Cancer, meta-analysis and reporting biases: the case of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents.

Reporting and publication bias is a well-known problem in meta-analysis and healthcare research. In 2002 we conducted a meta-analysis on the effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) on overall survival in cancer patients, which suggested some evidence for improved survival in patients receiving ESAs compared with controls. However, a meta-analysis of individual patient data conducted several years later showed the opposite of our first meta-analysis, that is, evidence for increased on-study mortality and reduced overall survival in cancer patients receiving ESAs. We aimed to determine whether the results of our first meta-analysis could have been affected by publication and reporting biases and, if so, whether timely access to clinical study reports and individual patient data could have prevented this. We conducted a hypothetical meta-analysis for overall survival including all studies and study data that could have been available in 2002, at the time when we conducted our first meta-analysis. Compared with our original meta-analysis, which suggested an overall survival benefit for cancer patients receiving ESAs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67‒0.99], our hypothetical meta-analysis based on the results of all studies conducted at the time of the first analysis did not show evidence for a beneficial effect of ESAs on overall survival (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83‒1.12). Thus we have to conclude that our first meta-analysis showed misleading overall survival benefits due to publication and reporting biases, which could have been prevented by timely access to clinical study reports and individual patient data. Unrestricted access to clinical study protocols including amendments, clinical study reports and individual patient data is needed to ensure timely detection of both beneficial and harmful effects of healthcare interventions.

Testing the allegiance bias hypothesis: a meta-analysis

This meta-analysis investigated whether the association between researcher allegiance (RA) and the relative effect of two psychotherapies can be explained through the methodological weaknesses of the treatment comparisons. Seventy-nine comparisons of psychotherapies for depression or posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) were included. Methodological quality (MQ) was investigated as both a moderator and a mediator of the RA-outcome association. MQ included balanced nonspecific factors, balanced specific factors, conceptual quality, patients-per-therapist ratio, randomization to conditions and outcome assessment. The RA-outcome association was stronger when the MQ was low, suggesting a buffering effect of MQ. In addition, differences in the conceptual quality of treatments mediated the effect of RA on outcome. The results support the view that RA acts as a bias in treatment comparisons.

Efficacy of experimental treatments compared with standard treatments in non-inferiority trials: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background There is concern that non-inferiority trials might be deliberately designed to conceal that a new treatment is less effective than a standard treatment. In order to test this hypothesis we performed a meta-analysis of non-inferiority trials to assess the average effect of experimental treatments compared with standard treatments. Methods One hundred and seventy non-inferiority treatment trials published in 121 core clinical journals were included. The trials were identified through a search of PubMed (1991 to 20 February 2009). Combined relative risk (RR) from meta-analysis comparing experimental with standard treatments was the main outcome measure. Results The 170 trials contributed a total of 175 independent comparisons of experimental with standard treatments. The combined RR for all 175 comparisons was 0.994 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.978–1.010] using a random-effects model and 1.002 (95% CI 0.996–1.008) using a fixed-effects model. Of the 175 comparisons, experimental treatment was considered to be non-inferior in 130 (74%). The combined RR for these 130 comparisons was 0.995 (95% CI 0.983–1.006) and the point estimate favoured the experimental treatment in 58% (n = 76) and standard treatment in 42% (n = 54). The median non-inferiority margin (RR) pre-specified by trialists was 1.31 [inter-quartile range (IQR) 1.18–1.59]. Conclusion In this meta-analysis of non-inferiority trials the average RR comparing experimental with standard treatments was close to 1. The experimental treatments that gain a verdict of non-inferiority in published trials do not appear to be systematically less effective than the standard treatments. Importantly, publication bias and bias in the design and reporting of the studies cannot be ruled out and may have skewed the study results in favour of the experimental treatments. Further studies are required to examine the importance of such bias.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with anthelmintic resistance in sheep.

BACKGROUND Anthelmintic drugs have been widely used in sheep as a cost-effective means for gastro-intestinal nematode (GIN) control. However, growing anthelmintic resistance (AHR) has created a compelling need to identify evidence-based management recommendations that reduce the risk of further development and impact of AHR. OBJECTIVE To identify, critically assess, and synthesize available data from primary research on factors associated with AHR in sheep. METHODS Publications reporting original observational or experimental research on selected factors associated with AHR in sheep GINs and published after 1974, were identified through two processes. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Agricola, CAB) and Web of Science (a collection of databases) were searched for potentially relevant publications. Additional publications were identified through consultation with experts, manual search of references of included publications and conference proceedings, and information solicited from small ruminant practitioner list-serves. Two independent investigators screened abstracts for relevance. Relevant publications were assessed for risk of systematic bias. Where sufficient data were available, random-effects Meta-Analyses (MAs) were performed to estimate the pooled Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) of AHR for factors reported in ≥2 publications. RESULTS Of the 1712 abstracts screened for eligibility, 131 were deemed relevant for full publication review. Thirty publications describing 25 individual studies (15 observational studies, 7 challenge trials, and 3 controlled trials) were included in the qualitative synthesis and assessed for systematic bias. Unclear (i.e. not reported, or unable to assess) or high risk of selection bias and confounding bias was found in 93% (14/15) and 60% (9/15) of the observational studies, respectively, while unclear risk of selection bias was identified in all of the trials. Ten independent studies were included in the quantitative synthesis, and MAs were performed for five factors. Only high frequency of treatment was a significant risk factor (OR=4.39; 95% CI=1.59, 12.14), while the remaining 4 variables were marginally significant: mixed-species grazing (OR=1.63; 95% CI=0.66, 4.07); flock size (OR=1.02; 95% CI=0.97, 1.07); use of long-acting drug formulations (OR=2.85; 95% CI=0.79, 10.24); and drench-and-shift pasture management (OR=4.08; 95% CI=0.75, 22.16). CONCLUSIONS While there is abundant literature on the topic of AHR in sheep GINs, few studies have explicitly investigated the association between putative risk or protective factors and AHR. Consequently, several of the current recommendations on parasite management are not evidence-based. Moreover, many of the studies included in this review had a high or unclear risk of systematic bias, highlighting the need to improve study design and/or reporting of future research carried out in this field.

Non-selective beta-blockers may reduce risk of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND & AIMS Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) are used in patients with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices. Experimental data suggest that NSBB inhibit angiogenesis and reduce bacterial translocation, which may prevent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We therefore assessed the effect of NSBB on HCC by performing a systematic review with meta-analyses of randomized trials. METHODS Electronic and manual searches were combined. Authors were contacted for unpublished data. Included trials assessed NSBB for patients with cirrhosis; the control group could receive any other intervention than NSBB. Fixed and random effects meta-analyses were performed with I(2) as a measure of heterogeneity. Subgroup, sensitivity, regression and sequential analyses were performed to evaluate heterogeneity, bias and the robustness of the results after adjusting for multiple testing. RESULTS Twenty-three randomized trials on 2618 patients with cirrhosis were included, of which 12 reported HCC incidence and 23 reported HCC mortality. The mean duration of follow-up was 26 months (range 8-82). In total, 47 of 694 patients randomized to NSBB developed HCC vs 65 of 697 controls (risk difference -0.026; 95% CI-0.052 to -0.001; number needed to treat 38 patients). There was no heterogeneity (I(2) = 7%) or evidence of small study effects (Eggers P = 0.402). The result was not confirmed in sequential analysis, which suggested that 3719 patients were needed to achieve the required information size. NSBB did not reduce HCC-related mortality (RD -0.011; 95% CI -0.040 to 0.017). CONCLUSIONS Non-selective beta-blockers may prevent HCC in patients with cirrhosis.

