What is matched adjusted indirect comparison?

What is matched adjusted indirect comparison?

Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are a form of population-adjusted ITC that attempt to reduce bias in treatment comparisons by matching patient-level data from the clinical trials of one treatment to aggregate data reported for comparator trials [17].

What is an indirect treatment comparison?

indirect comparison? treatments that have not been directly compared with each other in a head-to-head trial. It is often used when there is no evidence or insufficient evidence from head- to-head trials, or when more than two treatments are of interest.

How are matching adjusted indirect comparisons ( maics ) used?

Methods: Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) use IPD from trials of one treatment to match baseline summary statistics reported from trials of another treatment. After matching, by using an approach similar to propensity score weighting, treatment outcomes are compared across balanced trial populations.

How are matching-adjusted indirect comparisons used in clinical trials?

Methods: Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) use IPD from trials of one treatment to match baseline summary statistics reported from trials of another treatment. After matching, by using an approach similar to propensity score weighting, treatment outcomes are compared across balanced trial populations.

How are indirect comparisons limited by cross trial differences?

Conclusions: Indirect treatment comparisons can be limited by cross-trial differences. By combining IPD with published aggregate data, MAIC can reduce observed cross-trial differences and provide decision makers with timely comparative evidence. Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR).

Are there any unobserved differences in MAIC comparisons?

An important assumption of MAIC, as in any comparison of nonrandomized treatment groups, is that there are no unobserved cross-trial differences that could confound the comparison of outcomes. Conclusions: Indirect treatment comparisons can be limited by cross-trial differences.