These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15939261)
61. Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in early colorectal cancer from the clinician's perspective. Grothey A Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Oct; 17(5):529-35. PubMed ID: 18285442 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. [Surrogate end points in cancer research]. You WC; Gao F Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2003 Feb; 83(3):177-8. PubMed ID: 12817584 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
63. Using and interpreting surrogate end-points in cancer research. Schatzkin A; Freedman LS; Dorgan J; McShane L; Schiffman MH; Dawsey SM IARC Sci Publ; 1997; (142):265-71. PubMed ID: 9354925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Sufficient conditions for concluding surrogacy based on observed data. Wu Z; He P; Geng Z Stat Med; 2011 Aug; 30(19):2422-34. PubMed ID: 21590703 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Statistical evaluation of surrogate markers: validity, efficiency, and sensitivity. Qu Y Clin Trials; 2013 Oct; 10(5):693-5. PubMed ID: 23988465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. Surrogate end-points in clinical practice: are we providing worse care? Martin JH; Fay MF Intern Med J; 2010 Jun; 40(6):395-8. PubMed ID: 20636827 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
68. Surrogate end points: how well do they represent patient-relevant end points? Jost MM Biomark Med; 2007 Oct; 1(3):437-51. PubMed ID: 20477385 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. An inexplicable oversight and a misconception in research. Ingenbleek Y; Cynober L J Nutr Health Aging; 2005; 9(3):199. PubMed ID: 15864401 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
70. Surrogate end points: hopes and perils. Alonso A; Molenberghs G Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2008 Jun; 8(3):255-9. PubMed ID: 20528377 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Measuring soluble biomarkers in clinical trials: do tiered approaches to the analysis and validation of assays provide an answer to the fit-for-purpose challenge? Hucker R; Watson C; James I; Vincent S; Muirhead D Bioanalysis; 2014 Mar; 6(5):605-9. PubMed ID: 24620802 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
73. Clinical trial end points: on the road to nowhere? Holloway RG; Dick AW Neurology; 2002 Mar; 58(5):679-86. PubMed ID: 11889228 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. [End points of clinical studies: surrogate parameters of "hard clinical end points"?]. Böger RH Internist (Berl); 2002 Apr; 43(4):493-7. PubMed ID: 12053405 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
76. [The cure of cancer: new advances]. Pasternak J AMB Rev Assoc Med Bras; 1988; 34(5):147-8. PubMed ID: 3251307 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
77. Introduction. Smith JJ; Dunn BK Semin Oncol Nurs; 2012 May; 28(2):85-6. PubMed ID: 22542314 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
78. The expansion and advancement of cancer biomarkers. Nolen B Cancer Biomark; 2011-2012; 10(2):61-2. PubMed ID: 22430132 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
79. Should hydrogen therapy be included in a musculoskeletal medicine routine? Ostojic SM F1000Res; 2016; 5():2659. PubMed ID: 28003879 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Surrogate end points in cardio-thoracic trials: a call for better reporting and improved interpretation of trial findings. Ciani O; Manyara AM; Taylor RS Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2022 Sep; 62(4):. PubMed ID: 36112148 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]