Emulations of oncology trials using real-world data: a systematic literature review.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jennifer R Rider, Asher Wasserman, Lukas Slipski, Gillis Carrigan, Raymond Harvey, Xiaolong Jiao, Lynn McRoy, Nelson D Pace, Lauren Becnel, Amanda Bruno, Joy C Eckert, Priscilla Hodgkins, Purva Jain, David Merola, Osayi E Ovbiosa, Yanina Natanzon, Simone Pinheiro, Jameson Quinn, Carla Rodriguez-Watson, Ulka Campbell
{"title":"Emulations of oncology trials using real-world data: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Jennifer R Rider, Asher Wasserman, Lukas Slipski, Gillis Carrigan, Raymond Harvey, Xiaolong Jiao, Lynn McRoy, Nelson D Pace, Lauren Becnel, Amanda Bruno, Joy C Eckert, Priscilla Hodgkins, Purva Jain, David Merola, Osayi E Ovbiosa, Yanina Natanzon, Simone Pinheiro, Jameson Quinn, Carla Rodriguez-Watson, Ulka Campbell","doi":"10.1093/aje/kwae346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>By evaluating published emulations of oncology randomized control trial (RCT) studies in which both the active and comparator groups are sourced from real-world data (RWD) and target trial results are available for benchmarking, this systematic review aims to gain insight into factors related to emulation performance. Thirteen oncology emulation studies using various types of RWD were identified through an online database search of PubMed through 2022. Based on the ROBINS-I tool, most studies (n = 8) had a serious risk of overall bias driven by risk of bias from confounding. Approximately half of the studies (n = 6) fully proxied the RCT entry criteria. Of 11 RWD studies that provided sufficient detail to quantify emulation performance, the emulation hazard ratio (HR) estimate fell within the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the trial estimate in 9 of the studies. There were no clear trends between risk of bias or degree to which the entry criteria were proxied and emulation performance. Findings may have been influenced by publication bias and researcher degrees of freedom, as only one emulation study preregistered its protocol. Tools for comprehensively characterizing factors that affect emulation performance, including the real-world clinical context as it relates to the RCT research question, are needed to evaluate the feasibility of a RCT emulation. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.</p>","PeriodicalId":7472,"journal":{"name":"American journal of epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1783-1793"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwae346","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

By evaluating published emulations of oncology randomized control trial (RCT) studies in which both the active and comparator groups are sourced from real-world data (RWD) and target trial results are available for benchmarking, this systematic review aims to gain insight into factors related to emulation performance. Thirteen oncology emulation studies using various types of RWD were identified through an online database search of PubMed through 2022. Based on the ROBINS-I tool, most studies (n = 8) had a serious risk of overall bias driven by risk of bias from confounding. Approximately half of the studies (n = 6) fully proxied the RCT entry criteria. Of 11 RWD studies that provided sufficient detail to quantify emulation performance, the emulation hazard ratio (HR) estimate fell within the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the trial estimate in 9 of the studies. There were no clear trends between risk of bias or degree to which the entry criteria were proxied and emulation performance. Findings may have been influenced by publication bias and researcher degrees of freedom, as only one emulation study preregistered its protocol. Tools for comprehensively characterizing factors that affect emulation performance, including the real-world clinical context as it relates to the RCT research question, are needed to evaluate the feasibility of a RCT emulation. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

利用真实世界数据模拟肿瘤试验:系统性文献综述。
本系统性综述旨在通过评估已发表的肿瘤 RCTs 模拟研究(其中活性组和比较组均来自 RWD,且目标试验结果可作为基准),深入了解与模拟性能相关的因素。通过对PubMed到2022年的在线数据库检索,确定了13项使用各种类型RWD的肿瘤仿真研究。根据ROBINS-I工具,大多数研究(8项)因混杂偏倚风险而存在严重的整体偏倚风险。大约一半的研究(6 项)完全符合 RCT 入选标准。在 11 项提供了足够细节以量化仿真表现的 RWD 研究中,有 9 项研究的仿真 HR 估计值在试验估计值的 95% CI 范围内。在偏倚风险或入选标准的替代程度与仿真表现之间没有明显的趋势。研究结果可能受到发表偏倚和研究者自由度的影响,因为只有一项仿真研究对其方案进行了预先登记。要评估 RCT 模拟的可行性,就需要一些工具来全面描述影响模拟绩效的因素,包括与 RCT 研究问题相关的真实世界临床环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of epidemiology
American journal of epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
221
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Epidemiology is the oldest and one of the premier epidemiologic journals devoted to the publication of empirical research findings, opinion pieces, and methodological developments in the field of epidemiologic research. It is a peer-reviewed journal aimed at both fellow epidemiologists and those who use epidemiologic data, including public health workers and clinicians.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信