No study left behind: a network meta-analysis in non-small-cell lung cancer demonstrating the importance of considering all relevant data.


Hawkins, N; Scott, DA; Woods, BS; Thatcher, N; (2009) No study left behind: a network meta-analysis in non-small-cell lung cancer demonstrating the importance of considering all relevant data. Value in health, 12 (6). pp. 996-1003. ISSN 1098-3015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00541.x

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

Abstract

: To demonstrate the importance of considering all relevant indirect data in a network meta-analysis of treatments for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).<br/> : A recent National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence appraisal focussed on the indirect comparison of docetaxel with erlotinib in second-line treatment of NSCLC based on trials including a common comparator. We compared the results of this analysis to a network meta-analysis including other trials that formed a network of evidence. We also examined the importance of allowing for the correlations between the estimated treatment effects that can arise when analysing such networks.<br/> : The analysis of the restricted network including only trials of docetaxel and erlotinib linked via the common placebo comparator produced an estimated mean hazard ratio (HR) for erlotinib compared with docetaxel of 1.55 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-2.97). In contrast, the network meta-analysis produced an estimated HR for erlotinib compared with docetaxel of 0.83 (95% CI 0.65-1.06). Analyzing the wider network improved the precision of estimated treatment effects, altered their rankings and also allowed further treatments to be compared. Some of the estimated treatment effects from the wider network were highly correlated.<br/> : This empirical example shows the importance of considering all potentially relevant data when comparing treatments. Care should therefore be taken to consider all relevant information, including correlations induced by the network of trial data, when comparing treatments.<br/>

Item Type: Article
Keywords: 80 and over, Adult, Aged, Antineoplastic Agents, Antineoplastic Agents: therapeutic use, Bias (Epidemiology), Carcinoma, Data Interpretation, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Lung Neoplasms: drug therapy, Male, Middle Aged, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Non-Small-Cell Lung: drug therapy, Proportional Hazards Models, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Protein Kinase Inhibitors: therapeutic use, Quinazolines, Quinazolines: therapeutic use, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Research Design, Statistical, Taxoids, Taxoids: therapeutic use, Young Adult, indirect comparison, meta-analysis, mixed treatment comparisons, network, non, small-cell lung cancer, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Agents, therapeutic use, Bias (Epidemiology), Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, drug therapy, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Erlotinib Hydrochloride, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, drug therapy, Male, Middle Aged, Proportional Hazards Models, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, therapeutic use, Quinazolines, therapeutic use, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Research Design, Taxoids, therapeutic use, Young Adult
Faculty and Department: Faculty of Public Health and Policy > Dept of Health Services Research and Policy
PubMed ID: 19402854
Web of Science ID: 268304600018
URI: http://researchonline.lshtm.ac.uk/id/eprint/2534634

Statistics


Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads since deposit
0Downloads
83Hits
Accesses by country - last 12 months
Accesses by referrer - last 12 months
Impact and interest
Additional statistics for this record are available via IRStats2

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item