SpringerLink
Log in

Biometrie

  • Chapter
Strahlentherapie

  • 1915 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Abel U (1995) Die zytostatische Chemotherapie fortgeschrittener Karzinome, 2. vollst. überarbeitete Aufl. Hippokrates, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Abel U, Windeler J (1995) Erkenntnistheoretische Aspekte klinischer Studien. 1. Irrümer in der Bewertung medizinischer Therapien — Ursachen und Konsequenzen. Internist Prax 35:613–629

    Google Scholar 

  • Abel U, Koch A (1999) The role of randomization in clinical studies: myths and beliefs. J Clin Epidemiol 52:487–497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Adam J, Förster W (1996) Meta-Analysen — wirklich der Weisheit letzter Schluß? Münch Med Wschr 138:37–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer P, Köhne K (1994) Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. Biometrics 50:1029–1041. Correction in Biometrics 52:380

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benson K, Hartz AJ (2000) A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 342:1878–1886

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Black N (1996) Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 312:1215–1218

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bock J (1998) Bestimmung des Stichprobenumfangs. Oldenbourg, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Borzak S, Ridker PM (1995) Discordance between metaanalyses and large-scale randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med 123:873–877

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brannath W, Posch M, Bauer P (2002) Recursive combination tests. JASA 97:236–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Buyse M, Thirion P, Carlson RW, Burzykowski T, Molenberghs G, Piedbois P (2000) Relation between tumour response to first-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Lancet 356:373–378

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chow S-C, Liu J-P (1998) Design and analysis of clinical trials. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Concato J, Chah N, Horwitz RI (2000) Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med 342:1887–1892

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crowley J (ed) (2001) Handbook of statistics in clinical oncology. Dekker, New York Basel

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook PhJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR (1991) Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337:867–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Edler L, Flechtner H (1987) Remission in Phase-II-und Phase-III-Studien: Kriterien und Voraussetzungen. Onkologie 10:330–339

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Edler L (1993) Phase-II-Studien in der Onkologie: Wieviele Patienten sind erforderlich? Tumordiagn Ther 14:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Freidlin B, Korn E, George SL (1999) Data monitoring committees and interim monitoring guidelines. Control Clin Trials 20:395–407

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Friede T, Kieser M (2001) A comparison of methods for adaptive sample size adjustment. Stat Med 20:3861–3873

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Granone P, Trodella L, Margaritora S et al. (2000) Radiotherapy versus follow-up in the treatment of pathological stage Ia and Ib non-small cell lung cancer. Early stopped analysis of a randomized controlled study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 18:418–424

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Green S, Benedetti J, Crowley J (1997) Clinical trials in oncology. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollen PJ, Gralla RJ, Cox C, Eberly SW, Kris MG (1997) A dilemma in analysis: issues in the serial measurement of quality of life in patients with advanced lung cancer. Lung Cancer 18:119–136

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hollinshead A (1991) Active specific immunotherapy and immunochemotherapy in the treatment of lung and colon cancer. Semin Oncol 7:199–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hollinshead AC, Stewart THM, Takita H, Dalbow M, Concannon J (1987) Adjuvant specific active lung cancer immunotherapy trials. Cancer 60:1249–1262

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jennison C, Turnbull BW (1990) Statistical approaches to interim monitoring of medical trials: a review and commentary. Statistical Science 5:299–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennison C, Turnbull BW (2000) Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen DP (2000) Surrogate endpoints in assessment of new drugs in colorectal cancer. Commentary. Lancet 356:353–354

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kreuser E-D, Fiebig HH, Scheulen ME et al. (1998) Standard operating procedures and organization. Onkologie 21(Suppl 3):1–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunz R, Oxman AD (1998) The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. BMJ 317:1185–1190

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis JA, Facey KM (1998) Statistical shortcomings in licensing applications. Stat Med 17:1663–1673

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lilford RJ, Braunholtz D, Edwards S, Stevens A (2001) Monitoring clinical trials — interim data should be publicly available. BMJ 323:441–442

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Machin D, Campbell MJ (1987) Statistical tables for the design of clinical trials. Blackwell Sci Publ, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLehose RR, Reeves BC, Harvey IM, Sheldon TA, Russell IT, Black N (2000) A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomized and non-randomized studies. Health Technology Assessment 2000, Vol 4, No 34 (www.ncchta.org/htapubs.htm)

    Google Scholar 

  • McKee M, Britton A, Black N et al. (1999) Interpreting the evidence. Choosing between randomised and nonrandomised studies. BMJ 319:312–315

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moertel CG (1984) Improving the efficiency of clinical trials: a medical perspective. Stat Med 3:455–465

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: the QUORUM statement. Lancet 354:1896–1900

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moher D, Schulz KF, Altaian DG for the CONSORT Group (2001) The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 357:1191–1194

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Müller HH, Schäfer H (2001) Adaptive group sequential designs for clinical trials: Combining the advantages of adaptive and of classical group sequential approaches. Biometrics 57:886–891

