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 *

147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23819695)

  • 41. Bayesian decision theoretic two-stage design in phase II clinical trials with survival endpoint.
    Zhao L; Taylor JM; Schuetze SM
    Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(17):1804-20. PubMed ID: 22359354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. 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]  

  • 43. Statistical inference for extended or shortened phase II studies based on Simon's two-stage designs.
    Zhao J; Yu M; Feng XP
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Jun; 15():48. PubMed ID: 26048655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. A Review of Perspectives on the Use of Randomization in Phase II Oncology Trials.
    Grayling MJ; Dimairo M; Mander AP; Jaki TF
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2019 Dec; 111(12):1255-1262. PubMed ID: 31218346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Bayesian enhancement two-stage design for single-arm phase II clinical trials with binary and time-to-event endpoints.
    Shi H; Yin G
    Biometrics; 2018 Sep; 74(3):1055-1064. PubMed ID: 29466612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Comparing Go/No-Go Decision-Making Properties Between Single Arm Phase II Trial Designs in Oncology.
    Broglio K; Marshall J; Yu B; Frewer P
    Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2022 Mar; 56(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 34988927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness results from the randomised, Phase IIB trial in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia to compare fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone and low-dose rituximab: the Attenuated dose Rituximab with ChemoTherapy In Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (ARCTIC) trial.
    Howard DR; Munir T; McParland L; Rawstron AC; Chalmers A; Gregory WM; O'Dwyer JL; Smith A; Longo R; Varghese A; Smith A; Hillmen P
    Health Technol Assess; 2017 May; 21(28):1-374. PubMed ID: 28628003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. A Rescue Strategy for Handling Unevaluable Patients in Simon's Two Stage Design.
    Belin L; Broët P; De Rycke Y
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(9):e0137586. PubMed ID: 26368810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Bayesian hierarchical modeling of patient subpopulations: efficient designs of Phase II oncology clinical trials.
    Berry SM; Broglio KR; Groshen S; Berry DA
    Clin Trials; 2013 Oct; 10(5):720-34. PubMed ID: 23983156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Safety and Efficacy of Imatinib for Hospitalized Adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
    Emadi A; Chua JV; Talwani R; Bentzen SM; Baddley J
    Trials; 2020 Oct; 21(1):897. PubMed ID: 33115543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A confidence function-based posterior probability design for phase II cancer trials.
    Shan M
    Pharm Stat; 2021 May; 20(3):485-498. PubMed ID: 33336856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. [Randomised phase II trials in oncology].
    Piedbois P
    Bull Cancer; 2007 Nov; 94(11):953-6. PubMed ID: 18055312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Bayesian optimal phase II designs with dual-criterion decision making.
    Zhao Y; Li D; Liu R; Yuan Y
    Pharm Stat; 2023; 22(4):605-618. PubMed ID: 36871961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. 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]  

  • 55. Comparison of treatment effect from randomised controlled phase II trials and subsequent phase III trials using identical regimens in the same treatment setting.
    Liang F; Wu Z; Mo M; Zhou C; Shen J; Wang Z; Zheng Y
    Eur J Cancer; 2019 Nov; 121():19-28. PubMed ID: 31526874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. A Bayesian decision-theoretic sequential response-adaptive randomization design.
    Jiang F; Jack Lee J; Müller P
    Stat Med; 2013 May; 32(12):1975-94. PubMed ID: 23315678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Adaptive two-stage designs in phase II clinical trials.
    Banerjee A; Tsiatis AA
    Stat Med; 2006 Oct; 25(19):3382-95. PubMed ID: 16479547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Early phase trial design for assessing several dose levels for toxicity and efficacy for targeted agents.
    Hoering A; Mitchell A; LeBlanc M; Crowley J
    Clin Trials; 2013; 10(3):422-9. PubMed ID: 23529697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Practical and robust test for comparing binomial proportions in the randomized phase II setting.
    Attwood K; Park S; Hutson AD
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Mar; 21(2):361-371. PubMed ID: 34626075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Bayesian enhancement two-stage design with error control for phase II clinical trials.
    Jin H; Yin G
    Stat Med; 2020 Dec; 39(29):4452-4465. PubMed ID: 32854163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.