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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24064355)

  • 21. When are "positive" clinical trials in oncology truly positive?
    Ocana A; Tannock IF
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2011 Jan; 103(1):16-20. PubMed ID: 21131576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Adjusting for observational secondary treatments in estimating the effects of randomized treatments.
    Zhang M; Wang Y
    Biostatistics; 2013 Jul; 14(3):491-501. PubMed ID: 23349243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Sample size determination in clinical trials with multiple co-primary binary endpoints.
    Sozu T; Sugimoto T; Hamasaki T
    Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(21):2169-79. PubMed ID: 20687162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Statistical power of negative randomized controlled trials presented at American Society for Clinical Oncology annual meetings.
    Bedard PL; Krzyzanowska MK; Pintilie M; Tannock IF
    J Clin Oncol; 2007 Aug; 25(23):3482-7. PubMed ID: 17687153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The efficiency of clinical trial designs for predictive biomarker validation.
    Young KY; Laird A; Zhou XH
    Clin Trials; 2010 Oct; 7(5):557-66. PubMed ID: 20571132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Identification of biomarker-by-treatment interactions in randomized clinical trials with survival outcomes and high-dimensional spaces.
    Ternès N; Rotolo F; Heinze G; Michiels S
    Biom J; 2017 Jul; 59(4):685-701. PubMed ID: 27862181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Oncogenic targets, magnitude of benefit, and market pricing of antineoplastic drugs.
    Amir E; Seruga B; Martinez-Lopez J; Kwong R; Pandiella A; Tannock IF; Ocaña A
    J Clin Oncol; 2011 Jun; 29(18):2543-9. PubMed ID: 21606435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Availability of pharmacogenetic and pharmacogenomic information in anticancer drug monographs in France: personalized cancer therapy.
    Albertini L; Siest G; Jeannesson E; Visvikis-Siest S
    Pharmacogenomics; 2011 May; 12(5):681-91. PubMed ID: 21619430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Three-arm noninferiority trials with a prespecified margin for inference of the difference in the proportions of binary endpoints.
    Hida E; Tango T
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(4):774-89. PubMed ID: 23799810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. An efficient algorithm to determine the optimal two-stage randomized multinomial designs in oncology clinical trials.
    Zhang Y; Mietlowski W; Chen B; Wang Y
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jan; 21(1):56-65. PubMed ID: 21191854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Statistical analysis of clinical trials.
    Wassertheil-Smoller S; Kim MY
    Semin Nucl Med; 2010 Sep; 40(5):357-63. PubMed ID: 20674595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Sample size adjustments for varying cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes analyzed with second-order PQL mixed logistic regression.
    Candel MJ; Van Breukelen GJ
    Stat Med; 2010 Jun; 29(14):1488-501. PubMed ID: 20101669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A seamless phase II/III design with sample-size re-estimation.
    Bischoff W; Miller F
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Jul; 19(4):595-609. PubMed ID: 20183428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A behavioural Bayes approach to the determination of sample size for clinical trials considering efficacy and safety: imbalanced sample size in treatment groups.
    Kikuchi T; Gittins J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2011 Aug; 20(4):389-400. PubMed ID: 20223784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A type of sample size design in cancer clinical trials for response rate estimation.
    Liu J
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2011 Jan; 32(1):140-6. PubMed ID: 20965278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Exact tests using two correlated binomial variables in contemporary cancer clinical trials.
    Yu J; Kepner JL; Iyer R
    Biom J; 2009 Dec; 51(6):899-914. PubMed ID: 20014199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Impact of biomarkers on clinical trial risk.
    Reid GG; Bin Yameen TA; Parker JL
    Pharmacogenomics; 2013 Oct; 14(13):1645-58. PubMed ID: 24088135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Biomarker assay translation from discovery to clinical studies in cancer drug development: quantification of emerging protein biomarkers.
    Lee JW; Figeys D; Vasilescu J
    Adv Cancer Res; 2007; 96():269-98. PubMed ID: 17161683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.