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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37574976)

  • 1. Stochastic curtailment tests for phase II trial with time-to-event outcome using the concept of relative time in the case of non-proportional hazards.
    Sharma P; Phadnis MA
    J Biopharm Stat; 2024 Jul; 34(4):596-611. PubMed ID: 37574976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sample size reestimation and Bayesian predictive probability for single-arm clinical trials with a time-to-event endpoint using Weibull distribution with unknown shape parameter.
    Waleed M; He J; Phadnis MA
    J Biopharm Stat; 2024 Jul; 34(4):469-487. PubMed ID: 37545144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bayesian methods for setting sample sizes and choosing allocation ratios in phase II clinical trials with time-to-event endpoints.
    Cotterill A; Whitehead J
    Stat Med; 2015 May; 34(11):1889-903. PubMed ID: 25620687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Some design considerations incorporating early futility for single-arm clinical trials with time-to-event primary endpoints using Weibull distribution.
    Waleed M; He J; Phadnis MA
    Pharm Stat; 2021 May; 20(3):610-644. PubMed ID: 33565236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Applications of Bayesian statistical methodology to clinical trial design: A case study of a phase 2 trial with an interim futility assessment in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
    Smith CL; Jin Y; Raddad E; McNearney TA; Ni X; Monteith D; Brown R; Deeg MA; Schnitzer T
    Pharm Stat; 2019 Jan; 18(1):39-53. PubMed ID: 30321909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sample size calculation for two-arm trials with time-to-event endpoint for nonproportional hazards using the concept of Relative Time when inference is built on comparing Weibull distributions.
    Phadnis MA; Mayo MS
    Biom J; 2021 Oct; 63(7):1406-1433. PubMed ID: 34272897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An extension of Bayesian predictive sample size selection designs for monitoring efficacy and safety.
    Teramukai S; Daimon T; Zohar S
    Stat Med; 2015 Sep; 34(22):3029-39. PubMed ID: 26038148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Group sequential design for time-to-event outcome with non-proportional hazards using the concept of relative time utilizing two different Weibull distributions.
    Phadnis MA; Thewarapperuma N; Mayo MS
    Contemp Clin Trials Commun; 2024 Aug; 40():101315. PubMed ID: 39036558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bayesian optimal phase II clinical trial design with time-to-event endpoint.
    Zhou H; Chen C; Sun L; Yuan Y
    Pharm Stat; 2020 Nov; 19(6):776-786. PubMed ID: 32524679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Data monitoring in clinical trials: the case for stochastic curtailment.
    Davis BR; Hardy RJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1994 Sep; 47(9):1033-42. PubMed ID: 7730906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An analytical approach to assess the predictive value of biomarkers in Phase II decision making.
    Nikolakopoulos S; van der Wal WM; Roes KC
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(5):1106-23. PubMed ID: 23957519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Time-to-event analysis with treatment arm selection at interim.
    Di Scala L; Glimm E
    Stat Med; 2011 Nov; 30(26):3067-81. PubMed ID: 21898523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Bayesian dose-finding design for phase I/II clinical trials with nonignorable dropouts.
    Guo B; Yuan Y
    Stat Med; 2015 May; 34(10):1721-32. PubMed ID: 25626676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bayesian predictive approach to interim monitoring in clinical trials.
    Dmitrienko A; Wang MD
    Stat Med; 2006 Jul; 25(13):2178-95. PubMed ID: 16007570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bayesian predictive power for interim adaptation in seamless phase II/III trials where the endpoint is survival up to some specified timepoint.
    Schmidli H; Bretz F; Racine-Poon A
    Stat Med; 2007 Nov; 26(27):4925-38. PubMed ID: 17590875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. TOP: Time-to-Event Bayesian Optimal Phase II Trial Design for Cancer Immunotherapy.
    Lin R; Coleman RL; Yuan Y
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2020 Jan; 112(1):38-45. PubMed ID: 30924863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A flexible futility monitoring method with time-varying conditional power boundary.
    Ying Zhang ; Clarke WR
    Clin Trials; 2010 Jun; 7(3):209-18. PubMed ID: 20423927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Are non-constant rates and non-proportional treatment effects accounted for in the design and analysis of randomised controlled trials? A review of current practice.
    Jachno K; Heritier S; Wolfe R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 May; 19(1):103. PubMed ID: 31096924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A modified varying-stage adaptive phase II/III clinical trial design.
    Dong G; Vandemeulebroecke M
    Pharm Stat; 2016 Jul; 15(4):368-78. PubMed ID: 27264007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.