A Bayesian approach to probabilistic sensitivity analysis in structured benefit‐risk assessment

Quantitative decision models such as multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can be used in benefit-risk assessment to formalize trade-offs between benefits and risks, providing transparency to the assessment process. There is however no well-established method for propagating uncertainty of treatment effects data through such models to provide a sense of the variability of the benefit-risk balance. Here, we present a Bayesian statistical method that directly models the outcomes observed in randomized placebo-controlled trials and uses this to infer indirect comparisons between competing active treatments. The resulting treatment effects estimates are suitable for use within the MCDA setting, and it is possible to derive the distribution of the overall benefit-risk balance through Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation. The method is illustrated using a case study of natalizumab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

[1]  L. Phillips,et al.  Review of visualisation methods for therepresentation of benefit-risk assessment ofmedication: stage 2 of 2 , 2013 .

[2]  Nicola J Cooper,et al.  A Bayesian approach to evaluating net clinical benefit allowed for parameter uncertainty. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[3]  Tommi Tervonen,et al.  JSMAA: open source software for SMAA computations , 2014, Int. J. Syst. Sci..

[4]  Neil Hawkins,et al.  Network meta-analysis on the log-hazard scale, combining count and hazard ratio statistics accounting for multi-arm trials: A tutorial , 2010, BMC medical research methodology.

[5]  Ludwig Kappos,et al.  A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Bayesian random effects meta‐analysis of trials with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk scales by D. E. Warn, S. G. Thompson and D. J. Spiegelhalter, Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21: 1601–1623 , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  Shahrul Mt-Isa,et al.  Weighing benefit-risk of medicines: concepts and approaches. , 2011, Drug discovery today. Technologies.

[8]  D J Spiegelhalter,et al.  Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: a comparative study. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  Love Ekenberg,et al.  Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment Using Only Qualitative Information on Utilities , 2012, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[10]  Adrian F. M. Smith,et al.  Evidence-based medicine as Bayesian decision-making. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  Andrew Thomas,et al.  WinBUGS - A Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility , 2000, Stat. Comput..

[12]  J. W. Rose,et al.  Copolymer 1 reduces relapse rate and improves disability in relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis , 1995, Neurology.

[13]  Sam Salek,et al.  A quantitative approach to benefit‐risk assessment of medicines – part 1: the development of a new model using multi‐criteria decision analysis , 2007, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[14]  M Pirmohamed,et al.  Current Assessment of Risk–Benefit by Regulators: Is It Time to Introduce Decision Analyses? , 2007, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[15]  C. Granger,et al.  Intramuscular interferon beta‐1a for disease progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis , 1996, Annals of neurology.

[16]  Shahrul Mt-Isa,et al.  A case study using the PrOACT‐URL and BRAT frameworks for structured benefit risk assessment , 2016, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[17]  Tommi Tervonen,et al.  A stochastic multicriteria model for evidence‐based decision making in drug benefit‐risk analysis , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  Ludwig Kappos,et al.  A placebo-controlled trial of oral fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  A. Gelman.  Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models (comment on article by Browne and Draper) , 2004 .

[20]  Israel Steiner.  QUANTITATIVE RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF NATALIZUMAB , 2009, Neurology.

[21]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Book Reviews : Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improv ing Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health. Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998, 136 pages, $26.00 , 1998 .

[22]  N. Qizilbash,et al.  Benefit-risk analysis of glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting and clinically isolated syndrome multiple sclerosis. , 2012, Clinical therapeutics.

[23]  Meena Subramanyam,et al.  Risk of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  Risto Lahdelma,et al.  SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs , 1976 .

[26]  Jouni Kerman,et al.  Neutral noninformative and informative conjugate beta and gamma prior distributions , 2011 .