School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore.
Med Decis Making. 2019 Nov;39(8):899-909. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19881967. Epub 2019 Nov 9.
In June 2011, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Decision Support Unit published a Technical Support Document (TSD) providing recommendations on survival analysis for NICE technology appraisals (TAs). Survival analysis outputs are influential inputs into economic models estimating the cost-effectiveness of new cancer treatments. Hence, it is important that systematic and justifiable model selection approaches are used. This study investigates the extent to which the TSD recommendations have been followed since its publication. We reviewed NICE cancer TAs completed between July 2011 and July 2017. Information on survival analyses undertaken and associated critiques for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were extracted from the company submissions, Evidence Review Group (ERG) reports, and final appraisal determination documents. Information was extracted from 58 TAs. Only 4 (7%) followed all TSD recommendations for OS outcomes. The vast majority (91%) compared a range of common parametric models and assessed their fit to the data (86%). Only a minority of TAs included an assessment of the shape of the hazard function (38%) or proportional hazards assumption (40%). Validation of the extrapolated portion of the survival function using external data was attempted in a minority of TAs (40%). Extrapolated survival functions were frequently criticized by ERGs (71%). Survival analysis within NICE TAs remains suboptimal, despite publication of the TSD. Model selection is not undertaken in a systematic way, resulting in inconsistencies between TAs. More attention needs to be given to assessing hazard functions and validation of extrapolated survival functions. Novel methods not described in the TSD have been used, particularly in the context of immuno-oncology, suggesting that an updated TSD may be of value.
2011 年 6 月,英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所(NICE)决策支持单位发布了一份技术支持文件(TSD),就生存分析在 NICE 技术评估(TA)中的应用提出了建议。生存分析结果是评估新癌症治疗方法成本效益的经济模型的重要输入。因此,采用系统和合理的模型选择方法非常重要。本研究调查了自 TSD 发布以来,其建议得到遵循的程度。
我们回顾了 2011 年 7 月至 2017 年 7 月期间完成的 NICE 癌症 TA。从公司提交的文件、证据审查组(ERG)报告和最终评估决定文件中提取了关于生存分析的信息,以及关于总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)的相关评论。
信息从 58 项 TA 中提取。只有 4 项(7%)遵循了 OS 结果的所有 TSD 建议。绝大多数(91%)比较了一系列常见的参数模型,并评估了它们对数据的拟合程度(86%)。只有少数 TA 包括对危险函数形状的评估(38%)或比例风险假设(40%)。少数 TA(40%)尝试使用外部数据验证生存函数的外推部分。外推生存函数经常受到 ERG 的批评(71%)。
尽管 TSD 已经发布,但 NICE TA 中的生存分析仍然不理想。模型选择没有系统地进行,导致 TA 之间存在不一致。需要更加关注评估危险函数和验证外推生存函数。已经使用了 TSD 中未描述的新方法,特别是在免疫肿瘤学方面,这表明更新的 TSD 可能具有价值。