Application and Quality of Model‐Based Meta‐Analysis in Pharmaceutical Research: A Systematic Cross‐Sectional Analysis and Practical Considerations

Abstract

Model‐based meta‐analysis (MBMA) can be used in assisting drug development and optimizing treatment in clinical practice, potentially reducing costs and accelerating drug approval. We aimed to assess the application and quality of MBMA studies. We searched multiple databases to identify MBMA in pharmaceutical research. Eligible MBMA should incorporate pharmacological concepts to construct mathematical models and quantitatively examine and/or predict drug effects. Relevant information was summarized to provide an overview of the application of MBMA. We used AMSTAR‐2 and PRISMA 2020 checklists to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of included MBMA, respectively. A total of 143 MBMA studies were identified. MBMA was increasingly used over time for one or more areas: drug discovery and translational research (n = 8, 5.6%), drug development decision making (n = 42, 29.4%), optimization of clinical trial design (n = 46, 32.2%), medication in special populations (n = 15, 10.5%), and rationality and safety of drug use (n = 71, 49.7%). The included MBMA covered 17 disease areas, with the top three being nervous system diseases (n = 19, 13.2%), endocrine/nutritional/metabolic diseases (n = 17, 11.8%), and neoplasms (n = 16, 11.1%). Of these MBMA studies, 138 (96.5%) were rated as very low quality. The average rate of compliance with PRISMA was only 51.4%. Our findings suggested that MBMA was mainly used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of drugs, with a focus on chronic diseases. The methodological and reporting quality of MBMA should be further improved. Given AMSTAR‐2 and PRISMA checklists were not specifically designed for MBMA, adapted assessment checklists for MBMA should be warranted.