Study Metrics
Total Sample
3164
Treatment Group
1582
Control Group
1582
Covariates
4
PICO Comparisons
1
Quality Indicators
Transparency
High
DAG Usage
Yes
QBA Performed
No
Study Information
| First Author: | Kuehne |
| Publication Year: | 2022 |
| DOI: | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.10.005 |
| Preprint: | No preprint |
Institution & Funding
| Institutions: | Academia (UMIT TIROL University, Technical University Dresden, Innsbruck Medical University, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Massachusetts General Hospital), Industry (Eli Lilly and Company), and Health Services (Cancer Registry Tyrol) |
| Funding: | Declared: Public, private |
| Funding Institutions: | This work was supported by independent research grant by Lilly Research Award Program (LRAP) and partly funded by the state Tyrol (grant number F.16731/5-2019). |
Study Context
| Disease: | Ovarian cancer |
| Disease Category: | Oncology |
| Data Type: | Other |
| Number of Data Sources: | 1 |
| Geography: | US |
| Eligible Sample: | 1582.0 |
| Number of Treatments: | 2 |
Analytical Methods
| Analysis Method: | Cox PH |
| Estimand: | PP |
Quality Methods
Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG)
Used
Quantitative Bias Analysis (QBA)
Not Performed
Good Practice: This study employed advanced methodological approaches
including DAG methodology.
Target Trial Information
| Target Trial Name: | MRC OV05/EORTC 55955 |
| Registration Number: | ISRCTN87786644 |
| Target Trial DOI: | https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61268-8 |
TTE vs RCT Comparisons
Detailed comparison between Target Trial Emulation results and corresponding Randomized Controlled Trial outcomes.
Overall survival
MRC OV05/EORTC 55955
HR
Efficacy
Population
Female patients aged ≥18 years with ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who had disease progression after first-line chemotherapy (LOT1)
Intervention
Second-line chemotherapy (LOT2): KRd regimen (carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone)
Comparison
Delayed LOT2 (started >6 weeks after progression)
Outcome
Overall survival
RCT Result
1.01
95% CI: [0.82, 1.25]
vs
TTE Result
1.12
95% CI: [0.96, 1.28]
Concordance Assessment
Confidence Interval Overlap:
Yes
CIs overlap, suggesting concordance
CIs overlap, suggesting concordance
Direction Agreement:
Same Direction
Both point to similar conclusion
Both point to similar conclusion
Transparency Indicators
Protocol Registration
Available
Data Sharing
Not Available
Code Sharing
Not Available
Overall Transparency Score:
High Transparency - This study meets good transparency standards.
Conflicts & Funding
| Conflicts of Interest: | Declared: Financial |
| COI Institutions: | Eli Lilly and Company |
| Funding Source: | Declared: Public, private |
| Funding Institutions: | This work was supported by independent research grant by Lilly Research Award Program (LRAP) and partly funded by the state Tyrol (grant number F.16731/5-2019). |