The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Mark J. Ratain to Clinical Trials as Topic

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Mark J. Ratain has written about Clinical Trials as Topic.
Mark J. Ratain
Connection Strength
4.354
Clinical Trials as Topic
  1. Critical importance of correctly defining and reporting secondary endpoints when assessing the ethics of research biopsies. Clin Trials. 2024 Oct; 21(5):650-656.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.633
  2. 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: 0.455
  3. 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.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.353
  4. RECIST: no longer the sharpest tool in the oncology clinical trials toolbox---point. Cancer Res. 2012 Oct 15; 72(20):5145-9; discussion 5150.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.283
  5. Why RECIST works and why it should stay--reply to counterpoint. Cancer Res. 2012 Oct 15; 72(20):5158.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.283
  6. Recommended changes to oncology clinical trial design: revolution or evolution? Eur J Cancer. 2008 Jan; 44(1):8-11.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.202
  7. Phase II studies of modern drugs directed against new targets: if you are fazed, too, then resist RECIST. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Nov 15; 22(22):4442-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.164
  8. Optimizing the doses of cancer drugs after usual dose finding. Clin Trials. 2024 Jun; 21(3):340-349.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.155
  9. Finding the right dose. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2003 Sep; 1(9):517-8, 531.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.151
  10. Clinical trial designs for cytostatic agents. J Clin Oncol. 2001 Jun 15; 19(12):3154-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.130
  11. Conflict-of-interest policies. N Engl J Med. 2001 Mar 29; 344(13):1018.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.128
  12. Development of target-based antineoplastic agents. Invest New Drugs. 2000 Feb; 18(1):7-16.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.118
  13. Burdensome Research Procedures in Trials: Why Less Is More. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017 04 01; 109(4).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.097
  14. Tumour heterogeneity in the clinic. Nature. 2013 Sep 19; 501(7467):355-64.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.076
  15. Effects of vascular endothelial growth factor signaling inhibition on human erythropoiesis. Oncologist. 2013; 18(8):965-70.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.075
  16. Cancer pharmacogenomics: strategies and challenges. Nat Rev Genet. 2013 Jan; 14(1):23-34.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.072
  17. Opportunities and challenges in the development of experimental drug combinations for cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Aug 17; 103(16):1222-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.065
  18. 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: 0.059
  19. Biomarkers in early cancer drug development: limited utility. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Feb; 85(2):134-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  20. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics of anticancer agents. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009 Jan-Feb; 59(1):42-55.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  21. Pharmacogenetic pathway analysis of irinotecan. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Sep; 84(3):393-402.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.052
  22. Ethical, scientific, and regulatory perspectives regarding the use of placebos in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Mar 10; 26(8):1371-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  23. The investigational drug steering committee. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2007 Oct; 5(10):779-80.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.050
  24. Attitudes toward research participation and investigator conflicts of interest among advanced cancer patients participating in early phase clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Aug 10; 25(23):3488-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.050
  25. The value meal: how to save $1,700 per month or more on lapatinib. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Aug 10; 25(23):3397-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.049
  26. Pharmacogenetics of irinotecan: clinical perspectives on the utility of genotyping. Pharmacogenomics. 2006 Dec; 7(8):1211-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  27. The cancer and leukemia group B pharmacology and experimental therapeutics committee: a historical perspective. Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Jun 01; 12(11 Pt 2):3612s-6s.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  28. Measuring response in a post-RECIST world: from black and white to shades of grey. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006 05; 6(5):409-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  29. Pharmacokinetic variability of anticancer agents. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005 Jun; 5(6):447-58.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.043
  30. The tyranny of non-inferiority trials. Lancet Oncol. 2024 Oct; 25(10):e520-e525.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  31. Pharmacogenomics: road to anticancer therapeutics nirvana? Oncogene. 2003 Sep 29; 22(42):6621-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  32. Screening for sources of interindividual pharmacokinetic variability in anticancer drug therapy: utility of population analysis. Cancer Invest. 2001; 19(1):57-64.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  33. Optimal Sampling Strategies for Irinotecan (CPT-11) and its Active Metabolite (SN-38) in Cancer Patients. AAPS J. 2020 03 17; 22(3):59.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  34. Drug combinations: dangerous liaisons or great expectations? Ann Oncol. 1999 Apr; 10(4):375-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  35. Identification of a Genomic Region between SLC29A1 and HSP90AB1 Associated with Risk of Bevacizumab-Induced Hypertension: CALGB 80405 (Alliance). Clin Cancer Res. 2018 10 01; 24(19):4734-4744.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  36. Measuring financial toxicity as a clinically relevant patient-reported outcome: The validation of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST). Cancer. 2017 02 01; 123(3):476-484.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  37. Comparative Effects of CT Imaging Measurement on RECIST End Points and Tumor Growth Kinetics Modeling. Clin Transl Sci. 2016 Feb; 9(1):43-50.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  38. Cancer pharmacogenomics and pharmacoepidemiology: setting a research agenda to accelerate translation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Nov 17; 102(22):1698-705.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  39. Vascular endothelial growth factor pathway. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2010 May; 20(5):346-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  40. Relapse after interferon alfa-2b therapy for hairy-cell leukemia: analysis of prognostic variables. J Clin Oncol. 1988 Nov; 6(11):1714-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.014
  41. Interpreting P values in pharmacogenetic studies: a call for process and perspective. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Oct 10; 25(29):4513-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
  42. Interleukin-2 fusion protein: an investigational therapy for interleukin-2 receptor expressing malignancies. Eur J Cancer. 1997 Jan; 33 Suppl 1:S34-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  43. Randomized study of the duration of treatment with interferon alfa-2B in patients with hairy cell leukemia. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1988 May 04; 80(5):369-73.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.003
  44. A programmable and implantable pumping system for systemic chemotherapy: a performance analysis in 52 patients. J Clin Oncol. 1987 Dec; 5(12):1968-76.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.003
  45. Alpha-2 interferon therapy of hairy-cell leukemia: a multicenter study of 64 patients. J Clin Oncol. 1986 Jun; 4(6):900-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.003
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.