Cargando…

Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity in control group response rates when conducting network meta-analyses (NMA) was demonstrated using a case study involving a comparison of biologics for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Bayesian NM...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cameron, Chris, Varu, Abhishek, Lau, Arthur, Gharaibeh, Mahdi, Paulino, Marcelo, Rogoza, Raina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6796442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31619175
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0837-2
_version_ 1783459591062814720
author Cameron, Chris
Varu, Abhishek
Lau, Arthur
Gharaibeh, Mahdi
Paulino, Marcelo
Rogoza, Raina
author_facet Cameron, Chris
Varu, Abhishek
Lau, Arthur
Gharaibeh, Mahdi
Paulino, Marcelo
Rogoza, Raina
author_sort Cameron, Chris
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity in control group response rates when conducting network meta-analyses (NMA) was demonstrated using a case study involving a comparison of biologics for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Bayesian NMAs were conducted for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 treatment response based upon a set of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified by a recently completed systematic review of the literature. In addition to the performance of an unadjusted NMA, a model adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity of control group response rates using meta-regression was fit to the data. Model fit was evaluated, and findings from both analyses were compared with regard to clinical interpretations. RESULTS: ACR 50 response data from a total of 51 RCTs and 16,223 patients were analyzed. Inspection of cross-study variability in control group response rates identified considerable differences between studies. NMA incorporating adjustment for this variability was associated with an average change of 38.1% in the magnitude of the ORs between treatment comparisons, and over 64% of the odds ratio changed by 15% or more. Important changes in the clinical interpretations drawn from treatment comparisons were identified with this improved modeling approach. CONCLUSIONS: In comparing biologics for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, failure to adjust for cross-trial differences in the control arm response rates in NMA can lead to biased estimates of comparative efficacy between treatments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6796442
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67964422019-10-21 Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis Cameron, Chris Varu, Abhishek Lau, Arthur Gharaibeh, Mahdi Paulino, Marcelo Rogoza, Raina BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity in control group response rates when conducting network meta-analyses (NMA) was demonstrated using a case study involving a comparison of biologics for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Bayesian NMAs were conducted for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 treatment response based upon a set of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified by a recently completed systematic review of the literature. In addition to the performance of an unadjusted NMA, a model adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity of control group response rates using meta-regression was fit to the data. Model fit was evaluated, and findings from both analyses were compared with regard to clinical interpretations. RESULTS: ACR 50 response data from a total of 51 RCTs and 16,223 patients were analyzed. Inspection of cross-study variability in control group response rates identified considerable differences between studies. NMA incorporating adjustment for this variability was associated with an average change of 38.1% in the magnitude of the ORs between treatment comparisons, and over 64% of the odds ratio changed by 15% or more. Important changes in the clinical interpretations drawn from treatment comparisons were identified with this improved modeling approach. CONCLUSIONS: In comparing biologics for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, failure to adjust for cross-trial differences in the control arm response rates in NMA can lead to biased estimates of comparative efficacy between treatments. BioMed Central 2019-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6796442/ /pubmed/31619175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0837-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cameron, Chris
Varu, Abhishek
Lau, Arthur
Gharaibeh, Mahdi
Paulino, Marcelo
Rogoza, Raina
Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
title Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
title_full Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
title_fullStr Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
title_full_unstemmed Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
title_short Incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
title_sort incorporating adjustments for variability in control group response rates in network meta-analysis: a case study of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6796442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31619175
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0837-2
work_keys_str_mv AT cameronchris incorporatingadjustmentsforvariabilityincontrolgroupresponseratesinnetworkmetaanalysisacasestudyofbiologicsforrheumatoidarthritis
AT varuabhishek incorporatingadjustmentsforvariabilityincontrolgroupresponseratesinnetworkmetaanalysisacasestudyofbiologicsforrheumatoidarthritis
AT lauarthur incorporatingadjustmentsforvariabilityincontrolgroupresponseratesinnetworkmetaanalysisacasestudyofbiologicsforrheumatoidarthritis
AT gharaibehmahdi incorporatingadjustmentsforvariabilityincontrolgroupresponseratesinnetworkmetaanalysisacasestudyofbiologicsforrheumatoidarthritis
AT paulinomarcelo incorporatingadjustmentsforvariabilityincontrolgroupresponseratesinnetworkmetaanalysisacasestudyofbiologicsforrheumatoidarthritis
AT rogozaraina incorporatingadjustmentsforvariabilityincontrolgroupresponseratesinnetworkmetaanalysisacasestudyofbiologicsforrheumatoidarthritis