Mark J. Ratain to United States
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Mark J. Ratain has written about United States.
Connection Strength
1.481
-
Accelerated Approval Program Versus NCCN Guidelines as Mechanisms for Early Drug Access. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2024 08; 22(6):435-436.
Score: 0.099
-
Special designations and the US Food and Drug Administration's "dual mandate". J Natl Cancer Inst. 2024 Feb 08; 116(2):177-179.
Score: 0.096
-
An Ethical and Financial Obligation for Sickle Cell Disease Gene Therapy in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2024 01; 177(1):85-86.
Score: 0.095
-
Project Optimus: Is the US Food and Drug Administration Waiving Dose Optimization for Orphan Drugs? JAMA Oncol. 2023 11 01; 9(11):1489-1490.
Score: 0.094
-
Do patent applications and Cooperative Research and Development Agreements between the National Cancer Institute and industry serve the public interest? Nat Biotechnol. 2023 Nov; 41(11):1517-1519.
Score: 0.094
-
Interventional pharmacoeconomics for immune checkpoint inhibitors through alternative dosing strategies. Br J Cancer. 2023 10; 129(9):1389-1396.
Score: 0.092
-
Dose Optimization of Sotorasib: Is the US Food and Drug Administration Sending a Message? J Clin Oncol. 2021 11 01; 39(31):3423-3426.
Score: 0.081
-
Accelerated Approval of Anticancer Drugs: Lessons Learned From the Example of Olaratumab. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2021 07; 110(1):29-31.
Score: 0.076
-
Prospective International Randomized Phase II Study of Low-Dose Abiraterone With Food Versus Standard Dose Abiraterone In Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2018 05 10; 36(14):1389-1395.
Score: 0.064
-
Drug-Drug Interactions With Oral Antineoplastic Agents. JAMA Oncol. 2017 06 01; 3(6):736-738.
Score: 0.060
-
Impact of the 2010 Consensus Recommendations of the Clinical Trial Design Task Force of the NCI Investigational Drug Steering Committee. Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Nov 15; 21(22):5057-63.
Score: 0.054
-
Design of phase I combination trials: recommendations of the Clinical Trial Design Task Force of the NCI Investigational Drug Steering Committee. Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Aug 15; 20(16):4210-7.
Score: 0.050
-
Forecasting unanticipated consequences of "The Sunshine Act": mostly cloudy. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Aug 01; 32(22):2293-5.
Score: 0.049
-
Are drug labels static or dynamic? Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Sep; 94(3):302-4.
Score: 0.046
-
Why RECIST works and why it should stay--reply to counterpoint. Cancer Res. 2012 Oct 15; 72(20):5158.
Score: 0.043
-
Flushing oral oncology drugs down the toilet. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Oct 20; 29(30):3958-9.
Score: 0.041
-
Inconsistent labeling of food effect for oral agents across therapeutic areas: differences between oncology and non-oncology products. Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Sep 01; 16(17):4446-51.
Score: 0.038
-
Nonprofit biomedical companies. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Aug; 84(2):194-7.
Score: 0.033
-
The investigational drug steering committee. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2007 Oct; 5(10):779-80.
Score: 0.031
-
Genetic nondiscrimination legislation: a critical prerequisite for pharmacogenomics data sharing. Pharmacogenomics. 2007 May; 8(5):519.
Score: 0.030
-
Personalized medicine: building the GPS to take us there. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007 Mar; 81(3):321-2.
Score: 0.030
-
Conflict-of-interest policies. N Engl J Med. 2001 Mar 29; 344(13):1018.
Score: 0.020
-
Drug combinations: dangerous liaisons or great expectations? Ann Oncol. 1999 Apr; 10(4):375-6.
Score: 0.017
-
Oral chemotherapy: rationale and future directions. J Clin Oncol. 1998 Jul; 16(7):2557-67.
Score: 0.016
-
The Pharmacogenomics Research Network Translational Pharmacogenetics Program: Outcomes and Metrics of Pharmacogenetic Implementations Across Diverse Healthcare Systems. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2017 Sep; 102(3):502-510.
Score: 0.015
-
Patient Perceptions of Care as Influenced by a Large Institutional Pharmacogenomic Implementation Program. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2017 07; 102(1):106-114.
Score: 0.015
-
Disease-drug database for pharmacogenomic-based prescribing. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016 08; 100(2):179-90.
Score: 0.014
-
Population pharmacodynamic study of amonafide: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol. 1995 Mar; 13(3):741-7.
Score: 0.013
-
Statistical and ethical issues in the design and conduct of phase I and II clinical trials of new anticancer agents. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Oct 20; 85(20):1637-43.
Score: 0.012
-
Unsupported off-label chemotherapy in metastatic colon cancer. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Dec 29; 12:481.
Score: 0.011
-
Opportunities and challenges in the development of experimental drug combinations for cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Aug 17; 103(16):1222-6.
Score: 0.010
-
Cancer pharmacogenomics and pharmacoepidemiology: setting a research agenda to accelerate translation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Nov 17; 102(22):1698-705.
Score: 0.010
-
The design of phase II clinical trials testing cancer therapeutics: consensus recommendations from the clinical trial design task force of the national cancer institute investigational drug steering committee. Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Mar 15; 16(6):1764-9.
Score: 0.009
-
Guidelines for the development and incorporation of biomarker studies in early clinical trials of novel agents. Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Mar 15; 16(6):1745-55.
Score: 0.009
-
Inside information: Financial conflicts of interest for research subjects in early phase clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 May 05; 96(9):656-61.
Score: 0.006
-
Learning from our patients: one participant's impact on clinical trial research and informed consent. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Jun 01; 126(11):892-7.
Score: 0.004
-
Phase I study of paclitaxel and topotecan in patients with advanced tumors: a cancer and leukemia group B study. J Clin Oncol. 1995 Sep; 13(9):2230-7.
Score: 0.003
-
Ethical issues in phase I oncology research: a comparison of investigators and institutional review board chairpersons. J Clin Oncol. 1992 Nov; 10(11):1810-6.
Score: 0.003