BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

591 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22610168)

  • 1. An adaptive design to bridge the gap between Phase 2b/3 microbicide effectiveness trials and evidence required for licensure.
    Taylor DJ; Grobler A; Abdool Karim SS
    Clin Trials; 2012 Aug; 9(4):377-84. PubMed ID: 22610168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Some design issues in trials of microbicides for the prevention of HIV infection.
    Fleming TR; Richardson BA
    J Infect Dis; 2004 Aug; 190(4):666-74. PubMed ID: 15272392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Practical guidelines for adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trials that use Bayesian methods.
    Kimani PK; Glimm E; Maurer W; Hutton JL; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2012 Aug; 31(19):2068-85. PubMed ID: 22437262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Adaptive clinical trials for new drug applications in Japan.
    Ando Y; Hirakawa A; Uyama Y
    Eur Neuropsychopharmacol; 2011 Feb; 21(2):175-9. PubMed ID: 20961739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Adaptive designs at European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) with a focus on adaptive sample size re-estimation based on interim-effect size.
    Mauer M; Collette L; Bogaerts J;
    Eur J Cancer; 2012 Jun; 48(9):1386-91. PubMed ID: 22281098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bayesian predictive power for interim adaptation in seamless phase II/III trials where the endpoint is survival up to some specified timepoint.
    Schmidli H; Bretz F; Racine-Poon A
    Stat Med; 2007 Nov; 26(27):4925-38. PubMed ID: 17590875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. A Bayesian adaptive design for multi-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled phase I/II trials.
    Xie F; Ji Y; Tremmel L
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):739-48. PubMed ID: 22426247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A decision rule for sequential monitoring of clinical trials with a primary and supportive outcome.
    Zhao Y; Grambsch PM; Neaton JD
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(2):140-53. PubMed ID: 17456513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Sequential designs for phase III clinical trials incorporating treatment selection.
    Stallard N; Todd S
    Stat Med; 2003 Mar; 22(5):689-703. PubMed ID: 12587100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Some thoughts on sample size: a Bayesian-frequentist hybrid approach.
    Gordon Lan KK; Wittes JT
    Clin Trials; 2012 Oct; 9(5):561-9. PubMed ID: 22865839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Designing a series of decision-theoretic phase II trials in a small population.
    Hee SW; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(30):4337-51. PubMed ID: 22927289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Discounting phase 2 results when planning phase 3 clinical trials.
    Kirby S; Burke J; Chuang-Stein C; Sin C
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(5):373-85. PubMed ID: 22641524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A varying-stage adaptive phase II/III clinical trial design.
    Dong G
    Stat Med; 2014 Apr; 33(8):1272-87. PubMed ID: 24273128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Heterosexual anal intercourse has the potential to cause a significant loss of power in vaginal microbicide effectiveness studies.
    McGowan I; Taylor DJ
    Sex Transm Dis; 2010 Jun; 37(6):361-4. PubMed ID: 20514687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Futility interim monitoring with control of type I and II error probabilities using the interim Z-value or confidence limit.
    Lachin JM
    Clin Trials; 2009 Dec; 6(6):565-73. PubMed ID: 19933716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.