A Bayesian mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis of treatments for alcohol dependence and implications for planning future trials

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 899-910

  Desantis, Stacia M ^a   Zhu, Huirong ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

alcohol dependence; alcoholism; Bayesian network meta analysis; mixed treatment comparisons

Indexed keywords

ACAMPROSATE; DRUGS USED IN THE TREATMENT OF ADDICTION; NALTREXONE; TAURINE;

ALCOHOLISM; ANALOGS AND DERIVATIVES; BAYES THEOREM; HUMAN; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

ALCOHOL DETERRENTS; ALCOHOLISM; BAYES THEOREM; HUMANS; NALTREXONE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TAURINE;

EID: 84907616902     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14537558     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Chalmers I. The scandalous failure of scientists to cumulate scientifically: Ninth World Congress on Health Information and Libraries. Clin Trials. 2005 ; 2: 229-31
2. Mason BJ. Acamprosate and naltrexone treatment for alcohol dependence: an evidence-based risk-benefits assessment. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2003 ; 13 (6). 469-75
3. Bouza C, Angeles M, Munoz A, Amate JM. Efficacy and safety of naltrexone and acamprosate in the treatment of alcohol dependence: a systematic review. Addiction. 2004 ; 99 (7). 811-28
4. Snyder JL, Bowers TG. The efficacy of acamprosate and naltrexone in the treatment of alcohol dependence: a relative benefits analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2008 ; 34 (4). 449-61
5. Mann K, Lehert P, Morgan MY. The efficacy of acamprosate in the maintenance of abstinence in alcohol-dependent individuals: results of a meta-analysis. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004 ; 28 (1). 51-63
6. Dranitsaris G, Selby P, Negrete JC. Meta-analyses of placebo-controlled trials of acamprosate for the treatment of alcohol dependence: impact of the combined pharmacotherapies and behavior interventions study. J Addict Med. 2009 ; 3 (2). 74-82
7. Srisurapanont M, Jarusuraisin N. Opioid antagonists for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 ; (1). CD001867
8. Rosner S, Hackl-Herrwerth A, Leucht S, Lehert P, Vecchi S, Soyka M. Acamprosate for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 ; (9). CD004332
9. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 ; 50 (6). 683-91
10. Eddy DM, Hasselblad V, Shachter R London: Academic Press; ; 1992 :
11. Hasselblad V. Meta-analysis of multitreatment studies. Med Decis Making. 1998 ; 18 (1). 37-43
12. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002 ; 21 (16). 2313-24
13. 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). 1237-54
14. Salanti G, Dias S, Welton NJ, et al. Evaluating novel agent effects in multiple-treatments meta-regression. Stat Med. 2010 ; 29 (23). 2369-83
15. 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). 163-71
16. Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004 ; 23 (20). 3105-24
17. Lu G, Ades A. Assessing evidence inconsistency in mixed treatment comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc. 2006 ; 101 (474). 447-59
18. Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE. Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2010 ; 29 (7-8). 932-44
19. Hong H, Carlin BP, Shamliyan TA, et al. Comparing bayesian and frequentist approaches for multiple outcome mixed treatment comparisons. Med Decis Making. 2013 ; 33 (5). 702-14
20. Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS: a Bayesian modelling framework. Concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput. 2000 ; 10: 325-37
21. DiasSWeltonNSuttonAAdesA. A generalised linear modelling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. NICE DSU technical support document 2. 2013. Available from: URL: http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/Evidence-Synthesis-TSD-series(2391675).htm
22. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013 ; 33 (5). 607-17
23. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 1: introduction. Med Decis Making. 2013 ; 33 (5). 597-606
24. Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, Van Der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol. 2002 ; 64: 583-639
25. Ades AE, Mavranezouli I, Dias S, Welton NJ, Whittington C, Kendall T. Network meta-analysis with competing risk outcomes. Value Health. 2010 ; 13 (8). 976-83
26. Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Jones DR, Lambert PC, Thompson JR, Abrams KR. Evidence-based sample size calculations based upon updated meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2007 ; 26 (12). 2479-500
27. Anton RF, O'Malley SS, Ciraulo DA, et al. Combined pharmacotherapies and behavioral interventions for alcohol dependence: the COMBINE study. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2006 ; 295 (17). 2003-17
28. Kiefer F, Jahn H, Tarnaske T, et al. Comparing and combining naltrexone and acamprosate in relapse prevention of alcoholism: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003 ; 60 (1). 92-9
29. Mann K, Kiefer F, Smolka M, et al. Searching for responders to acamprosate and naltrexone in alcoholism treatment: rationale and design of the PREDICT study. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2009 ; 33 (4). 674-83
30. Mann K, Hermann D. Individualised treatment in alcohol-dependent patients. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010 ; 260: S116-20
31. Caldwell D, Ades A, Higgins J. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ. 2005 ; 331 (7521). 897-900
32. PhillipsBBallCSackettD. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence. 2001. Available from: URL: http://www.cebm.net/levelsofevidence.asp
33. Soares MO, Welton NJ, Harrison DA, et al. An evaluation of the feasibility, cost and value of information of a multicentre randomised controlled trial of intravenous immunoglobulin for sepsis (severe sepsis and septic shock): incorporating a systematic review, meta-analysis and value of information analysis. Health Technol Assess. 2012 ; 16 (7). 1-186