RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Network meta-analysis made simple: a composite likelihood approach
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.06.19.24309163
DO 10.1101/2024.06.19.24309163
A1 Liu, Yu-Lun
A1 Zhang, Bingyu
A1 Chu, Haitao
A1 Chen, Yong
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/20/2024.06.19.24309163.abstract
AB Network meta-analysis, also known as mixed treatments comparison meta-analysis or multiple treatments meta-analysis, extends conventional pairwise meta-analysis by simultaneously synthesizing multiple interventions in a single integrated analysis. Despite the growing popularity of network meta-analysis within comparative effectiveness research, it comes with potential challenges. For example, within-study correlations among treatment comparisons are rarely reported in the published literature. Yet, these correlations are pivotal for valid statistical inference. As demonstrated in earlier studies, ignoring these correlations can inflate mean squared errors of the resulting point estimates and lead to inaccurate standard error estimates. This paper introduces a composite likelihood-based approach that ensures accurate statistical inference without requiring knowledge of the within-study correlations. The proposed method is computationally robust and efficient, with substantially reduced computational time compared to the state-of-the-science methods implemented in R packages. The proposed method was evaluated through extensive simulations and applied to two important applications including a network meta-analysis comparing interventions for primary open-angle glaucoma, and another comparing treatments for chronic prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome.What is already known?Network meta-analysis extends conventional pairwise meta-analysis by simultaneously synthesizing multiple interventions in a single integrated analysis.A significant challenge in network meta-analysis is the lack of reported within-study correlations among treatment comparisons in the published studies.What is new?We propose a new method for network meta-analysis that ensures vaild statistical inference without the need for knowledge of within-study correlations.The proposed method employs a composite likelihood and a sandwich-type robust variance estimator, offering a computationally efficient and scalable solution, particularly for network meta-analysis with a large number of treatments and studies.Potential impact for Research Synthesis Methods readersThe proposed method can be easily applied to any univariate network meta-analysis project without requiring knowledge of within-study correlations among treatment comparisons.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was partially supported by grants from National Institutes of Health (R01DK128237, R01LM014344, R01LM013519, R01AI130460, R01AG073435, R56AG069880, R56AG074604, RF1AG077820, U01TR003709) and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Project Program Awards (ME-2019C3-18315 and ME-2018C3-14899). All statements in this report, including its findings and conclusions, are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), its Board of Governors or Methodology Committee.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe network meta-analysis datasets described in Sections 2 and 5 were obtained from the following published studies: Li et al., Wang et al.,and Thakkinstian et al. https://github.com/Penncil/xmeta/tree/master/R/CLNMA.equal.tau.R