307 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20855829)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Criticism of tumor response criteria raises trial design questions.
Twombly R
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2006 Feb; 98(4):232-4. PubMed ID: 16478740
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. [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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Other paradigms: randomized discontinuation trial design.
Stadler W
Cancer J; 2009; 15(5):431-4. PubMed ID: 19826364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. "Sufficient life expectancy": an amazing inclusion criterion in cancer phase II-III trials.
Penel N; Clisant S; Lefebvre JL; Adenis A
J Clin Oncol; 2009 Sep; 27(26):e105. PubMed ID: 19667257
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Newer phase II trial designs gaining ground.
Benowitz S
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Oct; 99(19):1428-9. PubMed ID: 17895467
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Dose density in breast cancer: a simple message?
Lin NU; Gelman R; Winer EP
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 Dec; 97(23):1712-4. PubMed ID: 16333021
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical trials referral resource. Current phase II and phase III clinical trials in the treatment of colorectal cancer.
Mooney MM; Schoenfeldt M
Oncology (Williston Park); 2004 Oct; 18(11):1396, 1401, 1404 passim. PubMed ID: 15609469
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Rationale and design of the enoximone clinical trials program.
Lowes BD; Shakar SF; Metra M; Feldman AM; Eichhorn E; Freytag JW; Gerber MJ; Liard JF; Hartman C; Gorczynski R; Evans G; Linseman JV; Stewart J; Robertson AD; Roecker EB; Demets DL; Bristow MR
J Card Fail; 2005 Dec; 11(9):659-69. PubMed ID: 16360960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
