Abstract:When indirectly comparing treatments across separate clinical trials, matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) can help avoid bias due to cross-trial differences in baseline characteristics. The approach uses propensity scores to adjust individual patient data from trials of one treatment to match published baseline characteristics from trials of comparator treatments. We assessed the statistical properties of MAIC, including the accuracy of estimated treatment effects and their standard errors, in a simulation study. Each simulation scenario included two randomized controlled trials with a common control arm and a dichotomous outcome. Sample sizes ranged from 125 to 1000 patients per arm. Cross-trial differences in baseline characteristics were simulated to generate low, moderate and high levels of potential bias. For each simulated dataset, MAIC was used to estimate the relative treatment effect using individual patient data from one trial and aggregate data from the other. Estimated treatment effects and standard errors were evaluated for accuracy across 1000 simulations. Indirect comparisons without matching adjustment were evaluated in parallel. By design, indirect comparisons without matching exhibited biases ranging from 10% to 200% of the true treatment effect across simulation scenarios. In contrast, the MAIC estimators exhibited negligible bias, falling within +/- 2% of the true treatment effect when all confounding variables were considered. The sandwich estimator closely approximated the true standard errors, and was slightly conservative, overestimating by as much as 8%, but usually less than 5%. These findings were consistent across the range of investigated sample sizes and levels of confounding. MAIC can remove bias due to observed cross-trial differences and provide reliable assessments of statistical uncertainty for indirect comparisons that combine individual patient data and aggregate data.

MC: Stata Module to Calculate a Matched Concordance Index

Single-Marker Analysis For Matched Case-Control Data

Boosting the concordance index for survival data - a unified framework to derive and evaluate biomarker combinations

Estimation of the concordance correlation coefficient for repeated measures using SAS and R

Case-Crossover Design and Its Implementation in R

Concordance probability in a big data setting: application in non-life insurance

Propensity Score Method: a Non-Parametric Technique to Reduce Model Dependence

Evaluating dynamic and predictive discrimination for recurrent event models: use of a time-dependent C-index

ROCnReg: An R Package for Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Inference with and without Covariate Information

Statistical inference for diagnostic test accuracy studies with multiple comparisons

Statistical Inference for Box–Cox based Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves

Methodological concerns about 'concordance-statistic for benefit' as a measure of discrimination in treatment benefit prediction

Matching calipers and the precision of index estimation

Matching Methods for Causal Inference with Time‐Series Cross‐Sectional Data

MATLAB toolbox for ROC analysis of multi-reader multi-case diagnostic imaging studies

Matching-adjusted Indirect Comparisons: A Simulation Study of Statistical Performance

A statistical comparison between Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), prevalence threshold, and Fowlkes-Mallows index

Testing Biased Randomization Assumptions and Quantifying Imperfect Matching and Residual Confounding in Matched Observational Studies

Nonparametric Covariate Adjustment for Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves

Matching with multiple criteria and its application to health disparities research

Log-rank test with coarsened exact matching