues with previous population adjustment approaches. It coherently synthesizes evidence from IPD and AgD studies in networks of any size while avoiding aggregation bias and noncollapsibility bias, allows for key assumptions to be assessed or relaxed, and can produce estimates relevant to a target population for decision-making. HIGHLIGHTS Multilevel network meta-regression (ML-NMR) extends the network meta-analysis framework to synthesize evidence from networks of studies providing individual patient data or aggregate data while adjusting for differences in effect modifiers between studies (population adjustment). We apply ML-NMR to a network of treatments for plaque psoriasis with ordered categorical outcomes.We demonstrate for the first time how ML-NMR allows key assumptions to be assessed. We check for violations of conditional constancy of relative effects (such as unobserved effect modifiers) through residual heterogeneity and inconsistency and the shared effect modifier assumption by relaxing this for each covariate in turn.Crucially for decision making, population-adjusted treatment effects can be produced in any relevant target population. We produce population-average estimates for 3 external target populations, represented by the PsoBest registry and the PROSPECT and Chiricozzi 2019 cohort studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David M. Phillippo
- David M. Phillippo, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK; ()
| | - Sofia Dias
- University of Bristol, Bristol, UK,University of York, York, North Yorkshire, UK
| | | | | | - Alan Brnabic
- Eli Lilly Australia Pty. Limited, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Daniel Saure
- Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Hessen, Germany
| | - Yves Schymura
- Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Hessen, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Riley RD, Hattle M, Collins GS, Whittle R, Ensor J. Calculating the power to examine treatment-covariate interactions when planning an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials with a binary outcome. Stat Med 2022; 41:4822-4837. [PMID: 35932153 PMCID: PMC9805219 DOI: 10.1002/sim.9538] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Revised: 06/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
Before embarking on an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) project, researchers and funders need assurance it is worth their time and cost. This should include consideration of how many studies are promising their IPD and, given the characteristics of these studies, the power of an IPDMA including them. Here, we show how to estimate the power of a planned IPDMA of randomized trials to examine treatment-covariate interactions at the participant level (ie, treatment effect modifiers). We focus on a binary outcome with binary or continuous covariates, and propose a three-step approach, which assumes the true interaction size is common to all trials. In step one, the user must specify a minimally important interaction size and, for each trial separately (eg, as obtained from trial publications), the following aggregate data: the number of participants and events in control and treatment groups, the mean and SD for each continuous covariate, and the proportion of participants in each category for each binary covariate. This allows the variance of the interaction estimate to be calculated for each trial, using an analytic solution for Fisher's information matrix from a logistic regression model. Step 2 calculates the variance of the summary interaction estimate from the planned IPDMA (equal to the inverse of the sum of the inverse trial variances from step 1), and step 3 calculates the corresponding power based on a two-sided Wald test. Stata and R code are provided, and two examples given for illustration. Extension to allow for between-study heterogeneity is also considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard D. Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of MedicineKeele UniversityKeeleStaffordshireUK
| | - Miriam Hattle
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of MedicineKeele UniversityKeeleStaffordshireUK
| | - Gary S. Collins
- Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustOxfordUK
| | - Rebecca Whittle
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of MedicineKeele UniversityKeeleStaffordshireUK
| | - Joie Ensor
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of MedicineKeele UniversityKeeleStaffordshireUK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Walker R, Stewart L, Simmonds M. Estimating interactions in individual participant data meta-analysis: a comparison of methods in practice. Syst Rev 2022; 11:211. [PMID: 36199096 PMCID: PMC9535994 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-02086-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Accepted: 09/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Medical interventions may be more effective in some types of individuals than others and identifying characteristics that modify the effectiveness of an intervention is a cornerstone of precision or stratified medicine. The opportunity for detailed examination of treatment-covariate interactions can be an important driver for undertaking an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, rather than a meta-analysis using aggregate data. A number of recent modelling approaches are available. We apply these methods to the Perinatal Antiplatelet Review of International Studies (PARIS) Collaboration IPD dataset and compare estimates between them. We discuss the practical implications of applying these methods, which may be of interest to aid meta-analysists in the use of these, often complex models.Models compared included the two-stage meta-analysis of interaction terms and one-stage models which fit multiple random effects and separate within and between trial information. Models were fitted for nine covariates and five binary outcomes and results compared.Interaction terms produced by the methods were generally consistent. We show that where data are sparse and there is low heterogeneity in the covariate distributions across trials, the meta-analysis of interactions may produce unstable estimates and have issues with convergence. In this IPD dataset, varying assumptions by using multiple random effects in one-stage models or using only within trial information made little difference to the estimates of treatment-covariate interaction. Method choice will depend on datasets characteristics and individual preference.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Walker
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
| | - Lesley Stewart
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Mark Simmonds
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Hodkinson A, Kontopantelis E, Zghebi SS, Grigoroglou C, McMillan B, Marwijk HV, Bower P, Tsimpida D, Emery CF, Burge MR, Esmiol H, Cupples ME, Tully MA, Dasgupta K, Daskalopoulou SS, Cooke AB, Fayehun AF, Houle J, Poirier P, Yates T, Henson J, Anderson DR, Grey EB, Panagioti M. Association Between Patient Factors and the Effectiveness of Wearable Trackers at Increasing the Number of Steps per Day Among Adults With Cardiometabolic Conditions: Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data From Randomized Controlled Trials. J Med Internet Res 2022; 24:e36337. [PMID: 36040779 PMCID: PMC9472038 DOI: 10.2196/36337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2022] [Revised: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 04/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Current evidence supports the use of wearable trackers by people with cardiometabolic conditions. However, as the health benefits are small and confounded by heterogeneity, there remains uncertainty as to which patient groups are most helped by wearable trackers. OBJECTIVE This study examined the effects of wearable trackers in patients with cardiometabolic conditions to identify subgroups of patients who most benefited and to understand interventional differences. METHODS We obtained individual participant data from randomized controlled trials of wearable trackers that were conducted before December 2020 and measured steps per day as the primary outcome in participants with cardiometabolic conditions including diabetes, overweight or obesity, and cardiovascular disease. We used statistical models to account for clustering of participants within trials and heterogeneity across trials to estimate mean differences with the 95% CI. RESULTS Individual participant data were obtained from 9 of 25 eligible randomized controlled trials, which included 1481 of 3178 (47%) total participants. The wearable trackers revealed that over the median duration of 12 weeks, steps per day increased by 1656 (95% CI 918-2395), a significant change. Greater increases in steps per day from interventions using wearable trackers were observed in men (interaction coefficient -668, 95% CI -1157 to -180), patients in age categories over 50 years (50-59 years: interaction coefficient 1175, 95% CI 377-1973; 60-69 years: interaction coefficient 981, 95% CI 222-1740; 70-90 years: interaction coefficient 1060, 95% CI 200-1920), White patients (interaction coefficient 995, 95% CI 360-1631), and patients with fewer comorbidities (interaction coefficient -517, 95% CI -1188 to -11) compared to women, those aged below 50, non-White patients, and patients with multimorbidity. In terms of interventional differences, only face-to-face delivery of the tracker impacted the effectiveness of the interventions by increasing steps per day. CONCLUSIONS In patients with cardiometabolic conditions, interventions using wearable trackers to improve steps per day mostly benefited older White men without multimorbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42019143012; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=143012.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Hodkinson
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Evangelos Kontopantelis
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Division of Informatics, Imaging & Data Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine & Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Salwa S Zghebi
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Christos Grigoroglou
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Brian McMillan
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Harm van Marwijk
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Brighton, Brighton, United Kingdom
| | - Peter Bower
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Dialechti Tsimpida
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Charles F Emery
- Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University College of Arts and Sciences, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Mark R Burge
- Department of Medicine, Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, United States
| | - Hunter Esmiol
- Department of Medicine, Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, United States
| | - Margaret E Cupples
- Department of General Practice and Primary Care, Centre for Public Heath, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
| | - Mark A Tully
- School of Medicine, Ulster University, Londonderry, United Kingdom
| | - Kaberi Dasgupta
- Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.,Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Stella S Daskalopoulou
- Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.,Centre for Translational Biology, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | | | - Ayorinde F Fayehun
- Department of Family Medicine, University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria
| | - Julie Houle
- Department of Nursing, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Paul Poirier
- Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval, Laval, QC, Canada
| | - Thomas Yates
- Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Joseph Henson
- Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Derek R Anderson
- Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University College of Arts and Sciences, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Elisabeth B Grey
- Centre for Motivation and Health Behaviour Change, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
| | - Maria Panagioti
- Division of Population Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Health Services Research and Primary Care, National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Papadimitropoulou K, Riley RD, Dekkers OM, Stijnen T, le Cessie S. MA-cont:pre/post effect size: An interactive tool for the meta-analysis of continuous outcomes using R Shiny. Res Synth Methods 2022; 13:649-660. [PMID: 35841123 PMCID: PMC9546083 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1592] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2021] [Revised: 05/23/2022] [Accepted: 07/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Meta‐analysis is a widely used methodology to combine evidence from different sources examining a common research phenomenon, to obtain a quantitative summary of the studied phenomenon. In the medical field, multiple studies investigate the effectiveness of new treatments and meta‐analysis is largely performed to generate the summary (average) treatment effect. In the meta‐analysis of aggregate continuous outcomes measured in a pretest‐posttest design using differences in means as the effect measure, a plethora of methods exist: analysis of final (follow‐up) scores, analysis of change scores and analysis of covariance. Specialised and general‐purpose statistical software is used to apply the various methods, yet, often the choice among them depends on data availability and statistical affinity. We present a new web‐based tool, MA‐cont:pre/post effect size, to conduct meta‐analysis of continuous data assessed pre‐ and post‐treatment using the aforementioned approaches on aggregate data and a more flexible approach of generating and analysing pseudo individual participant data. The interactive web environment, available by R Shiny, is used to create this free‐to‐use statistical tool, requiring no programming skills by the users. A basic statistical understanding of the methods running in the background is a prerequisite and we encourage the users to seek advice from technical experts when necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katerina Papadimitropoulou
- Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.,Data Science & Biometrics, Danone Nutricia Research - Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Richard D Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, England
| | - Olaf M Dekkers
- Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Theo Stijnen
- Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Saskia le Cessie
- Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.,Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Freeman SC, Cooper NJ, Sutton AJ, Crowther MJ, Carpenter JR, Hawkins N. Challenges of modelling approaches for network meta-analysis of time-to-event outcomes in the presence of non-proportional hazards to aid decision making: Application to a melanoma network. Stat Methods Med Res 2022; 31:839-861. [PMID: 35044255 PMCID: PMC9014691 DOI: 10.1177/09622802211070253] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Synthesis of clinical effectiveness from multiple trials is a well-established component of decision-making. Time-to-event outcomes are often synthesised using the Cox proportional hazards model assuming a constant hazard ratio over time. However, with an increasing proportion of trials reporting treatment effects where hazard ratios vary over time and with differing lengths of follow-up across trials, alternative synthesis methods are needed. OBJECTIVES To compare and contrast five modelling approaches for synthesis of time-to-event outcomes and provide guidance on key considerations for choosing between the modelling approaches. METHODS The Cox proportional hazards model and five other methods of estimating treatment effects from time-to-event outcomes, which relax the proportional hazards assumption, were applied to a network of melanoma trials reporting overall survival: restricted mean survival time, generalised gamma, piecewise exponential, fractional polynomial and Royston-Parmar models. RESULTS All models fitted the melanoma network acceptably well. However, there were important differences in extrapolations of the survival curve and interpretability of the modelling constraints demonstrating the potential for different conclusions from different modelling approaches. CONCLUSION The restricted mean survival time, generalised gamma, piecewise exponential, fractional polynomial and Royston-Parmar models can accommodate non-proportional hazards and differing lengths of trial follow-up within a network meta-analysis of time-to-event outcomes. We recommend that model choice is informed using available and relevant prior knowledge, model transparency, graphically comparing survival curves alongside observed data to aid consideration of the reliability of the survival estimates, and consideration of how the treatment effect estimates can be incorporated within a decision model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suzanne C Freeman
- Department of Health Sciences, 4488University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Nicola J Cooper
- Department of Health Sciences, 4488University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Alex J Sutton
- Department of Health Sciences, 4488University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Michael J Crowther
- Department of Health Sciences, 4488University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - James R Carpenter
- 4919MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK.,4906London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Neil Hawkins
- Health Economics & Health Technology Assessment, 3526University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Belias M, Rovers MM, Hoogland J, Reitsma JB, Debray TPA, IntHout J. Predicting personalised absolute treatment effects in individual participant data meta-analysis: An introduction to splines. Res Synth Methods 2022; 13:255-283. [PMID: 35000297 PMCID: PMC9303665 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1546] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2020] [Revised: 12/23/2021] [Accepted: 12/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Michail Belias
- Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Maroeska M Rovers
- Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hoogland
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes B Reitsma
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas P A Debray
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Joanna IntHout
- Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kessler RC, Luedtke A. Pragmatic Precision Psychiatry-A New Direction for Optimizing Treatment Selection. JAMA Psychiatry 2021; 78:1384-1390. [PMID: 34550327 DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.2500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Clinical trials have identified numerous prescriptive predictors of mental disorder treatment response, ie, predictors of which treatments are best for which patients. However, none of these prescriptive predictors is strong enough alone to guide precision treatment planning. This has prompted growing interest in developing precision treatment rules (PTRs) that combine information across multiple prescriptive predictors, but this work has been much less successful in psychiatry than some other areas of medicine. Study designs and analysis schemes used in research on PTR development in other areas of medicine are reviewed, key challenges for implementing similar studies of mental disorders are highlighted, and recent methodological advances to address these challenges are described here. OBSERVATIONS Discovering prescriptive predictors requires large samples. Three approaches have been used in other areas of medicine to do this: conduct very large randomized clinical trials, pool individual-level results across multiple smaller randomized clinical trials, and develop preliminary PTRs in large observational treatment samples that are then tested in smaller randomized clinical trials. The third approach is most feasible for research on mental disorders. This approach requires working with large real-world observational electronic health record databases; carefully selecting samples to emulate trials; extracting information about prescriptive predictors from electronic health records along with other inexpensive data augmentation strategies; estimating preliminary PTRs in the observational data using appropriate methods; implementing pragmatic trials to validate the preliminary PTRs; and iterating between subsequent observational studies and quality improvement pragmatic trials to refine and expand the PTRs. New statistical methods exist to address the methodological challenges of implementing this approach. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Advances in pragmatic precision psychiatry will require moving beyond the current focus on randomized clinical trials and adopting an iterative discovery-confirmation process that integrates observational and experimental studies in real-world clinical populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ronald C Kessler
- Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Alex Luedtke
- Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.,Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Faron M, Blanchard P, Ribassin-Majed L, Pignon JP, Michiels S, Le Teuff G. A frequentist one-step model for a simple network meta-analysis of time-to-event data in presence of an effect modifier. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0259121. [PMID: 34723994 PMCID: PMC8559936 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Individual patient data (IPD) present particular advantages in network meta-analysis (NMA) because interactions may lead an aggregated data (AD)-based model to wrong a treatment effect (TE) estimation. However, fewer works have been conducted for IPD with time-to-event contrary to binary outcomes. We aimed to develop a general frequentist one-step model for evaluating TE in the presence of interaction in a three-node NMA for time-to-event data. METHODS One-step, frequentist, IPD-based Cox and Poisson generalized linear mixed models were proposed. We simulated a three-node network with or without a closed loop with (1) no interaction, (2) covariate-treatment interaction, and (3) covariate distribution heterogeneity and covariate-treatment interaction. These models were applied to the NMA (Meta-analyses of Chemotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer [MACH-NC] and Radiotherapy in Carcinomas of Head and Neck [MARCH]), which compared the addition of chemotherapy or modified radiotherapy (mRT) to loco-regional treatment with two direct comparisons. AD-based (contrast and meta-regression) models were used as reference. RESULTS In the simulated study, no IPD models failed to converge. IPD-based models performed well in all scenarios and configurations with small bias. There were few variations across different scenarios. In contrast, AD-based models performed well when there were no interactions, but demonstrated some bias when interaction existed and a larger one when the modifier was not distributed evenly. While meta-regression performed better than contrast-based only, it demonstrated a large variability in estimated TE. In the real data example, Cox and Poisson IPD-based models gave similar estimations of the model parameters. Interaction decomposition permitted by IPD explained the ecological bias observed in the meta-regression. CONCLUSION The proposed general one-step frequentist Cox and Poisson models had small bias in the evaluation of a three-node network with interactions. They performed as well or better than AD-based models and should also be undertaken whenever possible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthieu Faron
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Équipe Labellisée Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
- Service de chirurgie viscérale oncologique, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Équipe Labellisée Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
- Service de radiothérapie, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Laureen Ribassin-Majed
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Équipe Labellisée Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
- Service de Biostatistique et d’Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Jean-Pierre Pignon
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Équipe Labellisée Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
- Service de Biostatistique et d’Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Stefan Michiels
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Équipe Labellisée Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
- Service de Biostatistique et d’Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Gwénaël Le Teuff
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Équipe Labellisée Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
- Service de Biostatistique et d’Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Ollier E, Blanchard P, Le Teuff G, Michiels S. Penalized Poisson model for network meta-analysis of individual patient time-to-event data. Stat Med 2021; 41:340-355. [PMID: 34710951 DOI: 10.1002/sim.9240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Revised: 10/14/2021] [Accepted: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Network meta-analysis (NMA) allows the combination of direct and indirect evidence from a set of randomized clinical trials. Performing NMA using individual patient data (IPD) is considered as a "gold standard" approach as it provides several advantages over NMA based on aggregate data. For example, it allows to perform advanced modeling of covariates or covariate-treatment interactions. An important issue in IPD NMA is the selection of influential parameters among terms that account for inconsistency, covariates, covariate-by-treatment interactions or nonproportionality of treatments effect for time to event data. This issue has not been deeply studied in the literature yet and in particular not for time-to-event data. A major difficulty is to jointly account for between-trial heterogeneity which could have a major influence on the selection process. The use of penalized generalized mixed effect model is a solution, but existing implementations have several shortcomings and an important computational cost that precludes their use for complex IPD NMA. In this article, we propose a penalized Poisson regression model to perform IPD NMA of time-to-event data. It is based only on fixed effect parameters which improve its computational cost over the use of random effects. It could be easily implemented using existing penalized regression package. Computer code is shared for implementation. The methods were applied on simulated data to illustrate the importance to take into account between trial heterogeneity during the selection procedure. Finally, it was applied to an IPD NMA of overall survival of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edouard Ollier
- Service de Biostatistique et d'Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.,Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Labeled Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France.,SAINBIOSE U1059, Equipe DVH, Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, France
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Labeled Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France.,Département de Radiothérapie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Gwénaël Le Teuff
- Service de Biostatistique et d'Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.,Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Labeled Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
| | - Stefan Michiels
- Service de Biostatistique et d'Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.,Oncostat U1018, Inserm, Université Paris-Saclay, Labeled Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis and Network Meta-Analysis. Methods Mol Biol 2021. [PMID: 34550597 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register]
Abstract
Meta-analyses are often conducted using trial-level summary data. However, when individual patient data (IPD ) is available, there is greater flexibility in the analysis and a wider range of statistical models that can be fitted. There are two approaches to fitting IPD models. The traditional two-stage approach involves analyzing each trial individually in the first stage and then combining trial estimates of treatment effectiveness in the second stage using methods developed for aggregate data meta-analysis. Growing in popularity is the one-stage approach in which trials are analyzed and synthesized within one statistical model whilst the clustering of patients within trials is accounted for. This chapter outlines both fixed effect and random effects one- and two-stage meta-analysis models for continuous, binary, and time-to-event outcomes. The meta-analysis framework is then extended to the scenario where there are more than two treatments and network meta-analysis models are described.The availability of IPD provides greater statistical power for investigating interactions between treatments and covariates. Treatment-covariate interactions contain both within- and across-trial information where the across-trial information may be subject to ecological bias. This chapter presents network meta-analysis models separating out the within- and across-trial information and finishes by considering practical solutions for dealing with missing covariate data, assessing the consistency assumption, combining IPD and aggregate data and specific considerations for time-to-event outcomes.
