230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35699319)
21. Bayesian Optimal Interval Design: A Simple and Well-Performing Design for Phase I Oncology Trials.
Yuan Y; Hess KR; Hilsenbeck SG; Gilbert MR
Clin Cancer Res; 2016 Sep; 22(17):4291-301. PubMed ID: 27407096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Time-to-Event Bayesian Optimal Interval Design to Accelerate Phase I Trials.
Yuan Y; Lin R; Li D; Nie L; Warren KE
Clin Cancer Res; 2018 Oct; 24(20):4921-4930. PubMed ID: 29769209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. On the relative efficiency of model-assisted designs: a conditional approach.
Lin R; Yuan Y
J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(4):648-662. PubMed ID: 31258039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies.
Iasonos A; Wilton AS; Riedel ER; Seshan VE; Spriggs DR
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(5):465-77. PubMed ID: 18827039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method.
Wheeler GM; Mander AP; Bedding A; Brock K; Cornelius V; Grieve AP; Jaki T; Love SB; Odondi L; Weir CJ; Yap C; Bond SJ
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jan; 19(1):18. PubMed ID: 30658575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Systematic comparison of the statistical operating characteristics of various Phase I oncology designs.
Ananthakrishnan R; Green S; Chang M; Doros G; Massaro J; LaValley M
Contemp Clin Trials Commun; 2017 Mar; 5():34-48. PubMed ID: 29740620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. A statistical evaluation of dose expansion cohorts in phase I clinical trials.
Boonstra PS; Shen J; Taylor JM; Braun TM; Griffith KA; Daignault S; Kalemkerian GP; Lawrence TS; Schipper MJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2015 Mar; 107(3):. PubMed ID: 25710960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Improving early phase oncology clinical trial design: The case for finding the optimal biological dose.
Phillips A; Mondal S
Pharm Stat; 2023; 22(4):739-747. PubMed ID: 36669771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Backfilling Patients in Phase I Dose-Escalation Trials Using Bayesian Optimal Interval Design (BOIN).
Zhao Y; Yuan Y; Korn EL; Freidlin B
Clin Cancer Res; 2024 Feb; 30(4):673-679. PubMed ID: 38048044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. A novel model of the continual reassessment method in Phase I trial.
Zhang W; Lei W; Zhu X
Sci Rep; 2023 Mar; 13(1):5047. PubMed ID: 36977709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Bayesian hybrid dose-finding design in phase I oncology clinical trials.
Yuan Y; Yin G
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(17):2098-108. PubMed ID: 21365672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. CUSUMIN: A cumulative sum interval design for cancer phase I dose finding studies.
Hatayama T; Yasui S
Pharm Stat; 2022 Nov; 21(6):1324-1341. PubMed ID: 35833753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Interplay of priors and skeletons in two-stage continual reassessment method.
Iasonos A; O'Quigley J
Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(30):4321-36. PubMed ID: 22893483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Comparison Between Simultaneous and Sequential Utilization of Safety and Efficacy for Optimal Dose Determination in Bayesian Model-Assisted Designs.
Li R; Takeda K; Rong A
Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2023 Jul; 57(4):728-736. PubMed ID: 37087525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Incorporating historical information to improve dose optimization design with toxicity and efficacy endpoints: iBOIN-ET.
Zhao Y; Liu R; Takeda K
Pharm Stat; 2023; 22(3):440-460. PubMed ID: 36514849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Rolling continual reassessment method with overdose control: An efficient and safe dose escalation design.
Zhu J; Sabanés Bové D; Liao Z; Beyer U; Yung G; Sarkar S
Contemp Clin Trials; 2021 Aug; 107():106436. PubMed ID: 34000410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of design methods for a safety run-in phase of a phase II clinical trial.
Ji L; Alonzo TA
Clin Trials; 2023 Apr; 20(2):181-191. PubMed ID: 36628921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Calibration of prior variance in the Bayesian continual reassessment method.
Lee SM; Cheung YK
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(17):2081-9. PubMed ID: 21413054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
