Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Rheumatology International 11/2014

01-11-2014 | Review Article

Network meta-analysis for comparing treatment effects of multiple interventions: an introduction

Authors: Ferrán Catalá-López, Aurelio Tobías, Chris Cameron, David Moher, Brian Hutton

Published in: Rheumatology International | Issue 11/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials have long been important synthesis tools for guiding evidence-based medicine. More recently, network meta-analyses, an extension of traditional meta-analyses enabling the comparison of multiple interventions, use new statistical methods to incorporate clinical evidence from both direct and indirect treatment comparisons in a network of treatments and associated trials. There is a need to provide education to ensure that core methodological considerations underlying network meta-analyses are well understood by readers and researchers to maximize their ability to appropriately interpret findings and appraise validity. Network meta-analyses are highly informative for assessing the comparative effects of multiple competing interventions in clinical practice and are a valuable tool for health technology assessment and comparative effectiveness research.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) (2008) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, Chichester Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) (2008) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, Chichester
2.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151:264–269PubMedCrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151:264–269PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
go back to reference Salanti G (2012) Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multipletreatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods 3:80–97CrossRef Salanti G (2012) Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multipletreatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods 3:80–97CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ioannidis JP (2009) Integration of evidence from multiple meta-analyses: a primer on umbrella reviews, treatment networks and multiple treatments meta-analyses. CMAJ 181:488–493PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Ioannidis JP (2009) Integration of evidence from multiple meta-analyses: a primer on umbrella reviews, treatment networks and multiple treatments meta-analyses. CMAJ 181:488–493PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Mills EJ, Ioannidis JP, Thorlund K, Schünemann HJ, Puhan MA, Guyatt GH (2012) How to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis. JAMA 308:1246–1253PubMedCrossRef Mills EJ, Ioannidis JP, Thorlund K, Schünemann HJ, Puhan MA, Guyatt GH (2012) How to use an article reporting a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis. JAMA 308:1246–1253PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Mills EJ, Thorlund K, Ioannidis JP (2013) Demystifying trial networks and network meta-analysis. BMJ 346:f2914PubMedCrossRef Mills EJ, Thorlund K, Ioannidis JP (2013) Demystifying trial networks and network meta-analysis. BMJ 346:f2914PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Cipriani A, Higgins JP, Geddes JR, Salanti G (2013) Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 159:130–137PubMedCrossRef Cipriani A, Higgins JP, Geddes JR, Salanti G (2013) Conceptual and technical challenges in network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 159:130–137PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Higgins JP, Whitehead A (1996) Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 15:2733–2749PubMedCrossRef Higgins JP, Whitehead A (1996) Borrowing strength from external trials in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 15:2733–2749PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD (1997) The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol 50:683–691PubMedCrossRef Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD (1997) The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol 50:683–691PubMedCrossRef
11.
12.
go back to reference Lu G, Ades AE (2004) Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 23:3105–3124PubMedCrossRef Lu G, Ades AE (2004) Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 23:3105–3124PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Salanti G, Kavvoura FK, Ioannidis JP (2008) Exploring the geometry of treatment networks. Ann Intern Med 148:544–553PubMedCrossRef Salanti G, Kavvoura FK, Ioannidis JP (2008) Exploring the geometry of treatment networks. Ann Intern Med 148:544–553PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Catalá-López F, Hutton B, Moher D (2014) The transitivity property across randomized controlled trials: if B is better than A, and C is better than B, will C be better than A? Rev Esp Cardiol. doi:10.1016/j.recesp.2013.11.016 Catalá-López F, Hutton B, Moher D (2014) The transitivity property across randomized controlled trials: if B is better than A, and C is better than B, will C be better than A? Rev Esp Cardiol. doi:10.​1016/​j.​recesp.​2013.​11.​016
15.
go back to reference Song F, Xiong T, Parekh-Bhurke S, Loke YK, Sutton AJ, Eastwood AJ et al (2011) Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 343:d4909PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Song F, Xiong T, Parekh-Bhurke S, Loke YK, Sutton AJ, Eastwood AJ et al (2011) Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 343:d4909PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Jansen JP, Naci H (2013) Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers. BMC Med 11:159PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Jansen JP, Naci H (2013) Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers. BMC Med 11:159PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
17.
18.
go back to reference Trinquart L, Chatellier G, Ravaud P (2012) Adjustment for reporting bias in network meta-analysis of antidepressant trials. BMC Med Res Methodol 12:150PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Trinquart L, Chatellier G, Ravaud P (2012) Adjustment for reporting bias in network meta-analysis of antidepressant trials. BMC Med Res Methodol 12:150PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Mills EJ, Kanters S, Thorlund K, Chaimani A, Veroniki AA, Ioannidis JP (2013) The effects of excluding treatments from network meta-analyses: survey. BMJ 347:f5195PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Mills EJ, Kanters S, Thorlund K, Chaimani A, Veroniki AA, Ioannidis JP (2013) The effects of excluding treatments from network meta-analyses: survey. BMJ 347:f5195PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Salanti G, Marinho V, Higgins JP (2009) A case study of multiple-treatments meta-analysis demonstrates that covariates should be considered. J Clin Epidemiol 62:857–864PubMedCrossRef Salanti G, Marinho V, Higgins JP (2009) A case study of multiple-treatments meta-analysis demonstrates that covariates should be considered. J Clin Epidemiol 62:857–864PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP (2011) Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 64:163–171PubMedCrossRef Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP (2011) Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 64:163–171PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Bafeta A, Trinquart L, Seror R, Ravaud P (2013) Analysis of the systematic reviews process in reports of network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review. BMJ 347:f3675PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Bafeta A, Trinquart L, Seror R, Ravaud P (2013) Analysis of the systematic reviews process in reports of network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review. BMJ 347:f3675PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Lee AW (2014) Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. J Clin Epidemiol 67:138–143PubMedCrossRef Lee AW (2014) Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. J Clin Epidemiol 67:138–143PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Orme ME, Macgilchrist KS, Mitchell S, Spurden D, Bird A (2012) Systematic review and network meta-analysis of combination and monotherapy treatments in disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-experienced patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of American College of Rheumatology criteria scores 20, 50, and 70. Biologics 6:429–464PubMedPubMedCentral Orme ME, Macgilchrist KS, Mitchell S, Spurden D, Bird A (2012) Systematic review and network meta-analysis of combination and monotherapy treatments in disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-experienced patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of American College of Rheumatology criteria scores 20, 50, and 70. Biologics 6:429–464PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Singh JA, Christensen R, Wells GA, Suarez-Almazor ME, Buchbinder R, Lopez-Olivo MA et al (2009) A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis: a cochrane overview. CMAJ 181:787–796. Erratum in: CMAJ 2010 182(8):806 Singh JA, Christensen R, Wells GA, Suarez-Almazor ME, Buchbinder R, Lopez-Olivo MA et al (2009) A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis: a cochrane overview. CMAJ 181:787–796. Erratum in: CMAJ 2010 182(8):806
26.
go back to reference Bergman GJ, Hochberg MC, Boers M, Wintfeld N, Kielhorn A, Jansen JP (2010) Indirect comparison of tocilizumab and other biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Semin Arthritis Rheum 39:425–441PubMedCrossRef Bergman GJ, Hochberg MC, Boers M, Wintfeld N, Kielhorn A, Jansen JP (2010) Indirect comparison of tocilizumab and other biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Semin Arthritis Rheum 39:425–441PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Launois R, Avouac B, Berenbaum F, Blin O, Bru I, Fautrel B et al (2011) Comparison of certolizumab pegol with other anticytokine agents for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a multiple-treatment Bayesian metaanalysis. J Rheumatol 38:835–845PubMedCrossRef Launois R, Avouac B, Berenbaum F, Blin O, Bru I, Fautrel B et al (2011) Comparison of certolizumab pegol with other anticytokine agents for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a multiple-treatment Bayesian metaanalysis. J Rheumatol 38:835–845PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Turkstra E, Ng SK, Scuffham PA (2011) A mixed treatment comparison of the short term efficacy of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Med Res Opin 27:1885–1897PubMedCrossRef Turkstra E, Ng SK, Scuffham PA (2011) A mixed treatment comparison of the short term efficacy of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Med Res Opin 27:1885–1897PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Schmitz S, Adams R, Walsh CD, Barry M, FitzGerald O (2012) A mixed treatment comparison of the efficacy of anti-TNF agents in rheumatoid arthritis for methotrexate non-responders demonstrates differences between treatments: a Bayesian approach. Ann Rheum Dis 71:225–230PubMedCrossRef Schmitz S, Adams R, Walsh CD, Barry M, FitzGerald O (2012) A mixed treatment comparison of the efficacy of anti-TNF agents in rheumatoid arthritis for methotrexate non-responders demonstrates differences between treatments: a Bayesian approach. Ann Rheum Dis 71:225–230PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Ghogomu EA, Maxwell LJ, Buchbinder R, Rader T, Pardo Pardo J, Johnston RV et al (2011) Adverse effects of biologics: a network meta-analysis and cochrane overview. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD008794 Ghogomu EA, Maxwell LJ, Buchbinder R, Rader T, Pardo Pardo J, Johnston RV et al (2011) Adverse effects of biologics: a network meta-analysis and cochrane overview. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD008794
