Network Meta-Analysis Using R: A Review of Currently Available Automated Packages

Network meta-analysis (NMA) – a statistical technique that allows comparison of multiple treatments in the same meta-analysis simultaneously – has become increasingly popular in the medical literature in recent years. The statistical methodology underpinning this technique and software tools for implementing the methods are evolving. Both commercial and freely available statistical software packages have been developed to facilitate the statistical computations using NMA with varying degrees of functionality and ease of use. This paper aims to introduce the reader to three R packages, namely, gemtc, pcnetmeta, and netmeta, which are freely available software tools implemented in R. Each automates the process of performing NMA so that users can perform the analysis with minimal computational effort. We present, compare and contrast the availability and functionality of different important features of NMA in these three packages so that clinical investigators and researchers can determine which R packages to implement depending on their analysis needs. Four summary tables detailing (i) data input and network plotting, (ii) modeling options, (iii) assumption checking and diagnostic testing, and (iv) inference and reporting tools, are provided, along with an analysis of a previously published dataset to illustrate the outputs available from each package. We demonstrate that each of the three packages provides a useful set of tools, and combined provide users with nearly all functionality that might be desired when conducting a NMA.

[1]  W. Elliott,et al.  Incident diabetes in clinical trials of antihypertensive drugs: a network meta-analysis , 2007, The Lancet.

[2]  Biondi Zoccai,et al.  Network Meta-Analysis: Evidence Synthesis With Mixed Treatment Comparison , 2014 .

[3]  Alex J. Sutton,et al.  Heterogeneity: Subgroups, Meta-Regression, Bias And Bias-Adjustment , 2011 .

[4]  David C Hoaglin,et al.  Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[5]  Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai.  Network Meta-Analysis: Evidence Synthesis With Mixed Treatment Comparison , 2014 .

[6]  Bradley P Carlin,et al.  Network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials: Reporting the proper summaries , 2014, Clinical trials.

[7]  Nicky J Welton,et al.  Automated generation of node‐splitting models for assessment of inconsistency in network meta‐analysis , 2015, Research synthesis methods.

[8]  Philippe Ravaud,et al.  Reporting of results from network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  Alex J. Sutton,et al.  Overall similarity and consistency assessment scores are not sufficiently accurate for predicting discrepancy between direct and indirect comparison estimates , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[10]  G. Lu,et al.  Assessing Evidence Inconsistency in Mixed Treatment Comparisons , 2006 .

[11]  Christopher H. Schmid,et al.  Characteristics of Networks of Interventions: A Description of a Database of 186 Published Networks , 2014, PloS one.

[12]  Harald Binder,et al.  Visualizing the flow of evidence in network meta‐analysis and characterizing mixed treatment comparisons , 2013, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  Dan Jackson,et al.  Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression‡ , 2012, Research synthesis methods.

[14]  Georgia Salanti,et al.  Indirect and mixed‐treatment comparison, network, or multiple‐treatments meta‐analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool , 2012, Research synthesis methods.

[15]  Georgia Salanti,et al.  Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[16]  Andrew W Lee,et al.  Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  Wolfgang Viechtbauer,et al.  Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package , 2010 .

[18]  S Dias,et al.  Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis , 2010, Statistics in medicine.

[19]  Andrea Cipriani,et al.  Conceptual and Technical Challenges in Network Meta-analysis , 2013, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[20]  B. Carlin,et al.  Comparing Bayesian and Frequentist Approaches for Multiple Outcome Mixed Treatment Comparisons , 2013, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[21]  Nicky J Welton,et al.  Automating network meta‐analysis , 2012, Research synthesis methods.

[22]  Alex J. Sutton,et al.  Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 2 , 2013, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[23]  S D Walter,et al.  The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[24]  T. Lumley.  Network meta‐analysis for indirect treatment comparisons , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[25]  Harald Binder,et al.  A graphical tool for locating inconsistency in network meta-analyses , 2013, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[26]  G. Lu,et al.  Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[27]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations , 1998 .

[28]  Nicky J Welton,et al.  Evaluating novel agent effects in multiple‐treatments meta‐regression , 2010, Statistics in medicine.

[29]  Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai,et al.  Choosing between frequentist and bayesian frameworks and the corresponding statistical package , 2014 .

[30]  Gerta Rücker,et al.  Network meta‐analysis, electrical networks and graph theory , 2012, Research synthesis methods.

[31]  Catrin Tudur Smith,et al.  Assessing key assumptions of network meta‐analysis: a review of methods , 2013, Research synthesis methods.

[32]  AE Ades,et al.  Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies‡ , 2012, Research synthesis methods.

[33]  Bradley P. Carlin,et al.  Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit , 2002 .