Content and quality of currently published phase II cancer trials

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 429-436

  Mariani, Luigi ^a   Marubini, Ettore ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CLINICAL TRIAL; DATA ANALYSIS; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0033984551     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/jco.2000.18.2.429     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Mariani L, Marubini E: Design and analysis of phase II cancer trials: A review of statistical methods and guidelines for medical researchers. Int Stat Rev 64:61-88, 1996
2. SAS Institute Inc: SAS/STAT software: Changes and enhancements for release 6.12. Cary, NC, SAS Institute Inc, 1996, pp 15-17
3. Stern JM, Simes RJ: Publication bias: Evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. Br Med J 315:640-645, 1997
4. Fleming TR: One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 38:143-151, 1982
5. Simon R: Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 10:1-10, 1989
6. Gehan EA: The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chron Dis 13:346-353, 1961
7. Altman DG: Statistics in medical journals. Stat Med 1:59-71, 1982
8. Altman DG: Statistics in medical journals: Developments in the 1980s. Stat Med 10:1897-1913, 1991
9. Kramar A, Potvin D, Hill C: Multistage designs for phase II clinical trials: Statistical issues in cancer research. Br J Cancer 74:1317-1320, 1996
10. Eisenhauer EA: Phase I and II trials of novel anticancer agents: Endpoints, efficacy and existentialism. Ann Oncol 9:1047-1052, 1998
11. Colditz GA, Miller JN, Mosteller F: How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. I: Medical. Stat Med 8:441-454, 1989
12. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al: Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 352:609-613, 1998
13. Kunz R, Oxman AD: The unpredictability paradox: Review of empirical comparisons of randomized and non-randomized clinical trials. Br Med J 317:1185-1190, 1998
14. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Human Medicine Evaluation Unit: Note for guidance on evaluation of anticancer medicinal products in man, London, UK, 1996. Http:// www.eudra.org//emea.html
15. Rogatko A, Litwin S: Phase II studies: Which is worse, false positive or false negative? J Natl Cancer Inst 88:462, 1996
16. Green SJ, Dahlberg S: Planned versus attained designs in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 11:853-862, 1992
17. Herndon JE: A design alternative for two-stage, phase II, multicenter cancer clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 19:440-450, 1998
18. Chen T, Ng TH: Optimal flexible designs in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 17:2301-2312, 1998
19. Atkinson EN, Brown BW: Confidence limits for probability of response in multistage phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 41:741-744, 1985
20. Duffy DE, Santner TJ: Confidence intervals for a binomial parameter based on multistage tests. Biometrics 43:81-93, 1987
21. Simon R, Wittes RE: Methodologic guidelines for reports of clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep 69:1-3, 1985
22. Chen TT: Optimal three-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 16:2701-2711, 1997
23. Heitjan DF: Bayesian interim analysis of phase II cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 16:1791-1802, 1997
24. Stallard N: Sample size determination for phase II clinical trials based on Bayesian decision theory. Biometrics 54:279-294, 1998
25. Stallard N: Approximately optimal designs for phase II clinical studies. J Biopharm Stat 8:469-487, 1998
26. Bryant J, Day R: Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 51:1372-1383, 1995
27. Conaway MR, Petroni GR: Bivariate designs for phase II trials. Biometrics 51:656-664, 1995
28. Conaway MR, Petroni GR: Designs for phase II trials allowing for a trade-off between response and toxicity. Biometrics 52:1375-1386, 1996
29. Thall PF, Simon R, Estey EH: Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm clinical trials with multiple outcomes. Stat Med 14:357-379, 1995
30. Thall PF, Sung HG: Some extensions and applications of a Bayesian strategy for monitoring multiple outcomes in clinical trials. Stat Med 17:1563-1580, 1998