214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26112909)
1. Flexible selection of a single treatment incorporating short-term endpoint information in a phase II/III clinical trial.
Stallard N; Kunz CU; Todd S; Parsons N; Friede T
Stat Med; 2015 Oct; 34(23):3104-15. PubMed ID: 26112909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trial design incorporating short-term endpoint information.
Stallard N
Stat Med; 2010 Apr; 29(9):959-71. PubMed ID: 20191605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Group-sequential methods for adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trials.
Stallard N
J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):787-801. PubMed ID: 21516569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A modified varying-stage adaptive phase II/III clinical trial design.
Dong G; Vandemeulebroecke M
Pharm Stat; 2016 Jul; 15(4):368-78. PubMed ID: 27264007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Adaptive seamless designs with interim treatment selection: a case study in oncology.
Carreras M; Gutjahr G; Brannath W
Stat Med; 2015 Apr; 34(8):1317-33. PubMed ID: 25640198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of methods for treatment selection in seamless phase II/III clinical trials incorporating information on short-term endpoints.
Kunz CU; Friede T; Parsons N; Todd S; Stallard N
J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(1):170-89. PubMed ID: 24697322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trials with hypotheses selection at interim: applications and practical considerations.
Schmidli H; Bretz F; Racine A; Maurer W
Biom J; 2006 Aug; 48(4):635-43. PubMed ID: 16972715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Seamless Phase II/III combination study through response adaptive randomization.
Wang L; Cui L
J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(6):1177-87. PubMed ID: 18027224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Practical guidelines for adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trials that use Bayesian methods.
Kimani PK; Glimm E; Maurer W; Hutton JL; Stallard N
Stat Med; 2012 Aug; 31(19):2068-85. PubMed ID: 22437262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Designing a seamless phase II/III clinical trial using early outcomes for treatment selection: an application in multiple sclerosis.
Friede T; Parsons N; Stallard N; Todd S; Valdes Marquez E; Chataway J; Nicholas R
Stat Med; 2011 Jun; 30(13):1528-40. PubMed ID: 21341301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Bayesian predictive power for interim adaptation in seamless phase II/III trials where the endpoint is survival up to some specified timepoint.
Schmidli H; Bretz F; Racine-Poon A
Stat Med; 2007 Nov; 26(27):4925-38. PubMed ID: 17590875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Adaptive Dunnett tests for treatment selection.
Koenig F; Brannath W; Bretz F; Posch M
Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(10):1612-25. PubMed ID: 17876763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Time-to-event analysis with treatment arm selection at interim.
Di Scala L; Glimm E
Stat Med; 2011 Nov; 30(26):3067-81. PubMed ID: 21898523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Optimizing the data combination rule for seamless phase II/III clinical trials.
Hampson LV; Jennison C
Stat Med; 2015 Jan; 34(1):39-58. PubMed ID: 25315892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. An alternative phase II/III design for continuous endpoints.
Huang WS; Liu JP; Hsiao CF
Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(2):105-14. PubMed ID: 20186724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessment of type I error rate associated with dose-group switching in a longitudinal Alzheimer trial.
Habteab Ghebretinsae A; Molenberghs G; Dmitrienko A; Offen W; Sethuraman G
J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(3):660-84. PubMed ID: 24697817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Optimal decision-making in oncology development programs based on probability of success for phase III utilizing phase II/III data on response and overall survival.
Götte H; Xiong J; Kirchner M; Demirtas H; Kieser M
Pharm Stat; 2020 Nov; 19(6):861-881. PubMed ID: 32662598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
