Comparison and Selection of Network Meta‐Analysis Models for Fitting and Extrapolating Cancer Survival Data

AIM: To assess network meta-analysis (NMA) model biases under different proportional hazards (PHs) scenarios, compare fitting and extrapolation performance for hazard ratios (HRs) using cancer survival data, identify metrics guiding model selection, and compare extrapolation strategies using parametric versus constant-tail HRs. METHODS: We conducted 30 NMAs (five three-arm trials, with each arm anchoring pairwise comparisons for overall survival and progression-free survival), subgroup analyses assessed the PH assumption and curve types. Models included Cox-PH, Fractional Polynomial, Royston-Parmar (RP), Piecewise Exponential (PWE), and Parametric Survival Model (PSM). For extrapolation, we categorized models into those using parametric-extrapolation HRs and those assuming constant-tail HRs. Main indicator was sum of squared errors (SSE), alongside Bias, assessed for observed data (SSE-O, Bias-O), fitting (SSE-F, Bias-F), and fitting-extrapolation (SSE-FE, Bias-FE). RESULTS: Model choice introduced much more uncertainty when the PH assumption was violated than when held. RP-2knot had the best HR fitting, comparable to RP-1knot; errors were 0.5- to 33.7-fold higher for other models. RP-2knot and RP-1knot demonstrated the best fitting-extrapolation performance. Friedman tests showed RP-2knot significantly outperformed other models in fitting, except RP-1knot, and in fitting-extrapolation, except RP-1knot and Cox-PH. SSE-O and Bias-O were highly correlated with model fitting (ρ = 0.682-0.713) and moderately with fitting-extrapolation. Within 2-3 years extrapolation window, constant-tail HR models outperformed parametric-extrapolation HR. CONCLUSIONS: Model selection required more caution when the PH assumption failed. RP model showed promising fitting and extrapolation performance. SSE-O and Bias-O may guide model selection in HR-fitting; extrapolation utility needs further validation. Non-PH models using constant-tail HRs showed better short-term extrapolation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
Published
2026-08-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.70183
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison and Selection of Network Meta‐Analysis Models for Fitting and Extrapolating Cancer Survival Data

Taihang Shao, Xing Qian, Hanqiao Shao, Mingye Zhao et al.
Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Comparison and Selection of Network Meta‐Analysis Models for Fitting and Extrapolating Cancer Survival Data

Taihang Shao, Xing Qian, Hanqiao Shao, Mingye Zhao, Wenxi Tang
article en

Abstract

AIM: To assess network meta-analysis (NMA) model biases under different proportional hazards (PHs) scenarios, compare fitting and extrapolation performance for hazard ratios (HRs) using cancer survival data, identify metrics guiding model selection, and compare extrapolation strategies using parametric versus constant-tail HRs. METHODS: We conducted 30 NMAs (five three-arm trials, with each arm anchoring pairwise comparisons for overall survival and progression-free survival), subgroup analyses assessed the PH assumption and curve types. Models included Cox-PH, Fractional Polynomial, Royston-Parmar (RP), Piecewise Exponential (PWE), and Parametric Survival Model (PSM). For extrapolation, we categorized models into those using parametric-extrapolation HRs and those assuming constant-tail HRs. Main indicator was sum of squared errors (SSE), alongside Bias, assessed for observed data (SSE-O, Bias-O), fitting (SSE-F, Bias-F), and fitting-extrapolation (SSE-FE, Bias-FE). RESULTS: Model choice introduced much more uncertainty when the PH assumption was violated than when held. RP-2knot had the best HR fitting, comparable to RP-1knot; errors were 0.5- to 33.7-fold higher for other models. RP-2knot and RP-1knot demonstrated the best fitting-extrapolation performance. Friedman tests showed RP-2knot significantly outperformed other models in fitting, except RP-1knot, and in fitting-extrapolation, except RP-1knot and Cox-PH. SSE-O and Bias-O were highly correlated with model fitting (ρ = 0.682-0.713) and moderately with fitting-extrapolation. Within 2-3 years extrapolation window, constant-tail HR models outperformed parametric-extrapolation HR. CONCLUSIONS: Model selection required more caution when the PH assumption failed. RP model showed promising fitting and extrapolation performance. SSE-O and Bias-O may guide model selection in HR-fitting; extrapolation utility needs further validation. Non-PH models using constant-tail HRs showed better short-term extrapolation.

Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
China Pharmaceutical University (CN), Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK), Shanghai Medical Information Center (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.