Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai Ospedale S. Giovanni Battista “Molinette”

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
STENT THROMBOSIS: WHICH IMPACT IN REAL CLINICAL PRACTICE? Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai Divisione di Cardiologia, Università di Torino Ospedale S. Giovanni Battista.
Advertisements

Failures of meta-analyses: the evidence against the evidences Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD Division of Cardiology,
ODAC May 3, Subgroup Analyses in Clinical Trials Stephen L George, PhD Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Duke University Medical Center.
Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai Division of Cardiology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Advanced Statistics for Interventional Cardiologists.
CURRENT PUBLICATION TRENDS IN INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai Division of Cardiology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD Sapienza University of Rome, Latina, Italy Stent thrombosis: the meta-analytic.
Evidence Based Medicine Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Ross Lawrenson.
8 February 2012, 12:30-13:10 A journey into bioclinical evidence: from bench... to bedside... to population Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai
A Systematic Review On The Hazards Of Aspirin Discontinuation Among Patients With Or At Risk For Coronary Artery Disease Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai Hemodynamics.
Stent thrombosis: evidence from a network meta-analysis Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai, MD Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies.
Elective Stenting versus Balloon Angioplasty with Bail-out Stenting for Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: Evidence from a Meta-analysis of Randomized.
Tips and tricks for performing standard meta-regression analysis with SPSS Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine,
Conducting and Interpreting Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses July 12, 2007.
Clinical Writing for Interventional Cardiologists.
Primer on Statistics for Interventional Cardiologists Giuseppe Sangiorgi, MD Pierfrancesco Agostoni, MD Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD.
EBM Conference (Day 2). Funding Bias “He who pays, Calls the Tune” Some Facts (& Myths) Is industry research more likely to be published No Is industry.
1 HIGH CLOPIDOGREL LOADING DOSE IS SUPERIOR TO A STANDARD 300 MG REGIMEN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION: EVIDENCE FROM A META-ANALYSIS.
Module 3 Finding the Evidence: Pre-appraised Literature.
Sifting through the evidence Sarah Fradsham. Types of Evidence Primary Literature Observational studies Case Report Case Series Case Control Study Cohort.
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :呂宥達 Date : 2005/10/27.
Why are drug-eluting stents safer than bare-metal stents? Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai, MD Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy METCARDIO,
1 Lecture 10: Meta-analysis of intervention studies Introduction to meta-analysis Selection of studies Abstraction of information Quality scores Methods.
Systematic Synthesis of the Literature: Introduction to Meta-analysis Linda N. Meurer, MD, MPH Department of Family and Community Medicine.
PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON ANTI- THROMBOTIC TREATMENT IN PATIENTS TREATED WITH DRUG-ELUTING STENTS Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai Ospedale S. Giovanni Battista.
Primer on Statistics for Interventional Cardiologists Giuseppe Sangiorgi, MD Pierfrancesco Agostoni, MD Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD.
Drug-eluting stent meta-analyses & Long-term follow-up of high-risk subsets: Reconciling the evidence DES e BMS: riflessioni e pensieri 23 febbraio 2007,
1 Superiority Of A Simple Stenting Strategy For Coronary Bifurcation Lesions In The Drug-Eluting Stent Era: Evidence From A Meta-Analysis Of 1141 Patients.
1 Lecture 10: Meta-analysis of intervention studies Introduction to meta-analysis Selection of studies Abstraction of information Quality scores Methods.
Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai University of Turin, Turin, Italy METCARDIO, Turin, Italy BMS & Sanofi Aventis Sponsored.
Is there any role for intravascular ultrasound in bifurcation lesions? Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
4 th European Bifurcation Club September PRAGUE A comprehensive meta- analysis on drug-eluting stenting for unprotected left main disease.
Drug-Eluting Stents in Challenging Lesions: Randomized Trials and Registries.
Columbia / CRF DES vs. BMS Meta-Analysis Kirtane et al, Circ 2009;119:
NURS3030H NURSING RESEARCH IN PRACTICE MODULE 7 ‘Systematic Reviews’’
Benefits and Pitfalls of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
The Research Design Continuum
Systematic Review Systematic review
Primer on Adjusted Indirect Comparison Meta-Analyses
Supplementary Table 1. PRISMA checklist
Second Generation DES Associated with Less Late and Very Late Stent Thrombosis Compared to First Generation DES Donald E. Cutlip, MD Beth Israel Deaconess.
Chapter 7 The Hierarchy of Evidence
STROBE Statement revision
Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai
Meta-Analysis: Synthesizing the evidence
Pilot Studies: What we need to know
Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai
Diabetes mellitus in patients undergoing percutaneous drug-eluting stent implantation: short and long-term results Claudio Moretti, M.D. Division of Cardiology,
Meta-Analysis: Synthesizing evidence
Background There is ongoing debate to identify the most effective drug-eluting stent between the two currently most used devices (ie, sirolimus- [SES]
Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai University of Turin, Turin, Italy
Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai, MD
AN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE META-ANALYSIS ON 1,274 PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS DRUG-ELUTING STENTING FOR UNPROTECTED LEFT MAIN CORONARY ARTERY.
P. Omedé,1 A. Abbate,4 G. P. Trevi,1 and I. Sheiban1
ZEUS Trial design: Patients who were deemed uncertain DES candidates due to bleeding, thrombotic, or restenosis risk were randomized to receive either.
What to expect? Core modules Introduction
Incidence and management of restenosis after treatment of unprotected left main disease with drug-eluting stents: 70 restenotic cases from a cohort of.
PREDICTORS OF ADVERSE EVENTS IN PATIENTS WITH UNPROTECTED LEFT MAIN DISEASE TREATED WITH DRUG-ELUTING STENTS: EVIDENCE FROM A COLLABORATIVE META-REGRESSION.
Late Thrombosis in Drug Eluting Stents (DES)
EAST GRADE course 2019 Introduction to Meta-Analysis
BENEFITS OF CLOPIDOGREL IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING CORONARY STENTING SIGNIFICANTLY DEPEND ON LOADING DOSE: EVIDENCE FROM A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-REGRESSION.
Single Versus Multiple Vessel Stenting In Patients With St-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From A 30,886-Patient Meta-Analysis Giuseppe Biondi.
ORAL CILOSTAZOL TREATMENT PREVENTS RESTENOSIS AND MAJOR ADVERSE CLINICAL EVENTS AFTER DRUG-ELUTING STENT IMPLANTATION: EVIDENCE FROM A META-ANALYSIS G.
What are systematic reviews and why do we need them?
Comparison of radial versus femoral access in patients undergoing invasive management for acute coronary syndromes: evidence from a systematic review and.
Is Prasugrel Superior To Ticagrelor For The Treatment Of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes? Evidence From A 32,893-Patient Adjusted Indirect Comparison.
What is a review? An article which looks at a question or subject and seeks to summarise and bring together evidence on a health topic. Ask What is a review?
Meta-analysis, systematic reviews and research syntheses
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis -Part 2-
Introduction to Systematic Reviews
Presentation transcript:

