BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

239 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7980801)

  • 21. Bayesian decision-theoretic group sequential clinical trial design based on a quadratic loss function: a frequentist evaluation.
    Lewis RJ; Lipsky AM; Berry DA
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(1):5-14. PubMed ID: 17327241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Randomized phase II trials with a prospective control.
    Jung SH
    Stat Med; 2008 Feb; 27(4):568-83. PubMed ID: 17573688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A Bayesian approach to jointly modeling toxicity and biomarker expression in a phase I/II dose-finding trial.
    Bekele BN; Shen Y
    Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):343-54. PubMed ID: 16011680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Sample-size calculations for trials that inform individual treatment decisions: a 'true-choice' approach.
    Girling AJ; Lilford RJ; Braunholtz DA; Gillett WR
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 17327242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. On Simon's two-stage design for single-arm phase IIA cancer clinical trials under beta-binomial distribution.
    Liu J; Lin Y; Shih WJ
    Stat Med; 2010 May; 29(10):1084-95. PubMed ID: 20077506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A type of sample size design in cancer clinical trials for response rate estimation.
    Liu J
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2011 Jan; 32(1):140-6. PubMed ID: 20965278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Improving the design of phase II trials of cytostatic anticancer agents.
    Stone A; Wheeler C; Barge A
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Feb; 28(2):138-45. PubMed ID: 16843736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A bayesian approach to the design of phase II clinical trials.
    Sylvester RJ
    Biometrics; 1988 Sep; 44(3):823-36. PubMed ID: 3203131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Optimal designs for two-arm, phase II clinical trial design with multiple constraints.
    Mayo MS; Mahnken JD; Soong SJ
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Jan; 20(1):106-24. PubMed ID: 20077252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Optimal and minimax three-stage designs for phase II oncology clinical trials.
    Chen K; Shan M
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Jan; 29(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 17544337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Adaptive two-stage designs in phase II clinical trials.
    Banerjee A; Tsiatis AA
    Stat Med; 2006 Oct; 25(19):3382-95. PubMed ID: 16479547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Biomarker-based Bayesian randomized phase II clinical trial design to identify a sensitive patient subpopulation.
    Morita S; Yamamoto H; Sugitani Y
    Stat Med; 2014 Oct; 33(23):4008-16. PubMed ID: 24820639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials.
    Thall PF; Russell KE
    Biometrics; 1998 Mar; 54(1):251-64. PubMed ID: 9544520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Some thoughts on sample size: a Bayesian-frequentist hybrid approach.
    Gordon Lan KK; Wittes JT
    Clin Trials; 2012 Oct; 9(5):561-9. PubMed ID: 22865839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Bayesian estimation of cost-effectiveness: an importance-sampling approach.
    Heitjan DF; Li H
    Health Econ; 2004 Feb; 13(2):191-8. PubMed ID: 14737756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The sample size for a clinical trial: a Bayesian-decision theoretic approach.
    Halpern J; Brown BW; Hornberger J
    Stat Med; 2001 Mar; 20(6):841-58. PubMed ID: 11252007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. An extension of the single threshold design for monitoring efficacy and safety in phase II clinical trials.
    Brutti P; Gubbiotti S; Sambucini V
    Stat Med; 2011 Jun; 30(14):1648-64. PubMed ID: 21520453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of single-arm vs. randomized phase II clinical trials: a Bayesian approach.
    Sambucini V
    J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(3):474-89. PubMed ID: 24896838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Use of predictive probabilities in phase II and phase III clinical trials.
    Johns D; Andersen JS
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 Mar; 9(1):67-79. PubMed ID: 10091910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Bayesian design and analysis of two x two factorial clinical trials.
    Simon R; Freedman LS
    Biometrics; 1997 Jun; 53(2):456-64. PubMed ID: 9192445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.