Drugs

, Volume 46, Issue 5, pp 805–818 | Cite as

Meta-Analysis

A Review of its Place in Therapeutic Decision Making
  • Milo Gibaldi
Review Article

Summary

The potential value of meta-analysis has captured the imagination of many investigators. Epidemiologists have, appropriately, greeted its broad application with considerable caution, yet practical matters, such as the need to consolidate and extract information from available data, have forced a more accepting approach.

Meta-analysis has been employed in many clinical settings to evaluate efficacy and safety of a variety of therapeutic interventions. It is likely that it will continue to have a role in extrapolating data from clinical trials for use in the clinic.

Keywords

Breast Cancer Fluoxetine Quinidine Streptokinase Flecainide 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altman LK. New method of analyzing health data stirs debate. New York Times, Aug 21, pp. B5, B9, 1990Google Scholar
  2. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Medical Association 268: 240–248, 1992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beasley CM Jr, Dornseif BE, Bosomworth JC, Sayler ME, Rampey AH Jr, et al. Fluoxetine and suicide: a meta-analysis of controlled trials of treatment for depression. British Medical Journal 303: 685–692, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bigger JR Jr, Fleiss JL, Kleiger R, Miller JP, Rolnitzky LM. Multicenter Post-Infarction Research Group. The relationships among ventricular arrhythmias, left ventricular dysfunction, and mortality in the two years after myocardial infarction. Circulation 69: 250–258, 1984Google Scholar
  5. Burroughs AK, Jenkins WJ, Sherlock S, Dunk A, Walt RP, et al. Controlled trial for the prevention of recurrent variceal haemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis. New England Journal of Medicine 309: 1539–1542, 1983PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) Investigators. Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 321: 1406–1412, 1989Google Scholar
  7. Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial II Investigators. Effect of the antiarrhythmic agent moricizine on survival after myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 327: 227–233,1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chalmers I, Hetherington J, Newdick M, Mutch L, Grant A, et al. The Oxford database of perinatal trials: developing a register of published reports of controlled trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 7: 306–325, 1986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chalmers TC, Matta RJ, Smith H Jr, Kunzler Am. Evidence favoring the use of anticoagulants in the hospital phase of acute myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 297: 1091–1096, 1977PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, et al. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Controlled Clinical Trials 2: 31–49, 1981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Colditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Hennekens CH, Rosner et al. Prospective study of estrogen replacement therapy and risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Journal of the American Medical Association 254: 2648–2653, 1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cook DJ, Laine LA, Guyatt GH, Raffin TA. Nosocomial pneumonia and the role of gastric pH. Chest 100: 7–13, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coplen SE, Antman EM, Berlin JA, Hewitt P, Chalmers TC. Efficacy and safety of quinidine therapy for maintenance of sinus rhythm after cardioversion. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Circulation 82: 1106–1116, 1990Google Scholar
  14. Cunningham FG, Lindheimer MD. Hypertension in pregnancy. New England Journal of Medicine 326: 927–932, 1992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dickersin K, Chann SS, Chalmers TC, Sacks HS, Smith H. Publication bias and clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 8: 343–353, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dickersin K, Meinert CL. Risk factors for publications bias: results of a follow-up study. Controlled Clinical Trials 11: 255, 1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dupont WD, Page DL. Therapy and breast cancer. Archives of Internal Medicine 151: 67–72, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fedorkow DM. Aspirin to prevent pregnancy-induced hypertension: a meta analysis. American College of Physicians’ Journal Club (Nov/Dec), p. 80, 1992Google Scholar
  19. Gallus AS. Overview of the management of thrombotic disorders. Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis 15: 99–110, 1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glass GV. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Education Research 5: 3–8, 1976Google Scholar
  21. Hayes PC, Davis JM, Lewis JA, Bouchier IAD. Meta-analysis of value of propranolol in prevention of variceal haemorrhage. Lancet 336: 153–156, 1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Haynes RB. Clinical review articles: should be as scientific as the articles they review. Editorial. British Medical Journal 304: 330–331, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hillner BE. Estrogen replacement and breast cancer: a metaanalysis. American College of Physicians’ Journal Club (May/June), p. 82, 1991Google Scholar
