Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 341, Issue 8842, 13 February 1993, Pages 418-422
The Lancet

STATISTICS
Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference?

https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(93)93004-KGet rights and content

Abstract

The use of meta-analyses or overviews to combine formally the results of related randomised clinical trials is becoming increasingly common. However the distinction between analyses based on information extracted from the published literature and those based on collecting and reanalysing updated individual patient data is not clear. We have investigated the difference between meta-analysis of the literature (MAL) and meta-analysis of individual patient data (MAP) by comparing the two approaches using randomised trials of cisplatin-based therapy in ovarian cancer. The MAL was based on 788 patients and the MAP on 1329 and estimated median follow-ups were 3·5 and 6·5 years, respectively. The MAL gave a result of greater statistical significance (p=0·027 vs p=0·30) and an estimate of absolute treatment effect three times as large as the MAP (7·5% vs 2·5%). Publication bias, patient exclusion, length of follow-up, and method of analysis all contributed to this observed difference.

The results of a meta-analysis of the literature alone may be misleading. Whenever possible, a meta-analysis of updated individual patient data should be done because this provides the least biased and most reliable means of addressing questions that have not been satisfactorily resolved by individual clinical trials.

References (36)

  • A. Whitehead et al.

    A general parametric approach to the meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

    Stat Med

    (1991)
  • LS. Freedman

    Tables of the number of patients required in clinical trials using the logrank test

    Stat Med

    (1982)
  • Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group

    Treatment of early breast cancer: vol 1, worldwide evidence 1990

    (1990)
  • Dr Bell et al.

    Advanced ovarian cancer: a prospective randomised trial of chlorambucil versus combined cyclophosphamide and cis-diamminedichloroplatinum

    Aust NZ J Med

    (1982)
  • Gynaecological Group, Clinical Oncological Society of Australia and the Sydney Branch, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research

    Chemotherapy of advanced ovarian adenocarcinoma: a randomised comparison of combination versus sequential therapy using chlorambucil and cisplatin

    Gynaecol Oncol

    (1986)
  • Dg Decker et al.

    Cyclophosphamide plus cis-platinum in combination: treatment program for stage III or IV ovarian carcinoma

    Obstet Gynecol

    (1982)
  • Rc Leonard et al.

    Randomised trial comparing prednimustine with combination chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma

    Cancer Chemother Pharmacol

    (1989)
  • Cited by (651)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text