Cargando…
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
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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9014691/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35044255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09622802211070253 |
_version_ | 1784688237362544640 |
---|---|
author | Freeman, Suzanne C Cooper, Nicola J Sutton, Alex J Crowther, Michael J Carpenter, James R Hawkins, Neil |
author_facet | Freeman, Suzanne C Cooper, Nicola J Sutton, Alex J Crowther, Michael J Carpenter, James R Hawkins, Neil |
author_sort | Freeman, Suzanne C |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9014691 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90146912022-04-19 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 Freeman, Suzanne C Cooper, Nicola J Sutton, Alex J Crowther, Michael J Carpenter, James R Hawkins, Neil Stat Methods Med Res Original Research Articles 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. SAGE Publications 2022-01-19 2022-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9014691/ /pubmed/35044255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09622802211070253 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Articles Freeman, Suzanne C Cooper, Nicola J Sutton, Alex J Crowther, Michael J Carpenter, James R Hawkins, Neil 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 |
title | 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 |
title_full | 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 |
title_fullStr | 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 |
title_full_unstemmed | 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 |
title_short | 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 |
title_sort | 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 |
topic | Original Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9014691/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35044255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09622802211070253 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT freemansuzannec challengesofmodellingapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisoftimetoeventoutcomesinthepresenceofnonproportionalhazardstoaiddecisionmakingapplicationtoamelanomanetwork AT coopernicolaj challengesofmodellingapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisoftimetoeventoutcomesinthepresenceofnonproportionalhazardstoaiddecisionmakingapplicationtoamelanomanetwork AT suttonalexj challengesofmodellingapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisoftimetoeventoutcomesinthepresenceofnonproportionalhazardstoaiddecisionmakingapplicationtoamelanomanetwork AT crowthermichaelj challengesofmodellingapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisoftimetoeventoutcomesinthepresenceofnonproportionalhazardstoaiddecisionmakingapplicationtoamelanomanetwork AT carpenterjamesr challengesofmodellingapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisoftimetoeventoutcomesinthepresenceofnonproportionalhazardstoaiddecisionmakingapplicationtoamelanomanetwork AT hawkinsneil challengesofmodellingapproachesfornetworkmetaanalysisoftimetoeventoutcomesinthepresenceofnonproportionalhazardstoaiddecisionmakingapplicationtoamelanomanetwork |