An epidemic of redundant meta-analyses.
cancer
meta-analysis
randomized controlled trial
redundant publications
venous thromboembolism
Journal
Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH
ISSN: 1538-7836
Titre abrégé: J Thromb Haemost
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101170508
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2021
05 2021
Historique:
revised:
05
02
2021
received:
01
12
2020
accepted:
19
02
2021
pubmed:
5
3
2021
medline:
22
5
2021
entrez:
4
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Meta-analyses are widely used to strengthen available evidence and obtain more precise estimates of treatment effect than any individual trial. Paradoxically, multiplication of meta-analyses on the same topic can lead to confusion as practitioners no longer benefit from a rapid and synthetic response. This phenomenon may appear disproportionate when the number of published meta-analyses exceeds the number of original studies. To describe an example of redundant meta-analyses published in the same area with the same randomized clinical trials (RCTs). A systematic review was performed to identify all published meta-analyses of original RCTs that compared direct oral anticoagulants with low molecular weight heparins in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). Forest plots were used to represent the meta-analyses results for efficacy (VTE recurrence) and safety (major bleeding) endpoints. An authors' network was constructed to explore the links between the authors of the published meta-analyses. In the past 3 years, four original RCTs were the subject of 20 published meta-analyses by 142 authors: five, four, and 11 meta-analyses pooled the data of two, three, and four RCTs, respectively. The results of meta-analyses were similar regarding the risks of VTE recurrence and major bleeding. The 11 meta-analyses of four RCTs were published within 6 months of the publication of the last RCT. The epidemic proportions of such redundant literature and authorship could be moderated by developing "living" meta-analyses and encouraging authors of new RCTs to update the corresponding meta-analysis in the same paper as their original research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Meta-analyses are widely used to strengthen available evidence and obtain more precise estimates of treatment effect than any individual trial. Paradoxically, multiplication of meta-analyses on the same topic can lead to confusion as practitioners no longer benefit from a rapid and synthetic response. This phenomenon may appear disproportionate when the number of published meta-analyses exceeds the number of original studies.
OBJECTIVES
To describe an example of redundant meta-analyses published in the same area with the same randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
METHODS
A systematic review was performed to identify all published meta-analyses of original RCTs that compared direct oral anticoagulants with low molecular weight heparins in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). Forest plots were used to represent the meta-analyses results for efficacy (VTE recurrence) and safety (major bleeding) endpoints. An authors' network was constructed to explore the links between the authors of the published meta-analyses.
RESULTS
In the past 3 years, four original RCTs were the subject of 20 published meta-analyses by 142 authors: five, four, and 11 meta-analyses pooled the data of two, three, and four RCTs, respectively. The results of meta-analyses were similar regarding the risks of VTE recurrence and major bleeding. The 11 meta-analyses of four RCTs were published within 6 months of the publication of the last RCT.
CONCLUSIONS
The epidemic proportions of such redundant literature and authorship could be moderated by developing "living" meta-analyses and encouraging authors of new RCTs to update the corresponding meta-analysis in the same paper as their original research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33660901
doi: 10.1111/jth.15280
pii: S1538-7836(22)00758-9
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anticoagulants
0
Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1299-1306Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2021 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.
Références
Ioannidis JP. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 2016;94(3):485-514.
Young AM, Marshall A, Thirlwall J, et al. Comparison of an oral factor Xa inhibitor with low molecular weight heparin in patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism: results of a randomized trial (SELECT-D). J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(20):2017-2023.
Raskob GE, van Es N, Verhamme P, et al. Edoxaban for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(7):615-624.
McBane RD, Wysokinski WE, Le-Rademacher JG, et al. Apixaban and dalteparin in active malignancy associated venous thromboembolism: the ADAM VTE trial. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(2):411-421.
Agnelli G, Becattini C, Meyer G, et al. Apixaban for the treatment of venous thromboembolism associated with cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(17):1599-1607.
Vedovati MC, Giustozzi M, Bonitta G, Agnelli G, Becattini C. Efficacy and safety of anticoagulant agents in patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer: a network meta-analysis. Thromb Res. 2018;170:175-180.
Li A, Garcia DA, Lyman GH, Carrier M. Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Res. 2019;173:158-163.
Kirkilesis GI, Kakkos SK, Tsolakis IA. Editor's choice - a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019;57(5):685-701.
Rossel A, Robert-Ebadi H, Combescure C, et al. Anticoagulant therapy for acute venous thrombo-embolism in cancer patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2019;14(3):e0213940.
Dong Y, Wang YI, Ma R-L, et al. Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2019;48(3):400-412.
Fuentes HE, McBane RD, Wysokinski WE, et al. Direct oral factor Xa inhibitors for the treatment of acute cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94(12):2444-2454.
Sidahmed S, Abdalla A, Kheiri B, et al. Anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: a comprehensive systematic review, pairwise and network meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2020;152:103005.
Mai V, Tanguay VF, Guay CA, et al. DOAC compared to LMWH in the treatment of cancer related-venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2020;50(3):661-667.
Brunetti ND, Tricarico L, Correale M, et al. Direct oral anticoagulants more effective than low-molecular-weight heparin for venous thrombo-embolism in cancer: an updated meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2020;50(2):305-310.
Moik F, Posch F, Zielinski C, Pabinger I, Ay C. Direct oral anticoagulants compared to low-molecular-weight heparin for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2020;4(4):550-561.
Giustozzi M, Agnelli G, del Toro-Cervera J, et al. Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism associated with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost. 2020;120(7):1128-1136.
Tao DL, Olson SR, DeLoughery TG, Shatzel JJ. The efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LMWH for cancer-associated thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Haematol. 2020;105(3):360-362.
Bhatia K, Uberoi G, Bajaj NS, et al. Meta-analysis comparing direct oral anticoagulants to low molecular weight heparin for treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. Am J Cardiol. 2020;133:175-178.
Samaranayake CB, Anderson J, McCabe C, Zahir SF, Upham J, Keir G. Direct oral anticoagulants for cancer associated venous thromboembolisms: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Intern Med J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.15049
Haykal T, Zayed Y, Deliwala S, et al. Direct oral anticoagulant versus low-molecular-weight heparin for treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Thromb Res. 2020;194:57-65.
Dong S, Zhang Y, Li Y, et al. Direct oral anticoagulant for the treatment of VTE in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Pharmacother. 2020;1060028020960037.
Elbadawi A, Shnoda M, Mahmoud K, Elgendy IY. Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparin for cancer related venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2020:pvaa067. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaa067
Camilli M, Lombardi M, Vescovo GM, et al. Efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparin in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2020;154:103074.
Mulder FI, Bosch FTM, Young AM, et al. Direct oral anticoagulants for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Blood. 2020;136(12):1433-1441.
Sabatino J, De Rosa S, Polimeni A, Sorrentino S, Indolfi C. Direct oral anticoagulants in patients with active cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis. JACC: Cardiooncology. 2020;2(3):428-440.
Rosendaal FR. The emergence of a new species: the professional meta-analyst. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47(12):1325-1326.
Zufferey PJ, Miquet M, Quenet S, et al. tranexamic acid in hip-fracture surgery (THIF) study. Tranexamic acid in hip fracture surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104(1):23-30.