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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

262 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16220505)

  • 21. Efficient adaptive designs with mid-course sample size adjustment in clinical trials.
    Bartroff J; Lai TL
    Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(10):1593-611. PubMed ID: 18275090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Issues in designing flexible trials.
    Posch M; Bauer P; Brannath W
    Stat Med; 2003 Mar; 22(6):953-69. PubMed ID: 12627412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Blinded sample size re-estimation in three-arm trials with 'gold standard' design.
    Mütze T; Friede T
    Stat Med; 2017 Oct; 36(23):3636-3653. PubMed ID: 28608469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Efficient group sequential designs when there are several effect sizes under consideration.
    Jennison C; Turnbull BW
    Stat Med; 2006 Mar; 25(6):917-32. PubMed ID: 16220524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Adaptive, group sequential and decision theoretic approaches to sample size determination.
    Mehta CR; Patel NR
    Stat Med; 2006 Oct; 25(19):3250-69; discussion 3297-301, 3302-4, 3313-4, 3326-47. PubMed ID: 16927402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Combining proof-of-concept with dose-finding: utilization of adaptive designs in migraine clinical trials.
    Sagkriotis A; Scholpp J
    Cephalalgia; 2008 Aug; 28(8):805-12. PubMed ID: 18513264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. An objective re-evaluation of adaptive sample size re-estimation: commentary on 'Twenty-five years of confirmatory adaptive designs'.
    Mehta C; Liu L
    Stat Med; 2016 Feb; 35(3):350-8. PubMed ID: 26757953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Power analyses for correlations from clustered study designs.
    Tu XM; Kowalski J; Crits-Christoph P; Gallop R
    Stat Med; 2006 Aug; 25(15):2587-606. PubMed ID: 16025545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. On the efficiency of adaptive sample size design.
    Cui L; Zhang L
    Stat Med; 2019 Mar; 38(6):933-944. PubMed ID: 30450621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials.
    Bornkamp B; Bretz F; Dmitrienko A; Enas G; Gaydos B; Hsu CH; König F; Krams M; Liu Q; Neuenschwander B; Parke T; Pinheiro J; Roy A; Sax R; Shen F
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(6):965-95. PubMed ID: 18027208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Sample size re-estimation for clinical trials with longitudinal negative binomial counts including time trends.
    Asendorf T; Henderson R; Schmidli H; Friede T
    Stat Med; 2019 Apr; 38(9):1503-1528. PubMed ID: 30575061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Some challenges with statistical inference in adaptive designs.
    Hung HM; Wang SJ; Yang P
    J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(5):1059-72. PubMed ID: 24915027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Optimization of adaptive designs: efficiency evaluation.
    Menon S; Chang M
    J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(4):641-61. PubMed ID: 22651106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Two-stage designs for cross-over bioequivalence trials.
    Kieser M; Rauch G
    Stat Med; 2015 Jul; 34(16):2403-16. PubMed ID: 25809815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Sample size adaptation designs and efficiency comparison with group sequential designs.
    Cui L
    Stat Med; 2024 May; 43(11):2203-2215. PubMed ID: 38545849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Adaptive methods: when and how should they be used in clinical trials?
    Porcher R; Lecocq B; Vray M;
    Therapie; 2011; 66(4):319-26, 309-17. PubMed ID: 21851793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Adaptive statistical analysis following sample size modification based on interim review of effect size.
    Hung HM; Cui L; Wang SJ; Lawrence J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(4):693-706. PubMed ID: 16022173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Viewpoints on the FDA draft adaptive designs guidance from the PhRMA working group.
    Gallo P; Anderson K; Chuang-Stein C; Dragalin V; Gaydos B; Krams M; Pinheiro J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Nov; 20(6):1115-24. PubMed ID: 21058107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Optimizing trial design in pharmacogenetics research: comparing a fixed parallel group, group sequential, and adaptive selection design on sample size requirements.
    Boessen R; van der Baan F; Groenwold R; Egberts A; Klungel O; Grobbee D; Knol M; Roes K
    Pharm Stat; 2013; 12(6):366-74. PubMed ID: 24214896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Partition testing in confirmatory adaptive designs with structured objectives.
    Sugitani T; Hamasaki T; Hamada C
    Biom J; 2013 May; 55(3):341-59. PubMed ID: 23576221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.