Assessing the consistency assumptions underlying network meta‐regression using aggregate data

When numerous treatments exist for a disease (Treatments 1, 2, 3, etc), network meta‐regression (NMR) examines whether each relative treatment effect (eg, mean difference for 2 vs 1, 3 vs 1, and 3 vs 2) differs according to a covariate (eg, disease severity). Two consistency assumptions underlie NMR: consistency of the treatment effects at the covariate value 0 and consistency of the regression coefficients for the treatment by covariate interaction. The NMR results may be unreliable when the assumptions do not hold. Furthermore, interactions may exist but are not found because inconsistency of the coefficients is masking them, for example, when the treatment effect increases as the covariate increases using direct evidence but the effect decreases with the increasing covariate using indirect evidence.

[1]  Wolfgang Viechtbauer,et al.  Two new methods to fit models for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects , 2016, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[2]  Dan Jackson,et al.  The design‐by‐treatment interaction model: a unifying framework for modelling loop inconsistency in network meta‐analysis , 2015, Research synthesis methods.

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

[4]  E. Effa,et al.  Artemether for severe malaria , 2014, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[5]  Dan Jackson,et al.  A design-by-treatment interaction model for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects , 2014, Statistics in medicine.

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

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

[8]  Alex J. Sutton,et al.  Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 4 , 2013, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[9]  Catrin Tudur Smith,et al.  Combining individual patient data and aggregate data in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis: Individual patient data may be beneficial if only for a subset of trials , 2013, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  Catrin Tudur Smith,et al.  Assessing the consistency assumption by exploring treatment by covariate interactions in mixed treatment comparison meta‐analysis: individual patient‐level covariates versus aggregate trial‐level covariates , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  A. Sutton,et al.  Mixed treatment comparisons using aggregate and individual participant level data , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  Jeroen P Jansen,et al.  Network meta‐analysis of individual and aggregate level data , 2012, Research synthesis methods.

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

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

[15]  Shannon Cope,et al.  Meta-regression models to address heterogeneity and inconsistency in network meta-analysis of survival outcomes , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[16]  J. Gerring.  A case study , 2011, Technology and Society.

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

[18]  Guobing Lu,et al.  Modeling between-trial variance structure in mixed treatment comparisons. , 2009, Biostatistics.

[19]  Julian P T Higgins,et al.  A case study of multiple-treatments meta-analysis demonstrates that covariates should be considered. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  N. Welton,et al.  Addressing between‐study heterogeneity and inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons: Application to stroke prevention treatments in individuals with non‐rheumatic atrial fibrillation , 2009, Statistics in medicine.

[21]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Meta‐analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  A. Marson,et al.  Multiple treatment comparisons in epilepsy monotherapy trials , 2007, Trials.

[23]  D. J. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Identifying outliers in Bayesian hierarchical models: a simulation-based approach , 2007 .

[24]  Alan Brennan,et al.  Using mixed treatment comparisons and meta‐regression to perform indirect comparisons to estimate the efficacy of biologic treatments in rheumatoid arthritis , 2007, Statistics in Medicine.

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

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

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

[28]  S. Thompson,et al.  How should meta‐regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[29]  S. Sharp,et al.  Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[30]  A Whitehead,et al.  Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. , 1996, Statistics in medicine.

[31]  S G Thompson,et al.  Systematic Review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated , 1994, BMJ.

[32]  Alex J. Sutton,et al.  Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 2: A Generalized Linear Modeling Framework for Pairwise and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. , 2013 .

[33]  S. Donegan,et al.  Artesunate versus quinine for treating severe malaria. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[34]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Meta‐analysis of a binary outcome using individual participant data and aggregate data , 2010, Research synthesis methods.

[35]  Organización Mundial de la Salud.  Guidelines for the treatment of malaria , 2010 .