Collapse
|
25
|
Abbasciano RG, Lai FY, Roman MA, Rizzello A, Pathak S, Ramzi J, Lucarelli C, Layton GR, Kumar T, Wozniak MJ, Eagle-Hemming B, Akowuah E, Rogers CA, Angelini GD, Murphy GJ. Activation of the innate immune response and organ injury after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials and analysis of individual patient data from randomised and non-randomised studies. Br J Anaesth 2021; 127:365-375. [PMID: 34229833 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.04.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2020] [Revised: 04/14/2021] [Accepted: 04/15/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is unclear whether the innate immune response represents a therapeutic target for organ protection strategies in cardiac surgery. METHODS A systematic review of trials of interventions targeting the inflammatory response to cardiac surgery reporting treatment effects on both innate immune system cytokines and organ injury was performed. The protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42020187239. Searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase were performed. Random-effects meta-analyses were used for the primary analysis. A separate analysis of individual patient data from six studies (n=785) explored sources of heterogeneity for treatment effects on cytokine levels. RESULTS Searches to May 2020 identified 251 trials evaluating 24 interventions with 20 582 participants for inclusion. Most trials had important limitations. Methodological limitations of the included trials and heterogeneity of the treatment effects on cytokine levels between trials limited interpretation. The primary analysis demonstrated inconsistency in the direction of the treatment effects on innate immunity and organ failure or death between interventions. Analyses restricted to important subgroups or trials with fewer limitations showed similar results. Meta-regression, pooling available data from all trials, demonstrated no association between the direction of the treatment effects on inflammatory cytokines and organ injury or death. The analysis of individual patient data demonstrated heterogeneity in the association between the cytokine response and organ injury after cardiac surgery for people >75 yr old and those with some chronic diseases. CONCLUSIONS The certainty of the evidence for a causal relationship between innate immune system activation and organ injury after cardiac surgery is low.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Florence Y Lai
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Marius A Roman
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Angelica Rizzello
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Suraj Pathak
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Joussi Ramzi
- Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Carla Lucarelli
- Department of Cardiac Surgery, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | | | - Tracy Kumar
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Marcin J Wozniak
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | | | - Enoch Akowuah
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Chris A Rogers
- Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, Bristol Trials Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Gavin J Murphy
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Hodkinson A, Heneghan C, Mahtani KR, Kontopantelis E, Panagioti M. Benefits and harms of Risperidone and Paliperidone for treatment of patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder: a meta-analysis involving individual participant data and clinical study reports. BMC Med 2021; 19:195. [PMID: 34429113 PMCID: PMC8386072 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-021-02062-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are severe mental illnesses which are highly prevalent worldwide. Risperidone and Paliperidone are treatments for either illnesses, but their efficacy compared to other antipsychotics and growing reports of hormonal imbalances continue to raise concerns. As existing evidence on both antipsychotics are solely based on aggregate data, we aimed to assess the benefits and harms of Risperidone and Paliperidone in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, using individual participant data (IPD), clinical study reports (CSRs) and publicly available sources (journal publications and trial registries). METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Central, EMBASE and PsycINFO until December 2020 for randomised placebo-controlled trials of Risperidone, Paliperidone or Paliperidone palmitate in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. We obtained IPD and CSRs from the Yale University Open Data Access project. The primary outcome Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score was analysed using one-stage IPD meta-analysis. Random-effect meta-analysis of harm outcomes involved methods for coping with rare events. Effect-sizes were compared across all available data sources using the ratio of means or relative risk. We registered our review on PROSPERO, CRD42019140556. RESULTS Of the 35 studies, IPD meta-analysis involving 22 (63%) studies showed a significant clinical reduction in the PANSS in patients receiving Risperidone (mean difference - 5.83, 95% CI - 10.79 to - 0.87, I2 = 8.5%, n = 4 studies, 1131 participants), Paliperidone (- 6.01, 95% CI - 8.7 to - 3.32, I2 = 4.3%, n = 13, 3821) and Paliperidone palmitate (- 7.89, 95% CI - 12.1 to - 3.69, I2 = 2.9%, n = 5, 2209). CSRs reported nearly two times more adverse events (4434 vs. 2296 publication, relative difference (RD) = 1.93, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.00) and almost 8 times more serious adverse events (650 vs. 82; RD = 7.93, 95% CI 6.32 to 9.95) than the journal publications. Meta-analyses of individual harms from CSRs revealed a significant increased risk among several outcomes including extrapyramidal disorder, tardive dyskinesia and increased weight. But the ratio of relative risk between the different data sources was not significant. Three treatment-related gynecomastia events occurred, and these were considered mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSION IPD meta-analysis conclude that Risperidone and Paliperidone antipsychotics had a small beneficial effect on reducing PANSS score over 9 weeks, which is more conservative than estimates from reviews based on journal publications. CSRs also contained significantly more data on harms that were unavailable in journal publications or trial registries. Sharing of IPD and CSRs are necessary when performing meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Hodkinson
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
- National Institute for Health Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| | - Carl Heneghan
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kamal R Mahtani
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Evangelos Kontopantelis
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
- Division of Informatics, Imaging & Data Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Maria Panagioti
- National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Breedvelt JJF, Warren FC, Segal Z, Kuyken W, Bockting CL. Continuation of Antidepressants vs Sequential Psychological Interventions to Prevent Relapse in Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry 2021; 78:868-875. [PMID: 34009273 PMCID: PMC8135055 DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.0823] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Depression frequently recurs. To prevent relapse, antidepressant medication is often taken in the long term. Sequentially delivering a psychological intervention while undergoing tapering of antidepressant medication might be an alternative to long-term antidepressant use. However, evidence is lacking on which patients may benefit from tapering antidepressant medication while receiving a psychological intervention and which should continue the antidepressant therapy. A meta-analysis of individual patient data with more power and precision than individual randomized clinical trials or a standard meta-analysis is warranted. OBJECTIVES To compare the associations between use of a psychological intervention during and/or after antidepressant tapering vs antidepressant use alone on the risk of relapse of depression and estimate associations of individual clinical factors with relapse. DATA SOURCES PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PsycInfo were last searched on January 23, 2021. Requests for individual participant data from included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were sent. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials that compared use of a psychological intervention while tapering antidepressant medication with antidepressant monotherapy were included. Patients had to be in full or partial remission from depression. Two independent assessors conducted screening and study selection. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Of 15 792 screened studies, 236 full-text articles were retrieved, and 4 RCTs that provided individual participant data were included. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Time to relapse and relapse status over 15 months measured via a blinded assessor using a diagnostic clinical interview. RESULTS Individual data from 714 participants (mean [SD] age, 49.2 [11.5] years; 522 [73.1%] female) from 4 RCTs that compared preventive cognitive therapy or mindfulness-based cognitive therapy during and/or after antidepressant tapering vs antidepressant monotherapy were available. Two-stage random-effects meta-analysis found no significant difference in time to depressive relapse between use of a psychological intervention during tapering of antidepressant medication vs antidepressant therapy alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60-1.23). Younger age at onset (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99), shorter duration of remission (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00), and higher levels of residual depressive symptoms at baseline (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10) were associated with a higher overall risk of relapse. None of the included moderators were associated with risk of relapse. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis suggest that regardless of the clinical factors included in these studies, the sequential delivery of a psychological intervention during and/or after tapering may be an effective relapse prevention strategy instead of long-term use of antidepressants. These results could be used to inform shared decision-making in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josefien J. F. Breedvelt
- Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Fiona C. Warren
- Institute of Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Zindel Segal
- Department of Clinical Psychological Science, University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Willem Kuyken
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Claudi L. Bockting
- Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Kishan AU, Karnes RJ, Romero T, Wong JK, Motterle G, Tosoian JJ, Trock BJ, Klein EA, Stish BJ, Dess RT, Spratt DE, Pilar A, Reddy C, Levin-Epstein R, Wedde TB, Lilleby WA, Fiano R, Merrick GS, Stock RG, Demanes DJ, Moran BJ, Braccioforte M, Huland H, Tran PT, Martin S, Martínez-Monge R, Krauss DJ, Abu-Isa EI, Alam R, Schwen Z, Chang AJ, Pisansky TM, Choo R, Song DY, Greco S, Deville C, McNutt T, DeWeese TL, Ross AE, Ciezki JP, Boutros PC, Nickols NG, Bhat P, Shabsovich D, Juarez JE, Chong N, Kupelian PA, D’Amico AV, Rettig MB, Berlin A, Tward JD, Davis BJ, Reiter RE, Steinberg ML, Elashoff D, Horwitz EM, Tendulkar RD, Tilki D. Comparison of Multimodal Therapies and Outcomes Among Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer With Adverse Clinicopathologic Features. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2115312. [PMID: 34196715 PMCID: PMC8251338 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.15312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The optimal management strategy for high-risk prostate cancer and additional adverse clinicopathologic features remains unknown. OBJECTIVE To compare clinical outcomes among patients with high-risk prostate cancer after definitive treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cohort study included patients with high-risk prostate cancer (as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network [NCCN]) and at least 1 adverse clinicopathologic feature (defined as any primary Gleason pattern 5 on biopsy, clinical T3b-4 disease, ≥50% cores with biopsy results positive for prostate cancer, or NCCN ≥2 high-risk features) treated between 2000 and 2014 at 16 tertiary centers. Data were analyzed in November 2020. EXPOSURES Radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), or EBRT plus brachytherapy boost (BT) with ADT. Guideline-concordant multimodal treatment was defined as RP with appropriate use of multimodal therapy (optimal RP), EBRT with at least 2 years of ADT (optimal EBRT), or EBRT with BT with at least 1 year ADT (optimal EBRT with BT). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was prostate cancer-specific mortality; distant metastasis was a secondary outcome. Differences were evaluated using inverse probability of treatment weight-adjusted Fine-Gray competing risk regression models. RESULTS A total of 6004 men (median [interquartile range] age, 66.4 [60.9-71.8] years) with high-risk prostate cancer were analyzed, including 3175 patients (52.9%) who underwent RP, 1830 patients (30.5%) who underwent EBRT alone, and 999 patients (16.6%) who underwent EBRT with BT. Compared with RP, treatment with EBRT with BT (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.78, [95% CI, 0.63-0.97]; P = .03) or with EBRT alone (sHR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.53-0.92]; P = .01) was associated with significantly improved prostate cancer-specific mortality; there was no difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality between EBRT with BT and EBRT alone (sHR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.67-1.18]; P = .43). No significant differences in prostate cancer-specific mortality were found across treatment cohorts among 2940 patients who received guideline-concordant multimodality treatment (eg, optimal EBRT alone vs optimal RP: sHR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.52-1.09]; P = .14). However, treatment with EBRT alone or EBRT with BT was consistently associated with lower rates of distant metastasis compared with treatment with RP (eg, EBRT vs RP: sHR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.44-0.58]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings suggest that among patients with high-risk prostate cancer and additional unfavorable clinicopathologic features receiving guideline-concordant multimodal therapy, prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes were equivalent among those treated with RP, EBRT, and EBRT with BT, although distant metastasis outcomes were more favorable among patients treated with EBRT and EBRT with BT. Optimal multimodality treatment is critical for improving outcomes in patients with high-risk prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amar U. Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles
| | | | - Tahmineh Romero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jessica K. Wong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | | | - Bruce J. Trock
- Department of Urology, Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Eric A. Klein
- Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Bradley J. Stish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Robert T. Dess
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Daniel E. Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Avinash Pilar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Chandana Reddy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | | | - Trude B. Wedde
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Wolfgang A. Lilleby
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ryan Fiano
- Schiffler Cancer Center, Wheeling Hospital, Wheeling Jesuit University, Wheeling, West Virginia
| | - Gregory S. Merrick
- Schiffler Cancer Center, Wheeling Hospital, Wheeling Jesuit University, Wheeling, West Virginia
| | - Richard G. Stock
- Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | | | - Brian J. Moran
- Prostate Cancer Foundation of Chicago, Westmont, Illinois
| | | | - Hartwig Huland
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Phuoc T. Tran
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Santiago Martin
- Department of Oncology, Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | | | - Daniel J. Krauss
- William Beaumont School of Medicine, Oakland University, Royal Oak, Michigan
| | - Eyad I. Abu-Isa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Ridwan Alam
- Department of Urology, Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Zeyad Schwen
- Department of Urology, Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Albert J. Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
| | | | - Richard Choo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Daniel Y. Song
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Stephen Greco
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Todd McNutt
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Theodore L. DeWeese
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Ashley E. Ross
- Texas Oncology, Dallas
- Now with Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Jay P. Ciezki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Paul C. Boutros
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles
- Department of Human Genetics, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Nicholas G. Nickols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
- Department of Radiation Oncology, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California
| | - Prashant Bhat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - David Shabsovich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Jesus E. Juarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Natalie Chong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles
| | | | - Anthony V. D’Amico
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Matthew B. Rettig
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California
| | - Alejandro Berlin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Jonathan D. Tward
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Brian J. Davis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | - David Elashoff
- Department of Medicine Statistics Core, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Eric M. Horwitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Rahul D. Tendulkar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Derya Tilki
- Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Louise J, Poprzeczny AJ, Deussen AR, Vinter C, Tanvig M, Jensen DM, Bogaerts A, Devlieger R, McAuliffe FM, Renault KM, Carlsen E, Geiker N, Poston L, Briley A, Thangaratinam S, Dodd JM. The effects of dietary and lifestyle interventions among pregnant women with overweight or obesity on early childhood outcomes: an individual participant data meta-analysis from randomised trials. BMC Med 2021; 19:128. [PMID: 34074261 PMCID: PMC8170974 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-021-01995-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2021] [Accepted: 04/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The impact of maternal obesity extends beyond birth, being independently associated with an increased risk of child obesity. Current evidence demonstrates that women provided with a dietary intervention during pregnancy improve their dietary quality and have a modest reduction in gestational weight gain. However, the effect of this on longer-term childhood obesity-related outcomes is unknown. METHODS We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis from RCTs in which women with a singleton, live gestation between 10+0 and 20+0 weeks and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m2 in early pregnancy were randomised to a diet and/or lifestyle intervention or continued standard antenatal care and in which longer-term maternal and child follow-up at 3-5 years of age had been undertaken. The primary childhood outcome was BMI z-score above the 90th percentile. Secondary childhood outcomes included skinfold thickness measurements and body circumferences, fat-free mass, dietary and physical activity patterns, blood pressure, and neurodevelopment. RESULTS Seven primary trials where follow-up of participants occurred were identified by a systematic literature search within the International Weight Management in Pregnancy (i-WIP) Collaborative Group collaboration, with six providing individual participant data. No additional studies were identified after a systematic literature search. A total of 2529 children and 2383 women contributed data. Approximately 30% of all child participants had a BMI z-score above the 90th percentile, with no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (aRR 0.97; 95% CI 0.87, 1.08; p=0.610). There were no statistically significant differences identified for any of the secondary outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS In overweight and obese pregnant women, we found no evidence that maternal dietary and/or lifestyle intervention during pregnancy modifies the risk of early childhood obesity. Future research may need to target the pre-conception period in women and early childhood interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO, CRD42016047165.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennie Louise
- The Robinson Research Institute, Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Amanda J Poprzeczny
- The Robinson Research Institute, Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,Women's and Babies Division, Department of Perinatal Medicine, The Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Road, Adelaide, South Australia, 5006, Australia
| | - Andrea R Deussen
- The Robinson Research Institute, Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Christina Vinter
- Institute of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Mette Tanvig
- Institute of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark
| | - Dorte Moller Jensen
- Institute of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.,Steno Diabetes Center, Odense University Hospital, 5000, Odense C, Denmark
| | - Annick Bogaerts
- Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Centre for Research and Innovation in Care (CRIC), University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Roland Devlieger
- Division of Mother and Child, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Fionnuala M McAuliffe
- UCD Perinatal Research Centre, School of Medicine & Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Kristina M Renault
- Obstetric Clinic, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hvidovre, Denmark
| | - Emma Carlsen
- Department of Pediatrics, Hvidovre University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark
| | - Nina Geiker
- Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Hvidovre, Denmark
| | - Lucilla Poston
- School of Life Course Sciences, Division of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK
| | - Annette Briley
- School of Life Course Sciences, Division of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.,Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia
| | - Shakila Thangaratinam
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jodie M Dodd
- The Robinson Research Institute, Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. .,Women's and Babies Division, Department of Perinatal Medicine, The Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Road, Adelaide, South Australia, 5006, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Sudell M, Tudur-Smith C, Liao X, Longden E, Dunn G, Kendall T, Emsley R, Morrison A, Varese F. Protocol for individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of patients with psychosis to investigate treatment effect modifiers for CBT versus treatment as usual or other psychosocial interventions. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e035062. [PMID: 34049898 PMCID: PMC8166625 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2019] [Revised: 01/31/2020] [Accepted: 02/28/2020] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Aggregate data meta-analyses have shown heterogeneous treatment effects for cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for patients with schizophrenia spectrum diagnoses. This heterogeneity could stem from specific intervention or patient characteristics that could influence the clinical effectiveness of CBT, termed treatment effect modifiers. This individual participant data meta-analysis will investigate a range of potential treatment effect modifiers of the efficacy of CBT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies investigating CBT versus treatment as usual, or CBT versus other psychosocial interventions, for patients with schizophrenia spectrum diagnoses. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, EMBASE and the online clinical trials registers of the US government, European Union, WHO and Current Controlled Trials will be searched. Two researchers will screen titles and abstracts identified by the search. Individual participant data will be requested for any eligible study, for the primary outcome (overall psychotic symptoms), secondary outcomes and treatment effect modifiers. Data will be checked and recoded according to an established statistical analysis plan. One-stage and two-stage random effects meta-analyses investigating potential treatment effect modifiers will be conducted. A list of potential treatment effect modifiers for CBT will be produced, motivating future research into particular modifiers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study does not require ethical approval as it is based on data from existing studies, although best ethical practice for secondary analysis of clinical data will be followed. The findings will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, and promoted to relevant stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42017060068.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Sudell
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Catrin Tudur-Smith
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Xiaomeng Liao
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Eleanor Longden
- Psychosis Research Unit, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Complex Trauma and Resilience Research Unit, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Graham Dunn
- Health Methodology Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Tim Kendall
- National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health, London, UK
| | - Richard Emsley
- Department of Biostatistics and Health InformaticsInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Anthony Morrison
- Psychosis Research Unit, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Filippo Varese
- Complex Trauma and Resilience Research Unit, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Pilgrim T, Rothenbühler M, Siontis GC, Kandzari DE, Iglesias JF, Asami M, Lefèvre T, Piccolo R, Koolen J, Saito S, Slagboom T, Muller O, Waksman R, Windecker S. Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents vs durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of individual patient data from 5 randomized trials. Am Heart J 2021; 235:140-148. [PMID: 33609498 DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2021.02.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2020] [Accepted: 02/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Newest generation drug-eluting stents combine biodegradable polymers with ultrathin stent platforms in order to minimize vessel injury and inflammatory response. Evidence from randomized controlled trials suggested that differences in stent design translate into differences in clinical outcome. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrathin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus eluting stents (BP SES) compared with thin strut, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS We pooled individual participant data from 5 randomized trials (NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946, NCT01443104, NCT02579031) including a total of 5,780 patients, and performed a one-stage meta-analysis using a mixed effects Cox regression model. RESULTS At a median duration of follow-up of 739 days (interquartile range 365-1,806 days), target-lesion failure occurred in 337 (10.3%) and 304 (12.2%) patients treated with BP SES and DP EES (HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.71-1.06, P = .16). There were no significant differences between BP SES and DP EES with regards to cardiac death (111 (3.4%) vs 102 (4.1%); HR 1.05, 95%CI 0.80-1.37, P = .73), target-vessel myocardial infarction (136 (4.1%) vs 126 (5.0%), HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.62-1.01, P = .061), and clinically-driven target-lesion revascularization (163 (5.0%) vs 147 (5.9%); HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.75-1.18, P = .61). The effect was consistent across major subgroups. In a landmark analysis, there was no significant interaction between treatment effect and timing of events. CONCLUSIONS In this patient-level meta-analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials, BP SES were associated with a similar risk of target-lesion failure compared with DP EES among patients undergoing PCI. STUDY REGISTRATION PROSPERO registry (CRD42018109098).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Pilgrim
- Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| | - Martina Rothenbühler
- Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - George Cm Siontis
- Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | | | - Juan F Iglesias
- Division of Cardiology, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Masahiko Asami
- Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Thierry Lefèvre
- Department of Interventional Cardiology, Hopital Jacques Cartier, Massy, France
| | - Raffaele Piccolo
- Division of Cardiology, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Federico II University, Naples, Italy
| | | | - Shigeru Saito
- Division of Cardiology & Catheterization Laboratories, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Japan; Sapporo Higashi Tokushukai Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | | | - Olivier Muller
- Department of Cardiology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Ron Waksman
- Division of Interventional Cardiology, MedStar Cardiovascular Research Network, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC
| | - Stephan Windecker
- Department of Cardiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Wang H, Chen Y, Lin Y, Abesig J, Wu IX, Tam W. The methodological quality of individual participant data meta-analysis on intervention effects: systematic review. BMJ 2021; 373:n736. [PMID: 33875446 PMCID: PMC8054226 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the methodological quality of individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis and to identify areas for improvement. DESIGN Systematic review. DATA SOURCES Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES Systematic reviews with IPD meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials on intervention effects published in English. RESULTS 323 IPD meta-analyses covering 21 clinical areas and published between 1991 and 2019 were included: 270 (84%) were non-Cochrane reviews and 269 (84%) were published in journals with a high impact factor (top quarter). The IPD meta-analyses showed low compliance in using a satisfactory technique to assess the risk of bias of the included randomised controlled trials (43%, 95% confidence interval 38% to 48%), accounting for risk of bias when interpreting results (40%, 34% to 45%), providing a list of excluded studies with justifications (32%, 27% to 37%), establishing an a priori protocol (31%, 26% to 36%), prespecifying methods for assessing both the overall effects (44%, 39% to 50%) and the participant-intervention interactions (31%, 26% to 36%), assessing and considering the potential of publication bias (31%, 26% to 36%), and conducting a comprehensive literature search (19%, 15% to 23%). Up to 126 (39%) IPD meta-analyses failed to obtain IPD from 90% or more of eligible participants or trials, among which only 60 (48%) provided reasons and 21 (17%) undertook certain strategies to account for the unavailable IPD. CONCLUSIONS The methodological quality of IPD meta-analyses is unsatisfactory. Future IPD meta-analyses need to establish an a priori protocol with prespecified data syntheses plan, comprehensively search the literature, critically appraise included randomised controlled trials with appropriate technique, account for risk of bias during data analyses and interpretation, and account for unavailable IPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Huan Wang
- Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 5/F, Xiangya School of Public Health, No. 238, Shang ma Yuan ling Alley, Kaifu district, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Yancong Chen
- Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 5/F, Xiangya School of Public Health, No. 238, Shang ma Yuan ling Alley, Kaifu district, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Yali Lin
- Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 5/F, Xiangya School of Public Health, No. 238, Shang ma Yuan ling Alley, Kaifu district, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Julius Abesig
- Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 5/F, Xiangya School of Public Health, No. 238, Shang ma Yuan ling Alley, Kaifu district, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Irene Xy Wu
- Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, 5/F, Xiangya School of Public Health, No. 238, Shang ma Yuan ling Alley, Kaifu district, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Wilson Tam
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
de Zoete A, de Boer MR, Rubinstein SM, van Tulder MW, Underwood M, Hayden JA, Buffart LM, Ostelo R. Moderators of the Effect of Spinal Manipulative Therapy on Pain Relief and Function in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: An Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2021; 46:E505-E517. [PMID: 33186277 PMCID: PMC7993913 DOI: 10.1097/brs.0000000000003814] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2020] [Revised: 07/28/2020] [Accepted: 09/17/2020] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to identify which participant characteristics moderate the effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) on pain and functioning in chronic LBP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND The effects of SMT are comparable to other interventions recommended in guidelines for chronic low back pain (LBP); however, it is unclear which patients are more likely to benefit from SMT compared to other therapies. METHODS IPD were requested from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of SMT in adults with chronic LBP for pain and function compared to various other therapies (stratified by comparison). Potential patient moderators (n = 23) were a priori based on their clinical relevance. We investigated each moderator using a one-stage approach with IPD and investigated this interaction with the intervention for each time point (1, 3, 6, and 12 months). RESULTS We received IPD from 21 of 46 RCTs (n = 4223). The majority (12 RCTs, n = 2249) compared SMT to recommended interventions. The duration of LBP, baseline pain (confirmatory), smoking, and previous exposure to SMT (exploratory) had a small moderating effect across outcomes and follow-up points; these estimates did not represent minimally relevant differences in effects; for example, patients with <1 year of LBP demonstrated more positive point estimates for SMT versus recommended therapy for the outcome pain (mean differences ranged from 4.97 (95% confidence interval, CI: -3.20 to 13.13) at 3 months, 10.76 (95% CI: 1.06 to 20.47) at 6 months to 5.26 (95% CI: -2.92 to 13.44) at 12 months in patients with over a year LBP. No other moderators demonstrated a consistent pattern across time and outcomes. Few moderator analyses were conducted for the other comparisons because of too few data. CONCLUSION We did not identify any moderators that enable clinicians to identify which patients are likely to benefit more from SMT compared to other treatments.Level of Evidence: 2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annemarie de Zoete
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Amsterdam Movement Science research institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michiel R. de Boer
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Amsterdam Movement Science research institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sidney M. Rubinstein
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Amsterdam Movement Science research institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maurits W. van Tulder
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Amsterdam Movement Science research institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department Physiotherapy & Occupational Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Martin Underwood
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
- University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, UK
| | - Jill A. Hayden
- Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Laurien M. Buffart
- Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Raymond Ostelo
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Amsterdam Movement Science research institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Hersi AF, Pistiolis L, Dussan Luberth C, Vikhe-Patil E, Nilsson F, Mohammed I, Olofsson Bagge R, Wärnberg F, Eriksson S, Karakatsanis A. Optimizing Dose and Timing in Magnetic Tracer Techniques for Sentinel Lymph Node Detection in Early Breast Cancers: The Prospective Multicenter SentiDose Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13040693. [PMID: 33572114 PMCID: PMC7914636 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2020] [Revised: 02/02/2021] [Accepted: 02/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) nanoparticles have comparable performance to the combination of radioisotope and blue dye (RI + BD) for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in breast cancer. In this multicenter prospective study, lower SPIO doses (undiluted 1.5 vs. 1.0 mL) in different timeframes (perioperative vs. 1–7 days preoperative) and injection sites (subareolar vs. peritumoral) were compared to the previous standard (diluted 2.0 mL perioperatively) from the earlier Nordic trial. RI + BD were co-administered as background. In total, 534 patients were analyzed. SPIO SLN detection rates were similar (97.5% vs. 100% vs. 97.6%, p = 0.11) and respectively non-inferior to the dual technique. Significantly more SLNs were retrieved in the preoperative 1.0 mL cohort compared with 1.5 mL and the Nordic cohorts (2.18 vs. 1.85 vs. 1.83, p = 0.003). Thus, SPIO at 1.5 and 1.0 mL was non-inferior to both Sienna+® and the dual technique for SLN detection. Abstract Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) are non-inferior to radioisotope and blue dye (RI + BD) for sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection. Previously, 2 mL SPIO (Sienna+®) in 3 mL NaCl was used. In this dose-optimizing study, lower doses of a new refined SPIO solution (Magtrace®) (1.5 vs. 1.0 mL) were tested in different timeframes (0–24 h perioperative vs. 1–7 days preoperative) and injections sites (subareolar vs. peritumoral). Two consecutive breast cancer cohorts (n = 328) scheduled for SLN-biopsy were included from 2017 to 2019. All patients received isotope ± blue dye as back-up. SLNs were identified primarily with the SentiMag® probe and thereafter a gamma-probe. The primary endpoint was SLN detection rate with SPIO. Analyses were performed as a one-step individual patient-level meta-analysis using patient-level data from the previously published Nordic Trial (n = 206) as a third, reference cohort. In 534 patients, the SPIO SLN detection rates were similar (97.5% vs. 100% vs. 97.6%, p = 0.11) and non-inferior to the dual technique. Significantly more SLNs were retrieved in the preoperative 1.0 mL cohort compared with 1.5 and the 2.0 mL cohorts (2.18 vs. 1.85 vs. 1.83, p = 0.003). Lower SPIO volumes injected up to 7 days before the operation have comparable efficacy to standard SPIO dose and RI + BD for SLN detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdi-Fatah Hersi
- Centre for Clinical Research, Region Västmanland—Uppsala University, Sigtunagatan, 72189 Västerås, Sweden;
- Department of Surgery, Västmanlands Hospital, Sigtunagatan, 72189 Västerås, Sweden
- Correspondence:
| | - Lida Pistiolis
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 41345 Gothenburg, Sweden; (L.P.); (R.O.B.); (F.W.)
