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 *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17303476)

  • 1. An adaptive approach for bivariate phase II clinical trial designs.
    Wu C; Liu A
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Jul; 28(4):482-6. PubMed ID: 17303476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Alternative designs of phase II trials considering response and toxicity.
    Jin H
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Jul; 28(4):525-31. PubMed ID: 17428744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of error rates in single-arm versus randomized phase II cancer clinical trials.
    Tang H; Foster NR; Grothey A; Ansell SM; Goldberg RM; Sargent DJ
    J Clin Oncol; 2010 Apr; 28(11):1936-41. PubMed ID: 20212253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Performance of adaptive designs for single-armed phase II oncology trials.
    Kieser M; Englert S
    J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(3):602-15. PubMed ID: 24905363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Early average change in tumor size in a phase 2 trial: efficient endpoint or false promise?
    Rubinstein LV; Dancey JE; Korn EL; Smith MA; Wright JJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Oct; 99(19):1422-3. PubMed ID: 17895470
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An extension of Bayesian predictive sample size selection designs for monitoring efficacy and safety.
    Teramukai S; Daimon T; Zohar S
    Stat Med; 2015 Sep; 34(22):3029-39. PubMed ID: 26038148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bivariate sequential designs for phase II trials.
    Conaway MR; Petroni GR
    Biometrics; 1995 Jun; 51(2):656-64. PubMed ID: 7662852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An alternative phase II/III design for continuous endpoints.
    Huang WS; Liu JP; Hsiao CF
    Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(2):105-14. PubMed ID: 20186724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Methods for proper handling of overrunning and underrunning in phase II designs for oncology trials.
    Englert S; Kieser M
    Stat Med; 2015 Jun; 34(13):2128-37. PubMed ID: 25781860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Flexible designs for phase II comparative clinical trials involving two response variables.
    Bersimis S; Sachlas A; Papaioannou T
    Stat Med; 2015 Jan; 34(2):197-214. PubMed ID: 25274584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mixed response and time-to-event endpoints for multistage single-arm phase II design.
    Lai X; Zee BC
    Trials; 2015 Jun; 16():250. PubMed ID: 26037094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Optimal two-stage designs allowing flexibility in number of subjects for phase II clinical trials.
    Masaki N; Koyama T; Yoshimura I; Hamada C
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Jul; 19(4):721-31. PubMed ID: 20183436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. P-value calculation for multistage phase II cancer clinical trials.
    Jung SH; Owzar K; George SL; Lee T
    J Biopharm Stat; 2006; 16(6):765-75; discussion 777-83. PubMed ID: 17146978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A Bayesian-frequentist two-stage single-arm phase II clinical trial design.
    Dong G; Shih WJ; Moore D; Quan H; Marcella S
    Stat Med; 2012 Aug; 31(19):2055-67. PubMed ID: 22415966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A modified varying-stage adaptive phase II/III clinical trial design.
    Dong G; Vandemeulebroecke M
    Pharm Stat; 2016 Jul; 15(4):368-78. PubMed ID: 27264007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Group-sequential methods for adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trials.
    Stallard N
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):787-801. PubMed ID: 21516569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Curtailed two-stage designs with two dependent binary endpoints.
    Chen CM; Chi Y
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(1):57-62. PubMed ID: 22162348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Practical guidelines for adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trials that use Bayesian methods.
    Kimani PK; Glimm E; Maurer W; Hutton JL; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2012 Aug; 31(19):2068-85. PubMed ID: 22437262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Phase II trials powered to detect tumor subtypes.
    Roberts JD; Ramakrishnan V
    Clin Cancer Res; 2011 Sep; 17(17):5538-45. PubMed ID: 21737510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.