  24. Hommes DW, Bura A, Mazzolai L, Buller HR, ten Cate JW. Subcutaneous heparin compared with continuous intravenous heparin administration in the initial treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Annals Internal Medicine 116: 279–284, 1992Google Scholar
  25. Hubbard SM, Henney JE, DeVia VT. A computer database for information on cancer treatment. New England Journal of Medicine 316: 315–318, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hull RD, Raskob GE, Hirsh J, Jay RM, Leclerc JR, et al. Continuous intravenous heparin compared with intermittent subcutaneous heparin in the initial treatment of proximal-vein thrombosis. New England Journal of Medicine 315: 1109–1114, 1986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Imperiale TF, Petrulis AS. A meta-analysis of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of pregnancy-induced hypertensive disease. Journal of the American Medical Association 266: 261–265,1991Google Scholar
  28. Lau J, Antman EM, Jimenez-Silva J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, et al. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 327: 248–254, 1992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lebrec D, Corbic M, Nouel O, Benhamou P. Propranolol — a medical treatment for portal hypertension. Lancet 2: 180–182, 1980PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levy G. Publication bias: its implications for clinical pharmacology. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 52: 115–119, 1991Google Scholar
  31. Light RJ, Smith PV. Accumulating evidence: procedures for resolving contradictions among different research studies. Harvard Education Review 41: 429–471, 1971Google Scholar
  32. Lipid Research Clinics Program. The Lipid Research Clinics coronary primary prevention trials results. I. Reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease. Journal of the American Medical Association 251: 351–364, 1984Google Scholar
  33. Mann C Meta-analysis in the breech. Science 249: 476–480, 1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Miettinen Huttrunen JK, Naukkarinen V. Multifactorial primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in middle-aged men. Risk factor changes, incidence, and mortality. Journal of the American Medical Association 254: 2097–2102, 1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Morganroth J, Goin JE. Quinidine-related mortality in the short-to-medium term treatment of ventricular arrhythmias. A meta-analysis. Circulation 84: 1977–1983, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mulrow CD. The medical review article: state of the science. Annals of Internal Medicine 106: 485–488, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Guidelines for reading literature reviews. Canadian Medical Association Journal 138: 697–703, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Peto R. Why do we need systematic overviews of randomized trials? Statistics in Medicine 6: 233–240, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Philbrick JT. Subcutaneous versus intravenous heparin for thrombosis: a meta-analysis. American College of Physicians’ Journal Club (May/June), p. 76, 1992Google Scholar
  40. Prendiville W, Elbourne D, Chalmers I. The effects of routine oxytocic administration in the management of the third stage of labour: an overview of the evidence from controlled trials. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 95: 3–16, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ramsay LE, Yeo WW, Jackson PR. Dietary reduction of serum cholesterol concentration: time to think again. British Medical Journal 303: 953–957, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ravnskov U. Cholesterol lowering trials in coronary heart disease: frequency of citation and outcome. British Medical Journal 305: 15–19, 1992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Burke VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. New England Journal of Medicine 316: 450–455, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Spector TD, Thompson SG. The potential and limitations of metaanalysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 45: 89–92,1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steinberg KK, Thacker SB, Smith J, Stroup DF, Zack MM, et al. A meta-analysis of the effect of estrogen replacement therapy on the risk of breast cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association 265: 1985–1990, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Thompson SG, Pocock SJ. Can meta-analyses be trusted? Lancet 338: 1127–1130, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tyroler HA. Overview of clinical trials of cholesterol lowering in relationship to epidemiologic studies. American Journal of Medicine 87 (Suppl. 4A): 14–19S, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Walker AM, Gregg GS, Zawel J, Lanes SF. Treatment efficacy of cyclosporine in renal transplantation. A quantitative review of all randomized clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Research and Pharmacoepidemiology 4: 161–173, 1990Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Milo Gibaldi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dean, School of Pharmacy, SC-69University of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations