740 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20212253)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Design issues of randomized phase II trials and a proposal for phase II screening trials.
Rubinstein LV; Korn EL; Freidlin B; Hunsberger S; Ivy SP; Smith MA
J Clin Oncol; 2005 Oct; 23(28):7199-206. PubMed ID: 16192604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of single-arm vs. randomized phase II clinical trials: a Bayesian approach.
Sambucini V
J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(3):474-89. PubMed ID: 24896838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer.
Karrison TG; Maitland ML; Stadler WM; Ratain MJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Oct; 99(19):1455-61. PubMed ID: 17895472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Designs for randomized phase II clinical trials with two treatment arms.
Hou W; Chang MN; Jung SH; Li Y
Stat Med; 2013 Nov; 32(25):4367-79. PubMed ID: 23630064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Correlation of single arm versus randomised phase 2 oncology trial characteristics with phase 3 outcome.
Monzon JG; Hay AE; McDonald GT; Pater JL; Meyer RM; Chen E; Chen BE; Dancey JE
Eur J Cancer; 2015 Nov; 51(17):2501-7. PubMed ID: 26338195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Sample size computation in phase II designs combining the A'Hern design and the Sargent and Goldberg design.
Neven A; Mauer M; Hasan B; Sylvester R; Collette L
J Biopharm Stat; 2020 Mar; 30(2):305-321. PubMed ID: 31331234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Randomized phase II trials: a long-term investment with promising returns.
Sharma MR; Stadler WM; Ratain MJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2011 Jul; 103(14):1093-100. PubMed ID: 21709274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Analysis of tumor burden versus progression-free survival for Phase II decision making.
Fridlyand J; Kaiser LD; Fyfe G
Contemp Clin Trials; 2011 May; 32(3):446-52. PubMed ID: 21266203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Setting the bar in phase II trials: the use of historical data for determining "go/no go" decision for definitive phase III testing.
Vickers AJ; Ballen V; Scher HI
Clin Cancer Res; 2007 Feb; 13(3):972-6. PubMed ID: 17277252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of a misspecification of response rates on type I and type II errors, in a phase II Simon design.
Baey C; Le Deley MC
Eur J Cancer; 2011 Jul; 47(11):1647-52. PubMed ID: 21493059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Research outcomes and recommendations for the assessment of progression in cancer clinical trials from a PhRMA working group.
Stone AM; Bushnell W; Denne J; Sargent DJ; Amit O; Chen C; Bailey-Iacona R; Helterbrand J; Williams G;
Eur J Cancer; 2011 Aug; 47(12):1763-71. PubMed ID: 21435858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimal two-stage randomized phase II clinical trials.
Logan BR
Clin Trials; 2005; 2(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 16279574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Designing phase II studies in cancer with time-to-event endpoints.
Owzar K; Jung SH
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(3):209-21. PubMed ID: 18559409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