| | - Carlos Dussan Luberth
- Department of Surgery, Linköping University Hospital, 58185 Linköping, Sweden; (C.D.L.); (E.V.-P.)
| | - Eva Vikhe-Patil
- Department of Surgery, Linköping University Hospital, 58185 Linköping, Sweden; (C.D.L.); (E.V.-P.)
| | - Fredrik Nilsson
- Department of Surgery and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University Hospital, 90187 Umeå, Sweden;
| | - Imad Mohammed
- Department of Surgery, Kalmar County Hospital, 39185 Kalmar, Sweden;
| | - Roger Olofsson Bagge
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 41345 Gothenburg, Sweden; (L.P.); (R.O.B.); (F.W.)
| | - Fredrik Wärnberg
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 41345 Gothenburg, Sweden; (L.P.); (R.O.B.); (F.W.)
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Akademiska Sjukhuset, 75185 Uppsala, Sweden;
| | - Staffan Eriksson
- Centre for Clinical Research, Region Västmanland—Uppsala University, Sigtunagatan, 72189 Västerås, Sweden;
- Department of Surgery, Västmanlands Hospital, Sigtunagatan, 72189 Västerås, Sweden
| | - Andreas Karakatsanis
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Akademiska Sjukhuset, 75185 Uppsala, Sweden;
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Optimizing Dose and Timing in Magnetic Tracer Techniques for Sentinel Lymph Node Detection in Early Breast Cancers: The Prospective Multicenter SentiDose Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2021. [PMID: 33572114 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040693.pmid:33572114;pmcid:pmc7914636] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) are non-inferior to radioisotope and blue dye (RI + BD) for sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection. Previously, 2 mL SPIO (Sienna+®) in 3 mL NaCl was used. In this dose-optimizing study, lower doses of a new refined SPIO solution (Magtrace®) (1.5 vs. 1.0 mL) were tested in different timeframes (0-24 h perioperative vs. 1-7 days preoperative) and injections sites (subareolar vs. peritumoral). Two consecutive breast cancer cohorts (n = 328) scheduled for SLN-biopsy were included from 2017 to 2019. All patients received isotope ± blue dye as back-up. SLNs were identified primarily with the SentiMag® probe and thereafter a gamma-probe. The primary endpoint was SLN detection rate with SPIO. Analyses were performed as a one-step individual patient-level meta-analysis using patient-level data from the previously published Nordic Trial (n = 206) as a third, reference cohort. In 534 patients, the SPIO SLN detection rates were similar (97.5% vs. 100% vs. 97.6%, p = 0.11) and non-inferior to the dual technique. Significantly more SLNs were retrieved in the preoperative 1.0 mL cohort compared with 1.5 and the 2.0 mL cohorts (2.18 vs. 1.85 vs. 1.83, p = 0.003). Lower SPIO volumes injected up to 7 days before the operation have comparable efficacy to standard SPIO dose and RI + BD for SLN detection.
Collapse
|
36
|
Persson MSM, Stocks J, Varadi G, Hashempur MH, van Middelkoop M, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Walsh DA, Doherty M, Zhang W. Predicting response to topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in osteoarthritis: an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2021; 59:2207-2216. [PMID: 32276272 PMCID: PMC7449808 DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2019] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To identify predictors of the specific (difference between treatment and placebo) and overall (change from baseline in treatment arm) treatment effects of topical NSAIDs in OA. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of topical NSAIDs in OA were identified through systematic literature searching and inquiry to pharmaceutical companies. The raw, de-identified data were analysed in one-stage individual patient data meta-analysis (IPD-MA). Negative values for treatment effects (0–100 scale) indicate pain reduction. Results Of 63 eligible RCTs, 15 provided IPD (n = 1951 on topical NSAID), including 11 placebo-controlled RCTs (n = 1587 on topical NSAIDs, 1553 on placebo). Seven potential predictors of response were examined. Topical NSAIDs were superior to placebo [−6 (95% CI −9, −4)], with a small, but statistically significant greater effect in women than men [difference −4 (95% CI −8, −1)]. The overall treatment effect was 4-fold larger than the specific effect [−25 (95% CI −31, −19)] and increased with greater baseline pain severity (P < 0.001). No differences in efficacy were observed for age, BMI, features of inflammation, duration of complaints or radiographic OA severity. Conclusion Topical NSAIDs are effective for OA pain relief. Greater overall pain relief in individuals with more baseline pain might be due to contextual and non-specific effects, including regression to the mean. Additional factors that have been linked either mechanistically or through empirical evidence to outcomes should be selected for inclusion across future RCTs in order to facilitate the identification of response predictors through IPD-MA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Monica S M Persson
- Academic Rheumatology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Joanne Stocks
- Academic Rheumatology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | | | | | - Marienke van Middelkoop
- Department of General Practice, University Medical Center, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sita Bierma-Zeinstra
- Department of General Practice, University Medical Center, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - David A Walsh
- Academic Rheumatology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Michael Doherty
- Academic Rheumatology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Weiya Zhang
- Academic Rheumatology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Seo M, White IR, Furukawa TA, Imai H, Valgimigli M, Egger M, Zwahlen M, Efthimiou O. Comparing methods for estimating patient-specific treatment effects in individual patient data meta-analysis. Stat Med 2020; 40:1553-1573. [PMID: 33368415 PMCID: PMC7898845 DOI: 10.1002/sim.8859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2020] [Revised: 09/28/2020] [Accepted: 12/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Meta‐analysis of individual patient data (IPD) is increasingly used to synthesize data from multiple trials. IPD meta‐analysis offers several advantages over meta‐analyzing aggregate data, including the capacity to individualize treatment recommendations. Trials usually collect information on many patient characteristics. Some of these covariates may strongly interact with treatment (and thus be associated with treatment effect modification) while others may have little effect. It is currently unclear whether a systematic approach to the selection of treatment‐covariate interactions in an IPD meta‐analysis can lead to better estimates of patient‐specific treatment effects. We aimed to answer this question by comparing in simulations the standard approach to IPD meta‐analysis (no variable selection, all treatment‐covariate interactions included in the model) with six alternative methods: stepwise regression, and five regression methods that perform shrinkage on treatment‐covariate interactions, that is, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), ridge, adaptive LASSO, Bayesian LASSO, and stochastic search variable selection. Exploring a range of scenarios, we found that shrinkage methods performed well for both continuous and dichotomous outcomes, for a variety of settings. In most scenarios, these methods gave lower mean squared error of the patient‐specific treatment effect as compared with the standard approach and stepwise regression. We illustrate the application of these methods in two datasets from cardiology and psychiatry. We recommend that future IPD meta‐analysis that aim to estimate patient‐specific treatment effects using multiple effect modifiers should use shrinkage methods, whereas stepwise regression should be avoided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Seo
- Institute of Social and Preventive MedicineUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
- Graduate School for Health SciencesUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
| | - Ian R. White
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - Toshi A. Furukawa
- Departments of Health Promotion and Human Behavior and of Clinical EpidemiologyKyoto University Graduate School of Medicine/School of Public HealthKyotoJapan
| | - Hissei Imai
- Departments of Health Promotion and Human Behavior and of Clinical EpidemiologyKyoto University Graduate School of Medicine/School of Public HealthKyotoJapan
| | - Marco Valgimigli
- Department of Cardiology, Bern University HospitalUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
| | - Matthias Egger
- Institute of Social and Preventive MedicineUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
| | - Marcel Zwahlen
- Institute of Social and Preventive MedicineUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
| | - Orestis Efthimiou
- Institute of Social and Preventive MedicineUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Papadimitropoulou K, Stijnen T, Riley RD, Dekkers OM, le Cessie S. Meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: Using pseudo IPD created from aggregate data to adjust for baseline imbalance and assess treatment-by-baseline modification. Res Synth Methods 2020; 11:780-794. [PMID: 32643264 PMCID: PMC7754323 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2020] [Revised: 05/08/2020] [Accepted: 06/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Meta‐analysis of individual participant data (IPD) is considered the “gold‐standard” for synthesizing clinical study evidence. However, gaining access to IPD can be a laborious task (if possible at all) and in practice only summary (aggregate) data are commonly available. In this work we focus on meta‐analytic approaches of comparative studies where aggregate data are available for continuous outcomes measured at baseline (pre‐treatment) and follow‐up (post‐treatment). We propose a method for constructing pseudo individual baselines and outcomes based on the aggregate data. These pseudo IPD can be subsequently analysed using standard analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) methods. Pseudo IPD for continuous outcomes reported at two timepoints can be generated using the sufficient statistics of an ANCOVA model, i.e., the mean and standard deviation at baseline and follow‐up per group, together with the correlation of the baseline and follow‐up measurements. Applying the ANCOVA approach, which crucially adjusts for baseline imbalances and accounts for the correlation between baseline and change scores, to the pseudo IPD, results in identical estimates to the ones obtained by an ANCOVA on the true IPD. In addition, an interaction term between baseline and treatment effect can be added. There are several modeling options available under this approach, which makes it very flexible. Methods are exemplified using reported data of a previously published IPD meta‐analysis of 10 trials investigating the effect of antihypertensive treatments on systolic blood pressure, leading to identical results compared with the true IPD analysis and of a meta‐analysis of fewer trials, where baseline imbalance occurred.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katerina Papadimitropoulou
- Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Data Science and Biometrics, Danone Nutricia Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Theo Stijnen
- Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Richard D Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Olaf M Dekkers
- Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Saskia le Cessie
- Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Riley RD, Debray TPA, Fisher D, Hattle M, Marlin N, Hoogland J, Gueyffier F, Staessen JA, Wang J, Moons KGM, Reitsma JB, Ensor J. Individual participant data meta-analysis to examine interactions between treatment effect and participant-level covariates: Statistical recommendations for conduct and planning. Stat Med 2020; 39:2115-2137. [PMID: 32350891 PMCID: PMC7401032 DOI: 10.1002/sim.8516] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2019] [Revised: 02/07/2020] [Accepted: 02/08/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
Precision medicine research often searches for treatment‐covariate interactions, which refers to when a treatment effect (eg, measured as a mean difference, odds ratio, hazard ratio) changes across values of a participant‐level covariate (eg, age, gender, biomarker). Single trials do not usually have sufficient power to detect genuine treatment‐covariate interactions, which motivate the sharing of individual participant data (IPD) from multiple trials for meta‐analysis. Here, we provide statistical recommendations for conducting and planning an IPD meta‐analysis of randomized trials to examine treatment‐covariate interactions. For conduct, two‐stage and one‐stage statistical models are described, and we recommend: (i) interactions should be estimated directly, and not by calculating differences in meta‐analysis results for subgroups; (ii) interaction estimates should be based solely on within‐study information; (iii) continuous covariates and outcomes should be analyzed on their continuous scale; (iv) nonlinear relationships should be examined for continuous covariates, using a multivariate meta‐analysis of the trend (eg, using restricted cubic spline functions); and (v) translation of interactions into clinical practice is nontrivial, requiring individualized treatment effect prediction. For planning, we describe first why the decision to initiate an IPD meta‐analysis project should not be based on between‐study heterogeneity in the overall treatment effect; and second, how to calculate the power of a potential IPD meta‐analysis project in advance of IPD collection, conditional on characteristics (eg, number of participants, standard deviation of covariates) of the trials (potentially) promising their IPD. Real IPD meta‐analysis projects are used for illustration throughout.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard D Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Thomas P A Debray
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - David Fisher
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK
| | - Miriam Hattle
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Nadine Marlin
- Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Jeroen Hoogland
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jan A Staessen
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Research Unit Hypertension and Cardiovascular Epidemiology, Studies Coordinating Centre, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Jiguang Wang
- Centre for Epidemiological Studies and Clinical Trials, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Karel G M Moons
- 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
| | - Joie Ensor
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Wijn SRW, Rovers MM, Rongen JJ, Østerås H, Risberg MA, Roos EM, Hare KB, van de Graaf VA, Poolman RW, Englund M, Hannink G. Arthroscopic meniscectomy versus non-surgical or sham treatment in patients with MRI confirmed degenerative meniscus lesions: a protocol for an individual participant data meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e031864. [PMID: 32152157 PMCID: PMC7064080 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031864] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) after degenerative meniscus tears is one of the most frequently performed surgeries in orthopaedics. Although several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been published that showed no clear benefit compared with sham treatment or non-surgical treatment, the incidence of APM remains high. The common perception by most orthopaedic surgeons is that there are subgroups of patients that do need APM to improve, and they argue that each study sample of the existing trials is not representative for the day-to-day patients in the clinic. Therefore, the objective of this individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) is to assess whether there are subgroups of patients with degenerative meniscus lesions who benefit from APM in comparison with non-surgical or sham treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS An existing systematic review will be updated to identify all RCTs worldwide that evaluated APM compared with sham treatment or non-surgical treatment in patients with knee symptoms and degenerative meniscus tears. Time and effort will be spent in contacting principal investigators of the original trials and encourage them to collaborate in this project by sharing their trial data. All individual participant data will be validated for missing data, internal data consistency, randomisation integrity and censoring patterns. After validation, all datasets will be combined and analysed using a one-staged and two-staged approach. The RCTs' characteristics will be used for the assessment of clinical homogeneity and generalisability of the findings. The most important outcome will be the difference between APM and control groups in knee pain, function and quality of life 2 years after the intervention. Other outcomes of interest will include the difference in adverse events and mental health. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION All trial data will be anonymised before it is shared with the authors. The data will be encrypted and stored on a secure server located in the Netherlands. No major ethical concerns remain. This IPDMA will provide the evidence base to update and tailor diagnostic and treatment protocols as well as (international) guidelines for patients for whom orthopaedic surgeons consider APM. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42017067240.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stan R W Wijn
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Maroeska M Rovers
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Health Evidence, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jan J Rongen
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Håvard Østerås
- Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | - May A Risberg
- Department of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ewa M Roos
- Department of Sports and Clinical Biomechanics, Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy and Center for Muscle and Joint Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Kristoffer B Hare
- Department of Orthopedics, Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Rudolf W Poolman
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Joint Research, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martin Englund
- Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Orthopaedics, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Gerjon Hannink
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
de Jong VM, Moons KG, Riley RD, Tudur Smith C, Marson AG, Eijkemans MJ, Debray TP. Individual participant data meta-analysis of intervention studies with time-to-event outcomes: A review of the methodology and an applied example. Res Synth Methods 2020; 11:148-168. [PMID: 31759339 PMCID: PMC7079159 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1384] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2019] [Revised: 10/23/2019] [Accepted: 10/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Many randomized trials evaluate an intervention effect on time-to-event outcomes. Individual participant data (IPD) from such trials can be obtained and combined in a so-called IPD meta-analysis (IPD-MA), to summarize the overall intervention effect. We performed a narrative literature review to provide an overview of methods for conducting an IPD-MA of randomized intervention studies with a time-to-event outcome. We focused on identifying good methodological practice for modeling frailty of trial participants across trials, modeling heterogeneity of intervention effects, choosing appropriate association measures, dealing with (trial differences in) censoring and follow-up times, and addressing time-varying intervention effects and effect modification (interactions).We discuss how to achieve this using parametric and semi-parametric methods, and describe how to implement these in a one-stage or two-stage IPD-MA framework. We recommend exploring heterogeneity of the effect(s) through interaction and non-linear effects. Random effects should be applied to account for residual heterogeneity of the intervention effect. We provide further recommendations, many of which specific to IPD-MA of time-to-event data from randomized trials examining an intervention effect.We illustrate several key methods in a real IPD-MA, where IPD of 1225 participants from 5 randomized clinical trials were combined to compare the effects of Carbamazepine and Valproate on the incidence of epileptic seizures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valentijn M.T. de Jong
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CareUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
| | - Karel G.M. Moons
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CareUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
- Cochrane Netherlands, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CareUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
| | - Richard D. Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele UniversityStaffordshireUK
| | | | - Anthony G. Marson
- Department of Molecular and Clinical PharmacologyUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
| | - Marinus J.C. Eijkemans
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CareUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
| | - Thomas P.A. Debray
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CareUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
- Cochrane Netherlands, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary CareUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Breedvelt JJF, Warren FC, Brouwer ME, Karyotaki E, Kuyken W, Cuijpers P, van Oppen P, Gilbody S, Bockting CLH. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of psychological relapse prevention interventions versus control for patients in remission from depression: a protocol. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e034158. [PMID: 32060157 PMCID: PMC7044815 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Psychological interventions and antidepressant medication can be effective interventions to prevent depressive relapse for patients currently in remission of depression. Less is known about overall factors that predict or moderate treatment response for patients receiving a psychological intervention for recurrent depression. This is a protocol for an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis which aims to assess predictors and moderators of relapse or recurrence for patients currently in remission from depression. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were completed on 13 October 2019. Study extractions and risk of bias assessments have been completed. Study authors will be asked to contribute IPD. Standard aggregate meta-analysis and IPD analysis will be conducted, and the outcomes will be compared with assess whether results differ between studies supplying data and those that did not. IPD files of individual data will be merged and variables homogenised where possible for consistency. IPD will be analysed via Cox regression and one and two-stage analyses will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The results will be published in peer review journals and shared in a policy briefing as well as accessible formats and shared with a range of stakeholders. The results will inform patients and clinicians and researchers about our current understanding of more personalised ways to prevent a depressive relapse. No local ethics approval was necessary following consultation with the legal department. Guidance on patient data storage and management will be adhered to. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42019127844.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josefien J F Breedvelt
- Department of Psychiatry and Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centre - Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Fiona C Warren
- Institute of Health Research, College of Medicine & Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Marlies E Brouwer
- Department of Psychiatry and Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centre - Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eirini Karyotaki
- Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Willem Kuyken
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Pim Cuijpers
- Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Patricia van Oppen
- Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, location VUmc and GGZ InGeest, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Simon Gilbody
- Mental Health and Addictions Research Group - Department of Health Sciences, The University of York, York, UK
| | - Claudi L H Bockting
- Department of Psychiatry and Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam University Medical Centre - Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Yang JJ, Yu D, Xiang YB, Blot W, White E, Robien K, Sinha R, Park Y, Takata Y, Lazovich D, Gao YT, Zhang X, Lan Q, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Johansson I, Tumino R, Riboli E, Tjønneland A, Skeie G, Quirós JR, Johansson M, Smith-Warner SA, Zheng W, Shu XO. Association of Dietary Fiber and Yogurt Consumption With Lung Cancer Risk: A Pooled Analysis. JAMA Oncol 2020; 6:e194107. [PMID: 31647500 PMCID: PMC6813596 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.4107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2019] [Accepted: 07/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance Dietary fiber (the main source of prebiotics) and yogurt (a probiotic food) confer various health benefits via modulating the gut microbiota and metabolic pathways. However, their associations with lung cancer risk have not been well investigated. Objective To evaluate the individual and joint associations of dietary fiber and yogurt consumption with lung cancer risk and to assess the potential effect modification of the associations by lifestyle and other dietary factors. Design, Setting, and Participants This pooled analysis included 10 prospective cohorts involving 1 445 850 adults from studies that were conducted in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Data analyses were performed between November 2017 and February 2019. Using harmonized individual participant data, hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for lung cancer risk associated with dietary fiber and yogurt intakes were estimated for each cohort by Cox regression and pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Participants who had a history of cancer at enrollment or developed any cancer, died, or were lost to follow-up within 2 years after enrollment were excluded. Exposures Dietary fiber intake and yogurt consumption measured by validated instruments. Main Outcomes and Measures Incident lung cancer, subclassified by histologic type (eg, adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma). Results The analytic sample included 627 988 men, with a mean (SD) age of 57.9 (9.0) years, and 817 862 women, with a mean (SD) age of 54.8 (9.7) years. During a median follow-up of 8.6 years, 18 822 incident lung cancer cases were documented. Both fiber and yogurt intakes were inversely associated with lung cancer risk after adjustment for status and pack-years of smoking and other lung cancer risk factors: hazard ratio, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.76-0.91) for the highest vs lowest quintile of fiber intake; and hazard ratio, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.87) for high vs no yogurt consumption. The fiber or yogurt associations with lung cancer were significant in never smokers and were consistently observed across sex, race/ethnicity, and tumor histologic type. When considered jointly, high yogurt consumption with the highest quintile of fiber intake showed more than 30% reduced risk of lung cancer than nonyogurt consumption with the lowest quintile of fiber intake (hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.61-0.73] in total study populations; hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54-0.89] in never smokers), suggesting potential synergism. Conclusions and Relevance Dietary fiber and yogurt consumption was associated with reduced risk of lung cancer after adjusting for known risk factors and among never smokers. Our findings suggest a potential protective role of prebiotics and probiotics against lung carcinogenesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jae Jeong Yang
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Danxia Yu
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Yong-Bing Xiang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes & Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - William Blot
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Emily White
- Cancer Prevention Program, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Kim Robien
- Department of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia
| | - Rashmi Sinha
- Division of Epidemiology & Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Yikyung Park
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri
| | - Yumie Takata
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
- College of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis
| | - DeAnn Lazovich
- Division of Epidemiology & Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
- Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
| | - Yu-Tang Gao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes & Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Xuehong Zhang
- Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Qing Lan
- Division of Epidemiology & Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita
- Department for Determinants of Chronic Diseases, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Centre, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Rosario Tumino
- Cancer Registry and Histopathology Department, Civic-M.P. Arezzo Hospital, American Samoa, Ragusa, Italy
| | - Elio Riboli
- Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
| | - Anne Tjønneland
- Diet, Genes and Environment, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Denmark Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Guri Skeie
- Department of Community Medicine, UIT, The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | | | - Mattias Johansson
- Genetic Epidemiology Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyons, France
| | - Stephanie A. Smith-Warner
- Department of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Wei Zheng
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Xiao-Ou Shu
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Hayden JA, Wilson MN, Stewart S, Cartwright JL, Smith AO, Riley RD, van Tulder M, Bendix T, Cecchi F, Costa LOP, Dufour N, Ferreira ML, Foster NE, Gudavalli MR, Hartvigsen J, Helmhout P, Kool J, Koumantakis GA, Kovacs FM, Kuukkanen T, Long A, Macedo LG, Machado LAC, Maher CG, Mehling W, Morone G, Peterson T, Rasmussen-Barr E, Ryan CG, Sjögren T, Smeets R, Staal JB, Unsgaard-Tøndel M, Wajswelner H, Yeung EW. Exercise treatment effect modifiers in persistent low back pain: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 3514 participants from 27 randomised controlled trials. Br J Sports Med 2019; 54:1277-1278. [DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2019-101205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/13/2019] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
