Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/35950
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBUYSE, Marc-
dc.contributor.authorSaad, Everardo D.-
dc.contributor.authorPeron, Julien-
dc.contributor.authorChiem, Jean-Christophe-
dc.contributor.authorDe Backer, Mickael-
dc.contributor.authorCantagallo, Eva-
dc.contributor.authorCiani, Oriana-
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-29T19:49:57Z-
dc.date.available2021-11-29T19:49:57Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.date.submitted2021-10-28T09:53:23Z-
dc.identifier.citationJOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 137 , p. 148 -158-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1942/35950-
dc.description.abstractObjective: The assessment of benefits and harms from experimental treatments often ignores the association between outcomes. In a randomized trial, generalized pairwise comparisons (GPC) can be used to assess a Net Benefit that takes this association into account. Study design and settings: We use GPC to analyze a fictitious trial of treatment versus control, with a binary efficacy outcome (response) and a binary toxicity outcome, as well as data from two actual randomized trials in oncology. In all cases, we compute the Net Benefit for scenarios with different orders of priority between response and toxicity, and a range of odds ratios (ORs) for the association between these outcomes. Results: The GPC Net Benefit was quite different from the benefit/harm computed using marginal treatment effects on response and toxicity. In the fictitious trial using response as first priority, treatment had an unfavorable Net Benefit if OR < 1, but favorable if OR > 1. With OR = 1, the Net Benefit was 0. Results changed drastically using toxicity as first priority. Conclusion: Even in a simple situation, marginal treatment effects can be misleading. In contrast, GPC assesses the Net Benefit as a function of the treatment effects on each outcome, the association between outcomes, and individual patient priorities. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.-
dc.description.sponsorshipBrussels-Capital (Innoviris); EORTC Cancer Research Fund; regions of Wallonia (BioWin Consortium) [7979]-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCIENCE INC-
dc.rights© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license-
dc.subject.otherGeneralized pairwise comparisons; Prioritized outcomes; Benefit; harm;-
dc.subject.otherNet Benefit-
dc.titleThe Net Benefit of a treatment should take the correlation between benefits and harms into account-
dc.typeJournal Contribution-
dc.identifier.epage158-
dc.identifier.spage148-
dc.identifier.volume137-
local.format.pages11-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatA1-
dc.description.notesBuyse, M (corresponding author), Int Inst Drug Dev, San Francisco, CA USA.; Buyse, M (corresponding author), Hasselt Univ, Interuniv Inst Biostat & Stat Bioinformat I BioSt, Diepenbeek, Belgium.-
dc.description.notesmarc.buyse@iddi.com-
local.publisher.placeSTE 800, 230 PARK AVE, NEW YORK, NY 10169 USA-
local.type.refereedRefereed-
local.type.specifiedArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.018-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000704355400016-
dc.contributor.orcidDe Backer, Mickael/0000-0003-1669-6391; CIANI,-
dc.contributor.orcidORIANA/0000-0002-3607-0508-
local.provider.typewosris-
local.uhasselt.uhpubyes-
local.description.affiliation[Buyse, Marc] Int Inst Drug Dev, San Francisco, CA USA.-
local.description.affiliation[Buyse, Marc] Hasselt Univ, Interuniv Inst Biostat & Stat Bioinformat I BioSt, Diepenbeek, Belgium.-
local.description.affiliation[Saad, Everardo D.; Chiem, Jean-Christophe] Int Inst Drug Dev, Louvain La Neuve, Belgium.-
local.description.affiliation[Peron, Julien] Hosp Civils Lyon, Dept Oncol, Pierre Benite, France.-
local.description.affiliation[Peron, Julien] Hosp Civils Lyon, Dept Biostat, Pierre Benite, France.-
local.description.affiliation[Peron, Julien] Univ Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5558, Biometry & Evolut Biol Lab, Biostat Hlth Team, Villeurbanne, France.-
local.description.affiliation[De Backer, Mickael] Univ Louvain, Inst Stat Biostat & Sci Actuarielles, Biostatist & Sci actuarielles, Louvain La Neuve, Belgium.-
local.description.affiliation[Cantagallo, Eva] European Org Res & Treatment Canc EORTC, Brussels, Belgium.-
local.description.affiliation[Ciani, Oriana] Univ Commerciale L Bocconi, CERGAS, Milan, Italy.-
local.description.affiliation[Ciani, Oriana] Univ Exeter, Med Sch, Evidence Synth & Modelling Hlth Improvement, Exeter, Devon, England.-
local.uhasselt.internationalyes-
item.validationecoom 2022-
item.contributorBUYSE, Marc-
item.contributorSaad, Everardo D.-
item.contributorPeron, Julien-
item.contributorChiem, Jean-Christophe-
item.contributorDe Backer, Mickael-
item.contributorCantagallo, Eva-
item.contributorCiani, Oriana-
item.accessRightsOpen Access-
item.fullcitationBUYSE, Marc; Saad, Everardo D.; Peron, Julien; Chiem, Jean-Christophe; De Backer, Mickael; Cantagallo, Eva & Ciani, Oriana (2021) The Net Benefit of a treatment should take the correlation between benefits and harms into account. In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 137 , p. 148 -158.-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
crisitem.journal.issn0895-4356-
crisitem.journal.eissn1878-5921-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
net benefit.pdfPublished version0 BAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

5
checked on Apr 30, 2024

Page view(s)

34
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Download(s)

4
checked on Sep 7, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.