The network meta-analytic-predictive approach to non-inferiority trials

Statistical Methods in Medical Research

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 219-240

  Schmidli, Heinz ^a   Wandel, Simon ^a   Neuenschwander, Beat ^a  

^a NOVARTIS PHARMA AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Bayesian inference; clinical trial; generalized linear model; meta analysis; mixed treatment comparison; NetMAP; network meta analysis; non inferiority; random effects

Indexed keywords

PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DATA BASE; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NETWORK META ANALYTIC PREDICTIVE APPROACH; NON INFERIORITY CLINICAL TRIAL; PLACEBO EFFECT; PREDICTION;

BAYES THEOREM; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PLACEBOS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84876704666     PISSN: 09622802     EISSN: 14770334     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0962280211432512     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Temple R, Ellenberg SS. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 1: ethical and scientific issues. Ann Intern Med. 2000 ; 133 (6). 455-463
2. Ellenberg SS, Temple R. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 2: practical issues and specific cases. Ann Intern Med. 2000 ; 133 (6). 464-470
3. Lewis JA. The European regulatory experience. Stat Med. 2002 ; 21 (19). 2931-2938
4. Jones B, Jarvis P, Lewis JA, Ebbutt AF. Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods. Br Med J. 1996 ; 313 (7048). 36-39 (Pubitemid 26229889)
5. Ellenberg SS. Scientific and ethical issues in the use of placebo and active controls in clinical trials. J Bone Miner Res. 2003 ; 18 (6). 1121-1124 (Pubitemid 37294952)
6. Hung HM, Wang SJ, O'Neill R. Challenges and regulatory experiences with non-inferiority trial design without placebo arm. Biometrical J. 2009 ; 51 (2). 324-334
7. Whitehead A Meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons ; 2002 :
8. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. J Royal Stat Soc Ser A. 2009 ; 172 (1). 137-159
9. ICH E10. Choice of control group in clinical trials. London: European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, CPMP/ICH/364/396, http://www.ich.org/LOB/media/MEDIA486.pdf (2000, accessed January 2011).
10. CHMP. Guideline for the choice of non-inferiority margin. London: European Medicines Agency, EMEA/CPMP/EWP/2158/99, http://www.emea.europa.eu/ pdfs/human/ewp/215899en.pdf (2005, accessed January 2011).
11. FDA. Draft guidance for industry: non-inferiority clinical trials. Silver Spring, MD: FDA, http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM202140.pdf (2010, accessed January 2011).
12. Hasselblad V, Kong DF. Statistical methods for comparison to placebo in active-control trials. Drug Inf J. 2001 ; 35: 435-449 (Pubitemid 32524896)
13. Higgins JP, Whitehead A. Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1996 ; 15 (24). 2733-2749 (Pubitemid 27011054)
14. Hasselblad V. Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies. Med Decis Making. 1998 ; 18: 37-43 (Pubitemid 28041639)
15. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002 ; 21 (16). 2313-2324
16. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004 ; 23 (20). 3105-3124 (Pubitemid 39334902)
17. Lu G, Ades AE. Assessing evidence inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc. 2006 ; 101 (474). 447-459 (Pubitemid 43972289)
18. Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2008 ; 17 (3). 279-301
19. Nixon RM, Bansback N, Brennan A. Using mixed treatment comparisons and meta-regression to perform indirect comparisons to estimate the efficacy of biologic treatments in rheumatoid arthritis. Stat Med. 2007 ; 26 (6). 1237-1254 (Pubitemid 46380839)
20. Thijs V, Lemmens R, Fieuws S. Network meta-analysis: simultaneous meta-analysis of common antiplatelet regimens after transient ischaemic attack or stroke. Eur Heart J. 2008 ; 29 (9). 1086-1092 (Pubitemid 351844879)
21. Wandel S, Jüni P, Tendal B, Nüesch E, Villiger PM, Welton NJ, et al. Effects of glucosamine, chondroitin, or placebo in patients with osteoarthritis of hip or knee: network meta-analysis. Br Med J. 2010 ; 341: c4675 - c4675
22. Simon R. Bayesian design and analysis of active control clinical trials. Biometrics. 1999 ; 55 (2). 484-487 (Pubitemid 29302573)
23. Sacco RL, Diener HC, Yusuf S, Cotton D, Ounpuu S, Lawton WA, et al. Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke. N Engl J Med. 2008 ; 359 (12). 1238-1251
24. Kent DM, Thaler DE. Stroke prevention-insights from incoherence. N Engl J Med. 2008 ; 359 (12). 1287-1289
25. Biller J. Antiplatelet therapy in ischemic stroke: variability in clinical trials and its impact on choosing the appropriate therapy. J Neurol Sci. 2009 ; 284 (1-2). 1-9
26. Algra A. Digestion of the antiplatelets comparison of PRoFESS: 18-7=1?. Stroke. 2009 ; 40 (5). 1932-1935
27. Lu G, Ades AE, Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Briggs AH, Caldwell DM. Meta-analysis of mixed treatment comparisons at multiple follow-up times. Stat Med. 2007 ; 26 (20). 3681-3699 (Pubitemid 47307743)
28. Pocock SJ. The combination of randomized and historical controls in clinical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1976 ; 29 (3). 175-188