BackgroundLow back pain is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Exercise therapy is widely recommended to treat persistent non-specific low back pain. While evidence suggests exercise is, on average, moderately effective, there remains uncertainty about which individuals might benefit the most from exercise.MethodsIn parallel with a Cochrane review update, we requested individual participant data (IPD) from high-quality randomised clinical trials of adults with our two primary outcomes of interest, pain and functional limitations, and calculated global recovery. We compiled a master data set including baseline participant characteristics, exercise and comparison characteristics, and outcomes at short-term, moderate-term and long-term follow-up. We conducted descriptive analyses and one-stage IPD meta-analysis using multilevel mixed-effects regression of the overall treatment effect and prespecified potential treatment effect modifiers.ResultsWe received IPD for 27 trials (3514 participants). For studies included in this analysis, compared with no treatment/usual care, exercise therapy on average reduced pain (mean effect/100 (95% CI) −10.7 (−14.1 to –7.4)), a result compatible with a clinically important 20% smallest worthwhile effect. Exercise therapy reduced functional limitations with a clinically important 23% improvement (mean effect/100 (95% CI) −10.2 (−13.2 to –7.3)) at short-term follow-up. Not having heavy physical demands at work and medication use for low back pain were potential treatment effect modifiers—these were associated with superior exercise outcomes relative to non-exercise comparisons. Lower body mass index was also associated with better outcomes in exercise compared with no treatment/usual care. This study was limited by inconsistent availability and measurement of participant characteristics.ConclusionsThis study provides potentially useful information to help treat patients and design future studies of exercise interventions that are better matched to specific subgroups.Protocol publicationhttps://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-64
Collapse
|
45
|
Belias M, Rovers MM, Reitsma JB, Debray TPA, IntHout J. Statistical approaches to identify subgroups in meta-analysis of individual participant data: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19:183. [PMID: 31477023 PMCID: PMC6720416 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0817-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2018] [Accepted: 08/07/2019] [Indexed: 02/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) is considered the gold standard for investigating subgroup effects. Frequently used regression-based approaches to detect subgroups in IPD-MA are: meta-regression, per-subgroup meta-analysis (PS-MA), meta-analysis of interaction terms (MA-IT), naive one-stage IPD-MA (ignoring potential study-level confounding), and centred one-stage IPD-MA (accounting for potential study-level confounding). Clear guidance on the analyses is lacking and clinical researchers may use approaches with suboptimal efficiency to investigate subgroup effects in an IPD setting. Therefore, our aim is to overview and compare the aforementioned methods, and provide recommendations over which should be preferred. Methods We conducted a simulation study where we generated IPD of randomised trials and varied the magnitude of subgroup effect (0, 25, 50% relative reduction), between-study treatment effect heterogeneity (none, medium, large), ecological bias (none, quantitative, qualitative), sample size (50,100,200), and number of trials (5,10) for binary, continuous and time-to-event outcomes. For each scenario, we assessed the power, false positive rate (FPR) and bias of aforementioned five approaches. Results Naive and centred IPD-MA yielded the highest power, whilst preserving acceptable FPR around the nominal 5% in all scenarios. Centred IPD-MA showed slightly less biased estimates than naïve IPD-MA. Similar results were obtained for MA-IT, except when analysing binary outcomes (where it yielded less power and FPR < 5%). PS-MA showed similar power as MA-IT in non-heterogeneous scenarios, but power collapsed as heterogeneity increased, and decreased even more in the presence of ecological bias. PS-MA suffered from too high FPRs in non-heterogeneous settings and showed biased estimates in all scenarios. Meta-regression showed poor power (< 20%) in all scenarios and completely biased results in settings with qualitative ecological bias. Conclusions Our results indicate that subgroup detection in IPD-MA requires careful modelling. Naive and centred IPD-MA performed equally well, but due to less bias of the estimates in the presence of ecological bias, we recommend the latter. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-019-0817-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michail Belias
- Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud university medical center, Mailbox 133, P.O. Box 9101, Nijmegen, 6500, HB, The Netherlands.
| | - Maroeska M Rovers
- Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud university medical center, Mailbox 133, P.O. Box 9101, Nijmegen, 6500, HB, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes B Reitsma
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, Utrecht, 3508, GA, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas P A Debray
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Cochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, PO Box 85500, Utrecht, 3508, GA, The Netherlands
| | - Joanna IntHout
- Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud university medical center, Mailbox 133, P.O. Box 9101, Nijmegen, 6500, HB, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Bernard P, Savard J, Steindorf K, Sweegers MG, Courneya KS, Newton RU, Aaronson NK, Jacobsen PB, May AM, Galvao DA, Chinapaw MJ, Stuiver MM, Griffith KA, Mesters I, Knoop H, Goedendorp MM, Bohus M, Thorsen L, Schmidt ME, Ulrich CM, Sonke GS, van Harten W, Winters-Stone KM, Velthuis MJ, Taaffe DR, van Mechelen W, Kersten MJ, Nollet F, Wenzel J, Wiskemann J, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Brug J, Buffart LM. Effects and moderators of exercise on sleep in adults with cancer: Individual patient data and aggregated meta-analyses. J Psychosom Res 2019; 124:109746. [PMID: 31443811 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2019.109746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2019] [Revised: 06/14/2019] [Accepted: 06/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effects of exercise interventions on sleep disturbances and sleep quality in patients with mixed cancer diagnoses, and identify demographic, clinical, and intervention-related moderators of these effects. METHODS Individual patient data (IPD) and aggregated meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Using data from the Predicting OptimaL cAncer RehabIlitation and Supportive care project, IPD of 2173 adults (mean age = 54.8) with cancer from 17 RCTs were analyzed. A complementary systematic search was conducted (until November 2018) to study the overall effects and test the representativeness of analyzed IPD. Effect sizes of exercise effects on self-reported sleep outcomes were calculated for all included RCTs. Linear mixed-effect models were used to evaluate the effects of exercise on post-intervention outcome values, adjusting for baseline values. Moderator effects were studied by testing interactions for demographic, clinical and intervention-related characteristics. RESULTS For all 27 eligible RCTs from the updated search, exercise interventions significantly decreased sleep disturbances in adults with cancer (g = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.16; -0.02]). No significant effect was obtained for sleep quality. RCTs included in IPD analyses constituted a representative sample of the published literature. The intervention effects on sleep disturbances were not significantly moderated by any demographic, clinical, or intervention-related factor, nor by sleep disturbances. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis provides some evidence that, compared to control conditions, exercise interventions may improve sleep disturbances, but not sleep quality, in cancer patients, although this effect is of a small magnitude. Among the investigated variables, none was found to significantly moderate the effect of exercise interventions on sleep disturbances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Bernard
- Université Laval Cancer Research Center, Québec, Québec, Canada; School of Psychology, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada; CHU de Québec - Université Laval Research Center, Québec, Québec, Canada; Physical Activity Sciences Department, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada; Research centre, University Institute of Mental Health at Montreal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
| | - J Savard
- Université Laval Cancer Research Center, Québec, Québec, Canada; School of Psychology, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada; CHU de Québec - Université Laval Research Center, Québec, Québec, Canada
| | - K Steindorf
- Division of Physical Activity, Prevention and Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Disease (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - M G Sweegers
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K S Courneya
- Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - R U Newton
- Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia
| | - N K Aaronson
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P B Jacobsen
- Division of Population Science, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - A M May
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - D A Galvao
- Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia
| | - M J Chinapaw
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M M Stuiver
- Department of Physiotherapy, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K A Griffith
- School of Nursing, University of Maryland, Baltimore, USA
| | - I Mesters
- Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
| | - H Knoop
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M M Goedendorp
- Department of Health Psychology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; Institute of Psychiatric and Psychosomatic Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Heidelberg t University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - M Bohus
- Institute of Psychiatric and Psychosomatic Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Heidelberg t University, Mannheim, Germany; Faculty of Health, University of Antwerp, Belgium
| | - L Thorsen
- National Advisory Unit on Late Effects after Cancer, Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - M E Schmidt
- Division of Physical Activity, Prevention and Cancer, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Disease (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - C M Ulrich
- Huntsman Cancer Institute and University of Utah, Department of Population Health Sciences, Salt Lake City, USA
| | - G S Sonke
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Division of Population Science, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - W van Harten
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Huntsman Cancer Institute and University of Utah, Department of Population Health Sciences, Salt Lake City, USA
| | | | - M J Velthuis
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - D R Taaffe
- Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia
| | - W van Mechelen
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J Kersten
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Hematology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F Nollet
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Wenzel
- Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, USA
| | - J Wiskemann
- Division of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - I M Verdonck-de Leeuw
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Brug
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - L M Buffart
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Baranowski T, Lyons EJ. Scoping Review of Pokémon Go: Comprehensive Assessment of Augmented Reality for Physical Activity Change. Games Health J 2019; 9:71-84. [PMID: 31386564 DOI: 10.1089/g4h.2019.0034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Pokémon Go™ (PG) is a mobile videogame that requires real-world walking to "catch" augmented reality (AR) virtual creatures. Media attention speculated that extensive physical activity (PA) could result from PG play, which could have public health benefit. Little is known about contextual factors related to PG play and how they may impact play initiation or duration. A systematic search of articles reporting the words PG was conducted with PubMed and Google Scholar. To understand the many possible influences on and outcomes of PG play, a scoping review was conducted by employing a conceptual model to organize the literature. Although large numbers of people started playing PG, these were a relatively small proportion of the relevant populations, but PG may have activated some of those most in need of PA. Diverse factors predicted who initiated PG play, but they tended to emphasize anticipated fun, escapism, nostalgia, social ties, and desire for PA. Environmental factors (e.g., unavailable GPS signals, trespassing laws) limited PG play for some. Diverse factors predicted duration of gameplay, but fun appeared to be prominent. The level of increases in PA from PG among youth and young adults appeared to be small or undetected, and of a relatively short duration (<2 months). Among older adults, however, there were modest increases in PA for up to 7 months post-release. This intensity and duration of increased PA appears to be inadequate to stem the epidemic of obesity but may have mental and social health benefits. Although many adverse outcomes from playing PG were reported, these appear to be low incidence, which should primarily influence PG players to knowingly exercise caution. Many research issues were identified to specify who might play AR games and effective strategies to enhance game design to increase PA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tom Baranowski
- Department of Pediatrics, USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Elizabeth J Lyons
- The University of Texas Medical Branch, Institute for Translational Sciences, Galveston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Playle R, Dimitropoulou P, Kelson M, Quinn L, Busse M. Exercise Interventions in Huntington's Disease: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis. Mov Disord Clin Pract 2019; 6:567-575. [PMID: 31538091 DOI: 10.1002/mdc3.12809] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2018] [Revised: 05/03/2019] [Accepted: 06/07/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Physical activity may be beneficial in Huntington's disease (HD); however, studies to date have been underpowered to detect change. We combined data from five randomized controlled feasibility trials using individual patient data meta-analyses. Methods/Design All trial interventions comprised a combination of supervised and self-directed physical activity, with varied emphasis on aerobic, strength, endurance, flexibility, and task training. Duration ranged from 8 to 16 weeks. The primary outcome was the modified Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Motor Score. Secondary outcomes included the Symbol Digit Modality Test, Berg Balance Scale, 30-second Chair stand, Timed Up and Go, Gait Speed, Physical Performance Test, Six-Minute Walk, International Physical Activity Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, EuroQol Health Utility Index, and Short-Form 36 Health Related Quality of Life Scale. The primary analysis utilized a two-stage approach. A one-stage approach was explored as a sensitivity analysis using a cross-classified (by study site) linear mixed-effects model. Results One hundred twenty-one participants provided complete data. Risk of bias was moderate; however, primary outcomes were blind assessed. Primary pooled effect estimates adjusted for baseline modified motor score (95% confidence interval) were 0.2 (-2.1 to 2.6) favoring control. There was considerable heterogeneity between the studies. Conclusions There was no evidence of an exercise effect on the modified motor score in these relatively short-duration interventions. Longer-duration trials incorporating supervised components meeting frequency, intensity, time, and type principles are required. Lack of common outcomes limited the analysis and highlight the importance of a core outcome set for evaluating exercise in HD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca Playle
