Skip to content
Prev 2636 / 5636 Next

[R-meta] Meta-Analisys whit events numbers, RR, OR and HR. It's possibe?

Dear Gerta and Michael,
Thank you very much for your answers.
I thought it was easier than what is shown in the papers, but maybe I did not explain it well.
I have six studies that report HR and its 95% CI. 2 studies that report number of events in the two branches. 3 studies that report OR and its 95% CI.

In the Cochrane manual, it says that these data can be meta-analyzed with the generic inverse of variance method.
but I don't understand if these measures can really be meta-analyzed together or not.
I will exemplify with less studies what you can find to see what you think

Suppose I have 4 studies that report:

HR (1.05, 0.44, 0.31, 0.77)
CI95% L (0.65, 0.16, 0.09, 0.68)
CI95% U (1.69, 1.22, 1.01, 0.87)
In the META package with the metagen function, this could be done according to the following example:
Conduct meta-analysis using hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals
#
# Data from Steurer et al. (2006), Analysis 1.1 Overall survival
# https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004270.pub2/abstract
#
study <- c("FCG on CLL 1996", "Leporrier 2001", "Rai 2000", "Robak 2000")
HR <- c(1.05, 0.44, 0.31, 0.77)
lower.HR <- c(0.65, 0.16, 0.09, 0.68)
upper.HR <- (1.69, 1.22, 1.01, 0.87)
#
# Input must be log hazard ratios, not hazard ratios
#
metagen(log(HR), lower = log(lower.HR), upper = log(upper.HR),
        studlab = study, sm = "HR")

Now, I could add the data of the papers that report OR for example:

OR (0,47 , 0.77, 072)
IC95% L (0.24, 0.52, 0.55)
IC95% U (0.91, 0.81, 0.89)

HR <- c(log(1.05),log(0.44), log(0.31), log(0.77), 0.47,0.77,0.72)
lower.HR <- c(log(0.65), log(0.16), log(0.09), log(0.68),0.24, 0.52, 0.55)
upper.HR <- (log(1.69), log(1.22), log(1.01),log( 0.87),0.91, 0.81, 0.89)


metagen(log(HR), lower = log(lower.HR), upper = log(upper.HR),
        studlab = study, sm = "HR")

Is this correct or should I analyze the HR on the one hand and the OR on the other?

By last. There is a study that reports HR backwards. In other words, not the HR for those who were taking the drug but for those who were not taking it. Is there a way to report it backwards so that you can meta-analyze it with the other HR.

For example, all studies report HR of statin patients. HR 0.78 patients taking statins had 22% fewer events than those not taking it.

One study reports the HR of patients not taking statins. HR2.17 (95% CI 1.04-4.54). In other words, those who did not take statins had twice the number of events.

Best regards














Lorenzo Mart?n Lobo MTSAC, FACC, FESC
Especialista Jerarquizado en Cardiolog?a
Jefe de Dpto Enf. Cardiovasculares y Cardiometabolismo Hospital Militar Campo de Mayo.
Jefe de Cardiolog?a Hospital Militar Campo de Mayo
Ex Jefe de Unidad Coronaria Hospital Militar Campo de Mayo
Miembro Titular de la Sociedad Argentina de Cardiolog?a
Fellow American College of Cardiology
Fellow European Society of Cardiology
Ex Miembro del Area de Investigaci?n de la SAC
Ex Director del Consejo de Aterosclerosis y Trombosis de la SAC
Miembro Asesor del Consejo de Aterosclerosis y Trombosis de la SAC
Ex Director del Consejo de Epidemiolog?a y Prevenci?n Cardiovascular de la SAC

Miembro Asesor del Consejo de Epidemiolog?a y Prevenci?n Cardiovascular de la SAC


Experto en Lipidos de la Sociedad Argentina de Lipidos.
Miembro de la Sociedad Argentina de Lipidos.
Instructor de ACLS de la American Heart Association