IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v39y2019i2p119-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leveraging Cumulative Network Meta-analysis and Value of Information Analysis to Understand the Evolving Value of Medical Research

Author

Listed:
  • David D. Kim

    (Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA)

  • Thomas A. Trikalinos

    (Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI)

  • John B. Wong

    (Division of Clinical Decision Making, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA)

Abstract

Background. Leveraging cumulative network meta-analysis (NMA) and value of information (VOI) analysis, this article aims to understand the evolving value of medical research and to identify gaps in the evidence for future research. Methods. As an illustration, we identified 31 randomized controlled trials (RCT) from 1980 to 2013 that examined a network of 3 interventions for coronary artery disease: medical therapy (MED), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. We conducted Bayesian NMA to combine evidence from a new RCT with existing knowledge. Then, using the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Diseases database, we developed an accelerated failure time model to estimate the joint effects of patient characteristics and treatment choices on survival outcomes. With the estimated coefficients and covariance matrices, we projected survival benefits and its surrounding uncertainty among 50,000 simulated patients treated with MED, PCI, or CABG. The value of resolving residual uncertainty from future trials was quantified through the VOI analysis. We repeated these steps for each published RCT to estimate dynamic changes in VOI estimates. Results. Our cumulative NMA found that CABG conferred a lower, but not statistically significant, mortality than PCI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% uncertainty interval, 0.80–1.05). MED had a nonsignificantly higher long-term mortality than PCI (HR, 1.11; 0.98–1.31) but significantly higher than CABG (HR, 1.23; 1.07–1.41). The greatest potential gains from future research would come from additional head-to-head trials between CABG v. PCI with the value of future research equaling 0.27 life years per patient. Conclusions. The combination of cumulative NMA and VOI approaches can improve the efficiency of comparative effectiveness research by using all of the available evidence to determine future research priorities.

Suggested Citation

  • David D. Kim & Thomas A. Trikalinos & John B. Wong, 2019. "Leveraging Cumulative Network Meta-analysis and Value of Information Analysis to Understand the Evolving Value of Medical Research," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(2), pages 119-129, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:2:p:119-129
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18823008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X18823008
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X18823008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:39:y:2019:i:2:p:119-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.