Meta-analysis of two studies in the presence of heterogeneity with applications in rare diseases

Abstract

Random-effects meta-analyses are used to combine evidence of treatment effects from multiple studies. Since treatment effects may vary across trials due to differences in study characteristics, heterogeneity in treatment effects between studies must be accounted for to achieve valid inference. The standard model for random-effects meta-analysis assumes approximately normal effect estimates and a normal random-effects model. However, standard methods based on this model ignore the uncertainty in estimating the between-trial heterogeneity. In the special setting of only two studies and in the presence of heterogeneity we investigate here alternatives such as the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method (HKSJ), the modified Knapp-Hartung method (mKH, a variation of the HKSJ method) and Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses with priors covering plausible heterogeneity values. The properties of these methods are assessed by applying them to five examples from various rare diseases and by a simulation study. Whereas the standard method based on normal quantiles has poor coverage, the HKSJ and mKH generally lead to very long, and therefore inconclusive, confidence intervals. The Bayesian intervals on the whole show satisfying properties and offer a reasonable compromise between these two extremes.

12 pages, 4 figures

References in corpus (3)

• Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman approach and its modification for random-effects meta-analysis with few studies
• Meta-analysis of few small studies in orphan diseases
• Interleukin-2 receptor antagonists for pediatric liver transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled studies

Cited by in corpus (16)

• Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis using the bayesmeta R package
• On weakly informative prior distributions for the heterogeneity parameter in Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis
• Likelihood-based meta-analysis with few studies: Empirical and simulation studies
• Dynamically borrowing strength from another study through shrinkage estimation
• Recent advances in methodology for clinical trials in small populations: the InSPiRe project
• Model averaging for robust extrapolation in evidence synthesis
• Using phase II data for the analysis of phase III studies: an application in rare diseases
• Summarizing empirical information on between-study heterogeneity for Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis
• Applying Meta-Analytic-Predictive Priors with the R Bayesian evidence synthesis tools
• Bounds for the weight of external data in shrinkage estimation
• Alternative to the application of PDG scale factors
• Contribution to the discussion of "When should meta-analysis avoid making hidden normality assumptions?": A Bayesian perspective
• A straightforward meta-analysis approach for oncology phase I dose-finding studies
• Investigating the heterogeneity of "study twins"
• A confidence interval robust to publication bias for random-effects meta-analysis of few studies
• Quantification of empirical determinacy: the impact of likelihood weighting on posterior location and spread in Bayesian meta-analysis estimated with JAGS and INLA