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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25903293)

  • 1. Estimation after subpopulation selection in adaptive seamless trials.
    Kimani PK; Todd S; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2015 Aug; 34(18):2581-601. PubMed ID: 25903293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Conditionally unbiased estimation in phase II/III clinical trials with early stopping for futility.
    Kimani PK; Todd S; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2013 Jul; 32(17):2893-910. PubMed ID: 23413228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Adjusting for treatment selection in phase II/III clinical trials with time to event data.
    Khan JN; Kimani PK; Glimm E; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2023 Jan; 42(2):146-163. PubMed ID: 36419206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Point estimation following two-stage adaptive threshold enrichment clinical trials.
    Kimani PK; Todd S; Renfro LA; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2018 Sep; 37(22):3179-3196. PubMed ID: 29855066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Unbiased estimation in seamless phase II/III trials with unequal treatment effect variances and hypothesis-driven selection rules.
    Robertson DS; Prevost AT; Bowden J
    Stat Med; 2016 Sep; 35(22):3907-22. PubMed ID: 27103068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trials with hypotheses selection at interim: general concepts.
    Bretz F; Schmidli H; König F; Racine A; Maurer W
    Biom J; 2006 Aug; 48(4):623-34. PubMed ID: 16972714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An adaptive seamless phase II/III design for oncology trials with subpopulation selection using correlated survival endpoints.
    Jenkins M; Stone A; Jennison C
    Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(4):347-56. PubMed ID: 22328327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Point and interval estimation in two-stage adaptive designs with time to event data and biomarker-driven subpopulation selection.
    Kimani PK; Todd S; Renfro LA; Glimm E; Khan JN; Kairalla JA; Stallard N
    Stat Med; 2020 Aug; 39(19):2568-2586. PubMed ID: 32363603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Estimation of treatment effect in two-stage confirmatory oncology trials of personalized medicines.
    Li W; Chen C; Li X; Beckman RA
    Stat Med; 2017 May; 36(12):1843-1861. PubMed ID: 28303586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Point estimation in adaptive enrichment designs.
    Kunzmann K; Benner L; Kieser M
    Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(25):3935-3947. PubMed ID: 28783881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of methods for constructing confidence intervals after phase II/III clinical trials.
    Kimani PK; Todd S; Stallard N
    Biom J; 2014 Jan; 56(1):107-28. PubMed ID: 24173686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A novel adaptive design strategy increases the efficiency of clinical trials in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.
    Chataway J; Nicholas R; Todd S; Miller DH; Parsons N; Valdés-Márquez E; Stallard N; Friede T
    Mult Scler; 2011 Jan; 17(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 20798135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Statistical aspects of the TNK-S2B trial of tenecteplase versus alteplase in acute ischemic stroke: an efficient, dose-adaptive, seamless phase II/III design.
    Levin B; Thompson JL; Chakraborty B; Levy G; MacArthur R; Haley EC
    Clin Trials; 2011 Aug; 8(4):398-407. PubMed ID: 21737464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi-stage designs for multi-arm clinical trials.
    Wason JM; Trippa L
    Stat Med; 2014 Jun; 33(13):2206-21. PubMed ID: 24421053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Conditionally unbiased and near unbiased estimation of the selected treatment mean for multistage drop-the-losers trials.
    Bowden J; Glimm E
    Biom J; 2014 Mar; 56(2):332-49. PubMed ID: 24353149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. How practical are adaptive designs likely to be for confirmatory trials?
    Gould AL
    Biom J; 2006 Aug; 48(4):644-9; discussion 660-2. PubMed ID: 16972716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A comparison of estimation methods adjusting for selection bias in adaptive enrichment designs with time-to-event endpoints.
    Di Stefano F; Pannaux M; Correges A; Galtier S; Robert V; Saint-Hilary G
    Stat Med; 2022 May; 41(10):1767-1779. PubMed ID: 35098579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trials with hypotheses selection at interim: opportunities and limitations.
    Jenniso C; Turnbull BW
    Biom J; 2006 Aug; 48(4):650-5; discussion 660-2. PubMed ID: 16972717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Data-driven treatment selection for seamless phase II/III trials incorporating early-outcome data.
    Kunz CU; Friede T; Parsons N; Todd S; Stallard N
    Pharm Stat; 2014; 13(4):238-46. PubMed ID: 24789367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.