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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21590790)

  • 61. Fractional dose-finding methods with late-onset toxicity in phase I clinical trials.
    Yin G; Zheng S; Xu J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(4):856-70. PubMed ID: 23786314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Dose finding with continuous outcome in phase I oncology trials.
    Wang Y; Ivanova A
    Pharm Stat; 2015; 14(2):102-7. PubMed ID: 25408518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Modeling adverse event counts in phase I clinical trials of a cytotoxic agent.
    Muenz DG; Braun TM; Taylor JM
    Clin Trials; 2018 Aug; 15(4):386-397. PubMed ID: 29779418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Continual reassessment method vs. traditional empirically based design: modifications motivated by Phase I trials in pediatric oncology by the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium.
    Onar A; Kocak M; Boyett JM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009; 19(3):437-55. PubMed ID: 19384687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. U-PRO-CRM: designing patient-centred dose-finding trials with patient-reported outcomes.
    Alger E; Lee SM; Cheung YK; Yap C
    ESMO Open; 2024 Jul; 9(7):103626. PubMed ID: 38968929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Dose-finding design for multi-drug combinations.
    Wages NA; Conaway MR; O'Quigley J
    Clin Trials; 2011 Aug; 8(4):380-9. PubMed ID: 21652689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Sensitivity of dose-finding studies to observation errors.
    Zohar S; O'Quigley J
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2009 Nov; 30(6):523-30. PubMed ID: 19580886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. CRM2DIM: A SAS macro for implementing the dual-agent Bayesian continual reassessment method.
    Bayar MA; Ivanova A; Le Teuff G
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2019 Jul; 176():211-223. PubMed ID: 31200907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Selection of the initial design for the two-stage continual reassessment method.
    Jia X; Ivanova A; Lee SM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2017; 27(3):495-506. PubMed ID: 28300466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs.
    Ahn C
    Stat Med; 1998 Jul; 17(14):1537-49. PubMed ID: 9699228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. 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]  

  • 72. 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]  

  • 73. TITE-gBOIN: Time-to-event Bayesian optimal interval design to accelerate dose-finding accounting for toxicity grades.
    Takeda K; Xia Q; Liu S; Rong A
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Mar; 21(2):496-506. PubMed ID: 34862715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Shift models for dose-finding in partially ordered groups.
    Horton BJ; Wages NA; Conaway MR
    Clin Trials; 2019 Feb; 16(1):32-40. PubMed ID: 30309262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies.
    Goodman SN; Zahurak ML; Piantadosi S
    Stat Med; 1995 Jun; 14(11):1149-61. PubMed ID: 7667557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Dose-finding approach for dose escalation with overdose control considering incomplete observations.
    Mauguen A; Le Deley MC; Zohar S
    Stat Med; 2011 Jun; 30(13):1584-94. PubMed ID: 21351289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. A web tool for designing and conducting phase I trials using the continual reassessment method.
    Wages NA; Petroni GR
    BMC Cancer; 2018 Feb; 18(1):133. PubMed ID: 29402249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Bayesian interval-based oncology dose-finding design with repeated quasi-continuous toxicity model.
    Zhao D; Zhu J; Wang L
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2021 Mar; 102():106265. PubMed ID: 33418097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Retrospective analysis of sequential dose-finding designs.
    O'Quigley J
    Biometrics; 2005 Sep; 61(3):749-56. PubMed ID: 16135026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. A simulation-based comparison of the traditional method, Rolling-6 design and a frequentist version of the continual reassessment method with special attention to trial duration in pediatric Phase I oncology trials.
    Onar-Thomas A; Xiong Z
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2010 May; 31(3):259-70. PubMed ID: 20298812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.