Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research article

Indirect comparisons of ranibizumab and dexamethasone in macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion

Authors: Howard HZ Thom, Gorana Capkun, Richard M Nixon, Alberto Ferreira

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Two treatments, ranibizumab and dexamethasone implant, for visual impairment due to macular oedema (ME) secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) have recently been studied in clinical trials. There have been no head to head comparisons of the two treatments, and improvement measured as gain in Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) was reported using different outcomes thresholds between trials. To overcome these limitations, and inform an economic model, we developed a combination of a multinomial model and an indirect Bayesian comparison model for multinomial outcomes.

Methods

Outcomes of change from baseline in BCVA for dexamethasone compatible with those available for ranibizumab, reported by 4 randomised controlled trials, were estimated by fitting a multinomial distribution model to the probability of a patient achieving outcomes in a range of changes from baseline in BCVA (numbers of letters) at month 1. A Bayesian indirect comparison multinomial model was then developed to compare treatments in the Branch RVO (BRVO) and Central RVO (CRVO) populations.

Results

The multinomial model had excellent fit to the observed results. With the Bayesian indirect comparison, the probabilities of achieving ≥20 letters, with 95% credible intervals, at month 1 in patients with BRVO were 0.191 (0.130, 0.261) with ranibizumab and 0.093 (0.027, 0.213) with dexamethasone. In patients with CRVO, probabilities were 0.133 (0.082, 0.195) (ranibizumab) and 0.063 (0.016, 0.153) (dexamethasone). Probabilities of a gain in ≥10 letters in BRVO patients were 0.500 (0.365, 0.650) v 0.459 (0.248, 0.724) and in CRVO patients 0.459 (0.332, 0.602) v 0.498 (0.263, 0.791) for ranibizumab and dexamethasone treatments respectively. The comparisons also favoured ranibizumab at month 6 although changes to therapies after month 3 may have introduced bias.

