When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial
Introduction: To achieve higher power or increased precision for a new trial, methods based on updating network meta-analysis (NMA) have been proposed by researchers. However, this approach could potentially lead to misinterpreted results and misstated conclusions. This work aims to investigate the...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Pharmacology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2023.1157708/full |
| _version_ | 1827957921076477952 |
|---|---|
| author | Fangshu Ye Chong Wang Chong Wang Annette M. O’Connor Annette M. O’Connor |
| author_facet | Fangshu Ye Chong Wang Chong Wang Annette M. O’Connor Annette M. O’Connor |
| author_sort | Fangshu Ye |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: To achieve higher power or increased precision for a new trial, methods based on updating network meta-analysis (NMA) have been proposed by researchers. However, this approach could potentially lead to misinterpreted results and misstated conclusions. This work aims to investigate the potential inflation of type I error risk when a new trial is conducted only when, based on a p-value of the comparison in the existing network, a “promising” difference between two treatments is noticed.Methods: We use simulations to evaluate the scenarios of interest. In particular, a new trial is to be conducted independently or depending on the results from previous NMA in various scenarios. Three analysis methods are applied to each simulation scenario: with the existing network, sequential analysis and without the existing network.Results: For the scenario that the new trial will be conducted only when a promising finding (p-value <5%) is indicated by the existing network, the type I error risk increased dramatically (38.5% in our example data) when analyzed with the existing network and sequential analysis. The type I error is controlled at 5% when analyzing the new trial without the existing network.Conclusion: If the intention is to combine a trial result with an existing network of evidence, or if it is expected that the trial will eventually be included in a network meta-analysis, then the decision that a new trial is performed should not depend on a statistically “promising” finding indicated by the existing network. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T15:28:37Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-04fc93ceab58470e8baa7da2c7e90221 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1663-9812 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T15:28:37Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Pharmacology |
| spelling | doaj.art-04fc93ceab58470e8baa7da2c7e902212023-04-28T09:48:10ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Pharmacology1663-98122023-04-011410.3389/fphar.2023.11577081157708When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trialFangshu Ye0Chong Wang1Chong Wang2Annette M. O’Connor3Annette M. O’Connor4Department of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesDepartment of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United StatesIntroduction: To achieve higher power or increased precision for a new trial, methods based on updating network meta-analysis (NMA) have been proposed by researchers. However, this approach could potentially lead to misinterpreted results and misstated conclusions. This work aims to investigate the potential inflation of type I error risk when a new trial is conducted only when, based on a p-value of the comparison in the existing network, a “promising” difference between two treatments is noticed.Methods: We use simulations to evaluate the scenarios of interest. In particular, a new trial is to be conducted independently or depending on the results from previous NMA in various scenarios. Three analysis methods are applied to each simulation scenario: with the existing network, sequential analysis and without the existing network.Results: For the scenario that the new trial will be conducted only when a promising finding (p-value <5%) is indicated by the existing network, the type I error risk increased dramatically (38.5% in our example data) when analyzed with the existing network and sequential analysis. The type I error is controlled at 5% when analyzing the new trial without the existing network.Conclusion: If the intention is to combine a trial result with an existing network of evidence, or if it is expected that the trial will eventually be included in a network meta-analysis, then the decision that a new trial is performed should not depend on a statistically “promising” finding indicated by the existing network.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2023.1157708/fullnetwork meta-analysisclinical trial designevidence synthesissequential analysisbovine respiratory diseaseantibiotic |
| spellingShingle | Fangshu Ye Chong Wang Chong Wang Annette M. O’Connor Annette M. O’Connor When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial Frontiers in Pharmacology network meta-analysis clinical trial design evidence synthesis sequential analysis bovine respiratory disease antibiotic |
| title | When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial |
| title_full | When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial |
| title_fullStr | When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial |
| title_full_unstemmed | When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial |
| title_short | When we shouldn’t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial |
| title_sort | when we shouldn t borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial |
| topic | network meta-analysis clinical trial design evidence synthesis sequential analysis bovine respiratory disease antibiotic |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2023.1157708/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fangshuye whenweshouldntborrowinformationfromanexistingnetworkoftrialsforplanninganewtrial AT chongwang whenweshouldntborrowinformationfromanexistingnetworkoftrialsforplanninganewtrial AT chongwang whenweshouldntborrowinformationfromanexistingnetworkoftrialsforplanninganewtrial AT annettemoconnor whenweshouldntborrowinformationfromanexistingnetworkoftrialsforplanninganewtrial AT annettemoconnor whenweshouldntborrowinformationfromanexistingnetworkoftrialsforplanninganewtrial |