323 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27581751)
1. Continual reassessment method for dose escalation clinical trials in oncology: a comparison of prior skeleton approaches using AZD3514 data.
James GD; Symeonides SN; Marshall J; Young J; Clack G
BMC Cancer; 2016 Aug; 16(1):703. PubMed ID: 27581751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessment of various continual reassessment method models for dose-escalation phase 1 oncology clinical trials: using real clinical data and simulation studies.
James GD; Symeonides S; Marshall J; Young J; Clack G
BMC Cancer; 2021 Jan; 21(1):7. PubMed ID: 33402104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A default method to specify skeletons for Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method for phase I clinical trials.
Pan H; Yuan Y
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(2):266-279. PubMed ID: 26991076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A simulation-based comparison of the traditional method, Rolling-6 design and a frequentist version of the continual reassessment method with special attention to trial duration in pediatric Phase I oncology trials.
Onar-Thomas A; Xiong Z
Contemp Clin Trials; 2010 May; 31(3):259-70. PubMed ID: 20298812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimal phase I dose-escalation trial designs in oncology--a simulation study.
Gerke O; Siedentop H
Stat Med; 2008 Nov; 27(26):5329-44. PubMed ID: 17849502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Designing dose-escalation trials with late-onset toxicities using the time-to-event continual reassessment method.
Normolle D; Lawrence T
J Clin Oncol; 2006 Sep; 24(27):4426-33. PubMed ID: 16983110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A comparison of model choices for the Continual Reassessment Method in phase I cancer trials.
Paoletti X; Kramar A
Stat Med; 2009 Oct; 28(24):3012-28. PubMed ID: 19672839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A new pragmatic design for dose escalation in phase 1 clinical trials using an adaptive continual reassessment method.
North B; Kocher HM; Sasieni P
BMC Cancer; 2019 Jun; 19(1):632. PubMed ID: 31242873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The continual reassessment method and its applications: a Bayesian methodology for phase I cancer clinical trials.
Ishizuka N; Ohashi Y
Stat Med; 2001 Sep 15-30; 20(17-18):2661-81. PubMed ID: 11523075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A two-stage dose selection strategy in phase I trials with wide dose ranges.
Wang O; Faries DE
J Biopharm Stat; 2000 Aug; 10(3):319-33. PubMed ID: 10959914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies.
Iasonos A; Wilton AS; Riedel ER; Seshan VE; Spriggs DR
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(5):465-77. PubMed ID: 18827039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The continual reassessment method for multiple toxicity grades: a bayesian model selection approach.
Pan H; Zhu C; Zhang F; Yuan Y; Zhang S; Zhang W; Li C; Wang L; Xia J
PLoS One; 2014; 9(5):e98147. PubMed ID: 24875783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The 3 + 3 design in dose-finding studies with small sample sizes: Pitfalls and possible remedies.
Chiuzan C; Dehbi HM
Clin Trials; 2024 Jun; 21(3):350-357. PubMed ID: 38618916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Randomized CRM: An Approach to Overcoming the Long-Memory Property of the CRM.
Koopmeiners JS; Wey A
J Biopharm Stat; 2017; 27(6):1028-1042. PubMed ID: 28340333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Posterior maximization and averaging for Bayesian working model choice in the continual reassessment method.
Daimon T; Zohar S; O'Quigley J
Stat Med; 2011 Jun; 30(13):1563-73. PubMed ID: 21351288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Performance of toxicity probability interval based designs in contrast to the continual reassessment method.
Horton BJ; Wages NA; Conaway MR
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 27435150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A statistical evaluation of dose expansion cohorts in phase I clinical trials.
Boonstra PS; Shen J; Taylor JM; Braun TM; Griffith KA; Daignault S; Kalemkerian GP; Lawrence TS; Schipper MJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2015 Mar; 107(3):. PubMed ID: 25710960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies.
Zohar S; Chevret S
Stat Med; 2001 Oct; 20(19):2827-43. PubMed ID: 11568943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Application of the continual reassessment method to a phase I dose-finding trial in Japanese patients: East meets West.
Morita S
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(17):2090-7. PubMed ID: 21500239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
