202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21341302)
1. Estimating the dose-toxicity curve in completed phase I studies.
Iasonos A; Ostrovnaya I
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(17):2117-29. PubMed ID: 21341302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessment of various continual reassessment method models for dose-escalation phase 1 oncology clinical trials: using real clinical data and simulation studies.
James GD; Symeonides S; Marshall J; Young J; Clack G
BMC Cancer; 2021 Jan; 21(1):7. PubMed ID: 33402104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies.
Iasonos A; Wilton AS; Riedel ER; Seshan VE; Spriggs DR
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(5):465-77. PubMed ID: 18827039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The 3 + 3 design in dose-finding studies with small sample sizes: Pitfalls and possible remedies.
Chiuzan C; Dehbi HM
Clin Trials; 2024 Jun; 21(3):350-357. PubMed ID: 38618916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method.
Wheeler GM; Mander AP; Bedding A; Brock K; Cornelius V; Grieve AP; Jaki T; Love SB; Odondi L; Weir CJ; Yap C; Bond SJ
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jan; 19(1):18. PubMed ID: 30658575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies.
Zohar S; Chevret S
Stat Med; 2001 Oct; 20(19):2827-43. PubMed ID: 11568943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A statistical evaluation of dose expansion cohorts in phase I clinical trials.
Boonstra PS; Shen J; Taylor JM; Braun TM; Griffith KA; Daignault S; Kalemkerian GP; Lawrence TS; Schipper MJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2015 Mar; 107(3):. PubMed ID: 25710960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Performance of toxicity probability interval based designs in contrast to the continual reassessment method.
Horton BJ; Wages NA; Conaway MR
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 27435150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Randomized CRM: An Approach to Overcoming the Long-Memory Property of the CRM.
Koopmeiners JS; Wey A
J Biopharm Stat; 2017; 27(6):1028-1042. PubMed ID: 28340333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The continual reassessment method and its applications: a Bayesian methodology for phase I cancer clinical trials.
Ishizuka N; Ohashi Y
Stat Med; 2001 Sep 15-30; 20(17-18):2661-81. PubMed ID: 11523075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Retrospective robustness of the continual reassessment method.
O'Quigley J; Zohar S
J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Sep; 20(5):1013-25. PubMed ID: 20721788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Rolling continual reassessment method with overdose control: An efficient and safe dose escalation design.
Zhu J; Sabanés Bové D; Liao Z; Beyer U; Yung G; Sarkar S
Contemp Clin Trials; 2021 Aug; 107():106436. PubMed ID: 34000410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Dose-finding clinical trial design for ordinal toxicity grades using the continuation ratio model: an extension of the continual reassessment method.
Van Meter EM; Garrett-Mayer E; Bandyopadhyay D
Clin Trials; 2012 Jun; 9(3):303-13. PubMed ID: 22547420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Performance of two-stage continual reassessment method relative to an optimal benchmark.
Wages NA; Conaway MR; O'Quigley J
Clin Trials; 2013; 10(6):862-75. PubMed ID: 24085776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The continual reassessment method for dose-finding studies: a tutorial.
Garrett-Mayer E
Clin Trials; 2006; 3(1):57-71. PubMed ID: 16539090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Optimal phase I dose-escalation trial designs in oncology--a simulation study.
Gerke O; Siedentop H
Stat Med; 2008 Nov; 27(26):5329-44. PubMed ID: 17849502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Systematic comparison of the statistical operating characteristics of various Phase I oncology designs.
Ananthakrishnan R; Green S; Chang M; Doros G; Massaro J; LaValley M
Contemp Clin Trials Commun; 2017 Mar; 5():34-48. PubMed ID: 29740620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The impact of non-drug-related toxicities on the estimation of the maximum tolerated dose in phase I trials.
Iasonos A; Gounder M; Spriggs DR; Gerecitano JF; Hyman DM; Zohar S; O'Quigley J
Clin Cancer Res; 2012 Oct; 18(19):5179-87. PubMed ID: 22825582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of model choices for the Continual Reassessment Method in phase I cancer trials.
Paoletti X; Kramar A
Stat Med; 2009 Oct; 28(24):3012-28. PubMed ID: 19672839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
