BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

812 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18304903)

  • 1. [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]  

  • 2. A strategic framework for novel drug development in multiple myeloma.
    Anderson KC; Hannah AL; Pazdur R; Farrell AT
    Br J Haematol; 2007 Jul; 138(2):153-9. PubMed ID: 17593022
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. New paradigm in dose-finding trials: patient-specific dosing and beyond phase I.
    Rogatko A; Babb JS; Tighiouart M; Khuri FR; Hudes G
    Clin Cancer Res; 2005 Aug; 11(15):5342-6. PubMed ID: 16061846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma.
    Llovet JM; Di Bisceglie AM; Bruix J; Kramer BS; Lencioni R; Zhu AX; Sherman M; Schwartz M; Lotze M; Talwalkar J; Gores GJ;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 May; 100(10):698-711. PubMed ID: 18477802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Developing drugs that do not cause tumor regression.
    Stadler W
    Clin Adv Hematol Oncol; 2003 Nov; 1(11):654-5. PubMed ID: 16258462
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Clinical trials.
    Farrington P; Miller E
    Methods Mol Med; 2003; 87():335-52. PubMed ID: 12958466
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Randomized phase II trials: misleading and unreliable.
    Stewart DJ
    J Clin Oncol; 2010 Nov; 28(31):e649-50; author reply e651-3. PubMed ID: 20855829
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Phase I cancer trials methodology].
    Le Tourneau C; Faivre S; Raymond E; DiƩras V
    Bull Cancer; 2007 Nov; 94(11):943-51. PubMed ID: 18055311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Does the Prentice criterion validate surrogate endpoints?
    Berger VW
    Stat Med; 2004 May; 23(10):1571-8. PubMed ID: 15122737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical trials of novel and targeted therapies: endpoints, trial design, and analysis.
    Suman VJ; Dueck A; Sargent DJ
    Cancer Invest; 2008 Jun; 26(5):439-44. PubMed ID: 18568764
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Optimal designs for estimating the most successful dose.
    Zohar S; O'Quigley J
    Stat Med; 2006 Dec; 25(24):4311-20. PubMed ID: 16969893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Re: Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma.
    Di Maio M; Daniele B; Gallo C; Perrone F
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Nov; 100(21):1557; author reply 1557-8. PubMed ID: 18957679
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Three-dose-cohort designs in cancer phase I trials.
    Huang B; Chappell R
    Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(12):2070-93. PubMed ID: 17764082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 41.