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 *

382 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16609005)

  • 1. Phase II clinical trial design: methods in translational research from the Genitourinary Committee at the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.
    Gray R; Manola J; Saxman S; Wright J; Dutcher J; Atkins M; Carducci M; See W; Sweeney C; Liu G; Stein M; Dreicer R; Wilding G; DiPaola RS
    Clin Cancer Res; 2006 Apr; 12(7 Pt 1):1966-9. PubMed ID: 16609005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Improving the design of phase II trials of cytostatic anticancer agents.
    Stone A; Wheeler C; Barge A
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Feb; 28(2):138-45. PubMed ID: 16843736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Novel designs and end points for phase II clinical trials.
    Adjei AA; Christian M; Ivy P
    Clin Cancer Res; 2009 Mar; 15(6):1866-72. PubMed ID: 19276272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Trial design for evaluation of novel targeted therapies.
    Farley J; Rose PG
    Gynecol Oncol; 2010 Feb; 116(2):173-6. PubMed ID: 19853899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Phase II clinical trials in oncology: are we hitting the target?
    Ang MK; Tan SB; Lim WT
    Expert Rev Anticancer Ther; 2010 Mar; 10(3):427-38. PubMed ID: 20214523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Lessons learned from independent central review.
    Ford R; Schwartz L; Dancey J; Dodd LE; Eisenhauer EA; Gwyther S; Rubinstein L; Sargent D; Shankar L; Therasse P; Verweij J
    Eur J Cancer; 2009 Jan; 45(2):268-74. PubMed ID: 19101138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimising the design of phase II oncology trials: the importance of randomisation.
    Ratain MJ; Sargent DJ
    Eur J Cancer; 2009 Jan; 45(2):275-80. PubMed ID: 19059773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Review of phase II trial designs used in studies of molecular targeted agents: outcomes and predictors of success in phase III.
    El-Maraghi RH; Eisenhauer EA
    J Clin Oncol; 2008 Mar; 26(8):1346-54. PubMed ID: 18285606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Quantitative evaluation of single-arm versus randomized phase II cancer clinical trials.
    Pond GR; Abbasi S
    Clin Trials; 2011 Jun; 8(3):260-9. PubMed ID: 21511687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Examining heterogeneity in phase II trial designs may improve success in phase III.
    Tuma RS
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Feb; 100(3):164-6. PubMed ID: 18230788
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Randomized phase II designs in cancer clinical trials: current status and future directions.
    Lee JJ; Feng L
    J Clin Oncol; 2005 Jul; 23(19):4450-7. PubMed ID: 15994154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Optimizing randomized phase II trials assessing tumor progression.
    Stone A; Wheeler C; Carroll K; Barge A
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Feb; 28(2):146-52. PubMed ID: 16807129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Randomized phase II trials with a prospective control.
    Jung SH
    Stat Med; 2008 Feb; 27(4):568-83. PubMed ID: 17573688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Optimal designs for two-arm, phase II clinical trial design with multiple constraints.
    Mayo MS; Mahnken JD; Soong SJ
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Jan; 20(1):106-24. PubMed ID: 20077252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Optimal and minimax three-stage designs for phase II oncology clinical trials.
    Chen K; Shan M
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Jan; 29(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 17544337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Methodological approaches of clinical studies with targeted therapies].
    Penel N; Saleron J; Lansiaux A; Clisant S; Adenis A; Fournier C; Duhamel A; Bonneterre J
    Bull Cancer; 2008 Feb; 95(2):185-90. PubMed ID: 18304903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparing an experimental agent to a standard agent: relative merits of a one-arm or randomized two-arm Phase II design.
    Taylor JM; Braun TM; Li Z
    Clin Trials; 2006; 3(4):335-48. PubMed ID: 17060208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Optimizing the ongoing search for new treatments for Parkinson disease: using futility designs.
    Tilley BC; Palesch YY; Kieburtz K; Ravina B; Huang P; Elm JJ; Shannon K; Wooten GF; Tanner CM; Goetz GC;
    Neurology; 2006 Mar; 66(5):628-33. PubMed ID: 16534099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Design and conduct of phase II studies of targeted anticancer therapy: recommendations from the task force on methodology for the development of innovative cancer therapies (MDICT).
    Booth CM; Calvert AH; Giaccone G; Lobbezoo MW; Eisenhauer EA; Seymour LK
    Eur J Cancer; 2008 Jan; 44(1):25-9. PubMed ID: 17845846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Other paradigms: better treatments are identified by better trials: the value of randomized phase II studies.
    Sharma MR; Maitland ML; Ratain MJ
    Cancer J; 2009; 15(5):426-30. PubMed ID: 19826363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 20.