325 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24904956)
1. Seamless Phase I/II Adaptive Design for Oncology Trials of Molecularly Targeted Agents.
Wages NA; Tait C
J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(5):903-20. PubMed ID: 24904956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Improved adaptive randomization strategies for a seamless Phase I/II dose-finding design.
Yan D; Wages NA; Dressler EV
J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(2):333-347. PubMed ID: 30451068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Phase I/II dose-finding design for molecularly targeted agent: Plateau determination using adaptive randomization.
Riviere MK; Yuan Y; Jourdan JH; Dubois F; Zohar S
Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Feb; 27(2):466-479. PubMed ID: 26988926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Two-stage approach based on zone and dose findings for two-agent combination Phase I/II trials.
Shimamura F; Hamada C; Matsui S; Hirakawa A
J Biopharm Stat; 2018; 28(6):1025-1037. PubMed ID: 29420127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A utility-based Bayesian optimal interval (U-BOIN) phase I/II design to identify the optimal biological dose for targeted and immune therapies.
Zhou Y; Lee JJ; Yuan Y
Stat Med; 2019 Dec; 38(28):5299-5316. PubMed ID: 31621952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Towards using a full spectrum of early clinical trial data: a retrospective analysis to compare potential longitudinal categorical models for molecular targeted therapies in oncology.
Colin P; Micallef S; Delattre M; Mancini P; Parent E
Stat Med; 2015 Sep; 34(22):2999-3016. PubMed ID: 26059319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Bayesian dose-finding designs for combination of molecularly targeted agents assuming partial stochastic ordering.
Guo B; Li Y
Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(5):859-75. PubMed ID: 25413162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. STEIN: A simple toxicity and efficacy interval design for seamless phase I/II clinical trials.
Lin R; Yin G
Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(26):4106-4120. PubMed ID: 28786138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Statistical controversies in clinical research: building the bridge to phase II-efficacy estimation in dose-expansion cohorts.
Boonstra PS; Braun TM; Taylor JMG; Kidwell KM; Bellile EL; Daignault S; Zhao L; Griffith KA; Lawrence TS; Kalemkerian GP; Schipper MJ
Ann Oncol; 2017 Jul; 28(7):1427-1435. PubMed ID: 28200082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A dose-finding approach for genomic patterns in phase I trials.
Kaneko S; Hirakawa A; Kakurai Y; Hamada C
J Biopharm Stat; 2020 Sep; 30(5):834-853. PubMed ID: 32310707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. TITE-BOIN-ET: Time-to-event Bayesian optimal interval design to accelerate dose-finding based on both efficacy and toxicity outcomes.
Takeda K; Morita S; Taguri M
Pharm Stat; 2020 May; 19(3):335-349. PubMed ID: 31829517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A Phase I/II adaptive design for heterogeneous groups with application to a stereotactic body radiation therapy trial.
Wages NA; Read PW; Petroni GR
Pharm Stat; 2015; 14(4):302-10. PubMed ID: 25962576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Repeated measures dose-finding design with time-trend detection in the presence of correlated toxicity data.
Yin J; Paoletti X; Sargent DJ; Mandrekar SJ
Clin Trials; 2017 Dec; 14(6):611-620. PubMed ID: 28764555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Statistical designs for early phases of cancer clinical trials.
Guan S
J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1109-26. PubMed ID: 23075011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A Bayesian dose-finding design for phase I/II clinical trials with nonignorable dropouts.
Guo B; Yuan Y
Stat Med; 2015 May; 34(10):1721-32. PubMed ID: 25626676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A Bayesian adaptive Phase I-II clinical trial for evaluating efficacy and toxicity with delayed outcomes.
Koopmeiners JS; Modiano J
Clin Trials; 2014 Feb; 11(1):38-48. PubMed ID: 24082004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Phase I/II adaptive design for drug combination oncology trials.
Wages NA; Conaway MR
Stat Med; 2014 May; 33(12):1990-2003. PubMed ID: 24470329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparison of phase I dose-finding designs in clinical trials with monotonicity assumption violation.
Abbas R; Rossoni C; Jaki T; Paoletti X; Mozgunov P
Clin Trials; 2020 Oct; 17(5):522-534. PubMed ID: 32631095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A Dose-Finding Method Based on Multiple Dosing in Two-Agent Combination Phase I Trials.
Kakurai Y; Hirakawa A; Hamada C
J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(5):1065-76. PubMed ID: 25369852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A trivariate continual reassessment method for phase I/II trials of toxicity, efficacy, and surrogate efficacy.
Zhong W; Koopmeiners JS; Carlin BP
Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(29):3885-95. PubMed ID: 22807126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
