Head-to-head drug comparisons in multiple sclerosis
- 29 October 2019
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Neurology
- Vol. 93 (18), 793-809
- https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000008319
Abstract
Disease-modifying drugs are changing the natural history of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, currently available clinical trial data are insufficient to develop accurate personalized treatment algorithms to assign the best possible treatment to each person with MS according to disease features, treatment history, and comorbidities. Such accurate algorithms would require the presence of numerous head-to-head trials of long duration, which is virtually impossible, given the economic costs, required time, and difficulties with attrition. Thus, efforts are being made to compare relative treatment efficacy through observational designs, using large multicenter prospective cohorts or “big MS data,” and network meta-analyses. Although such studies can yield useful information, they are liable to biases and their results should be confirmed in other study populations, including smaller, single-center cohorts, where some of these biases can be minimized. In this View article, we analyze the potential benefits and biases of all these strategies alternative to head-to-head trials in MS. Finally, we propose the combination of all these types of studies to obtain reliable head-to-head drug comparisons in the absence of randomized designs.This publication has 43 references indexed in Scilit:
- Switch to natalizumab versus fingolimod in active relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosisAnnals of Neurology, 2014
- Frequentist Approach for Detecting Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis Pair-Wise Comparisons: Enhanced Q-Test Use By Using I2 and H2 StatisticsValue in Health, 2014
- Evaluation of Methods for the Inclusion of Real World Evidence in Network Meta-Analysis – A Case Study in Multiple SclerosisValue in Health, 2014
- Methods for Constructing and Assessing Propensity ScoresHealth Services Research, 2014
- Industry sponsorship and research outcomePublished by Wiley ,2012
- Using the Propensity Score Method to Estimate Causal EffectsOrganizational Research Methods, 2012
- Sensitivity Analysis in Observational StudiesPublished by Wiley ,2005
- Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Constructing a Control Group Using Multivariate Matched Sampling Methods That Incorporate the Propensity ScoreThe American Statistician, 1985
- The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effectsBiometrika, 1983