Psychological therapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Panic disorder is characterised by the presence of recurrent unexpected panic attacks, discrete periods of fear or anxiety that have a rapid onset and include symptoms such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating and shaking. Panic disorder is common in the general population, with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. A previous Cochrane meta-analysis suggested that psychological therapy (either alone or combined with pharmacotherapy) can be chosen as a first-line treatment for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. However, it is not yet clear whether certain psychological therapies can be considered superior to others. In order to answer this question, in this review we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA), in which we compared eight different forms of psychological therapy and three forms of a control condition. OBJECTIVES To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of different psychological therapies and different control conditions for panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in adults. SEARCH METHODS We conducted the main searches in the CCDANCTR electronic databases (studies and references registers), all years to 16 March 2015. We conducted complementary searches in PubMed and trials registries. Supplementary searches included reference lists of included studies, citation indexes, personal communication to the authors of all included studies and grey literature searches in OpenSIGLE. We applied no restrictions on date, language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on adults with a formal diagnosis of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. We considered the following psychological therapies: psychoeducation (PE), supportive psychotherapy (SP), physiological therapies (PT), behaviour therapy (BT), cognitive therapy (CT), cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), third-wave CBT (3W) and psychodynamic therapies (PD). We included both individual and group formats. Therapies had to be administered face-to-face. The comparator interventions considered for this review were: no treatment (NT), wait list (WL) and attention/psychological placebo (APP). For this review we considered four short-term (ST) outcomes (ST-remission, ST-response, ST-dropouts, ST-improvement on a continuous scale) and one long-term (LT) outcome (LT-remission/response). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS As a first step, we conducted a systematic search of all relevant papers according to the inclusion criteria. For each outcome, we then constructed a treatment network in order to clarify the extent to which each type of therapy and each comparison had been investigated in the available literature. Then, for each available comparison, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis. Subsequently, we performed a network meta-analysis in order to synthesise the available direct evidence with indirect evidence, and to obtain an overall effect size estimate for each possible pair of therapies in the network. Finally, we calculated a probabilistic ranking of the different psychological therapies and control conditions for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS We identified 1432 references; after screening, we included 60 studies in the final qualitative analyses. Among these, 54 (including 3021 patients) were also included in the quantitative analyses. With respect to the analyses for the first of our primary outcomes, (short-term remission), the most studied of the included psychological therapies was CBT (32 studies), followed by BT (12 studies), PT (10 studies), CT (three studies), SP (three studies) and PD (two studies).The quality of the evidence for the entire network was found to be low for all outcomes. The quality of the evidence for CBT vs NT, CBT vs SP and CBT vs PD was low to very low, depending on the outcome. The majority of the included studies were at unclear risk of bias with regard to the randomisation process. We found almost half of the included studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and detection bias. We also found selective outcome reporting bias to be present and we strongly suspected publication bias. Finally, we found almost half of the included studies to be at high risk of researcher allegiance bias.Overall the networks appeared to be well connected, but were generally underpowered to detect any important disagreement between direct and indirect evidence. The results showed the superiority of psychological therapies over the WL condition, although this finding was amplified by evident small study effects (SSE). The NMAs for ST-remission, ST-response and ST-improvement on a continuous scale showed well-replicated evidence in favour of CBT, as well as some sparse but relevant evidence in favour of PD and SP, over other therapies. In terms of ST-dropouts, PD and 3W showed better tolerability over other psychological therapies in the short term. In the long term, CBT and PD showed the highest level of remission/response, suggesting that the effects of these two treatments may be more stable with respect to other psychological therapies. However, all the mentioned differences among active treatments must be interpreted while taking into account that in most cases the effect sizes were small and/or results were imprecise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is no high-quality, unequivocal evidence to support one psychological therapy over the others for the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults. However, the results show that CBT - the most extensively studied among the included psychological therapies - was often superior to other therapies, although the effect size was small and the level of precision was often insufficient or clinically irrelevant. In the only two studies available that explored PD, this treatment showed promising results, although further research is needed in order to better explore the relative efficacy of PD with respect to CBT. Furthermore, PD appeared to be the best tolerated (in terms of ST-dropouts) among psychological treatments. Unexpectedly, we found some evidence in support of the possible viability of non-specific supportive psychotherapy for the treatment of panic disorder; however, the results concerning SP should be interpreted cautiously because of the sparsity of evidence regarding this treatment and, as in the case of PD, further research is needed to explore this issue. Behaviour therapy did not appear to be a valid alternative to CBT as a first-line treatment for patients with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia.

Meta-analysis and dose-response metaregression: circulating insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) and mortality

Context: IGF-I plays a central role in metabolism and growth regulation. High IGF-I levels are associated with increased cancer risk and low IGF-I levels with increased risk for cardiovascular disease. Objective: Our objective was to determine the relationship between circulating IGF-I levels and mortality in the general population using random-effects meta-analysis and dose-response metaregression. Data Sources: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from 1985 to September 2010 to identify relevant studies. Study Selection: Population-based cohort studies and (nested) case-control studies reporting on the relation between circulating IGF-I and mortality were assessed for eligibility. Data Extraction: Data extraction was performed by two investigators independently, using a standardized data extraction sheet. Data Synthesis: Twelve studies, with 14,906 participants, were included. Overall, risk of bias was limited. Mortality in subjects with low or high IGF-I levels was compared with mid-centile reference categories. All-cause mortality was increased in subjects with low as well as high IGF-I, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.27 (95% CI = 1.08–1.49) and HR of 1.18 (95% CI = 1.04–1.34), respectively. Dose-response metaregression showed a U-shaped relation of IGF-I and all-cause mortality (P = 0.003). The predicted HR for the increase in mortality comparing the 10th IGF-I with the 50th percentile was 1.56 (95% CI = 1.31–1.86); the predicted HR comparing the 90th with the 50th percentile was 1.29 (95% CI = 1.06–1.58). A U-shaped relationship was present for both cancer mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Conclusions: Both low and high IGF-I concentrations are associated with increased mortality in the general population.