Conclusion

The newly developed combination of multinomial and indirect Bayesian comparison models indicated a trend for ranibizumab association with a greater percentage of ME patients achieving visual gains than dexamethasone at months 1 and 6 in a common clinical context, although results were not classically significant. The method was a useful tool for comparisons of probability distributions between clinical trials that reported events on different categorical scales and estimates can be used to inform economic models.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Reshak J, Reshak M: Branch retinal vein occlusion: pathogenisis, visual prognosis, and treatment modalities. Curr Eyes Res. 2008, 33: 111-131. 10.1080/02713680701851902.CrossRef Reshak J, Reshak M: Branch retinal vein occlusion: pathogenisis, visual prognosis, and treatment modalities. Curr Eyes Res. 2008, 33: 111-131. 10.1080/02713680701851902.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Group CRVOS: Natural history and clinical management of central retinal vein occlusion. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997, 115: 486-491.CrossRef Group CRVOS: Natural history and clinical management of central retinal vein occlusion. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997, 115: 486-491.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Group SSR: A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone with standard care to treat vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study report 6. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009, 127: 1115-1128.CrossRef Group SSR: A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of intravitreal triamcinolone with standard care to treat vision loss associated with macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion: the Standard Care vs Corticosteroid for Retinal Vein Occlusion (SCORE) Study report 6. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009, 127: 1115-1128.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Mohamed Q, McIntosh RL, Saw SM, Wong TY: Interventions for central retinal vein occlusion: an evidence-based systematic review. Ophthamology. 2007, 114: 507-519,524. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.11.011.CrossRef Mohamed Q, McIntosh RL, Saw SM, Wong TY: Interventions for central retinal vein occlusion: an evidence-based systematic review. Ophthamology. 2007, 114: 507-519,524. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.11.011.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Campochiaro PA, Heier JS, Feiner L, Gray S, Saroj N, Rundle AC, Murahashi WY, Rubio RG: Ranibizumab for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion. Six-month primary End point results of a phase III study. Ophthamology. 2010, 117: 1102-1112. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.021.CrossRef Campochiaro PA, Heier JS, Feiner L, Gray S, Saroj N, Rundle AC, Murahashi WY, Rubio RG: Ranibizumab for macular edema following branch retinal vein occlusion. Six-month primary End point results of a phase III study. Ophthamology. 2010, 117: 1102-1112. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.021.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Brown DM, Campochiaro PA, Singh RP, Li Z, Gray S, Saroj N, Rundle AC, Rubio RG, Murahashi WY: Ranibizumab for macular edema following central retinal vein occlusion. Six-month primary End point results of a phase III study. Ophthamology. 2010, 117: 1124-1133. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.022.CrossRef Brown DM, Campochiaro PA, Singh RP, Li Z, Gray S, Saroj N, Rundle AC, Rubio RG, Murahashi WY: Ranibizumab for macular edema following central retinal vein occlusion. Six-month primary End point results of a phase III study. Ophthamology. 2010, 117: 1124-1133. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.022.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Haller JA, Bandello F, Belfort R, Blumenkranz MS, Gillies M, Heier J, Loewenstein A, Yoon YH, Jacques ML, Jiao J, Li XY, Whitcup SM, OZURDEX GENEVA Study Group: Randomized, sham-controlled trial of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema Due to retinal vein occlusion. Ophthamology. 2010, 117: 1134-1136. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.03.032.CrossRef Haller JA, Bandello F, Belfort R, Blumenkranz MS, Gillies M, Heier J, Loewenstein A, Yoon YH, Jacques ML, Jiao J, Li XY, Whitcup SM, OZURDEX GENEVA Study Group: Randomized, sham-controlled trial of dexamethasone intravitreal implant in patients with macular edema Due to retinal vein occlusion. Ophthamology. 2010, 117: 1134-1136. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.03.032.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Allergan: Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant (Ozurdex®) for the Treatment of Macular Oedema Caused by Retinal Vein Occlusion. Single Technology Appraisal. 2010, London, UK: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Allergan: Dexamethasone Intravitreal Implant (Ozurdex®) for the Treatment of Macular Oedema Caused by Retinal Vein Occlusion. Single Technology Appraisal. 2010, London, UK: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
11.
go back to reference Abel K, Black D, Bryden D: TA229 Dexamethasone intravitreal implant for the treatment of macular oedema caused by retinal vein occlusion (RVO). NICE Technology Appraisals. 2011 Abel K, Black D, Bryden D: TA229 Dexamethasone intravitreal implant for the treatment of macular oedema caused by retinal vein occlusion (RVO). NICE Technology Appraisals. 2011
13.
go back to reference Kinge B, Stordahl PB, Forsaa V, Fossen K, Haugstad M, Helgesen OH, Seland J, Stene-Johansen I: Efficacy of ranibizumab in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: results from the sham-controlled ROCC study. Am J Ophthalmology. 2010, 150: 310-314. 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.03.028.CrossRef Kinge B, Stordahl PB, Forsaa V, Fossen K, Haugstad M, Helgesen OH, Seland J, Stene-Johansen I: Efficacy of ranibizumab in patients with macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion: results from the sham-controlled ROCC study. Am J Ophthalmology. 2010, 150: 310-314. 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.03.028.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference NICE: Single Technology Appraisal (STA). Specification for Manufacturer/Sponsor Submission of Evidence. 2009, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence NICE: Single Technology Appraisal (STA). Specification for Manufacturer/Sponsor Submission of Evidence. 2009, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
15.
go back to reference Lasdon LS, Waren AD, Jain A, Ratner M: Design and testing of a generalized reduced gradient code for nonlinear programming. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software . 1978, 4: 34-50. 10.1145/355769.355773.CrossRef Lasdon LS, Waren AD, Jain A, Ratner M: Design and testing of a generalized reduced gradient code for nonlinear programming. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software . 1978, 4: 34-50. 10.1145/355769.355773.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Ades A, Mavranezouli M, Dias S, Welton N, Whittington C, Kendall T: Network meta-analysis with competing risk outcomes. Value Health. 2010, 13: 976-983. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00784.x.CrossRefPubMed Ades A, Mavranezouli M, Dias S, Welton N, Whittington C, Kendall T: Network meta-analysis with competing risk outcomes. Value Health. 2010, 13: 976-983. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00784.x.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Trikalinos T, Olkin I: A method for the meta-analysis of mutually exclusive binary outcomes. Statistcs in Medicine. 2008, 27: 4279-4300. 10.1002/sim.3299.CrossRef Trikalinos T, Olkin I: A method for the meta-analysis of mutually exclusive binary outcomes. Statistcs in Medicine. 2008, 27: 4279-4300. 10.1002/sim.3299.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE: NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2: A Generalised Linear Modelling Framework for Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials, 2011. 2014, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, last updated April 2014; available from http://www.nicedsu.org.uk Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE: NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2: A Generalised Linear Modelling Framework for Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials, 2011. 2014, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, last updated April 2014; available from http://​www.​nicedsu.​org.​uk
19.
go back to reference Bucher HC, Guyett 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: 683-691. 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00049-8.CrossRefPubMed Bucher HC, Guyett 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: 683-691. 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00049-8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D: WinBUGS - a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Statistics and Computing. 2000, 10: 325-337. 10.1023/A:1008929526011.CrossRef Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D: WinBUGS - a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Statistics and Computing. 2000, 10: 325-337. 10.1023/A:1008929526011.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JPT: Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ. 2005, 331: 897-900. 10.1136/bmj.331.7521.897.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JPT: Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ. 2005, 331: 897-900. 10.1136/bmj.331.7521.897.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Lu G, Ades AE: Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 3105-3124. 10.1002/sim.1875.CrossRefPubMed Lu G, Ades AE: Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 3105-3124. 10.1002/sim.1875.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Abrams KR, Ades AE: Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making in Healthcare. 2012, Chichester, West Sussex, UK: John Wiley and SonsCrossRef Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Cooper NJ, Abrams KR, Ades AE: Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making in Healthcare. 2012, Chichester, West Sussex, UK: John Wiley and SonsCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Sweeting MJ, Sutton AJ, Lambert PC: What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 1351-1375. 10.1002/sim.1761.CrossRefPubMed Sweeting MJ, Sutton AJ, Lambert PC: What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 1351-1375. 10.1002/sim.1761.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Sutton A, Ades AE, Cooper N, Abrams K: Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008, 26: 753-767. 10.2165/00019053-200826090-00006.CrossRefPubMed Sutton A, Ades AE, Cooper N, Abrams K: Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008, 26: 753-767. 10.2165/00019053-200826090-00006.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Turner RM, Spiegelhalter DJ: Bias modelling in evidence synthesis. JR Statist Soc A. 2009, 172: 21-47. 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00547.x.CrossRef Turner RM, Spiegelhalter DJ: Bias modelling in evidence synthesis. JR Statist Soc A. 2009, 172: 21-47. 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00547.x.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Indirect comparisons of ranibizumab and dexamethasone in macular oedema secondary to retinal vein occlusion
Authors
Howard HZ Thom
Gorana Capkun
Richard M Nixon
Alberto Ferreira
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-140

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2014 Go to the issue