首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Individual participant data meta-analysis to examine interactions between treatment effect and participant-level covariates: Statistical recommendations for conduct and planning
Authors:Richard D. Riley  Thomas P.A. Debray  David Fisher  Miriam Hattle  Nadine Marlin  Jeroen Hoogland  Francois Gueyffier  Jan A. Staessen  Jiguang Wang  Karel G.M. Moons  Johannes B. Reitsma  Joie Ensor
Affiliation:1. Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK;2. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands;3. MRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials & Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK;4. Blizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK;5. Inserm, Lyon, France;6. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Research Unit Hypertension and Cardiovascular Epidemiology, Studies Coordinating Centre, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium;7. Centre for Epidemiological Studies and Clinical Trials, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
Abstract:Precision medicine research often searches for treatment-covariate interactions, which refers to when a treatment effect (eg, measured as a mean difference, odds ratio, hazard ratio) changes across values of a participant-level covariate (eg, age, gender, biomarker). Single trials do not usually have sufficient power to detect genuine treatment-covariate interactions, which motivate the sharing of individual participant data (IPD) from multiple trials for meta-analysis. Here, we provide statistical recommendations for conducting and planning an IPD meta-analysis of randomized trials to examine treatment-covariate interactions. For conduct, two-stage and one-stage statistical models are described, and we recommend: (i) interactions should be estimated directly, and not by calculating differences in meta-analysis results for subgroups; (ii) interaction estimates should be based solely on within-study information; (iii) continuous covariates and outcomes should be analyzed on their continuous scale; (iv) nonlinear relationships should be examined for continuous covariates, using a multivariate meta-analysis of the trend (eg, using restricted cubic spline functions); and (v) translation of interactions into clinical practice is nontrivial, requiring individualized treatment effect prediction. For planning, we describe first why the decision to initiate an IPD meta-analysis project should not be based on between-study heterogeneity in the overall treatment effect; and second, how to calculate the power of a potential IPD meta-analysis project in advance of IPD collection, conditional on characteristics (eg, number of participants, standard deviation of covariates) of the trials (potentially) promising their IPD. Real IPD meta-analysis projects are used for illustration throughout.
Keywords:effect modifier  individual participant data (IPD)  meta-analysis  subgroup effect  treatment-covariate interaction
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号