How Valuable are Multiple Treatment Comparison Methods in Evidence-Based Health-Care Evaluation?

被引:56
作者
Cooper, Nicola J. [1 ]
Peters, Jaime [2 ]
Lai, Monica C. W. [1 ]
Juni, Peter [4 ]
Wandel, Simon [4 ]
Palmer, Steve [5 ]
Paulden, Mike [5 ]
Conti, Stefano [6 ]
Welton, Nicky J. [7 ]
Abrams, Keith R. [1 ]
Bujkiewicz, Sylwia [1 ]
Spiegelhalter, David [3 ]
Sutton, Alex J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leicester, Dept Hlth Sci, Leicester LE1 7RH, Leics, England
[2] Univ Exeter, Peninsula Med Sch, Exeter, Devon, England
[3] MRC Biostat Unit, Cambridge, England
[4] Univ Bern, Inst Social & Prevent Med, Bern, Switzerland
[5] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[6] Hlth Protect Agcy, London, England
[7] Univ Bristol, Sch Social & Community Med, Bristol, Avon, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Decision models; Evidence synthesis; Meta-analysis; Mixed treatment comparisons; Network meta-analysis; NONVALVULAR ATRIAL-FIBRILLATION; MIXED TREATMENT COMPARISONS; ANTITHROMBOTIC THERAPY; NETWORK METAANALYSIS; PREVENT STROKE; TRIALS; ANTICOAGULATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jval.2010.09.001
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Objectives: To compare the use of pair-wise meta-analysis methods to multiple treatment comparison (MTC) methods for evidence-based health-care evaluation to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alternative health-care interventions based on the available evidence. Methods: Pair-wise meta-analysis and more complex evidence syntheses, incorporating an MTC component, are applied to three examples: 1) clinical effectiveness of interventions for preventing strokes in people with atrial fibrillation; 2) clinical and cost-effectiveness of using drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease; and 3) clinical and cost-effectiveness of using neuraminidase inhibitors in the treatment of influenza. We compare the two synthesis approaches with respect to the assumptions made, empirical estimates produced, and conclusions drawn. Results: The difference between point estimates of effectiveness produced by the pair-wise and MTC approaches was generally unpredictable-sometimes agreeing closely whereas in other instances differing considerably. In all three examples, the MTC approach allowed the inclusion of randomized controlled trial evidence ignored in the pair-wise meta-analysis approach. This generally increased the precision of the effectiveness estimates from the MTC model. Conclusions: The MTC approach to synthesis allows the evidence base on clinical effectiveness to be treated as a coherent whole, include more data, and sometimes relax the assumptions made in the pair-wise approaches. However, MTC models are necessarily more complex than those developed for pair-wise meta-analysis and thus could be seen as less transparent. Therefore, it is important that model details and the assumptions made are carefully reported alongside the results. Copyright (C) 2011, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:371 / 380
页数:10
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2003, Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2009, REP IND COMP WORK GR
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2008, GUIDE METHODS TECHNO
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2000, Methods for meta-analysis in medical research
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2009, INDIRECT EVIDENCE IN
[6]   The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [J].
Bucher, HC ;
Guyatt, GH ;
Griffith, LE ;
Walter, SD .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 50 (06) :683-691
[7]  
Burch J, 2009, NICE APPRAISAL, P168
[8]   Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence [J].
Caldwell, DM ;
Ades, AE ;
Higgins, JPT .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 331 (7521) :897-900
[9]   Mixed comparison of stroke prevention treatments in individuals with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation [J].
Cooper, Nicola J. ;
Sutton, Alexander J. ;
Lu, Guobing ;
Khunti, Kamlesh .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2006, 166 (12) :1269-1275
[10]   Comprehensive decision analytical modelling in economic evaluation: a Bayesian approach [J].
Cooper, NJ ;
Sutton, AJ ;
Abrams, KR ;
Turner, D ;
Wailoo, A .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2004, 13 (03) :203-226