Importance of assessing and adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity in network meta-analysis: a case study of psoriasis
Author(s) -
Chris Cameron,
Brian Hutton,
Cheryl Druchok,
Sean McElligott,
Sandhya Nair,
A Schubert,
Aaron Situ,
Abhishek Varu,
Reggie Villacorta
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of comparative effectiveness research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.567
H-Index - 23
eISSN - 2042-6313
pISSN - 2042-6305
DOI - 10.2217/cer-2018-0065
Subject(s) - medicine , psoriasis , psoriasis area and severity index , covariate , placebo , meta analysis , psychological intervention , clinical trial , physical therapy , statistics , alternative medicine , psychiatry , dermatology , pathology , mathematics
Aim: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity when conducting network meta-analyses (NMAs) was demonstrated using a case study of biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods: Bayesian NMAs were conducted for Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 response. Several covariates were considered to account for cross-trial differences: baseline risk (i.e., placebo response), prior biologic use, body weight, psoriasis duration, age, race and baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score. Model fit was evaluated. Results: The baseline risk-adjusted NMA, which adjusts for multiple observed and unobserved effect modifiers, was associated with the best model fit. Lack of adjustment for cross-trial differences led to different clinical interpretations of findings. Conclusion: Failure to adjust for cross-trial differences in NMA can have important implications for clinical interpretations when studying the comparative efficacy of healthcare interventions.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom