165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35707213)
1. Quantifying treatment differences in confirmatory trials under non-proportional hazards.
Jiménez JL
J Appl Stat; 2022; 49(2):466-484. PubMed ID: 35707213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of the restricted mean survival time with the hazard ratio in superiority trials with a time-to-event end point.
Huang B; Kuan PF
Pharm Stat; 2018 May; 17(3):202-213. PubMed ID: 29282880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Log-Rank Test vs MaxCombo and Difference in Restricted Mean Survival Time Tests for Comparing Survival Under Nonproportional Hazards in Immuno-oncology Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Mukhopadhyay P; Ye J; Anderson KM; Roychoudhury S; Rubin EH; Halabi S; Chappell RJ
JAMA Oncol; 2022 Sep; 8(9):1294-1300. PubMed ID: 35862037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Empirical power comparison of statistical tests in contemporary phase III randomized controlled trials with time-to-event outcomes in oncology.
Horiguchi M; Hassett MJ; Uno H
Clin Trials; 2020 Dec; 17(6):597-606. PubMed ID: 32933339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Dynamic RMST curves for survival analysis in clinical trials.
Liao JJZ; Liu GF; Wu WC
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Aug; 20(1):218. PubMed ID: 32854619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Sequential tests for non-proportional hazards data.
Brückner M; Brannath W
Lifetime Data Anal; 2017 Jul; 23(3):339-352. PubMed ID: 26969674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Estimation of treatment effects in weighted log-rank tests.
Lin RS; León LF
Contemp Clin Trials Commun; 2017 Dec; 8():147-155. PubMed ID: 29696204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Interim monitoring using the adaptively weighted log-rank test in clinical trials for survival outcomes.
Yang S
Stat Med; 2019 Feb; 38(4):601-612. PubMed ID: 30209818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Properties of the weighted log-rank test in the design of confirmatory studies with delayed effects.
Jiménez JL; Stalbovskaya V; Jones B
Pharm Stat; 2019 May; 18(3):287-303. PubMed ID: 30592138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A novel sample size formula for the weighted log-rank test under the proportional hazards cure model.
Xiong X; Wu J
Pharm Stat; 2017 Jan; 16(1):87-94. PubMed ID: 27860138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Robust group sequential designs for trials with survival endpoints and delayed response.
Ghosh P; Ristl R; König F; Posch M; Jennison C; Götte H; Schüler A; Mehta C
Biom J; 2022 Feb; 64(2):343-360. PubMed ID: 34935177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Performance of Restricted Mean Survival Time Based Methods and Traditional Survival Methods: An Application in an Oncological Data.
Huang Q; Tian C
Comput Math Methods Med; 2022; 2022():7264382. PubMed ID: 36619796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Partitioned log-rank tests for the overall homogeneity of hazard rate functions.
Liu Y; Yin G
Lifetime Data Anal; 2017 Jul; 23(3):400-425. PubMed ID: 26995734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Statistical Considerations for Sequential Analysis of the Restricted Mean Survival Time for Randomized Clinical Trials.
Lu Y; Tian L
Stat Biopharm Res; 2021; 13(2):210-218. PubMed ID: 33927801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Complex survival trial design by the product integration method.
Tang Y
Stat Med; 2022 Feb; 41(4):798-814. PubMed ID: 34908180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A weighted log-rank test and associated effect estimator for cancer trials with delayed treatment effect.
Yu C; Huang X; Nian H; He P
Pharm Stat; 2021 May; 20(3):528-550. PubMed ID: 33427400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Average Hazard Ratio - A Good Effect Measure for Time-to-event Endpoints when the Proportional Hazard Assumption is Violated?
Rauch G; Brannath W; Brückner M; Kieser M
Methods Inf Med; 2018 May; 57(3):89-100. PubMed ID: 29719915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Designing clinical trials with (restricted) mean survival time endpoint: Practical considerations.
Eaton A; Therneau T; Le-Rademacher J
Clin Trials; 2020 Jun; 17(3):285-294. PubMed ID: 32063031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A new modeling and inference approach for the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial outcomes.
Yang S; Ambrosius WT; Fine LJ; Bress AP; Cushman WC; Raj DS; Rehman S; Tamariz L
Clin Trials; 2018 Jun; 15(3):305-312. PubMed ID: 29671345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of different population-level summary measures for randomised trials with time-to-event outcomes, with a focus on non-inferiority trials.
Quartagno M; Morris TP; Gilbert DC; Langley RE; Nankivell MG; Parmar MK; White IR
Clin Trials; 2023 Dec; 20(6):594-602. PubMed ID: 37337728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
