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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28776422)

  • 21. A benchmark for dose-finding studies with unknown ordering.
    Mozgunov P; Paoletti X; Jaki T
    Biostatistics; 2022 Jul; 23(3):721-737. PubMed ID: 33409536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Dose-finding design using mixed-effect proportional odds model for longitudinal graded toxicity data in phase I oncology clinical trials.
    Doussau A; Thiébaut R; Paoletti X
    Stat Med; 2013 Dec; 32(30):5430-47. PubMed ID: 24018535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A model-assisted design for partially or completely ordered groups.
    Celum C; Conaway M
    Pharm Stat; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38769904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. STEIN: A simple toxicity and efficacy interval design for seamless phase I/II clinical trials.
    Lin R; Yin G
    Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(26):4106-4120. PubMed ID: 28786138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Bayesian dose-finding phase I trial design incorporating pharmacokinetic assessment in the field of oncology.
    Takeda K; Komatsu K; Morita S
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Nov; 17(6):725-733. PubMed ID: 30066356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Adaptive dose insertion in early phase clinical trials.
    Hu B; Bekele BN; Ji Y
    Clin Trials; 2013 Apr; 10(2):216-24. PubMed ID: 20819841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The performance of model-based versus rule-based phase I clinical trials in oncology : A quantitative comparison of the performance of model-based versus rule-based phase I trials with molecularly targeted anticancer drugs over the last 2 years.
    van Brummelen EM; Huitema AD; van Werkhoven E; Beijnen JH; Schellens JH
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2016 Jun; 43(3):235-42. PubMed ID: 26960536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Small-sample behavior of novel phase I cancer trial designs.
    Oron AP; Hoff PD
    Clin Trials; 2013 Feb; 10(1):63-80. PubMed ID: 23345304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Consequences of Performing Parallel Dose Finding Trials in Heterogeneous Groups of Patients.
    Horton BJ; O'Quigley J; Conaway MR
    JNCI Cancer Spectr; 2019 Jun; 3(2):pkz013. PubMed ID: 31206097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. On the coherence of model-based dose-finding designs for drug combination trials.
    Park Y; Liu S
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(11):e0242561. PubMed ID: 33253260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A non-parametric approach to the design and analysis of two-dimensional dose-finding trials.
    Ivanova A; Wang K
    Stat Med; 2004 Jun; 23(12):1861-70. PubMed ID: 15195320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. dfpk: An R-package for Bayesian dose-finding designs using pharmacokinetics (PK) for phase I clinical trials.
    Toumazi A; Comets E; Alberti C; Friede T; Lentz F; Stallard N; Zohar S; Ursino M
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2018 Apr; 157():163-177. PubMed ID: 29477425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Phase I studies of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer patients: a review of the designs.
    Potter DM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2006; 16(5):579-604. PubMed ID: 17037260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Dose finding with continuous outcome in phase I oncology trials.
    Wang Y; Ivanova A
    Pharm Stat; 2015; 14(2):102-7. PubMed ID: 25408518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Optimal designs for estimating the most successful dose.
    Zohar S; O'Quigley J
    Stat Med; 2006 Dec; 25(24):4311-20. PubMed ID: 16969893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Dose finding with longitudinal data: simpler models, richer outcomes.
    Paoletti X; Doussau A; Ezzalfani M; Rizzo E; Thiébaut R
    Stat Med; 2015 Sep; 34(22):2983-98. PubMed ID: 26109523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Clinical trial simulations in paediatric oncology: A feasibility study from the Innovative Therapies for Children with Cancer Consortium.
    Janssen JM; Zwaan CM; Schellens JHM; Beijnen JH; Huitema ADR
    Eur J Cancer; 2017 Nov; 85():78-85. PubMed ID: 28892776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Toxicity and Efficacy Probability Interval Design for Phase I Adoptive Cell Therapy Dose-Finding Clinical Trials.
    Li DH; Whitmore JB; Guo W; Ji Y
    Clin Cancer Res; 2017 Jan; 23(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 27742793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.