29. Carlin JB. Letter to the editor. Stat Med. 2000 ; 19 (5). 753-759
30. van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med. 2002 ; 21 (4). 589-624 (Pubitemid 34141379)
31. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB Bayesian data analysis. 2 nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2004. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press ; 2004 :
32. Neuenschwander B, Capkun-Niggli G, Branson M, Spiegelhalter DJ. Summarizing historical information on controls in clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2010 ; 7 (1). 5-18
33. Stijnen T, Hamza TH, Ozdemir P. Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data. Stat Med. 2010 ; 29 (29). 3046-3067
34. Spiegelhalter DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons ; 2004 :
35. Gelman A. Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models. Bayesian Analysis. 2006 ; 1: 515-533
36. Pullenayegum EM. An informed reference prior for between-study heterogeneity in meta-analyses of binary outcomes. Stat Med. 2011 ; 30 (26). 3082-3094
37. Gelfand AE, Smith AFM. Sampling-based approaches to calculating marginal densities. J Am Stat Assoc. 1990 ; 85: 398-409
38. Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS - a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput. 2000 ; 10: 325-337
39. Cohen M, Demers C, Gurfinkel EP, Turpie AG, Fromell GJ, Goodman S, et al. Low-molecular-weight heparins in non-ST-segment elevation ischemia: the ESSENCE trial. Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Enoxaparin versus intravenous unfractionated heparin, in non-Q-wave Coronary Events. Am J Cardiol. 1998 ; 82 (5B). 19L - 24L
40. Oler A, Whooley MA, Oler J, Grady D. Adding heparin to aspirin reduces the incidence of myocardial infarction and death in patients with unstable angina. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1996 ; 276 (10). 811-815 (Pubitemid 26301581)
41. Fisher LD, Gent M, Büller HR. Active-control trials: how would a new agent compare with placebo? A method illustrated with clopidogrel, aspirin, and placebo. Am Heart J. 2001 ; 141 (1). 26-32 (Pubitemid 32061308)
42. Durrleman S, Chaikin P. The use of putative placebo in active control trials: two applications in a regulatory setting. Stat Med. 2003 ; 22 (6). 941-952 (Pubitemid 36322096)
43. Fleming TR. Current issues in non-inferiority trials. Stat Med. 2008 ; 27 (3). 317-332 (Pubitemid 351227869)
44. Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 ; 64 (2). 163-171
45. Wang SJ, Hung HM, Tsong Y. Utility and pitfalls of some statistical methods in active controlled clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 2002 ; 23 (1). 15-28 (Pubitemid 34164355)
46. Senn SJ. 'Equivalence is different' - some comments on therapeutic equivalence. Biometrical J. 2005 ; 47: 104-107
47. Snapinn S, Jiang Q. Preservation of effect and the regulatory approval of new treatments on the basis of non-inferiority trials. Stat Med. 2008 ; 27 (3). 382-391 (Pubitemid 351227874)
48. Rothmann M, Li N, Chen G, Chi GY, Temple R, Tsou HH. Design and analysis of non-inferiority mortality trials in oncology. Stat Med. 2003 ; 22 (2). 239-264 (Pubitemid 36163584)
49. Julious SA and Owen RJ. A comparison of methods for sample size estimation for non-inferiority studies with binary outcomes. Stat Methods Med Res 2010; DOI: 10.1177/0962280210378945.
50. Jansen JP. Network meta-analysis of survival data with fractional polynomials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 ; 11 (1). 61-61
51. Witte S, Schmidli H, O'Hagan A, Racine-Poon A. Designing a non-inferiority study in kidney transplantation: a case study. Pharm Stat. 2011 ; 10: 427-432
52. Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2010 ; 29 (7-8). 932-944
53. Gould AL. Another view of active-controlled trials. Control Clin Trials. 1991 ; 12 (4). 474-485
54. Ibrahim JG, Chen MH. Power prior distributions for regression models. Stat Sci. 2000 ; 15: 46-60
55. Neuenschwander B, Branson M, Spiegelhalter DJ. A note on the power prior. Stat Med. 2009 ; 28 (28). 3562-3566
56. Hobbs BP, Carlin BP, Mandrekar SJ, Sargent DJ. Hierarchical commensurate and power prior models for adaptive incorporation of historical information in clinical trials. Biometrics. 2011 ; 67 (3). 1047-1056
57. CHMP. Points to consider in application with 1. Meta-analysis; 2. One pivotal study. London: The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, CPMP/EWP/2330/99, http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document- library/Scientific-guideline/2009/09/WC500003657.pdf (2001, accessed January 2011).
58. Julious SA, Wang SJ. Issues with indirect comparisons in clinical trials particularly with respect to non-inferiority trials. Drug Inf J. 2008 ; 42 (6). 625-633
59. Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, Van Der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J Royal Stat Soc Ser B. 2002 ; 64: 583-639
60. Julious SA. Time to end the non-inferiority complex?. Pharm Stat. 2011 ; 10: 393-394
61. Alderson NE, Campbell G, D'Agostino R, Ellenberg S, Lindborg S, O'Neill R, et al. Statistical issues: a roundtable discussion. Clin Trials. 2005 ; 2: 364-372 (Pubitemid 41306280)