The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Mark J. Ratain to Biomarkers, Tumor

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Mark J. Ratain has written about Biomarkers, Tumor.
Connection Strength

1.829
  1. Might cigarettes be a "smoking gun" to reduce taxane myelotoxicity? Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Aug 15; 18(16):4219-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.244
  2. Biomarkers in early cancer drug development: limited utility. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Feb; 85(2):134-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.191
  3. Biomarkers in phase I oncology trials: signal, noise, or expensive distraction? Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Nov 15; 13(22 Pt 1):6545-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.176
  4. 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: 0.153
  5. Genome-wide association studies of survival in 1520 cancer patients treated with bevacizumab-containing regimens. Int J Cancer. 2022 01 15; 150(2):279-289.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.115
  6. Clinical evaluation of germline polymorphisms associated with capecitabine toxicity in breast cancer: TBCRC-015. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020 Jun; 181(3):623-633.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.104
  7. Ethical Framework for Including Research Biopsies in Oncology Clinical Trials: American Society of Clinical Oncology Research Statement. J Clin Oncol. 2019 09 10; 37(26):2368-2377.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.099
  8. Analyzing the clinical actionability of germline pharmacogenomic findings in oncology. Cancer. 2018 07 15; 124(14):3052-3065.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.091
  9. 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.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  10. Reply to T.A. Yap et al. J Clin Oncol. 2016 07 10; 34(20):2432-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.079
  11. Analysis of Impact of Post-Treatment Biopsies in Phase I Clinical Trials. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb 01; 34(4):369-74.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.077
  12. Serum C-Telopeptide Collagen Crosslinks and Plasma Soluble VEGFR2 as Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers in a Trial of Sequentially Administered Sunitinib and Cilengitide. Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Nov 15; 21(22):5092-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.075
  13. Loss of heterozygosity at the CYP2D6 locus in breast cancer: implications for germline pharmacogenetic studies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Dec 08; 107(2).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.072
  14. 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: 0.070
  15. Incorporating biomarkers into drug labeling. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2014 Aug; 12(8):525-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.070
  16. 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.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.052
  17. Phase II randomised discontinuation trial of brivanib in patients with advanced solid tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2019 10; 120:132-139.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  18. A pharmacodynamic study of sirolimus and metformin in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2018 08; 82(2):309-317.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  19. 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: 0.013
  20. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging pharmacodynamic biomarker study of sorafenib in metastatic renal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Oct 01; 26(28):4572-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.012
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.