Survival Analysis for Economic Evaluations Alongside Clinical Trials—Extrapolation with Patient-Level Data
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 22 January 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Medical Decision Making
- Vol. 33 (6), 743-754
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x12472398
Abstract
Background. In health technology assessments (HTAs) of interventions that affect survival, it is essential to accurately estimate the survival benefit associated with the new treatment. Generally, trial data must be extrapolated, and many models are available for this purpose. The choice of extrapolation model is critical because different models can lead to very different cost-effectiveness results. A failure to systematically justify the chosen model creates the possibility of bias and inconsistency between HTAs. Objective. To demonstrate the limitations and inconsistencies associated with the survival analysis component of HTAs and to propose a process guide that will help exclude these from future analyses. Methods. We reviewed the survival analysis component of 45 HTAs undertaken for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the cancer disease area. We drew upon our findings to identify common limitations and to develop a process guide. Results. The chosen survival models were not systematically justified in any of the HTAs reviewed. The range of models considered was usually insufficient, and the rationale for the chosen model was universally limited: In particular, the plausibility of the extrapolated portion of fitted survival curves was very rarely explicitly considered. Limitations. We do not seek to describe and review all methods available for performing survival analysis—several approaches exist that are not mentioned in this article. Instead we seek to analyze methods commonly used in HTAs and limitations associated with their application. Conclusions. Survival analysis has not been conducted systematically in HTAs. A systematic approach such as the one proposed here is required to reduce the possibility of bias in cost-effectiveness results and inconsistency between technology assessments.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Ends Justify the Mean: Outcome Measures for Estimating the Value of New Cancer TherapiesHealth Outcomes Research in Medicine, 2012
- Cautions Regarding the Fitting and Interpretation of Survival CurvesPharmacoEconomics, 2011
- Survival Time Outcomes in Randomized, Controlled Trials and Meta-Analyses: The Parallel Universes of Efficacy and Cost-EffectivenessValue in Health, 2011
- Network meta-analysis of survival data with fractional polynomialsBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2011
- Network meta‐analysis of parametric survival curvesResearch Synthesis Methods, 2010
- Methodological issues in the economic analysis of cancer treatmentsEuropean Journal of Cancer, 2006
- Bayesian evidence synthesis to extrapolate survival estimates in cost-effectiveness studiesStatistics in Medicine, 2005
- Incremental net benefit in randomized clinical trials with quality‐adjusted survivalStatistics in Medicine, 2003
- Flexible parametric proportional‐hazards and proportional‐odds models for censored survival data, with application to prognostic modelling and estimation of treatment effectsStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Incremental net benefit in randomized clinical trialsStatistics in Medicine, 2001