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 *

143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33738842)

  • 21. Adaptive designs at European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) with a focus on adaptive sample size re-estimation based on interim-effect size.
    Mauer M; Collette L; Bogaerts J;
    Eur J Cancer; 2012 Jun; 48(9):1386-91. PubMed ID: 22281098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Tradeoff-based optimization criteria in clinical trials with multiple objectives and adaptive designs.
    Dmitrienko A; Paux G; Pulkstenis E; Zhang J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2016; 26(1):120-40. PubMed ID: 26391238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Conditional power and friends: The why and how of (un)planned, unblinded sample size recalculations in confirmatory trials.
    Kunzmann K; Grayling MJ; Lee KM; Robertson DS; Rufibach K; Wason JMS
    Stat Med; 2022 Feb; 41(5):877-890. PubMed ID: 35023184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Optimal unplanned design modification in adaptive two-stage trials.
    Pilz M; Herrmann C; Rauch G; Kieser M
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Nov; 21(6):1121-1137. PubMed ID: 35604767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A Tutorial on Value-Based Adaptive Designs: Could a Value-Based Sequential 2-Arm Design Have Created More Health Economic Value for the Big CACTUS Trial?
    Flight L; Brennan A; Wilson I; Chick SE
    Value Health; 2024 Oct; 27(10):1328-1337. PubMed ID: 38977182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Performance of adaptive sample size adjustment with respect to stopping criteria and time of interim analysis.
    Jahn-Eimermacher A; Hommel G
    Stat Med; 2007 Mar; 26(7):1450-61. PubMed ID: 16900553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Performance of adaptive designs for single-armed phase II oncology trials.
    Kieser M; Englert S
    J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(3):602-15. PubMed ID: 24905363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. On sample size determination in multi-armed confirmatory adaptive designs.
    Wassmer G
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):802-17. PubMed ID: 21516570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Optimal adaptive promising zone designs.
    Mehta C; Bhingare A; Liu L; Senchaudhuri P
    Stat Med; 2022 May; 41(11):1950-1970. PubMed ID: 35165917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Adaptive Optimal Designs for Dose-Finding Studies with Time-to-Event Outcomes.
    Ryeznik Y; Sverdlov O; Hooker AC
    AAPS J; 2017 Dec; 20(1):24. PubMed ID: 29285730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. An evaluation of inferential procedures for adaptive clinical trial designs with pre-specified rules for modifying the sample size.
    Levin GP; Emerson SC; Emerson SS
    Biometrics; 2014 Sep; 70(3):556-67. PubMed ID: 24766094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Adaptive designs for single-arm phase II trials in oncology.
    Englert S; Kieser M
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(3):241-9. PubMed ID: 22411839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Optimized adaptive enrichment designs for three-arm trials: learning which subpopulations benefit from different treatments.
    Steingrimsson JA; Betz J; Qian T; Rosenblum M
    Biostatistics; 2021 Apr; 22(2):283-297. PubMed ID: 31420983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Vasopressors and the search for the optimal trial design.
    Maharaj R
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2011 Nov; 32(6):924-30. PubMed ID: 21807122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Sample size adjustment designs with time-to-event outcomes: A caution.
    Freidlin B; Korn EL
    Clin Trials; 2017 Dec; 14(6):597-604. PubMed ID: 28795844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Reasonable two-stage adaptive designs for single-arm phase II clinical trials.
    Kashiwabara K; Matsuyama Y
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Nov; 17(6):770-780. PubMed ID: 30168250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Optimal adaptive sequential designs for crossover bioequivalence studies.
    Xu J; Audet C; DiLiberti CE; Hauck WW; Montague TH; Parr AF; Potvin D; Schuirmann DJ
    Pharm Stat; 2016; 15(1):15-27. PubMed ID: 26538182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Adaptive trial designs in diagnostic accuracy research.
    Zapf A; Stark M; Gerke O; Ehret C; Benda N; Bossuyt P; Deeks J; Reitsma J; Alonzo T; Friede T
    Stat Med; 2020 Feb; 39(5):591-601. PubMed ID: 31773788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Practical characteristics of adaptive design in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials.
    Sato A; Shimura M; Gosho M
    J Clin Pharm Ther; 2018 Apr; 43(2):170-180. PubMed ID: 28850685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Optimized adaptive enrichment designs.
    Ondra T; Jobjörnsson S; Beckman RA; Burman CF; König F; Stallard N; Posch M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Jul; 28(7):2096-2111. PubMed ID: 29254436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.