Abstract

BackgroundNetwork meta-analysis consists of simultaneous analysis of both direct comparisons of interventions within randomized controlled trials and indirect comparisons across trials based on a common comparator. In this paper, we aimed to characterise the conceptual understanding and the rationale for the use of network meta-analysis in assessing drug efficacy.MethodsWe selected randomized controlled trials, assessing efficacy of antibiotics for the treatment of leptospirosis as a case study. A pairwise meta-analysis was conducted using a random effect model, assuming that different studies assessed different but related treatment effects. The analysis was then extended to a network meta-analysis, which consists of direct and indirect evidence in a network of antibiotics trials, using a suite of multivariate meta-analysis routines of STATA (mvmeta command). We also assessed an assumption of ‘consistency’ that estimates of treatment effects from direct and indirect evidence are in agreement.ResultsSeven randomised controlled trials were identified for this analysis. These RCTs assessed the efficacy of antibiotics such as penicillin, doxycycline and cephalosporin for the treatment of human leptospirosis. These studies made comparisons between antibiotics (i.e. an antibiotic versus alternative antibiotic) in the primary study and a placebo, except for cephalosporin. These studies were sufficient to allow the creation of a network for the network meta-analysis; a closed loop in which three comparator antibiotics were connected to each other through a polygon. The comparison of penicillin versus the placebo has the largest contribution to the entire network (31.8%). The assessment of rank probabilities indicated that penicillin presented the greatest likelihood of improving efficacy among the evaluated antibiotics for treating leptospirosis.ConclusionsFindings suggest that network meta-analysis, a meta-analysis comparing multiple treatments, is feasible and should be considered as better precision of effect estimates for decisions when several antibiotic options are available for the treatment of leptospirosis.

Highlights

  • Network meta-analysis consists of simultaneous analysis of both direct comparisons of interventions within randomized controlled trials and indirect comparisons across trials based on a common comparator

  • We found four randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared penicillin to a placebo [22,23,24,25], two RCTs comparing penicillin to a cephalosporin [2, 26], one RCT comparing doxycycline and a placebo [27], and further RCT comparing penicillin to doxycycline [2]

  • These seven RCTs [2, 22,23,24,25,26,27] were sufficient to allow the creation of a network for the network meta-analysis (NMA)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Network meta-analysis consists of simultaneous analysis of both direct comparisons of interventions within randomized controlled trials and indirect comparisons across trials based on a common comparator. Systematic reviews may include a quantitative data synthesis (i.e. meta-analysis), which is the statistical combination of results from ≥ 2 individual studies [1]. Naing et al BMC Infectious Diseases (2017) 17:29 single meta-analysis [3]. It expands the scope of a traditional (conventional) pairwise meta-analysis by analysing simultaneously both direct comparisons of interventions within RCTs and indirect comparisons across trials based on a common comparator [5,6,7]. The optimal treatment of leptospirosis remains a subject of debate, mainly due to the wide and biphasic clinical spectrum of the disease and the distinct pathogenesis in these two phases [13, 14]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call