Meta-analysis of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in patients with depression and coronary heart disease

The occurrence of depression in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) substantially increases the likelihood of a poorer cardiovascular prognosis. Although antidepressants are generally effective in decreasing depression, their use in patients with CHD is controversial. We carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the health effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo or no antidepressants in patients with CHD and depression. Observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trial Register and other trial registries, and references of relevant articles. Primary outcomes were readmission for CHD (including myocardial infarction, unstable angina, and stroke) and all-cause mortality; the secondary outcome was severity of depression symptoms. Seven articles on 6 RCTs involving 2,461 participants were included. One study incorrectly randomized participants, and another was a reanalysis of RCT data. These were considered observational and analyzed separately. When only properly randomized trials were considered (n = 734 patients), patients on SSRIs showed no significant differences in mortality (risk ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 2.01) or CHD readmission rates (0.74, 0.44 to 1.23) compared to controls. Conversely, when all studies were included, SSRI use was associated with a significant decrease in CHD readmission (0.63, 0.46 to 0.86) and mortality rates (0.56, 0.35 to 0.88). A significantly greater improvement in depression symptoms was always apparent in patients on SSRIs with all selected indicators. In conclusion, in patients with CHD and depression, SSRI medication decreases depression symptoms and may improve CHD prognosis.

Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations

Meta-analysis, the statistical combination of results from several studies to produce a single estimate of a treatment effect or size of an association, continues to attract controversy. We illustrate and discuss the promises and limitations of meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of clinical trials can prevent delays in the introduction of effective treatments or lead to the timely identification of adverse effects. However, meta-analyses are liable to numerous biases, both at the level of the individual study and the selection of studies for inclusion in meta-analysis. The biases and confounding factors that threaten the validity of individual studies will also affect meta-analyses of observational studies. We argue that meta-analyses should only be performed within the framework of systematic reviews that have been prepared using methods that minimize bias and address the combinability of studies.

Subclinical thyroid dysfunction and the risk for fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Data on the association between subclinical thyroid dysfunction and fractures conflict. PURPOSE To assess the risk for hip and nonspine fractures associated with subclinical thyroid dysfunction among prospective cohorts. DATA SOURCES Search of MEDLINE and EMBASE (1946 to 16 March 2014) and reference lists of retrieved articles without language restriction. STUDY SELECTION Two physicians screened and identified prospective cohorts that measured thyroid function and followed participants to assess fracture outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION One reviewer extracted data using a standardized protocol, and another verified data. Both reviewers independently assessed methodological quality of the studies. DATA SYNTHESIS The 7 population-based cohorts of heterogeneous quality included 50,245 participants with 1966 hip and 3281 nonspine fractures. In random-effects models that included the 5 higher-quality studies, the pooled adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of participants with subclinical hyperthyroidism versus euthyrodism were 1.38 (95% CI, 0.92 to 2.07) for hip fractures and 1.20 (CI, 0.83 to 1.72) for nonspine fractures without statistical heterogeneity (P = 0.82 and 0.52, respectively; I2= 0%). Pooled estimates for the 7 cohorts were 1.26 (CI, 0.96 to 1.65) for hip fractures and 1.16 (CI, 0.95 to 1.42) for nonspine fractures. When thyroxine recipients were excluded, the HRs for participants with subclinical hyperthyroidism were 2.16 (CI, 0.87 to 5.37) for hip fractures and 1.43 (CI, 0.73 to 2.78) for nonspine fractures. For participants with subclinical hypothyroidism, HRs from higher-quality studies were 1.12 (CI, 0.83 to 1.51) for hip fractures and 1.04 (CI, 0.76 to 1.42) for nonspine fractures (P for heterogeneity = 0.69 and 0.88, respectively; I2 = 0%). LIMITATIONS Selective reporting cannot be excluded. Adjustment for potential common confounders varied and was not adequately done across all studies. CONCLUSION Subclinical hyperthyroidism might be associated with an increased risk for hip and nonspine fractures, but additional large, high-quality studies are needed. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Swiss National Science Foundation.

