Conflating marginal and conditional treatment effects: Comments on 'Assessing the performance of population adjustment methods for anchored indirect comparisons: A simulation study'

Abstract

In this commentary, we highlight the importance of: (1) carefully considering and clarifying whether a marginal or conditional treatment effect is of interest in a population-adjusted indirect treatment comparison; and (2) developing distinct methodologies for estimating the different measures of effect. The appropriateness of each methodology depends on the preferred target of inference.

arXiv comment6 pages, submitted to Statistics in Medicine. Response to `Assessing the performance of population adjustment methods for anchored indirect comparisons: A simulation study' by Phillippo, Dias, Ades and Welton, published in Statistics in Medicine (2020). Updated after Ph.D. proposal defense/transfer viva comments

Cited by in corpus (10)

• Methods for Population Adjustment with Limited Access to Individual Patient Data: A Review and Simulation Study
• Parametric G-computation for Compatible Indirect Treatment Comparisons with Limited Individual Patient Data
• Target estimands for population-adjusted indirect comparisons
• Transportability of model-based estimands in evidence synthesis
• Multilevel network meta-regression for general likelihoods: synthesis of individual and aggregate data with applications to survival analysis
• Two-stage matching-adjusted indirect comparison
• Effect modification in anchored indirect treatment comparisons: Comments on "Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons: Application to time-to-event data"
• Effect modification and non-collapsibility leads to conflicting treatment decisions: a review of marginal and conditional estimands and recommendations for decision-making
• On matching-adjusted indirect comparison and calibration estimation
• Marginalization of Regression-Adjusted Treatment Effects in Indirect Comparisons with Limited Patient-Level Data