Interpretation of results from subset analyses within overviews of randomized clinical trials.

Evaluating treatment effects within different subsets of patients is a common practice in the analysis of individual randomized clinical trials. Such analyses are limited, however, by the number of patients available. Overviews, by providing evidence based on large numbers of patients, can be useful for overcoming the difficulties of detecting therapeutic effects within subsets of patients. However, inconsistent subset definitions, misclassification of patients, and incomplete availability of patient subsets from the trials included in the overview bias the estimates of effect size. Separate analyses of subsets of studies are also possible within an overview. Studies being pooled generally differ with respect to treatments applied, control groups, patient eligibility, quality control, study conduct, and follow-up maturity. Separate comparisons within subsets defined by these features will be misinterpreted unless confounding factors are recognized. Indirect comparisons between overviews have the same informative value as nonrandomized trials with historical controls.

[1]  L. Kalish,et al.  Adjuvant CMFP versus CMFP plus tamoxifen versus observation alone in postmenopausal, node-positive breast cancer patients: three-year results of an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. , 1985, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[2]  J M Lachin,et al.  Assessment of stratum-covariate interactions in Cox's proportional hazards regression model. , 1986, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  R. Nissen-Meyer,et al.  Surgical adjuvant chemotherapy. Results with one short course with cyclophosphamide after mastectomy for breast cancer , 1978, Cancer.

[4]  G. Ribeiro,et al.  The Christie Hospital tamoxifen (Nolvadex) adjuvant trial for operable breast carcinoma--7-yr results. , 1985, European journal of cancer & clinical oncology.

[5]  S. Pocock,et al.  Clinical Trials: A Practical Approach , 1984 .

[6]  G. Bonadonna,et al.  Combination chemotherapy as an adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer. , 1976, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  R Peto,et al.  Effect of intravenous streptokinase on acute myocardial infarction: pooled results from randomized trials. , 1982, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  M. Pike,et al.  Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. analysis and examples. , 1977, British Journal of Cancer.

[9]  R. Peto,et al.  INTRAVENOUS STREPTOKINASE FOR ACUTE MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION - REPLY , 1983 .

[10]  C. Redmond,et al.  Adjuvant chemotherapy with and without tamoxifen in the treatment of primary breast cancer: 5-year results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Trial. , 1986, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  D. Cox,et al.  Two New Tests Associated with Analysis of Variance , 1984 .

[12]  M. Gail,et al.  Testing for qualitative interactions between treatment effects and patient subsets. , 1985, Biometrics.

[13]  L. Skoog,et al.  Tamoxifen and combination chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. , 1984, Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer.