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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Freeman, Suzanne C, Cooper, Nicola J, Sutton, Alex J, Crowther, Michael J, Carpenter, James R, Hawkins, Neil
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