Body mass index, hormone replacement therapy, and endometrial cancer risk: a meta-analysis

Background: Body mass index (BMI) is a risk factor for endometrial cancer. We quantified the risk and investigated whether the association differed by use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), menopausal status, and histologic type. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (1966 to December 2009) to identify prospective studies of BMI and incident endometrial cancer. We did random-effects meta-analyses, meta-regressions, and generalized least square regressions for trend estimations assuming linear, and piecewise linear, relationships. Results: Twenty-four studies (17,710 cases) were analyzed; 9 studies contributed to analyses by HRT, menopausal status, or histologic type, all published since 2003. In the linear model, the overall risk ratio (RR) per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was 1.60 (95% CI, 1.52–1.68), P < 0.0001. In the piecewise model, RRs compared with a normal BMI were 1.22 (1.19–1.24), 2.09 (1.94–2.26), 4.36 (3.75–5.10), and 9.11 (7.26–11.51) for BMIs of 27, 32, 37, and 42 kg/m2, respectively. The association was stronger in never HRT users than in ever users: RRs were 1.90 (1.57–2.31) and 1.18 (95% CI, 1.06–1.31) with P for interaction ¼ 0.003. In the piecewise model, the RR in never users was 20.70 (8.28–51.84) at BMI 42 kg/m2, compared with never users at normal BMI. The association was not affected by menopausal status (P ¼ 0.34) or histologic type (P ¼ 0.26). Conclusions: HRT use modifies the BMI-endometrial cancer risk association. Impact: These findings support the hypothesis that hyperestrogenia is an important mechanism underlying the BMI-endometrial cancer association, whilst the presence of residual risk in HRT users points to the role of additional systems. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(12); 3119–30.

Domains of physical activity and all-cause mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies

Background The dose–response relation between physical activity and all-cause mortality is not well defined at present. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association with all-cause mortality of different domains of physical activity and of defined increases in physical activity and energy expenditure. Methods MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to September 2010 for cohort studies examining all-cause mortality across different domains and levels of physical activity in adult general populations. We estimated combined risk ratios (RRs) associated with defined increments and recommended levels, using random-effects meta-analysis and dose–response meta-regression models. Results Data from 80 studies with 1 338 143 participants (118 121 deaths) were included. Combined RRs comparing highest with lowest activity levels were 0.65 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60–0.71] for total activity, 0.74 (95% CI 0.70–0.77) for leisure activity, 0.64 (95% CI 0.55–0.75) for activities of daily living and 0.83 (95% CI 0.71–0.97) for occupational activity. RRs per 1-h increment per week were 0.91 (95% CI 0.87–0.94) for vigorous exercise and 0.96 (95% CI 0.93–0.98) for moderate-intensity activities of daily living. RRs corresponding to 150 and 300 min/week of moderate to vigorous activity were 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.92) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.65–0.85), respectively. Mortality reductions were more pronounced in women. Conclusion Higher levels of total and domain-specific physical activity were associated with reduced all-cause mortality. Risk reduction per unit of time increase was largest for vigorous exercise. Moderate-intensity activities of daily living were to a lesser extent beneficial in reducing mortality.

Role of hepatitis C virus genotype 3 in liver fibrosis progression - a systematic review and meta-analysis

The progression of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C has long been considered to be independent from viral genotypes. However, recent studies suggest an association between Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 3 and accelerated liver disease progression. We completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the association between HCV genotypes and fibrosis progression. PubMed, Embase and ISI Web of Knowledge databases were searched for cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies on treatment-naïve HCV-infected adults in which liver fibrosis progression rate (FPR) was assessed by the ratio of fibrosis stage in one single biopsy to the duration of infection (single-biopsy studies) or from the change in fibrosis stage between two biopsies (paired biopsies studies). A random effect model was used to derive FPR among different HCV genotypes. Eight single-biopsy studies (3182 patients, mean/median duration of infection ranging from 9 to 21 years) and eight paired biopsies studies (mean interval between biopsies 2-12 years) met the selection criteria. The odds ratio for the association of genotype 3 with accelerated fibrosis progression was 1.52 (95% CI 1.12-2.07, P = 0.007) in single-biopsy studies and 1.37 (95% CI 0.87-2.17, P = 0.17) in paired biopsy studies. In conclusion, viral genotype 3 was associated with faster fibrosis progression in single-biopsy studies. This observation may have important consequences on the clinical management of genotype 3-infected patients. The association was not significant in paired biopsies studies, although the latter may be limited by important indication bias, short observation time and small sample size.