Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis
Objectives To systematically review and meta-analyse the evidence for effect modification by refractory status and number of treatment lines in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM); and to assess whether effect modification is likely to invalidate network meta-analyses (NMA) that assume negli...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023-08-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/8/e067966.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846166815617581056 |
|---|---|
| author | Atle Fretheim Christopher James Rose Ingrid Kristine Ohm Liv Giske Gunn Eva Næss |
| author_facet | Atle Fretheim Christopher James Rose Ingrid Kristine Ohm Liv Giske Gunn Eva Næss |
| author_sort | Atle Fretheim |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives To systematically review and meta-analyse the evidence for effect modification by refractory status and number of treatment lines in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM); and to assess whether effect modification is likely to invalidate network meta-analyses (NMA) that assume negligible modification.Design Systematic review, meta-analysis and simulation.Data sources We systematically searched the literature (e.g., OVID Medline) to identify eligible publications in February 2020 and regularly updated the search until January 2022. We also contacted project stakeholders (including industry)Eligibility criteria Phase 2 and 3 randomised controlled trials reporting stratified estimates for comparisons with at least one of a prespecified set of treatments relevant for use in Norwegian RRMM patients.Outcomes We used meta-analysis to estimate relative HRs (RHRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with respect to refractory status and number of treatment lines. We used the estimated RHRs in simulations to estimate the percentage of NMA results expected to differ significantly in the presence versus absence of effect modification.Results Among the 42 included publications, stratified estimates were published by and extracted from up to 18 (43%) publications and on as many as 8364 patients. Within-study evidence for effect modification is very weak (p>0.05 for 47 of 49 sets of stratified estimates). The largest RHR estimated was 1.32 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.49) for the modifying effect of refractory status on HR for PFS. Simulations suggest that, in the worst case, this would result in only 4.48% (95% CI 4.42% to 4.54%) of NMA estimates differing statistically significantly in the presence versus absence of effect modification.Conclusions Based on the available evidence, effect modification appears to be sufficiently small that it can be neglected in adequately performed NMAs. NMAs can probably be relied on to provide estimates of HRs for OS and PFS in RRMM, subject to caveats discussed herein. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-43a2e95465b44abfb5f04a5d04df14f8 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-08-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj-art-43a2e95465b44abfb5f04a5d04df14f82024-11-15T08:15:08ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552023-08-0113810.1136/bmjopen-2022-067966Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysisAtle Fretheim0Christopher James Rose1Ingrid Kristine Ohm2Liv Giske3Gunn Eva Næss4Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, NorwaystatisticianReviews and Health Technology Assessments, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, NorwayReviews and Health Technology Assessments, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, NorwayReviews and Health Technology Assessments, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, NorwayObjectives To systematically review and meta-analyse the evidence for effect modification by refractory status and number of treatment lines in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM); and to assess whether effect modification is likely to invalidate network meta-analyses (NMA) that assume negligible modification.Design Systematic review, meta-analysis and simulation.Data sources We systematically searched the literature (e.g., OVID Medline) to identify eligible publications in February 2020 and regularly updated the search until January 2022. We also contacted project stakeholders (including industry)Eligibility criteria Phase 2 and 3 randomised controlled trials reporting stratified estimates for comparisons with at least one of a prespecified set of treatments relevant for use in Norwegian RRMM patients.Outcomes We used meta-analysis to estimate relative HRs (RHRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with respect to refractory status and number of treatment lines. We used the estimated RHRs in simulations to estimate the percentage of NMA results expected to differ significantly in the presence versus absence of effect modification.Results Among the 42 included publications, stratified estimates were published by and extracted from up to 18 (43%) publications and on as many as 8364 patients. Within-study evidence for effect modification is very weak (p>0.05 for 47 of 49 sets of stratified estimates). The largest RHR estimated was 1.32 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.49) for the modifying effect of refractory status on HR for PFS. Simulations suggest that, in the worst case, this would result in only 4.48% (95% CI 4.42% to 4.54%) of NMA estimates differing statistically significantly in the presence versus absence of effect modification.Conclusions Based on the available evidence, effect modification appears to be sufficiently small that it can be neglected in adequately performed NMAs. NMAs can probably be relied on to provide estimates of HRs for OS and PFS in RRMM, subject to caveats discussed herein.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/8/e067966.full |
| spellingShingle | Atle Fretheim Christopher James Rose Ingrid Kristine Ohm Liv Giske Gunn Eva Næss Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis BMJ Open |
| title | Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full | Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_short | Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_sort | effect modification in network meta analyses for relapsed refractory multiple myeloma systematic review and meta analysis |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/8/e067966.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT atlefretheim effectmodificationinnetworkmetaanalysesforrelapsedrefractorymultiplemyelomasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT christopherjamesrose effectmodificationinnetworkmetaanalysesforrelapsedrefractorymultiplemyelomasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT ingridkristineohm effectmodificationinnetworkmetaanalysesforrelapsedrefractorymultiplemyelomasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT livgiske effectmodificationinnetworkmetaanalysesforrelapsedrefractorymultiplemyelomasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT gunnevanæss effectmodificationinnetworkmetaanalysesforrelapsedrefractorymultiplemyelomasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |