Your trials are unlikely to include all relevant comparators.
Ingress-health network meta-analyses, mixed treatment comparisons and matching adjusted treatment comparisons can support your product
Single randomized controlled trials (RCT’s) rarely provide adequate information for addressing the evidence demands of decision-makers. Instead, each trial provides a piece of evidence that, taken together, addresses important questions for patients, clinicians, and other healthcare decision-makers. Traditional pairwise meta-analyses of RCT’s are used to synthesize the results of different trials evaluating the same intervention(s).
When the available RCT’s of interest do not all compare the same interventions, but each trial compares a subset of the interventions of interest, it is possible to develop a network of RCT’s where all trials have at least one intervention in common with another. Such a network allows for indirect comparisons of interventions not studied in a head-to-head fashion. A network of multiple RCT’s involving your treatment and treatments compared directly, indirectly, or both, can be synthesized by means of a Network meta-analysis (NMA).
In case a single arm study or lack of a common comparator matching adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC’s) can be used to compare the efficacy and safety of the relevant treatments. For that purpose the patient level data of one of the trials is re-weighed to reflect the patient and disease characteristics of the trial that contains the comparator product. Hereby, allowing an indirect comparison of the two products.