Quantitative summaries of treatment effect estimates obtained with network meta-analysis of survival curves to inform decision-making

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Jeroen P Jansen²  Shannon Cope¹ 

[1] Mapi Group, 33 Bloor Street East, Suite 1300, Toronto M4W 3H1, Canada;Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston MA, USA

关键词: Survival;    Probabilities;    Rank;    Network meta-analysis;   

Others  :  866551
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-13-147

 received in 2013-07-04, accepted in 2013-11-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Increasingly, network meta-analysis (NMA) of published survival data are based on parametric survival curves as opposed to reported hazard ratios to avoid relying on the proportional hazards assumption. If a Bayesian framework is used for the NMA, rank probabilities associated with the alternative treatments can be obtained, which directly support decision-making. In the context of survival analysis multiple treatment effect measures are available to inform the rank probabilities.

Methods

A fractional polynomial NMA of overall survival in advanced melanoma was performed as an illustrative example. Rank probabilities were calculated and presented for the following effect measures: 1) median survival; 2) expected survival; 3) mean survival at the follow-up time point of the trial with the shortest follow-up; 4) hazard or hazard ratio over time; 5) cumulative hazard or survival proportions over time; and 6) mean survival at subsequent time points. The advantages and disadvantages of the alternative measures were discussed.

Results

Since hazard and survival estimates may vary over time for the compared interventions, calculations of rank probabilities for an NMA of survival curves may depend on the effect measure. With methods 1–3 rank probabilities do not vary over time, which are easier to understand and communicate than rank probabilities that vary over time as obtained with methods 4–6. However, rank probabilities based on methods 4–6 provide useful information regarding the relative treatment effects over time.

Conclusions

Different approaches to summarize results of a NMA of survival curves with rank probabilities have pros and cons. Rank probabilities of treatment effects over time provide a more transparent and informative approach to help guide decision-making than single rank probabilities based on collapsed measures, such as median survival or expected survival. Rank probabilities based on survival proportions are the most intuitive and straightforward to communicate, but alternatives based on the hazard function or mean survival over time may also be useful.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Cope and Jansen; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ: Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making 2013, 33(5):607-617.
• [2]Glenny AM, Altman DG, Song F, et al.: Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Health Technol Assess 2005, 9:1-134.
• [3]Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B, et al.: Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons & network meta-analysis for health care decision-making: report of the ISPOR task force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices—part 1. Value Health 2011, 14:417-428.
• [4]Song F, Altman DG, Glenny A, Deeks JJ: Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ 2003, 326:472.
• [5]Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JPT: Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 2005, 331:897-900.
• [6]Sutton A, Ades AE, Cooper N, Abrams K: Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics 2008, 26:753-767.
• [7]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE; 2008.
• [8]Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory committee. (Version 4.3). Canberra: Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing; 2008.
• [9]Wells GA, Sultan SA, Chen L, Khan M, Coyle D: Indirect Evidence: Indirect Treatment Comparisons in Meta-Analysis. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2009.
• [10]Lu G, Ades AE: Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 2004, 23:3105-3124.
• [11]Sculpher M, Claxton K, Drummon M, McCabe C: Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision-making? Health Econ 2006, 15(7):677-687.
• [12]Jansen JP, Crawford B, Bergman G, Stam W: Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons: an introduction to mixed treatment comparisons. Value Health 2008, 11(5):956-964.
• [13]Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JPA: Graphical methods and numeric summaries for presenting results for multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64(2):163-171.
• [14]Ouwens MJNM, Philips Z, Jansen JP: Network meta-analysis of parametric survival curves. Res Synth Methods 2010, 1(3–4):258-271.
• [15]Jansen JP: Network meta-analysis of survival data with fractional polynomials. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:61. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Jansen JP, Cope S: Meta-regression models to address heterogeneity and inconsistency in network meta-analysis of survival outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012, 12:152. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-152 BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Latimer NR: Survival analysis for economic evaluations alongside clinical trials- extrapolation with individual patient-level data. Med Decis Making 2013., 33(5) doi:10.1177/0272989X12472398
• [18]Avril MF, Aamdal S, Grob JJ, Hauschild A, Mohr P, Bonerandi JJ, et al.: Fotemustine compared with dacarbazine in patients with disseminated malignant melanoma: a phase III study. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22(6):1118-1125.
• [19]Bajetta E, Di Leo A, Zampino MG, Sertoli MR, Comella G, Barduagni M, et al.: Multicenter randomized trial of dacarbazine alone or in combination with two different doses and schedules of interferon alfa-2a in the treatment of advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol 1994, 12:806-811.
• [20]Chapman PB, Einhorn LH, Meyers ML, Saxman S, Destro AN, Panageas KS, et al.: Phase III multicenter randomized trial of the dartmouth regimen versus dacarbazine in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:2745-2751.
• [21]Chiarion SV, Nortilli R, Aversa SM, Paccagnella A, Medici M, Corti L, et al.: Phase II randomized study of dacarbazine, carmustine, cisplatin and tamoxifen versus dacarbazine alone in advanced melanoma patients. Melanoma Res 2001, 11(2):189-196.
• [22]Cocconi G, Bella M, Calabresi F, Tonato M, Canaletti R, Boni C, et al.: Treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma with dacarbazine plus tamoxifen. New Engl J Med 1992, 327:516-523.
• [23]Falkson CI, Ibrahim J, Kirkwood JM, Coates AS, Atkins MB, Blum RH: Phase III trial of dacarbazine versus dacarbazine with interferon alpha-2b versus dacarbazine with tamoxifen versus dacarbazine with interferon alpha-2b and tamoxifen in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma: an eastern cooperative oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 1998, 16:1743-1751.
• [24]Falkson CI, Falkson G, Falkson HC: Improved results with the addition of interferon alfa-2b to dacarbazine in the treatment of patients with metastatic malignant melanoma. J Clin Oncol 1991, 9:1403-1408.
• [25]Middleton MR, Grob JJ, Aaronson N, Fierlbeck G, Tilgen W, Seiter S, et al.: Randomized phase III study of temozolomide versus dacarbazine in the treatment of patients with advanced metastatic malignant melanoma. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:158-166.
• [26]Thomson DB, Adena M, McLeod GR, Hersey P, Gill PG, Coates AS, et al.: Interferon-alpha 2a does not improve response or survival when combined with dacarbazine in metastatic malignant melanoma: results of a multi-institutional Australian randomized trial. Melanoma Res 1993, 3:133-138.
• [27]Young AM, Marsden J, Goodman A, Burton A, Dunn JA: Prospective randomized comparison of dacarbazine (DTIC) versus DTIC plus interferon-alpha (IFN-alpha) in metastatic melanoma. Clin Oncol 2001, 13:458-465.
• [28]Spiegelhalter D, Thomas A, Best N, Lunn D: WinBUGS User Manual: Version 1.4. Cambridge: MRC Biostatistics Unit; 2003.
• [29]Cope S, Ouwens MJNM, Jansen JP, Schmid P: Progression-free survival with Fulvestrant 500 mg and alternative endocrine therapies as second-line treatment for advanced breast cancer: a network meta-analysis with parametric survival models. Value Health 2013, 16(2):403-417.