Hierarchical Bayesian approaches for detecting inconsistency in network meta-analysis

被引:8
作者
Zhao, Hong [1 ]
Hodges, James S. [1 ]
Ma, Haijun [2 ]
Jiang, Qi [2 ]
Carlin, Bradley P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Sch Publ Hlth, Div Biostat, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 USA
关键词
multiple treatment comparisons; Bayesian analysis; inconsistency detection; MODEL; CONSISTENCY;
D O I
10.1002/sim.6938
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Network meta-analysis (NMA), also known as multiple treatment comparisons, is commonly used to incorporate direct and indirect evidence comparing treatments. With recent advances in methods and software, Bayesian approaches to NMA have become quite popular and allow models of previously unanticipated complexity. However, when direct and indirect evidence differ in an NMA, the model is said to suffer from inconsistency. Current inconsistency detection in NMA is usually based on contrast-based (CB) models; however, this approach has certain limitations. In this work, we propose an arm-based random effects model, where we detect discrepancy of direct and indirect evidence for comparing two treatments using the fixed effects in the model while flagging extreme trials using the random effects. We define discrepancy factors to characterize evidence of inconsistency for particular treatment comparisons, which is novel in NMA research. Our approaches permit users to address issues previously tackled via CB models. We compare sources of inconsistency identified by our approach and existing loop-based CB methods using real and simulated datasets and demonstrate that our methods can offer powerful inconsistency detection. Copyright (c) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:3524 / 3536
页数:13
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] Extending methods for investigating the relationship between treatment effect and baseline risk from pairwise meta-analysis to network meta-analysis
    Achana, Felix A.
    Cooper, Nicola J.
    Dias, Sofia
    Lu, Guobing
    Rice, Stephen J. C.
    Kendrick, Denise
    Sutton, Alex J.
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2013, 32 (05) : 752 - 771
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2008, Guidelines for Preparing Submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee
  • [3] Carlin BP, 2009, CH CRC TEXT STAT SCI, V78, P1
  • [4] METAANALYSIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS
    DERSIMONIAN, R
    LAIRD, N
    [J]. CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1986, 7 (03): : 177 - 188
  • [5] Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis
    Dias, S.
    Welton, N. J.
    Caldwell, D. M.
    Ades, A. E.
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2010, 29 (7-8) : 932 - 944
  • [6] Dias S., 2011, NICE DSU TECHNICAL S
  • [7] Dündar Y, 2004, HEALTH TECHNOL ASSES, V8, P1
  • [8] Fiore M.C., 1996, SMOKING CESSATION CL
  • [9] Model choice: A minimum posterior predictive loss approach
    Gelfand, AE
    Ghosh, SK
    [J]. BIOMETRIKA, 1998, 85 (01) : 1 - 11
  • [10] Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies
    Higgins, J. P. T.
    Jackson, D.
    Barrett, J. K.
    Lu, G.
    Ades, A. E.
    White, I. R.
    [J]. RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2012, 3 (02) : 98 - 110