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 *

212 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]
    of 11.