31.
go back to reference Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades AE (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Mak 33:641–656CrossRef Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades AE (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Mak 33:641–656CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, Ades AE (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity–subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Mak 33:618–640CrossRef Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, Ades AE (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity–subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Mak 33:618–640CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Mak 33:607–617CrossRef Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Mak 33:607–617CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 1: introduction. Med Decis Mak 33:597–606CrossRef Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 1: introduction. Med Decis Mak 33:597–606CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Li T, Puhan MA, Vedula SS, Singh S, Dickersin K, Ad hoc network meta-analysis methods meeting working group (2011) Network meta-analysis-highly attractive but more methodological research is needed. BMC Med 9:79PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Li T, Puhan MA, Vedula SS, Singh S, Dickersin K, Ad hoc network meta-analysis methods meeting working group (2011) Network meta-analysis-highly attractive but more methodological research is needed. BMC Med 9:79PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Ioannidis JP, Karassa FB, Druyts E, Thorlund K, Mills EJ (2013) Biologic agents in rheumatology: unmet issues after 200 trials and $200 billion sales. Nat Rev Rheumatol 9:665–673PubMedCrossRef Ioannidis JP, Karassa FB, Druyts E, Thorlund K, Mills EJ (2013) Biologic agents in rheumatology: unmet issues after 200 trials and $200 billion sales. Nat Rev Rheumatol 9:665–673PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Thorlund K, Druyts E, Aviña-Zubieta JA, Wu P, Mills EJ (2013) Why the findings of published multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses of biologic treatments for rheumatoid arthritis are different: an overview of recurrent methodological shortcomings. Ann Rheum Dis 72:1524–1535PubMedCrossRef Thorlund K, Druyts E, Aviña-Zubieta JA, Wu P, Mills EJ (2013) Why the findings of published multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses of biologic treatments for rheumatoid arthritis are different: an overview of recurrent methodological shortcomings. Ann Rheum Dis 72:1524–1535PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Ades AE, Madan J, Welton NJ (2011) Indirect and mixed treatment comparisons in arthritis research. Rheumatology (Oxford) 50(suppl 4):iv5–iv9CrossRef Ades AE, Madan J, Welton NJ (2011) Indirect and mixed treatment comparisons in arthritis research. Rheumatology (Oxford) 50(suppl 4):iv5–iv9CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Ades AE, Caldwell DM, Reken S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Dias S (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 7: a reviewer’s checklist. Med Decis Mak 33:679–691CrossRef Ades AE, Caldwell DM, Reken S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Dias S (2013) Evidence synthesis for decision making 7: a reviewer’s checklist. Med Decis Mak 33:679–691CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Nikolakopoulou A, Chaimani A, Veroniki AA, Vasiliadis HS, Schmid CH, Salanti G (2014) Characteristics of networks of interventions: a description of a database of 186 published networks. PLoS One 9:e86754PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Nikolakopoulou A, Chaimani A, Veroniki AA, Vasiliadis HS, Schmid CH, Salanti G (2014) Characteristics of networks of interventions: a description of a database of 186 published networks. PLoS One 9:e86754PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
41.
go back to reference Sutton AJ, Abrams KR (2001) Bayesian methods in meta-analysis and evidence synthesis. Stat Methods Med Res 10:277–303PubMedCrossRef Sutton AJ, Abrams KR (2001) Bayesian methods in meta-analysis and evidence synthesis. Stat Methods Med Res 10:277–303PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Network meta-analysis for comparing treatment effects of multiple interventions: an introduction
Authors
Ferrán Catalá-López
Aurelio Tobías
Chris Cameron
David Moher
Brian Hutton
Publication date
01-11-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Rheumatology International / Issue 11/2014
Print ISSN: 0172-8172
Electronic ISSN: 1437-160X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-014-2994-2

Other articles of this Issue 11/2014

Rheumatology International 11/2014 Go to the issue