Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Network meta analysis of published summary survival data #7

Closed
prabpharm opened this issue Jan 12, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Network meta analysis of published summary survival data #7

prabpharm opened this issue Jan 12, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@prabpharm
Copy link

Dear Guido,
I am trying to run an NMA using netmeta, where effect size is hazard ratio (confidence interval) using the following code:
nma1 <- netmeta(TE = lnHR, seTE = lnSE, treat1 = treat1, treat2 = treat2, studlab = study, sm = "HR")
As you highlighted in one of the issues discussed earlier https://github.com/guido-s/netmeta/issues/4#issue-399944434, I have used log of hazard ratio (lnHR) and its SE (lnSE). I imputed these variables separately and added to my dataframe. My question is, does the netmeta function has any argument/other mechanism to calculate logs in a single line of code, or for calculating SE from CIs? I tried to find the solution in the package documentation but failed (maybe due to my limited understanding).

My second question is not about the netmeta package, but about NMA is general, I am not sure if should ask you about this here. I am pooling only two studies (and two treatment comparisons) in this NMA. Does that make any sense, pooling just two comparisons?

Many thanks for responding, and apologies if I had failed to comply to etiquette of this platform, as this is my first step here, I am no programmer or statistician, just trying to learn a bit.

Regards,
Prabhakar

@guido-s
Copy link
Owner

guido-s commented Jan 13, 2020

Dear Prabhakar,

You can use R function metagen to calculate the standard error of the log hazard ratio from the confidence interval:

study <- c("FCG on CLL 1996", "Leporrier 2001", "Rai 2000", "Robak 2000")
HR <- c(0.55, 0.92, 0.79, 1.18)
lower.HR <- c(0.28, 0.79, 0.59, 0.64)
upper.HR <- c(1.09, 1.08, 1.05, 2.17)
# Input must be log hazard ratios, not hazard ratios
m <- metagen(log(HR), lower = log(lower.HR), upper = log(upper.HR),
             studlab = study, sm = "HR")
# Log hazard ratio
m$TE
# Standard error of log hazard ratio
m$seTE

print(metagen(m$TE, m$seTE, sm = "HR", studlab = m$studlab), digits = 2)

Concerning your second question, it is possible to conduct a network meta-analysis with only two studies (e.g., comparing A vs Placebo and B vs Placebo). However, there is no possibility to check whether the treatment comparisons are consistent as you only have indirect evidence for the comparison A vs B.

Best wishes, Guido

@guido-s guido-s closed this as completed Jan 13, 2020
@prabpharm
Copy link
Author

Thank you so much for answering! Really appreciate you taking time and helping.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants