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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34907654)

  • 1. Improving the assessment of the probability of success in late stage drug development.
    Hampson LV; Bornkamp B; Holzhauer B; Kahn J; Lange MR; Luo WL; Cioppa GD; Stott K; Ballerstedt S
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Mar; 21(2):439-459. PubMed ID: 34907654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Better decision making in drug development through adoption of formal prior elicitation.
    Dallow N; Best N; Montague TH
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Jul; 17(4):301-316. PubMed ID: 29603614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Decision-making in drug development using a composite definition of success.
    Saint-Hilary G; Robert V; Gasparini M
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Sep; 17(5):555-569. PubMed ID: 29956453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A New Comprehensive Approach to Assess the Probability of Success of Development Programs Before Pivotal Trials.
    Hampson LV; Holzhauer B; Bornkamp B; Kahn J; Lange MR; Luo WL; Singh P; Ballerstedt S; Cioppa GD
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2022 May; 111(5):1050-1060. PubMed ID: 34762298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Practical experiences of adopting assurance as a quantitative framework to support decision making in drug development.
    Crisp A; Miller S; Thompson D; Best N
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Jul; 17(4):317-328. PubMed ID: 29635777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Optimal designs for phase II/III drug development programs including methods for discounting of phase II results.
    Erdmann S; Kirchner M; Götte H; Kieser M
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Oct; 20(1):253. PubMed ID: 33036572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Alternative strategies in drug development: clinical pharmacological aspects.
    Kuhlmann J
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1999 Dec; 37(12):575-83. PubMed ID: 10599949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Model-Based Meta-Analysis for Multiple Myeloma: A Quantitative Drug-Independent Framework for Efficient Decisions in Oncology Drug Development.
    Teng Z; Gupta N; Hua Z; Liu G; Samnotra V; Venkatakrishnan K; Labotka R
    Clin Transl Sci; 2018 Mar; 11(2):218-225. PubMed ID: 29168990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Development of a practical approach to expert elicitation for randomised controlled trials with missing health outcomes: Application to the IMPROVE trial.
    Mason AJ; Gomes M; Grieve R; Ulug P; Powell JT; Carpenter J
    Clin Trials; 2017 Aug; 14(4):357-367. PubMed ID: 28675302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Do we need to adjust for interim analyses in a Bayesian adaptive trial design?
    Ryan EG; Brock K; Gates S; Slade D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Jun; 20(1):150. PubMed ID: 32522284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Eliciting judgements about dependent quantities of interest: The SHeffield ELicitation Framework extension and copula methods illustrated using an asthma case study.
    Holzhauer B; Hampson LV; Gosling JP; Bornkamp B; Kahn J; Lange MR; Luo WL; Brindicci C; Lawrence D; Ballerstedt S; O'Hagan A
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Sep; 21(5):1005-1021. PubMed ID: 35373454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Optimal decision-making in oncology development programs based on probability of success for phase III utilizing phase II/III data on response and overall survival.
    Götte H; Xiong J; Kirchner M; Demirtas H; Kieser M
    Pharm Stat; 2020 Nov; 19(6):861-881. PubMed ID: 32662598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Predictive probability of success using surrogate endpoints.
    Saint-Hilary G; Barboux V; Pannaux M; Gasparini M; Robert V; Mastrantonio G
    Stat Med; 2019 May; 38(10):1753-1774. PubMed ID: 30548627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bayesian probability of success for clinical trials using historical data.
    Ibrahim JG; Chen MH; Lakshminarayanan M; Liu GF; Heyse JF
    Stat Med; 2015 Jan; 34(2):249-64. PubMed ID: 25339499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Benchmarking biopharmaceutical process development and manufacturing cost contributions to R&D.
    Farid SS; Baron M; Stamatis C; Nie W; Coffman J
    MAbs; 2020; 12(1):1754999. PubMed ID: 32449439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessing the success probability of a Phase III clinical trial based on Phase II data.
    Su Z
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2010 Nov; 31(6):620-3. PubMed ID: 20713180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bayesian methods for analysis of biosimilar phase III trials.
    Weiss RE; Xia X; Zhang N; Wang H; Chi E
    Stat Med; 2018 Sep; 37(20):2938-2953. PubMed ID: 29797335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Simulation optimization for Bayesian multi-arm multi-stage clinical trial with binary endpoints.
    Yu Z; Ramakrishnan V; Meinzer C
    J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(2):306-317. PubMed ID: 30763151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A Bayesian three-tier quantitative decision-making framework for single arm studies in early phase oncology.
    Liu Z; Liu J; Xia M
    J Biopharm Stat; 2023 Jan; 33(1):60-76. PubMed ID: 35723946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An extension of Bayesian expected power and its application in decision making.
    Liu F
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Sep; 20(5):941-53. PubMed ID: 20721783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.