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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38956450)

  • 41. Improving interim decisions in randomized trials by exploiting information on short-term endpoints and prognostic baseline covariates.
    Van Lancker K; Vandebosch A; Vansteelandt S
    Pharm Stat; 2020 Sep; 19(5):583-601. PubMed ID: 32248662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. 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]  

  • 43. Assessment of futility in clinical trials.
    Snapinn S; Chen MG; Jiang Q; Koutsoukos T
    Pharm Stat; 2006; 5(4):273-81. PubMed ID: 17128426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. An optimal Bayesian predictive probability design for phase II clinical trials with simple and complicated endpoints.
    Guo B; Liu S
    Biom J; 2020 Mar; 62(2):339-349. PubMed ID: 31402481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Design of a Bayesian adaptive phase 2 proof-of-concept trial for BAN2401, a putative disease-modifying monoclonal antibody for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.
    Satlin A; Wang J; Logovinsky V; Berry S; Swanson C; Dhadda S; Berry DA
    Alzheimers Dement (N Y); 2016 Jan; 2(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 29067290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. 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]  

  • 47. Interim evaluation of efficacy or futility in group-sequential trials with multiple co-primary endpoints.
    Asakura K; Hamasaki T; Evans SR
    Biom J; 2017 Jul; 59(4):703-731. PubMed ID: 27757980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Group sequential adaptive designs in series of time-to-event randomised trials in rare diseases: A simulation study.
    Bayar MA; Le Teuff G; Koenig F; Le Deley MC; Michiels S
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Jun; 29(6):1483-1498. PubMed ID: 31354106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Using Bayesian Evidence Synthesis Methods to Incorporate Real-World Evidence in Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation.
    Wheaton L; Papanikos A; Thomas A; Bujkiewicz S
    Med Decis Making; 2023 Jul; 43(5):539-552. PubMed ID: 36998240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Assurance in vaccine efficacy clinical trial design based on immunological responses.
    Callegaro A; Zahaf T; Tibaldi F
    Biom J; 2021 Oct; 63(7):1434-1443. PubMed ID: 34254347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in digestive oncology trials: which candidates? A questionnaires survey among clinicians and methodologists.
    Methy N; Bedenne L; Bonnetain F
    BMC Cancer; 2010 Jun; 10():277. PubMed ID: 20537166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Assessment of the information theory approach to evaluating time-to-event surrogate and true endpoints in a meta-analytic setting.
    Dimier N; Todd S
    Pharm Stat; 2021 Mar; 20(2):335-347. PubMed ID: 33145928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Comparison of Bayesian vs Frequentist Adaptive Trial Design in the Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort Trial.
    Broglio K; Meurer WJ; Durkalski V; Pauls Q; Connor J; Berry D; Lewis RJ; Johnston KC; Barsan WG
    JAMA Netw Open; 2022 May; 5(5):e2211616. PubMed ID: 35544137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. A Bayesian piecewise exponential phase II design for monitoring a time-to-event endpoint.
    Qing Y; Thall PF; Yuan Y
    Pharm Stat; 2023 Jan; 22(1):34-44. PubMed ID: 35851545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Seamless phase 2/3 design for trials with multiple co-primary endpoints using Bayesian predictive power.
    Yang J; Li G; Yang D; Wu J; Wang J; Gao X; Liu P
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 Jan; 24(1):12. PubMed ID: 38233758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Value of Adaptive Trials and Surrogate Endpoints for Clinical Decision-Making in Rare Cancers.
    Krendyukov A; Singhvi S; Zabransky M
    Front Oncol; 2021; 11():636561. PubMed ID: 33763370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Group sequential designs for stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials.
    Grayling MJ; Wason JM; Mander AP
    Clin Trials; 2017 Oct; 14(5):507-517. PubMed ID: 28653550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. Statistical considerations and endpoints for clinical lung cancer studies: Can progression free survival (PFS) substitute overall survival (OS) as a valid endpoint in clinical trials for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer?
    Pilz LR; Manegold C; Schmid-Bindert G
    Transl Lung Cancer Res; 2012 Mar; 1(1):26-35. PubMed ID: 25806152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Does the decision in a validation process of a surrogate endpoint change with level of significance of treatment effect? A proposal on validation of surrogate endpoints.
    Sertdemir Y; Burgut R
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2009 Jan; 30(1):8-12. PubMed ID: 18809512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.