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 *

356 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20077252)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Optimal two-stage randomized multinomial designs for Phase II oncology trials.
    Sun LZ; Chen C; Patel K
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009; 19(3):485-93. PubMed ID: 19384690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Randomized two-stage Phase II clinical trial designs based on Barnard's exact test.
    Shan G; Ma C; Hutson AD; Wilding GE
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(5):1081-90. PubMed ID: 23957517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An efficient algorithm to determine the optimal two-stage randomized multinomial designs in oncology clinical trials.
    Zhang Y; Mietlowski W; Chen B; Wang Y
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jan; 21(1):56-65. PubMed ID: 21191854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Adaptive two-stage designs in phase II clinical trials.
    Banerjee A; Tsiatis AA
    Stat Med; 2006 Oct; 25(19):3382-95. PubMed ID: 16479547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Early selection in a randomized phase II clinical trial.
    Steinberg SM; Venzon DJ
    Stat Med; 2002 Jun; 21(12):1711-26. PubMed ID: 12111907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Seamless Phase II/III combination study through response adaptive randomization.
    Wang L; Cui L
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(6):1177-87. PubMed ID: 18027224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. A three-outcome design for randomized comparative phase II clinical trials.
    Hong S; Wang Y
    Stat Med; 2007 Aug; 26(19):3525-34. PubMed ID: 17262879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.