An Overview of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stents: the Meta-analytic Approach Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai Ospedale S. Giovanni Battista “Molinette” Università di Torino Convegno Regionale Piemonte “Aggiornamenti in tema di valvulopatie, resincronizzazione e malattia coronarica” - Torino, 14 Novembre 2007 (h 16.30-16.50)

Learning goals Why such a fuzz on meta-analyses? What is a meta-analysis? Are meta-analyses useful? How can I appraise the internal and external validity of a meta-analysis? What are the meta-analysis results on drug-eluting stents?

Learning goals Why such a fuzz on meta-analyses? What is a meta-analysis? Are meta-analyses useful? How can I appraise the internal and external validity of a meta-analysis? What are the meta-analysis results on drug-eluting stents?

Do you remember 2005? The rosy future… Buzzword = ?

Do you remember 2005? The rosy future… Buzzword = Late loss

Do you remember 2005? The rosy future…

Late 2006 surprise: the death/MI/thrombosis iceberg Buzzword = ?

Late 2006 surprise: the death/MI/thrombosis iceberg Buzzword = Thrombosis

Late 2006 surprise: the death/MI/thrombosis iceberg

Learning goals Why such a fuzz on meta-analyses? What is a meta-analysis? Are meta-analyses useful? How can I appraise the internal and external validity of a meta-analysis? What are the meta-analysis results on drug-eluting stents?

