手法を比較
選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。
| メタアナリシス的第I相臨床試験× | ネットワークメタアナリシス× | |
|---|---|---|
| 分野≠ | 疫学 | エビデンス統合 |
| 系統 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 提唱年≠ | 2000s–2010s | 2002 |
| 提唱者≠ | Neuenschwander, Capkun-Niggli, Branson, Spiegelhalter and colleagues | Lumley (2002) |
| 種類≠ | Bayesian meta-analytic dose-finding design | Method |
| 原典≠ | Neuenschwander, B., Capkun-Niggli, G., Branson, M., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2010). Summarizing historical information on controls in clinical trials. Clinical Trials, 7(1), 5–18. DOI ↗ | Lumley, T. (2002). Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Statistics in Medicine, 21(16), 2313–2324. DOI ↗ |
| 別名≠ | meta-analytic dose-finding, MAP prior Phase I, MAPT design, Bayesian meta-analytic Phase I | Mixed Treatment Comparison, MTC, Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis |
| 関連 | 1 | 1 |
| 概要≠ | A meta-analytic Phase I clinical trial formally pools evidence from prior Phase I studies — using Bayesian or frequentist meta-analysis — to construct an informative prior (or summary estimate) for dose-toxicity relationships before or during a new first-in-human or early-phase study. The approach increases statistical efficiency, reduces the number of patients exposed to subtherapeutic or toxic doses, and accelerates dose selection by systematically leveraging all relevant historical dose-finding data. | Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a systematic method for comparing multiple interventions simultaneously within a single analytical framework, incorporating both direct evidence (head-to-head trials) and indirect evidence (comparisons via common comparators). First formalized by Lumley in 2002, NMA allows researchers to rank treatments and quantify comparative effectiveness even when some treatment pairs have never been directly studied. |
| ScholarGateデータセット ↗ |
|
|