» Articles » PMID: 38637311

Sharing Information Across Patient Subgroups to Draw Conclusions from Sparse Treatment Networks

Overview
Journal Biom J
Specialty Public Health
Date 2024 Apr 18
PMID 38637311
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Network meta-analysis (NMA) usually provides estimates of the relative effects with the highest possible precision. However, sparse networks with few available studies and limited direct evidence can arise, threatening the robustness and reliability of NMA estimates. In these cases, the limited amount of available information can hamper the formal evaluation of the underlying NMA assumptions of transitivity and consistency. In addition, NMA estimates from sparse networks are expected to be imprecise and possibly biased as they rely on large-sample approximations that are invalid in the absence of sufficient data. We propose a Bayesian framework that allows sharing of information between two networks that pertain to different population subgroups. Specifically, we use the results from a subgroup with a lot of direct evidence (a dense network) to construct informative priors for the relative effects in the target subgroup (a sparse network). This is a two-stage approach where at the first stage, we extrapolate the results of the dense network to those expected from the sparse network. This takes place by using a modified hierarchical NMA model where we add a location parameter that shifts the distribution of the relative effects to make them applicable to the target population. At the second stage, these extrapolated results are used as prior information for the sparse network. We illustrate our approach through a motivating example of psychiatric patients. Our approach results in more precise and robust estimates of the relative effects and can adequately inform clinical practice in presence of sparse networks.

Citing Articles

Generalized Fused Lasso for Treatment Pooling in Network Meta-Analysis.

Kong X, Daly C, Beliveau A Stat Med. 2024; 43(30):5635-5649.

PMID: 39510799 PMC: 11639656. DOI: 10.1002/sim.10253.

References
1.
Turner R, Turkova A, Moore C, Bamford A, Archary M, Barlow-Mosha L . Borrowing information across patient subgroups in clinical trials, with application to a paediatric trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022; 22(1):49. PMC: 8858505. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-022-01539-3. View

2.
Wadsworth I, Hampson L, Jaki T . Extrapolation of efficacy and other data to support the development of new medicines for children: A systematic review of methods. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016; 27(2):398-413. DOI: 10.1177/0962280216631359. View

3.
Rover C, Bender R, Dias S, Schmid C, Schmidli H, Sturtz S . On weakly informative prior distributions for the heterogeneity parameter in Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2021; 12(4):448-474. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1475. View

4.
Baker R, Jackson D . Meta-analysis inside and outside particle physics: two traditions that should converge?. Res Synth Methods. 2015; 4(2):109-24. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1065. View

5.
Hampson L, Whitehead J, Eleftheriou D, Brogan P . Bayesian methods for the design and interpretation of clinical trials in very rare diseases. Stat Med. 2014; 33(24):4186-201. PMC: 4260127. DOI: 10.1002/sim.6225. View