Exponential increase in PubMed citations PubMed search strategy: ("2001"[PDAT] : "2005"[PDAT]) AND (("systematic"[title/abstract] AND "review"[title/abstract]) OR ("systematic"[title/abstract] AND "overview"[title/abstract]) OR ("meta-analysis"[title/abstract] OR "meta-analyses"[title/abstract]))

Famous quotes “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants” Isaac Newton “The great advances in science usually result from new tools rather than from new doctrines” Freeman Dyson

Famous quotes “I like to think of the meta-analytic process as similar to being in a helicopter. On the ground individual trees are visible with high resolution. This resolution diminishes as the helicopter rises, and in its place we begin to see patterns not visible from the ground” Ingram Olkin

Minimal glossary Review: viewpoint on a subject quoting different primary authors Overview: as above Qualitative review: deliberately avoids a systematic approach Systematic review: deliberately uses a systematic approach to study search, selection, abstraction, appraisal and pooling Quantitative review: uses quantitative methods to appraise or synthesize data Meta-analysis: uses specific statistical methods for data pooling and/or exploratory analysis Individual patient data meta-analysis: uses specific stastistical methods for data pooling or exploration exploiting individual patient data

Systematic review vs meta-analysis What is a systematic review? A systematic appraisal of the methodological quality, clinical relevance and consistency of published evidence on a specific clinical topic in order to provide clear suggestions for a specific healthcare problem What is a meta-analysis? A quantitative synthesis that, preserving the identity of individual studies, tries to provide an estimate of the overall effect of an intervention, exposure, or diagnostic strategy

Individual patient data meta-analysis Ideally should be a systematic review and meta-analysis based on individual patient data Major pros: a unique database containing primary studies is created and used (consistency checks and homogenous variables are created) the same analytical tools can be used across studies subgroup analyses can be performed even for groups that were not reported in the original publications Major cons: some studies may have to be excluded (publication bias) because original authors may not provide source data poses major logistical and financial challenges

Systematic review and meta-regression A meta-regression employs meta-analytic methods to explore the impact of covariates or moderators on the main effect measure or on other All the limitations of non-RCT studies applies, and thus they should mainly be regarded as hypothesis generating

Indirect and network meta-analyses An indirect comparison meta-analysis exploit several randomized trials sharing a common comparator to generate an interaction indirect effect estimates Network meta-analyses combine estimates from direct and indirect meta-analyses to provide more precise effect estimates

Learning goals Why such a fuzz on meta-analyses? What is a meta-analysis? Are meta-analyses useful? How can I appraise the internal and external validity of a meta-analysis? What are the meta-analysis results on drug-eluting stents?

Meta-analysis: Cons “Exercise in mega-silliness” “Mixing apples with oranges” Not original research Big RCTs definitely better Pertinent studies might not be found, or may be of low quality or internal validity Publication and small study bias Average effect largely unapplicable to individuals Lau et al, Lancet 1998

Cons Smith et al, BMJ 2003

Meta-analysis: Pros Systematic searches for clinical evidence Explicit and standardized methods for search and selection of evidence sources Thorough appraisal of the internal validity of primary studies Quantitative synthesis with increased statistical power Increased external validity by appraising the effect of an intervention (exposure) across different settings Test subgroup hypotheses Explore clinical and statistical heterogeneit Lau et al, Lancet 1998

A famous cumulative meta-analysis Antman et al, JAMA 1992

Antman et al, JAMA 1992

Learning goals Why such a fuzz on meta-analyses? What is a meta-analysis? Are meta-analyses useful? How can I appraise the internal and external validity of a meta-analysis? What are the meta-analysis results on drug-eluting stents?

Should we trust meta-analyses? It depends on their internal validity!

Oxman-Guyatt index of internal validity 1. Where the search methods used to find evidence stated? 2. Was the search for evidence reasonably comprehensive? 3. Were the criteria for deciding which studies to include in the overview reported 4. Was bias in the selection of studies avoided 5. Were the criteria used for assessing the validity of the included studies reported? 6. Was the validity of all studies referred to in the text assessed using appropriate criteria 7. Were the methods used to combine the findings of the relevant studies reported? 8. Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately relative to the primary question the overview addresses? 9. Were the conclusions made by the author(s) supported by the data and/or analysis reported in the overview? Oxman et al, J Clin Epidemiol 1991

Biondi-Zoccai et al, BMJ 2006

Steg et al, Arch Intern Med 2007

Learning goals Why such a fuzz on meta-analyses? What is a meta-analysis? Are meta-analyses useful? How can I appraise the internal and external validity of a meta-analysis? What are the meta-analysis results on drug-eluting stents?

Synopsis Meta-analyses showing a DES hazard Meta-analyses suggesting DES safety Bavry et al, Am J Med 2006 Camenzind et al, Circ 2007 Kastrati et al, NEJM 2007 Nordmann et al, Eur Heart J 2006 Spaulding et al, NEJM 2007* Stone et al, NEJM 2007* Dibra et al, J Am Coll Cardiol 2007 Holmes et al, Eur Heart J 2006* Mauri et al, NEJM 2007* Pasceri et al, Am Heart J 2007 Stettler et al, Lancet 2007 *likely stemming from the same analysis set STOP! GO!

Nordmann et al, Eur Heart J 2006

Bavry et al, Am J Med 2006

Camenzind et al, Circulation 2007

Camenzind et al, Circulation 2007

Spaulding et al, NEJM 2007

Hazard ratio for death Kastrati et al, NEJM 2007

P=0.02 Kastrati et al, NEJM 2007

Mauri et al, NEJM 2007

Stone et al, NEJM 2007

Stone et al, NEJM 2007

Meta-analysis on 5 studies-1230 pts with DES implantation for ISR: TLR Dibra et al, J Am Coll Cardiol 2007

Cypher versus Taxus meta-analysis Schomig et al, JACC 2007

Hazards of mixing and duplicating data Kereiakes et al, JACC 2007

Stettler et al, Lancet 2007

Rationale of indirect/network meta-analyses OR (A vs C) TREATMENT A TREATMENT C ln ORa-b = ln ORa-c – ln ORb-c OR (A vs B) var (ln ORa-b) = var (ln ORa-c) – var (ln ORb-c) TREATMENT B TREATMENT C OR (B vs C) Biondi-Zoccai et al, Minerva Cardioangiol 2008

Rationale of indirect/network meta-analyses Patients randomized to treatment A vs treatment C Patients randomized to treatment B vs treatment C Patients randomized to treatment A vs treatment C Patients randomized to treatment B vs treatment C Large theoretical overlap between patients randomized to A vs C and to B vs C ↓ UNADJUSTED INDIRECT META-ANALYSIS OF A VS B LIKELY RELIABLE Small theoretical overlap between patients randomized to A vs C and to B vs C ↓ UNADJUSTED INDIRECT META-ANALYSIS OF A VS B LIKELY UNRELIABLE (multivariable methods recommended) Biondi-Zoccai et al, Minerva Cardioangiol 2008

Meta-analysis on 16 studies-1278 pts with unprotected left main DES implantation Agostoni et al (2005, 58 pts) 15,5 Carriè et al (2006, 120 pts) 12.5 Chieffo et al (2005, 85 pts) 32,7 Christiansen et al (2006, 42 pts) 7,1 de Lezo et al (2004, 52 pts) 5,8 Dudek et al (2006, 28 pts) 14,3 Han et al (2006, 138 pts) 10,9 KOMATE (2005, 54 pts) 4,6 Lee et al (2006, 50 pts) 10,6 Study Lozano et al (2005, 42 pts) 26,2 Migliorini et al (2006, 156 pts) 23,7 Palmerini et al (2006, 94 pts) 25,5 Park et al (2005, 102 pts) 8,8 Price et al (2006, 50 pts) 54,0 Sheiban et al (2006, 85 pts) 9,1 Wood et al (2006, 100 pts) 19,0 Overall estimate (95%CI) 16,5 (11,7-21,3) 15 30 45 60 Rate of mid-term MACE (%) Biondi-Zoccai et al, Am Heart J 2007

Meta-analysis on 16 studies-1278 pts with unprotected left main DES implantation Prevalence of non-bifurcational ULM Log10 transformed MACE rate at mid-term follow-up 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 -,2 -,4 -,6 -,8 -1,0 -1,2 -1,4 Beta=-0.015 P=0.001 Biondi-Zoccai et al, Am Heart J 2007

Take home messages

Take home messages

Not all meta-analyses are born equal, nor of equal quality

Results of meta-analyses suggest DES are likely associated with a minor increase in stent thrombosis

However DES are warranted in patients at higher risk of restenosis or those who can tolerate dual antiplatelet therapy for >6-12 months

For further slides on these topics please feel free to visit the metcardio.org website: http://www.metcardio.org/slides.html