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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33426918)

  • 1. Importance of incorporating quantitative imaging biomarker technical performance characteristics when estimating treatment effects.
    Obuchowski NA; Remer EM; Sakaie K; Schneider E; Fox RJ; Nakamura K; Avila R; Guimaraes A
    Clin Trials; 2021 Apr; 18(2):197-206. PubMed ID: 33426918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantitative imaging biomarkers: Effect of sample size and bias on confidence interval coverage.
    Obuchowski NA; Bullen J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Oct; 27(10):3139-3150. PubMed ID: 29298603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical methods for technical performance assessment.
    Raunig DL; McShane LM; Pennello G; Gatsonis C; Carson PL; Voyvodic JT; Wahl RL; Kurland BF; Schwarz AJ; Gönen M; Zahlmann G; Kondratovich MV; O'Donnell K; Petrick N; Cole PE; Garra B; Sullivan DC;
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Feb; 24(1):27-67. PubMed ID: 24919831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Statistical Considerations for Planning Clinical Trials with Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers.
    Obuchowski NA; Mozley PD; Matthews D; Buckler A; Bullen J; Jackson E
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2019 Jan; 111(1):19-26. PubMed ID: 30597055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Interpreting Change in Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers.
    Obuchowski NA
    Acad Radiol; 2018 Mar; 25(3):372-379. PubMed ID: 29191687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Statistical issues in the comparison of quantitative imaging biomarker algorithms using pulmonary nodule volume as an example.
    Obuchowski NA; Barnhart HX; Buckler AJ; Pennello G; Wang XF; Kalpathy-Cramer J; Kim HJ; Reeves AP;
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Feb; 24(1):107-40. PubMed ID: 24919828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using audit information to adjust parameter estimates for data errors in clinical trials.
    Shepherd BE; Shaw PA; Dodd LE
    Clin Trials; 2012 Dec; 9(6):721-9. PubMed ID: 22848072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reference-free error estimation for multiple measurement methods.
    Madan H; Pernuš F; Špiclin Ž
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Jul; 28(7):2196-2209. PubMed ID: 29384043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reducing bias in trials from reactions to measurement: the MERIT study including developmental work and expert workshop.
    French DP; Miles LM; Elbourne D; Farmer A; Gulliford M; Locock L; Sutton S; McCambridge J;
    Health Technol Assess; 2021 Sep; 25(55):1-72. PubMed ID: 34553685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Estimating the Precision of Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers without Test-Retest Studies.
    Obuchowski NA; Buckler AJ
    Acad Radiol; 2022 Apr; 29(4):543-549. PubMed ID: 34272163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mammographic density, endocrine therapy and breast cancer risk: a prognostic and predictive biomarker review.
    Atakpa EC; Thorat MA; Cuzick J; Brentnall AR
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2021 Oct; 10(10):CD013091. PubMed ID: 34697802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. MarkVCID cerebral small vessel consortium: I. Enrollment, clinical, fluid protocols.
    Wilcock D; Jicha G; Blacker D; Albert MS; D'Orazio LM; Elahi FM; Fornage M; Hinman JD; Knoefel J; Kramer J; Kryscio RJ; Lamar M; Moghekar A; Prestopnik J; Ringman JM; Rosenberg G; Sagare A; Satizabal CL; Schneider J; Seshadri S; Sur S; Tracy RP; Yasar S; Williams V; Singh H; Mazina L; Helmer KG; Corriveau RA; Schwab K; Kivisäkk P; Greenberg SM;
    Alzheimers Dement; 2021 Apr; 17(4):704-715. PubMed ID: 33480172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy and precision of proton density fat fraction measurement across field strengths and scan intervals: A phantom and human study.
    Kim HJ; Cho HJ; Kim B; You MW; Lee JH; Huh J; Kim JK
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Jul; 50(1):305-314. PubMed ID: 30430684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quantitative imaging biomarkers: a review of statistical methods for computer algorithm comparisons.
    Obuchowski NA; Reeves AP; Huang EP; Wang XF; Buckler AJ; Kim HJ; Barnhart HX; Jackson EF; Giger ML; Pennello G; Toledano AY; Kalpathy-Cramer J; Apanasovich TV; Kinahan PE; Myers KJ; Goldgof DB; Barboriak DP; Gillies RJ; Schwartz LH; Sullivan DC;
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Feb; 24(1):68-106. PubMed ID: 24919829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bias in retrospective analyses of biomarker effect using data from an outcome-adaptive randomized trial.
    Ji L; McShane LM; Krailo M; Sposto R
    Clin Trials; 2019 Dec; 16(6):599-609. PubMed ID: 31581815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE-MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials.
    Shukla-Dave A; Obuchowski NA; Chenevert TL; Jambawalikar S; Schwartz LH; Malyarenko D; Huang W; Noworolski SM; Young RJ; Shiroishi MS; Kim H; Coolens C; Laue H; Chung C; Rosen M; Boss M; Jackson EF
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Jun; 49(7):e101-e121. PubMed ID: 30451345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A Bayesian framework for performance assessment and comparison of imaging biomarker quantification methods.
    Smith BJ; Beichel RR
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Apr; 28(4):1003-1018. PubMed ID: 29271301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing methods to estimate treatment effects on a continuous outcome in multicentre randomized controlled trials: a simulation study.
    Chu R; Thabane L; Ma J; Holbrook A; Pullenayegum E; Devereaux PJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2011 Feb; 11():21. PubMed ID: 21338524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Beyond total treatment effects in randomised controlled trials: Baseline measurement of intermediate outcomes needed to reduce confounding in mediation investigations.
    Landau S; Emsley R; Dunn G
    Clin Trials; 2018 Jun; 15(3):247-256. PubMed ID: 29552919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.