The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Mark J. Ratain to Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Mark J. Ratain has written about Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic.
  1. 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.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.468
  2. Targeted therapies: redefining the primary objective of phase I oncology trials. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep; 11(9):503-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.467
  3. Might cigarettes be a "smoking gun" to reduce taxane myelotoxicity? Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Aug 15; 18(16):4219-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.407
  4. Randomized phase II trials: a long-term investment with promising returns. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jul 20; 103(14):1093-100.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.377
  5. Analysis of the yield of phase II combination therapy trials in medical oncology. Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Nov 01; 16(21):5296-302.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.357
  6. Other paradigms: better treatments are identified by better trials: the value of randomized phase II studies. Cancer J. 2009 Sep-Oct; 15(5):426-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.332
  7. Optimising the design of phase II oncology trials: the importance of randomisation. Eur J Cancer. 2009 Jan; 45(2):275-80.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.316
  8. Clarification regarding "phase II trials published in 2002: a cross-specialty comparison showing significant design differences between oncology trials and other medical specialties" and the accompanying commentary, "phase II cancer trials: out of control?". Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Nov 01; 13(21):6540.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.293
  9. Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Oct 03; 99(19):1455-61.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.290
  10. Phase II trials published in 2002: a cross-specialty comparison showing significant design differences between oncology trials and other medical specialties. Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Apr 15; 13(8):2400-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.282
  11. Testing the wrong hypothesis in phase II oncology trials: there is a better alternative. Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Feb 01; 13(3):781-2.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.278
  12. Phase II oncology trials: let's be positive. Clin Cancer Res. 2005 Aug 15; 11(16):5661-2.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.251
  13. 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.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.111
  14. Resampling phase III data to assess phase II trial designs and endpoints. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Apr 15; 18(8):2309-15.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.098
  15. 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.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.086
  16. Evaluating the activity of temsirolimus in neuroendocrine cancer. Br J Cancer. 2007 Jan 15; 96(1):177; author reply 178-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.069
  17. Randomized phase II trials and prostate-specific antigen endpoints in prostate cancer: much ado about nothing? J Clin Oncol. 2005 Nov 01; 23(31):8124-5; author reply 8125-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.064
  18. Oncology phase I trial design and conduct: time for a change - MDICT Guidelines 2022. Ann Oncol. 2023 01; 34(1):48-60.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  19. Troxacitabine in patients with refractory leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2002 Aug 01; 20(15):3356; author reply 3356-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  20. Rationale for phase I study of UFT plus leucovorin and oral JM-216. Oncology (Williston Park). 1997 Sep; 11(9 Suppl 10):26-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.036
  21. Promising new agents in oncologic treatment. Curr Opin Oncol. 1996 Nov; 8(6):525-34.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  22. Estimation of renal cell carcinoma treatment effects from disease progression modeling. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Apr; 93(4):345-51.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  23. Flavopiridol metabolism in cancer patients is associated with the occurrence of diarrhea. Clin Cancer Res. 2000 Sep; 6(9):3400-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  24. Anticancer agents targeting signaling molecules and cancer cell environment: challenges for drug development? J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Aug 04; 91(15):1281-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.