- Centre for Trials Research Cardiff University Cardiff United Kingdom
| | | | - Mark Kelson
- School of Mathematics/The Alan Turing Institute University of Exeter Exeter United Kingdom
| | - Lori Quinn
- Centre for Trials Research Cardiff University Cardiff United Kingdom.,Teachers College Columbia University New York New York USA
| | - Monica Busse
- Centre for Trials Research Cardiff University Cardiff United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Piccolo R, Bonaa KH, Efthimiou O, Varenne O, Baldo A, Urban P, Kaiser C, Remkes W, Räber L, de Belder A, van 't Hof AWJ, Stankovic G, Lemos PA, Wilsgaard T, Reifart J, Rodriguez AE, Ribeiro EE, Serruys PWJC, Abizaid A, Sabaté M, Byrne RA, de la Torre Hernandez JM, Wijns W, Jüni P, Windecker S, Valgimigli M. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Lancet 2019; 393:2503-2510. [PMID: 31056295 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30474-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 153] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2019] [Revised: 02/19/2019] [Accepted: 02/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have mostly been investigated in head-to-head non-inferiority trials against early-generation DES and have typically shown similar efficacy and superior safety. How the safety profile of new-generation DES compares with that of bare-metal stents (BMS) is less clear. METHODS We did an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials to compare outcomes after implantation of new-generation DES or BMS among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction. Data were pooled in a one-stage random-effects meta-analysis and examined at maximum follow-up and a 1-year landmark. Risk estimates are reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. This study is registered in PROSPERO, number CRD42017060520. FINDINGS We obtained individual data for 26 616 patients in 20 randomised trials. Mean follow-up was 3·2 (SD 1·8) years. The risk of the primary outcome was reduced in DES recipients compared with BMS recipients (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·78-0·90, p<0·001) owing to a reduced risk of myocardial infarction (0·79, 0·71-0·88, p<0·001) and a possible slight but non-significant cardiac mortality benefit (0·89, 0·78-1·01, p=0·075). All-cause death was unaffected (HR with DES 0·96, 95% CI 0·88-1·05, p=0·358), but risk was lowered for definite stent thrombosis (0·63, 0·50-0·80, p<0·001) and target-vessel revascularisation (0·55, 0·50-0·60, p<0·001). We saw a time-dependent treatment effect, with DES being associated with lower risk of the primary outcome than BMS up to 1 year after placement. While the effect was maintained in the longer term, there was no further divergence from BMS after 1 year. INTERPRETATION The performance of new-generation DES in the first year after implantation means that BMS should no longer be considered the gold standard for safety. Further development of DES technology should target improvements in clinical outcomes beyond 1 year. FUNDING Bern University Hospital.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raffaele Piccolo
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Kaare H Bonaa
- Department of Community Medicine, University of Tromsø-Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Orestis Efthimiou
- Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Olivier Varenne
- Department of Cardiology, Hôpital Cochin, AP-HP, Paris, France; Université Paris Descartes, Faculté de Médecine, Paris, France
| | - Andrea Baldo
- Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | | | - Christoph Kaiser
- Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Wouter Remkes
- Department of Cardiology, Isala Heart Centre, Zwolle, Netherlands
| | - Lorenz Räber
- Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Adam de Belder
- Department of Cardiology, Sussex Cardiac Centre, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals, Brighton, UK
| | - Arnoud W J van 't Hof
- Department of Cardiology, Isala Heart Centre, Zwolle, Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Netherlands; Department of Cardiology, Zuyderland Medical Centre Heerlen, Netherlands
| | - Goran Stankovic
- Department of Cardiology, Clinical Centre of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
| | - Pedro A Lemos
- Heart Institute (InCor), University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Tom Wilsgaard
- Department of Community Medicine, University of Tromsø-Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Jörg Reifart
- Department of Cardiology, Kerckhoff Klinik, Bad Nauheim, Germany
| | - Alfredo E Rodriguez
- Cardiac Unit, Cardiology Fellow Training Program, Otamendi Hospital, Buenos Aires School of Medicine, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Expedito E Ribeiro
- Heart Institute (InCor), University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Patrick W J C Serruys
- International Centre for Circulatory Health, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, London, UK
| | - Alex Abizaid
- Department of Invasive Cardiology, Institute Dante Pazzanese of Cardiology, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Manel Sabaté
- Cardiology Department, Cardiovascular Institute (ICCV), Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Robert A Byrne
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany; German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Munich, Germany; Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany
| | | | - William Wijns
- Lambe Institute for Translational Medicine, Galway, Ireland; Cúram, Biomedical Sciences, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Peter Jüni
- Applied Health Research Centre of the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Department of Medicine, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Stephan Windecker
- Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Marco Valgimigli
- Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Yang JJ, Yu D, Wen W, Saito E, Rahman S, Shu XO, Chen Y, Gupta PC, Gu D, Tsugane S, Xiang YB, Gao YT, Yuan JM, Tamakoshi A, Irie F, Sadakane A, Tomata Y, Kanemura S, Tsuji I, Matsuo K, Nagata C, Chen CJ, Koh WP, Shin MH, Park SK, Wu PE, Qiao YL, Pednekar MS, He J, Sawada N, Li HL, Gao J, Cai H, Wang R, Sairenchi T, Grant E, Sugawara Y, Zhang S, Ito H, Wada K, Shen CY, Pan WH, Ahn YO, You SL, Fan JH, Yoo KY, Ashan H, Chia KS, Boffetta P, Inoue M, Kang D, Potter JD, Zheng W. Association of Diabetes With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality in Asia: A Pooled Analysis of More Than 1 Million Participants. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e192696. [PMID: 31002328 PMCID: PMC6481439 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.2696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 98] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Asia is home to the largest diabetic populations in the world. However, limited studies have quantified the association of diabetes with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in Asian populations. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the association of diabetes with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in Asia and to investigate potential effect modifications of the diabetes-mortality associations by participants' age, sex, education level, body mass index, and smoking status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This pooled analysis incorporated individual participant data from 22 prospective cohort studies of the Asia Cohort Consortium conducted between 1963 and 2006. A total of 1 002 551 Asian individuals (from mainland China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, India, and Bangladesh) were followed up for more than 3 years. Cohort-specific hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for all-cause and cause-specific mortality were estimated using Cox regression models and then pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Analysis was conducted between January 10, 2018, and August 31, 2018. EXPOSURES Doctor-diagnosed diabetes, age, sex, education level, body mass index, and smoking status. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES All-cause and cause-specific mortality. RESULTS Of 1 002 551 participants (518 537 [51.7%] female; median [range] age, 54.0 [30.0-98.0] years), 148 868 deaths were ascertained during a median (range) follow-up of 12.6 (3.0-38.9) years. The overall prevalence of diabetes reported at baseline was 4.8% for men and 3.6% for women. Patients with diabetes had a 1.89-fold risk of all-cause death compared with patients without diabetes (hazard ratio [HR], 1.89; 95% CI, 1.74-2.04), with the highest relative risk of death due to diabetes itself (HR, 22.8; 95% CI, 18.5-28.1), followed by renal disease (HR, 3.08; 95% CI, 2.50-3.78), coronary heart disease (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.19-3.02), and ischemic stroke (HR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.85-2.51). The adverse diabetes-mortality associations were more evident among women (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.89-2.32) than among men (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.62-1.88) (P for interaction < .001) and more evident among adults aged 30 to 49 years (HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 2.08-2.84) than among adults aged 70 years and older (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.40-1.62) (P for interaction < .001). A similar pattern of association was found between diabetes and cause-specific mortality, with significant variations noted by sex and age. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found that diabetes was associated with increased risk of death from several diseases among Asian populations. Development and implementation of diabetes management programs are urgently needed to reduce the burden of diabetes in Asia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jae Jeong Yang
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Danxia Yu
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Wanqing Wen
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Eiko Saito
- Division of Cancer Statistics Integration, Center for Cancer Control and Information Services, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shafiur Rahman
- Department of Global Health Policy, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Xiao-Ou Shu
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Yu Chen
- Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York
- Department of Environmental Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York
| | - Prakash C. Gupta
- Healis-Sekhsaria Institute for Public Health, Mahape, Navi Mumbai, India
| | - Dongfeng Gu
- Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Shoichiro Tsugane
- Epidemiology and Prevention Group, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yong-Bing Xiang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
- Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
| | - Yu-Tang Gao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
- Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jian-Min Yuan
- Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Akiko Tamakoshi
- Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Fujiko Irie
- Department of Health and Welfare, Ibaraki Prefectural Office, Mito, Japan
| | | | - Yasutake Tomata
- Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
| | - Seiki Kanemura
- Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
| | - Ichiro Tsuji
- Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
| | - Keitaro Matsuo
- Division of Molecular & Clinical Epidemiology, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Nagoya, Japan
- Department of Epidemiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Chisato Nagata
- Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu University, Gifu City, Japan
| | | | - Woon-Puay Koh
- Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Myung-Hee Shin
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sue K. Park
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul National University Graduate School, Seoul, South Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Pei-Ei Wu
- Taiwan Biobank, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei city, Taiwan
| | - You-Lin Qiao
- National Cancer Center, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
| | | | - Jiang He
- Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana
| | - Norie Sawada
- Epidemiology and Prevention Group, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hong-Lan Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
- Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jing Gao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
- Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
| | - Hui Cai
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Renwei Wang
- Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Toshimi Sairenchi
- Department of Public Health, Dokkyo Medical University School of Medicine, Mibu, Japan
| | - Eric Grant
- Radiation Effects Research Foundation, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Yumi Sugawara
- Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
| | - Shu Zhang
- Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
| | - Hidemi Ito
- Division of Molecular & Clinical Epidemiology, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Nagoya, Japan
- Department of Epidemiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Keiko Wada
- Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu University, Gifu City, Japan
| | - Chen-Yang Shen
- Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei City, Taiwan
- College of Public Health, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan
| | - Wen-Harn Pan
- Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei City, Taiwan
| | - Yoon-Ok Ahn
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - San-Lin You
- School of Medicine & Big Data Research Center, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taipei City, Taiwan
| | - Jin-Hu Fan
- National Cancer Center, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Keun-Young Yoo
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea
| | - Habibul Ashan
- Department of Health Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
- Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
- Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
- Cancer Research Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Kee Seng Chia
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Paolo Boffetta
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Manami Inoue
- Epidemiology and Prevention Group, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Daehee Kang
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Seoul National University Graduate School, Seoul, South Korea
- Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - John D. Potter
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
- Centre for Public Health Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Wei Zheng
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| |
Collapse
|