Individual patient-level and study-level meta-analysis for investigating modifiers of treatment effect

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 34, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 717-721

  Teramukai, Satoshi ^a   Matsuyama, Yutaka ^c   Mizuno, Sachiko ^c   Sakamoto, Junichi ^b  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^b KYOTO UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; Individual patient data; Interaction test; Meta analysis; Meta regression

Indexed keywords

CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL; DATA ANALYSIS; HUMAN; LUNG SMALL CELL CANCER; META ANALYSIS; PATIENT CODING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LUNG TUMOR; PATHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; META-ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM STAGING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 14544299743     PISSN: 03682811     EISSN: 14653621     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyh138     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Thompson SG. Why and how sources of heterogeneity should be investigated. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care. London: BMJ Publishing Group 2001;157-75.
2. Schmid CH. Exploring heterogeneity in randomized trials via meta-analysis. Drug Inf J 1999;33:211-24.
3. Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat Med 1999;18:2693-708.
4. Cutler C, Giri S, Jeyapalan S, Paniagua D, Viswanathan A, Antin JH. Acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic peripheral-blood stem-cell and bone marrow transplantation: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3685-91.
5. Zeka A, Gore R, Kriebel D. Effects of alcohol and tobacco on aerodigestive cancer risks: a meta-regression analysis. Cancer Causes Control 2003;14:897-906.
6. Lambert PC, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR. A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:86-94.
7. Berlin JA, Santanna J, Schmid CH, Szczech LA, Feldman HI. Individual patient- versus group-level data meta-regressions for the investigation of treatment effects modifiers: ecological bias rears its ugly head. Stat Med 2002;21:371-87.
8. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat Med 2004;23:1663-82.
9. Sakamoto J, Teramukai S, Watanabe Y, Hayata Y, Okayasu T, Nakazato H, et al. Meta-analysis of adjuvant immunochemotherapy using OK-432 in patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer. J Immunother 2001;24:250-6.
10. Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley 2002;118-9.
11. Greenland S. Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature. Epidemiol Rev 1987;9:1-30.
12. Davey Smith G, Egger M. Going beyond the grand mean: subgroup analysis in meta-analysis of randomised trials. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman G, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care. London: BMJ Publishing Group 2001;143-56.
13. Assmann SF, Pocock SJ, Enos LE, Kasten LE. Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet 2000;355:1064-9.
14. Brookes ST, Whitley E, Peters TJ, Mulheran PA, Egger M, Davey Smith G. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess 2001;5:33.
15. Thompson SG, Higgins JPT. How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Stat Med 2002;21:1559-73.
16. Morgenstern H. Uses of ecological analysis in epidemiological research. Am J Public Health 1982;72:1336-44.