169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35932152)
1. Use of copula to model within-study association in bivariate meta-analysis of binomial data at the aggregate level: A Bayesian approach and application to surrogate endpoint evaluation.
Papanikos T; Thompson JR; Abrams KR; Bujkiewicz S
Stat Med; 2022 Nov; 41(25):4961-4981. PubMed ID: 35932152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bivariate network meta-analysis for surrogate endpoint evaluation.
Bujkiewicz S; Jackson D; Thompson JR; Turner RM; Städler N; Abrams KR; White IR
Stat Med; 2019 Aug; 38(18):3322-3341. PubMed ID: 31131475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Bayesian meta-analytical methods to incorporate multiple surrogate endpoints in drug development process.
Bujkiewicz S; Thompson JR; Riley RD; Abrams KR
Stat Med; 2016 Mar; 35(7):1063-89. PubMed ID: 26530518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bayesian hierarchical meta-analytic methods for modeling surrogate relationships that vary across treatment classes using aggregate data.
Papanikos T; Thompson JR; Abrams KR; Städler N; Ciani O; Taylor R; Bujkiewicz S
Stat Med; 2020 Apr; 39(8):1103-1124. PubMed ID: 31990083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification with multivariate normal and Gaussian copula models.
Taylor JM; Conlon AS; Elliott MR
Clin Trials; 2015 Aug; 12(4):317-22. PubMed ID: 25490988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Uncertainty in the Bayesian meta-analysis of normally distributed surrogate endpoints.
Bujkiewicz S; Thompson JR; Spata E; Abrams KR
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Oct; 26(5):2287-2318. PubMed ID: 26271918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Time-to-event surrogate endpoint validation using mediation analysis and meta-analytic data.
Le Coënt Q; Legrand C; Rondeau V
Biostatistics; 2023 Dec; 25(1):98-116. PubMed ID: 36398615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An investigation into the two-stage meta-analytic copula modelling approach for evaluating time-to-event surrogate endpoints which comprise of one or more events of interest.
Dimier N; Todd S
Pharm Stat; 2017 Sep; 16(5):322-333. PubMed ID: 28544622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification and a Gaussian copula model.
Conlon A; Taylor J; Elliott MR
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Feb; 26(1):88-107. PubMed ID: 24947559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Utilization of treatment effect on a surrogate endpoint for planning a study to evaluate treatment effect on a final endpoint.
Quan H; Xu Z; Luo J; Paux G; Cho M; Chen X
Pharm Stat; 2023; 22(4):633-649. PubMed ID: 36866697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. surrosurv: An R package for the evaluation of failure time surrogate endpoints in individual patient data meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials.
Rotolo F; Paoletti X; Michiels S
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2018 Mar; 155():189-198. PubMed ID: 29512498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A joint frailty-copula model for meta-analytic validation of failure time surrogate endpoints in clinical trials.
Sofeu CL; Emura T; Rondeau V
Biom J; 2021 Feb; 63(2):423-446. PubMed ID: 33006170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparing Bayesian hierarchical meta-regression methods and evaluating the influence of priors for evaluations of surrogate endpoints on heterogeneous collections of clinical trials.
Collier W; Haaland B; Inker LA; Heerspink HJL; Greene T
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 Feb; 24(1):39. PubMed ID: 38365599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Validation of Progression-Free Survival as a Surrogate Endpoint for Overall Survival in Malignant Mesothelioma: Analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B and North Central Cancer Treatment Group (Alliance) Trials.
Wang X; Wang X; Hodgson L; George SL; Sargent DJ; Foster NR; Ganti AK; Stinchcombe TE; Crawford J; Kratzke R; Adjei AA; Kindler HL; Vokes EE; Pang H
Oncologist; 2017 Feb; 22(2):189-198. PubMed ID: 28188257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification when surrogate and outcome measures are multivariate normal.
Conlon AS; Taylor JM; Elliott MR
Biostatistics; 2014 Apr; 15(2):266-83. PubMed ID: 24285772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes: a marginal beta-binomial model approach.
Chen Y; Hong C; Ning Y; Su X
Stat Med; 2016 Jan; 35(1):21-40. PubMed ID: 26303591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Univariate and bivariate likelihood-based meta-analysis methods performed comparably when marginal sensitivity and specificity were the targets of inference.
Dahabreh IJ; Trikalinos TA; Lau J; Schmid CH
J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Mar; 83():8-17. PubMed ID: 28063915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Tumor response and progression-free survival as potential surrogate endpoints for overall survival in extensive stage small-cell lung cancer: findings on the basis of North Central Cancer Treatment Group trials.
Foster NR; Qi Y; Shi Q; Krook JE; Kugler JW; Jett JR; Molina JR; Schild SE; Adjei AA; Mandrekar SJ
Cancer; 2011 Mar; 117(6):1262-71. PubMed ID: 20960500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data.
Stijnen T; Hamza TH; Ozdemir P
Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(29):3046-67. PubMed ID: 20827667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A Poisson approach to the validation of failure time surrogate endpoints in individual patient data meta-analyses.
Rotolo F; Paoletti X; Burzykowski T; Buyse M; Michiels S
Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Jan; 28(1):170-183. PubMed ID: 28681681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
