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 *

206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8962459)

  • 1. Designs for phase II trials allowing for a trade-off between response and toxicity.
    Conaway MR; Petroni GR
    Biometrics; 1996 Dec; 52(4):1375-86. PubMed ID: 8962459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bivariate sequential designs for phase II trials.
    Conaway MR; Petroni GR
    Biometrics; 1995 Jun; 51(2):656-64. PubMed ID: 7662852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Alternative designs of phase II trials considering response and toxicity.
    Jin H
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Jul; 28(4):525-31. PubMed ID: 17428744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Curtailed two-stage designs in Phase II clinical trials.
    Chi Y; Chen CM
    Stat Med; 2008 Dec; 27(29):6175-89. PubMed ID: 18816510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials.
    Bryant J; Day R
    Biometrics; 1995 Dec; 51(4):1372-83. PubMed ID: 8589229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Continuous toxicity monitoring in phase II trials in oncology.
    Ivanova A; Qaqish BF; Schell MJ
    Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):540-5. PubMed ID: 16011702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Statistical designs for early phases of cancer clinical trials.
    Guan S
    J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1109-26. PubMed ID: 23075011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Toxicity-evaluation designs for phase I/II cancer immunotherapy trials.
    Messer K; Natarajan L; Ball ED; Lane TA
    Stat Med; 2010 Mar; 29(7-8):712-20. PubMed ID: 20213706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A flexible multi-stage design for phase II oncology trials.
    Tan MT; Xiong X
    Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(4):369-73. PubMed ID: 22328328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparing an experimental agent to a standard agent: relative merits of a one-arm or randomized two-arm Phase II design.
    Taylor JM; Braun TM; Li Z
    Clin Trials; 2006; 3(4):335-48. PubMed ID: 17060208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Admissible two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials.
    Jung SH; Lee T; Kim K; George SL
    Stat Med; 2004 Feb; 23(4):561-9. PubMed ID: 14755389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Improving the flexibility and efficiency of phase II designs for oncology trials.
    Englert S; Kieser M
    Biometrics; 2012 Sep; 68(3):886-92. PubMed ID: 22150825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Targeting population entering phase III trials: a new stratified adaptive phase II design.
    Tournoux-Facon C; De Rycke Y; Tubert-Bitter P
    Stat Med; 2011 Apr; 30(8):801-11. PubMed ID: 21432875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Bayesian dose-finding in phase I/II clinical trials using toxicity and efficacy odds ratios.
    Yin G; Li Y; Ji Y
    Biometrics; 2006 Sep; 62(3):777-84. PubMed ID: 16984320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Methods of joint evaluation of efficacy and toxicity in phase II clinical trials.
    Tournoux C; De Rycke Y; Médioni J; Asselain B
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2007 Jul; 28(4):514-24. PubMed ID: 17331808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. One- and two-stage designs for stratified phase II clinical trials.
    London WB; Chang MN
    Stat Med; 2005 Sep; 24(17):2597-611. PubMed ID: 16118809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Phase II stopping rules that employ response rates and early progression.
    Goffin JR; Tu D
    J Clin Oncol; 2008 Aug; 26(22):3715-20. PubMed ID: 18669457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dose selection in seamless phase II/III clinical trials based on efficacy and safety.
    Kimani PK; Stallard N; Hutton JL
    Stat Med; 2009 Mar; 28(6):917-36. PubMed ID: 19152231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.