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 *

205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26098617)

  • 1. Reducing unnecessary measurements in clinical trials with multiple primary endpoints.
    Sozu T; Sugimoto T; Hamasaki T
    J Biopharm Stat; 2016; 26(4):631-43. PubMed ID: 26098617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sample size determination in clinical trials with multiple co-primary endpoints including mixed continuous and binary variables.
    Sozu T; Sugimoto T; Hamasaki T
    Biom J; 2012 Sep; 54(5):716-29. PubMed ID: 22829198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A convenient formula for sample size calculations in clinical trials with multiple co-primary continuous endpoints.
    Sugimoto T; Sozu T; Hamasaki T
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(2):118-28. PubMed ID: 22415870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sample size determination in superiority clinical trials with multiple co-primary correlated endpoints.
    Sozu T; Sugimoto T; Hamasaki T
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):650-68. PubMed ID: 21516562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Power and sample size for clinical trials when efficacy is required in multiple endpoints: application to an Alzheimer's treatment trial.
    Xiong C; Yu K; Gao F; Yan Y; Zhang Z
    Clin Trials; 2005; 2(5):387-93. PubMed ID: 16317808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Testing multiple primary endpoints in clinical trials with sample size adaptation.
    Liu Y; Hu M
    Pharm Stat; 2016; 15(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 26607410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multiplicity Adjustment and Sample Size Calculation in Clinical Trials with Multiple Endpoints: An Industry Survey of Current Practices in Japan.
    Sakamaki K; Morita Y; Iba K; Kamiura T; Yoshida S; Ogawa N; Suganami H; Tsuchiya S; Fukimbara S
    Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2020 Sep; 54(5):1097-1105. PubMed ID: 32030692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Design, data monitoring, and analysis of clinical trials with co-primary endpoints: A review.
    Hamasaki T; Evans SR; Asakura K
    J Biopharm Stat; 2018; 28(1):28-51. PubMed ID: 29083951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Statistical considerations for testing multiple endpoints in group sequential or adaptive clinical trials.
    Hung HM; Wang SJ; O'Neill R
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(6):1201-10. PubMed ID: 18027226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An examination of the efficiency of the sequential parallel design in psychiatric clinical trials.
    Tamura RN; Huang X
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(4):309-17. PubMed ID: 17848492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Statistical planning in confirmatory clinical trials with multiple treatment groups, multiple visits, and multiple endpoints.
    Sun H; Snyder E; Koch GG
    J Biopharm Stat; 2018; 28(1):189-211. PubMed ID: 28992425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Interim evaluation of efficacy or futility in group-sequential trials with multiple co-primary endpoints.
    Asakura K; Hamasaki T; Evans SR
    Biom J; 2017 Jul; 59(4):703-731. PubMed ID: 27757980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Impact of weighted composite compared to traditional composite endpoints for the design of randomized controlled trials.
    Bakal JA; Westerhout CM; Armstrong PW
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Dec; 24(6):980-8. PubMed ID: 22275378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Adaptive Designs with Discrete Test Statistics and Consideration of Overrunning.
    Schmidt R; Burkhardt B; Faldum A
    Methods Inf Med; 2015; 54(5):434-46. PubMed ID: 26429500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Addressing multiplicity issues of a composite endpoint and its components in clinical trials.
    Huque MF; Alosh M; Bhore R
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):610-34. PubMed ID: 21516560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Adaptive extensions of a two-stage group sequential procedure for testing primary and secondary endpoints (I): unknown correlation between the endpoints.
    Tamhane AC; Wu Y; Mehta CR
    Stat Med; 2012 Aug; 31(19):2027-40. PubMed ID: 22729929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sample size determination for equivalence assessment with multiple endpoints.
    Sun A; Dong X; Tsong Y
    J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(6):1203-14. PubMed ID: 25032845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Power and sample size when multiple endpoints are considered.
    Senn S; Bretz F
    Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(3):161-70. PubMed ID: 17674404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Use of composite endpoints in clinical trials.
    Sankoh AJ; Li H; D'Agostino RB
    Stat Med; 2014 Nov; 33(27):4709-14. PubMed ID: 24833282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Multiple-arm superiority and non-inferiority designs with various endpoints.
    Chang M
    Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 17323311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.