An iterative method to protect the type I error rate in bioequivalence studies under two-stage adaptive 2×2 crossover designs.
暂无分享,去创建一个
[2] A. Fuglsang. Futility Rules in Bioequivalence Trials with Sequential Designs , 2013, The AAPS Journal.
[3] L. Endrenyi,et al. Regulatory and study conditions for the determination of bioequivalence of highly variable drugs. , 2009, Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques.
[4] S. Pocock. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials , 1977 .
[5] Donald J. Schuirmann,et al. Optimal adaptive sequential designs for crossover bioequivalence studies , 2015, Pharmaceutical statistics.
[6] Walter W Hauck,et al. Additional results for 'Sequential design approaches for bioequivalence studies with crossover designs'. , 2012, Pharmaceutical statistics.
[7] L. Endrenyi,et al. Sample sizes for designing bioequivalence studies for highly variable drugs. , 2011, Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques.
[8] Helmut Schütz,et al. Two-stage designs in bioequivalence trials , 2015, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.
[9] P. O'Brien,et al. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. , 1979, Biometrics.
[10] A. Marshall,et al. A literature review of applied adaptive design methodology within the field of oncology in randomised controlled trials and a proposed extension to the CONSORT guidelines , 2017, BMC Medical Research Methodology.
[11] W. Maurer,et al. Controlling the type I error rate in two‐stage sequential adaptive designs when testing for average bioequivalence , 2018, Statistics in medicine.
[12] Donald J. Schuirmann,et al. Sequential design approaches for bioequivalence studies with crossover designs , 2008, Pharmaceutical statistics.
[13] Q. Kang,et al. Testing for bioequivalence of highly variable drugs from TR‐RT crossover designs with heterogeneous residual variances , 2017, Pharmaceutical statistics.
[14] Kristian Thorlund,et al. Key design considerations for adaptive clinical trials: a primer for clinicians , 2018, British Medical Journal.
[15] Laszlo Endrenyi,et al. Evaluation of the Bioequivalence of Highly-Variable Drugs and Drug Products , 2001, Pharmaceutical Research.
[16] Daniel Alcaide,et al. Consumer's risk in the EMA and FDA regulatory approaches for bioequivalence in highly variable drugs. , 2016, Statistics in medicine.
[17] D. Labes,et al. Inflation of Type I Error in the Evaluation of Scaled Average Bioequivalence, and a Method for its Control , 2016, Pharmaceutical Research.
[18] Vladimir Dragalin,et al. Implementation of an adaptive group sequential design in a bioequivalence study. , 2007, Pharmaceutical statistics.
[19] Meinhard Kieser,et al. Two‐stage designs for cross‐over bioequivalence trials , 2015, Statistics in medicine.
[20] A. Fuglsang. Controlling type I errors for two-stage bioequivalence study designs , 2011 .
[21] B. Levin,et al. Overview, hurdles, and future work in adaptive designs: perspectives from a National Institutes of Health-funded workshop , 2012, Clinical trials.
[22] V. Karalis,et al. On the statistical model of the two‐stage designs in bioequivalence assessment , 2014, The Journal of pharmacy and pharmacology.
[23] Erik Cobo,et al. Two-stage designs versus European scaled average designs in bioequivalence studies for highly variable drugs: Which to choose? , 2017, Statistics in medicine.
[24] Panos Macheras,et al. Bioequivalence of Highly Variable Drugs: A Comparison of the Newly Proposed Regulatory Approaches by FDA and EMA , 2011, Pharmaceutical Research.