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 *

86 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27642221)

  • 1. Uniformly Most Powerful Tests for Simultaneously Detecting a Treatment Effect in the Overall Population and at Least One Subpopulation.
    Rosenblum M
    J Stat Plan Inference; 2014 Dec; 155():107-116. PubMed ID: 27642221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Optimal Tests of Treatment Effects for the Overall Population and Two Subpopulations in Randomized Trials, using Sparse Linear Programming.
    Rosenblum M; Liu H; Yen EH
    J Am Stat Assoc; 2014 Jan; 109(507):1216-1228. PubMed ID: 25568502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Identifying treatment effect heterogeneity in clinical trials using subpopulations of events: STEPP.
    Lazar AA; Bonetti M; Cole BF; Yip WK; Gelber RD
    Clin Trials; 2016 Apr; 13(2):169-79. PubMed ID: 26493094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Optimizing randomized trial designs to distinguish which subpopulations benefit from treatment.
    Rosenblum M; Van der Laan MJ
    Biometrika; 2011 Dec; 98(4):845-860. PubMed ID: 23049131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Multiple testing procedures for adaptive enrichment designs: combining group sequential and reallocation approaches.
    Rosenblum M; Qian T; Du Y; Qiu H; Fisher A
    Biostatistics; 2016 Oct; 17(4):650-62. PubMed ID: 27006374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Multiple testing for a combination drug with two study endpoints.
    Shao J; Zhang S; Zhao J; Chiang A
    Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(17):1779-90. PubMed ID: 22576824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. UNIFORMLY MOST POWERFUL BAYESIAN TESTS.
    Johnson VE
    Ann Stat; 2013; 41(4):1716-1741. PubMed ID: 24659829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Robustness of testing procedures for confirmatory subpopulation analyses based on a continuous biomarker.
    Graf AC; Wassmer G; Friede T; Gera RG; Posch M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Jun; 28(6):1879-1892. PubMed ID: 29888651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of methods for estimating the number of true null hypotheses in multiplicity testing.
    Hsueh HM; Chen JJ; Kodell RL
    J Biopharm Stat; 2003 Nov; 13(4):675-89. PubMed ID: 14584715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Simultaneous multiple comparison procedures in psychiatric research.
    Hall W; Bird KD
    Aust N Z J Psychiatry; 1986 Mar; 20(1):46-54. PubMed ID: 3460585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Group sequential designs with prospectively planned rules for subpopulation enrichment.
    Rosenblum M; Luber B; Thompson RE; Hanley D
    Stat Med; 2016 Sep; 35(21):3776-91. PubMed ID: 27076411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Enrichment design with patient population augmentation.
    Yang B; Zhou Y; Zhang L; Cui L
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2015 May; 42():60-7. PubMed ID: 25746817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plot (STEPP) analysis for continuous, binary, and count outcomes.
    Yip WK; Bonetti M; Cole BF; Barcella W; Wang XV; Lazar A; Gelber RD
    Clin Trials; 2016 Aug; 13(4):382-90. PubMed ID: 27094489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Controlling the rate of Type I error over a large set of statistical tests.
    Keselman HJ; Cribbie R; Holland B
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2002 May; 55(Pt 1):27-39. PubMed ID: 12034010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The fallback procedure for evaluating a single family of hypotheses.
    Wiens BL; Dmitrienko A
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(6):929-42. PubMed ID: 16279352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A likelihood-based method for testing for nonstochastic variation of diversification rates in phylogenies.
    McConway KJ; Sims HJ
    Evolution; 2004 Jan; 58(1):12-23. PubMed ID: 15058715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A method to increase the power of multiple testing procedures through sample splitting.
    Rubin D; Dudoit S; van der Laan M
    Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2006; 5():Article19. PubMed ID: 17049030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.