Literature DB >> 20473185

Bayesian meta-analyses for comparative effectiveness and informing coverage decisions.

Scott M Berry1, K Jack Ishak, Bryan R Luce, Donald A Berry.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based medicine is increasingly expected in health care decision-making. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid have initiated efforts to understand the applicability of Bayesian techniques for synthesizing evidence. As a case study, a Bayesian analysis of clinical trials of implantable cardioverter defibrillators was undertaken using patient-level data not typically available for analysis.
PURPOSE: Conduct Bayesian meta-analyses of the defibrillator trials using published results to demonstrate a Bayesian approach useful to policy makers. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, DATA EXTRACTION: We reconsidered trials in a 2007 systematic review by Ezekowitz et al (Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:251-262) and extracted information from the original published articles. Employing a Bayesian hierarchical approach, we developed a base model and 2 variants, and modeled hazard ratios separately within each year of follow-up. We considered sequential meta-analyses over time and found the predictive distribution of the results of the next trial, given its sample size. DATA SYNTHESIS: For the most robust of 3 models, the probability that the mean defibrillator effect (in the population of trials) is beneficial is greater than 0.999. In that model, about 5% of trials in the population of trials would have a detrimental effect. Despite the moderate amount of heterogeneity across the trials, there was stability of conclusions after the first 3 of the 12 total trials had been conducted. This stability enabled reasonable predictions for the results of future trials. LIMITATIONS: Inability to assess treatment effects within subsets of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Bayesian meta-analyses based on literature surveys can effectively inform coverage decisions. Bayesian modeling for endpoints such as mortality can elucidate treatment effects over time. The Bayesian approach used in a sequential manner over time can predict results and help assess the utility of future clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20473185     DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e24563

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  4 in total

1.  Should perioperative supplemental oxygen be routinely recommended for surgery patients? A Bayesian meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lillian S Kao; Stefanos G Millas; Claudia Pedroza; Jon E Tyson; Kevin P Lally
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Bayesian approaches for comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Donald A Berry
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Bayesian hierarchical modeling of patient subpopulations: efficient designs of Phase II oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Scott M Berry; Kristine R Broglio; Susan Groshen; Donald A Berry
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  How can we improve the interpretation of systematic reviews?

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Sharon E Straus; David Moher
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 8.775

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.