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moyé LA (2003) Multiple analyses in clinical trials: fundamentals for investigators. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro AJ (1998) What now for postoperative radiotherapy for lung cancer? Commentary. Lancet 352:250–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Naylor CD (1997) Meta-analysis and the meta-analysis of clinical research. BMJ 315:617–619

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson RB (1984) Cancer trials: pseudoscience or situation science? In: Buyse M et al. (eds) Cancer clinical trials. Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, pp 3–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Oellrich S, Freischläger F, Benner A, Kieser M (1997) Sample size determination on survival time data — a review. Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biologie 28:64–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Perleth M (1998) Evidenz-basierte Medizin: eine Einführung. In: Perleth M, Antes G (Hrsg) Evidenzbasierte Medizin. Wissenschaft im Praxisalltag. MMV Medizin Verlag, München, S 13–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Petitti DB (1994) Meta-analysis, decision analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis. Oxford Univ Press, New York Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Piantadosi S (1997) Clinical trials: a methodological perspective. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock SJ (1983) Clinical trials — a practical approach. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • PORT Meta-analysis Trialists Group (1998) Postoperative radiotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from nine ran-domised controlled trials. Lancet 352:257–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranstam J, Buyse M, George SL et al. (2000) Fraud in medical research: an international survey of biostatisticians. Control Clin Trials 21:415–427

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett DL (1979) Bias in analytical research. J Chronic Disease 32:51–63

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB (1997) Evidence-based medicine. Churchill Livingston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sackett DL (1998) Was ist Evidenz-basierte Medizin? Editorial. In: Perleth M, Antes G (Hrsg) Evidenzbasierte Medizin. Wissenschaft im Praxisalltag. MMV Medizin Verlag, München, S 9–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz K, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG (1995) Empirical evidence of bias. JAMA 273:408–412

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzer G, Galandi D, Antes G, Schumacher M (2000) Meta-Analyse randomisierter klinischer Studien, Publikations-Bias und Evidence-based Medicine. Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biologie 31:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Salek S (1998) Compendium of quality of life instruments. Wiley, Chichester New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Spilker B (ed) (1996) Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2nd ed. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern JM, Simes RJ (1997) Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ 315:640–645

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sylvester R, Bartelink H, Rubens R (1994) A reversal of fortune: practical problems in the monitoring and interpretation of an EORTC breast cancer trial. Stat Med 13:1329–1335

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al. (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Unnebrink K, Windeler J (1999) Sensitivity analysis by worst and best case assessment: is it really sensitive? Drug Inf J 33:835–839

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickers A, Goyal N, Harland R, Rees R (1998) Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. Control Clin Trials 19:159–166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vollmar J (Hrsg) (1995) Biometrie in der chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie 6. Testprinzipien in klinischen und präklinischen Studien. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallack MK, Sivanandham M, Balch CM et al. (1995) A phase III randomized, double-blind, multiinstitutional trial of vaccinia melanoma oncolysate-active specific immunotherapy for patients with stage II melanoma. Cancer 75:34–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wallack MK, Sivanandham M, Whooley B, Ditaranto K, Bartolucci AA (1996) Favorable clinical responses in subsets of patients from a randomized, multi-institutional melanoma vaccine trial. Ann Surg Oncol 3:110–117

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Warr D, McKinney S, Tannock I (1984) Influence of measurement error on assessment of response to anticancer chemotherapy: proposal for new criteria of tumor response. J Clin Oncol 2:1040–1046

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss RB, Rifkin RM, Stewart FM, Theriault RL, Williams LA, Herman AA, Beveridge RA (2000) High-dose chemotherapy for high-risk primary breast cancer: an onsite review of the Bezwoda study. Lancet 355:999–1003

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss RB, Gill GG, Hudis CA (2001) An on-site audit of the South African trial of high-dose chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer and associated publications. J Clin Oncol 19:2771–2777

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Windeler J (1993) Das Intention-to-treat-Prinzip in klinischen Arzneimittelprüfungen. Arzneimitteltherapie 11:103–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittes J, Brittain E (1990) The role of internal pilot studies in increasing the efficiency of clinical trials. Stat Med 9:65–72

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nationales Zentrum für Tumorerkrankungen Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 350, D-69120, Heidelberg

    U. Abel (Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Dr. med.)

  2. Abteilung Medizinische Biometrie, Universität Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 305, D-69120, Heidelberg

    M. Pritsch (Dr. med.)

Authors
  1. U. Abel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Pritsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Abteilung für Klinische Radiologie, Universität Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg

    M. Wannenmacher

  2. Abteilung Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie Radiologische Klinik, Universität Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg

    J. Debus

  3. Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim

    F. Wenz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Abel, U., Pritsch, M. (2006). Biometrie. In: Wannenmacher, M., Debus, J., Wenz, F. (eds) Strahlentherapie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68520-3_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68520-3_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-22812-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68520-3

  • eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation