ライフサイエンスコーパス: futility

1 fied stopping rules (nonbinding stopping for futility).

2 l guidelines, the study was stopped owing to futility.

3 e trial was subsequently closed early due to futility.

4 The trial was terminated for futility.

5 for intensive care discontinuation owing to futility.

6 Accrual was stopped early for futility.

7 of itself should not be considered a sign of futility.

8 .66), the trial was stopped for anticipated futility.

9 rocess to address questions of perioperative futility.

10 Enrollment was stopped early because of futility.

11 ntersection of BD/DNC and rubrics of medical futility.

12 sis of 48 patients, the study was closed for futility.

13 approach to addressing clinical questions of futility.

14 We used early progression as an indicator of futility.

15 ard recommended termination of the trial for futility.

16 esistance, and costs in the face of ultimate futility.

17 ucation to increase recognition of treatment futility.

18 The trial was terminated early for futility.

19 , and are hampered by varying definitions of futility.

20 There has been a shift in the language of futility.

21 une, 2009, when the trial was terminated for futility.

22 analyses, the study was terminated early for futility.

23 he study was terminated after 6 years due to futility.

24 terim analysis recommended early closure for futility.

25 The trial was stopped early because of futility.

26 erapy; three did not because of judgments of futility.

27 Data Safety Monitoring Board for reasons of futility.

28 treatment before consideration of treatment futility.

29 e recommended the trial be stopped early for futility.

30 n premature discontinuation of the study for futility.

31 at a prespecified interim analysis owing to futility.

32 Ag lateral flow assay titers (<=1:80) due to futility.

33 were identified as independent predictors of futility.

34 ne and lopinavir-ritonavir groups because of futility.

35 m analysis, the trial was stopped because of futility.

36 on these data, the trial was terminated for futility.

37 sults of a prespecified interim analysis for futility.

38 rim analysis that appeared to have suggested futility.

39 se results from an interim analysis revealed futility.

40 The study was terminated early for futility.

41 ib and evacetrapib were terminated early for futility.

42 ring board stopped the trial on the basis of futility.

43 ts, at which point the trial was stopped for futility.

44 The trial was terminated early due to futility.

45 after the second interim analysis because of futility.

46 s stopped at the second interim analysis for futility.

47 pendent data monitoring committee because of futility.

48 dy variable-region genes pursue the virus in futility.

49 o 1.49), which triggered early reporting for futility.

50 n premature discontinuation of the study for futility.

51 , reaching the early stopping boundaries for futility.

52 trial was stopped in October 2010 because of futility.

53 The study was prematurely terminated for futility.

54 nalyses (probability to conclude in favor of futility, 0.977).

55 us has been achieved about the definition of futility; 3) futility is a value-laden determination, th

56 benefit, 10 due to logistical issues, 8 for futility, 6 because of newly available evidence, 1 for h

57 ere burden vs. benefit (88%) and qualitative futility (83%).

58 On the basis of evidence of futility, a data and safety monitoring board recommended

59 the continue arm), the trial was stopped for futility according to a prespecified futility analysis.

60 monitoring boundaries for benefit, harm, or futility (adjusted CI, 0.72-1.10).

61 The study was stopped early for futility after 143 and 129 patients were enrolled in the

62 The trial was terminated for futility after 1454 patients had been enrolled; 485 had

63 Results The study was halted for futility after 312 of the planned 322 patients with COX-

64 ng board recommended stopping enrollment for futility after 314 patients (163 in the LY-CoV555 group

65 The trial was terminated because of futility after 329 patients had undergone randomization.

66 5-year follow-up, the trial was stopped for futility after 49 patients were enrolled (median age, 39

67 The trial was stopped for futility after 506 patients were enrolled.

68 The board later recommended stopping for futility after 615 participants (median age, 67 years; 1

69 y and monitoring board stopped the trial for futility after 644 of the intended 900 participants were

70 The study was stopped early because of futility after 656 participants had undergone randomizat

71 The study was stopped because of futility after 745 of an estimated 1000 patients had bee

72 The trial was concluded early for futility after a planned interim analysis.

73 The study was terminated for futility after a preplanned interim analysis.

74 The study was terminated early for futility after an interim data analysis on data for 77 p

75 ly, the trial was terminated prematurely for futility after enrolling a total of 1050 patients.

76 as terminated prior to phase 3 for treatment futility after interim analysis on the recommendations o

77 The trial was stopped for futility after the interim analysis, because the results

78 tient enrolment was interrupted for possible futility after the onset of the Omicron wave, the analys

79 a monitoring committee stopped the study for futility after the second interim analysis.

80 w to date has effectively dealt with medical futility--an issue that has engendered significant debat

81 study was halted after about 6.5 years when futility analyses revealed a less than 1% probability of

82 eptember, 2014, on the basis of results from futility analyses.

83 l was closed for emerging safety profile and futility analysis after the eighth review with 364 neona

84 d interim efficacy analysis and an unplanned futility analysis based on 394 patients appeared to have

85 A prespecified interim futility analysis conducted after 100 patients reached 9

86 Futility analysis determined that the probability of det

87 A futility analysis did not support continuing the study.

88 Because results of a prespecified futility analysis indicated a very low likelihood of a s

89 as closed prematurely when a planned interim futility analysis indicated that PVI FU/RT had a higher

90 e clinical outcome of the preplanned interim futility analysis scheduled to occur after documentation

91 The study was terminated after a futility analysis showed a low probability of detecting

92 A Bayesian futility analysis utilizing the first 49 randomly assign

93 A preplanned, unmasked, nonbinding interim futility analysis was conducted when 33% of participants

94 A non-binding futility analysis was done when approximately one-third

95 A futility analysis was performed when approximately half

96 An efficacy futility analysis was planned for when approximately 33%

97 The planned interim futility analysis when 35 deaths (of 103 analyzable pati

98 he trial was stopped early on the basis of a futility analysis when the median follow-up was 9.6 year

99 Before the futility analysis, 90 participants were randomly assigne

100 Based on a prespecified interim futility analysis, the study closed early, with 273 (92%

101 data and safety monitoring board review of a futility analysis.

102 as closed as a result of a scheduled interim futility analysis.

103 ated at 398 patients based on a prespecified futility analysis.

104 ped for futility according to a prespecified futility analysis.

105 ed trials have been conducted; both failed a futility analysis.

106 s and was terminated after a planned interim futility analysis.

107 hich closed in 2009 owing to findings from a futility analysis.

108 We did a futility analysis: if the 90% upper confidence bound of

109 ents) groups was halted after a prespecified futility analysis; planned accrual was completed for bot

110 interim analysis, the trial was stopped for futility and a full analysis undertaken once data snapsh

111 ate reasons and based on concepts of medical futility and allocation of scarce resources.

112 lly providing early insight into therapeutic futility and allowing response-adapted treatment strateg

113 Independent predictors of futility and failure-free survival were identified and a

114 tient whose 'phenotype' betrays the ultimate futility and lack of sustainability of the state.

115 ard recommended termination of the trial for futility and possible harm.

116 Fear of futility and public reporting often affects decision mak

117 In this paper, we examine the nature of futility and question whether it is a sufficiently robus

118 ttempts should trigger careful assessment of futility and risks of continuing the procedure.

119 Data Safety and Monitoring Board because of futility and safety concerns after 85 patients were rand

120 53 talactoferrin and 152 placebo) because of futility and safety concerns identified by the Data Safe

121 Although it was stopped early for futility and safety considerations, this trial contribut

122 ignment was unmasked on Dec 11, 2017, due to futility and the numerically higher frequency of adverse

123 ial was terminated early (March 2019) due to futility, and follow-up ended in September 2019.

124 After tens of seconds of such motor futility, animals became passive for similar durations.

125 f Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs) in futility as now deemed as morally and ethically appropri

126 The study was stopped for futility as recommended by the safety committee after a

127 An interim futility assessment was performed on the basis of a seve

128 Three interim analyses with futility assessments were planned.

129 The trial was stopped early as a result of futility at a planned interim analysis.

130 early trial termination based on efficacy or futility at a planned interim analysis.

131 was terminated early because of evidence of futility at a planned interim analysis; therefore, all p

132 A pre-specified stopping rule for futility at interim analysis led the trial to be stopped

133 The trial was stopped for futility at interim analysis.

134 The trial was stopped for futility at the end of part 1.

135 Arm C was closed for futility at the first interim analysis (n = 241), and ar

136 The stopping boundary for futility at the first interim analysis was a p value of

137 The study was stopped for futility at the first scheduled interim analysis after e

138 lled 1,048 patients and was discontinued for futility at the interim analysis.

139 n = 267) and arm B (n = 275) were closed for futility at the second interim analysis.

140 committee recommended study termination for futility at the second preplanned interim analysis (382

141 The study was stopped for futility at the time of the first planned interim analys

142 Enrollment was stopped for futility based on prespecified interim analysis criteria

143 The trial was terminated early for futility based on results of a planned interim analysis

144 randomized before the study was stopped for futility based on the recommendation of the unblinded Da

145 l in elderly people was terminated early for futility because aspirin had no effect on disability-fre

146 The study was stopped prematurely for futility because of a lower than expected incidence of t

147 Both trial designs stopped for futility before reaching the planned maximum sample size

148 he hazard ratio had crossed the prespecified futility bound.

149 because it unexpectedly met the prespecified futility boundaries at the first interim analysis.

150 Interim analyses crossed the futility boundaries for demonstrating superiority of bot

151 t the planned interim analysis, prespecified futility boundaries were crossed for the progression-fre

152 cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries.

153 ly study closure according to a prespecified futility boundary after 341 patients had enrolled.

154 conducted, the frequentist design passed the futility boundary after 936 participants were randomized

155 analysis, both taxane regimens passed the OS futility boundary and the Data Monitoring Committee appr

156 The test statistic crossed the prespecified futility boundary at second interim analysis after 340 d

157 was closed to accrual in March 2018 after a futility boundary had been crossed, concluding that ITT

158 data monitoring committee concluded that the futility boundary had been crossed.

159 Because the futility boundary was crossed at a preplanned interim an

160 The futility boundary was crossed at the planned interim ana

161 At the third planned interim analysis, the futility boundary was crossed, and the data and safety m

162 The study was stopped after a preplanned futility boundary was crossed.

163 ued randomisation at interim review when the futility boundary was crossed.

164 endent data monitoring committee because the futility boundary was not crossed after 50% of the requi

165 D had received TKM-130803, the pre-specified futility boundary was reached, indicating a probability

166 owed that the cumulative z-curve crossed the futility boundary, indicating firm evidence for lack of

167 ival between groups crossed the prespecified futility boundary, the independent data monitoring commi

168 s unblinded after crossing a prespecified OS futility boundary.

169 n the basis of their own personal notions of futility, but should instead rely on institutional or mu

170 determination of medical appropriateness and futility, but there are unique considerations during a p

171 o phase 3 because the trial met criteria for futility, but we continued to follow-up recruited patien

172 The trial was stopped early for futility by the Data Monitoring and Safety Committee, bu

173 resses the question of whether perioperative futility can be defined.

174 e support, the Supreme Court has not heard a futility case, and the only clear legal rule on futile t

175 zed, open-label, blinded end point, phase 2, futility clinical trial that enrolled 120 patients with

176 erapy did not meet prespecified criteria for futility compared with an SBP target of 180 mm Hg or les

177 on in descending order were: family request; futility considered or declared by the medical team; fam

178 s situation is the key, since the concept of futility could lead to inappropriate decisions.

179 of CMTNS worsening from natural history, so futility could not be declared (P > .99).

180 ted early at month 12 based on predetermined futility criteria for efficacy and discontinuation rates

181 h group) of the primary endpoint showed that futility criteria had been met, and the trial was stoppe

182 ve vaccine in South Africa, was stopped when futility criteria in the Step study (assessing the same

183 rial was closed, having met protocol-defined futility criteria.

184 on of 1331 patients, having met prespecified futility criteria.

185 oagulation could be initiated for failure or futility criteria.

186 Additional prespecified futility criterion was a less than 25% predicted probabi

187 he study was terminated after a prespecified futility criterion was reached.

188 was less than 30% in both treatment groups (futility criterion).

189 This reduced kidney allograft futility (death or continued need for hemodialysis withi

190 This reduced kidney allograft futility (death or continued need for hemodialysis withi

191 A futility design to determine whether AA was unable to re

192 We did a multicentre, futility-design, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-

193 Futility designs in Parkinson's disease are feasible in

194 due process mechanism for resolving medical futility disputes and other end-of-life ethical disagree

195 A due-process model for adjudicating futility disputes has been developed, and may provide a

196 eloped, and may provide a better solution to futility disputes than previous futility statutes.

197 deciding the most appropriate way to resolve futility disputes.

198 n can erode family trust and fuel so-called "futility" disputes.

199 [recombinant Ad5 (rAd5)-HIV] were halted for futility due to lack of vaccine efficacy and unexpected

200 the data and safety monitoring board due to futility for efficacy at an unplanned interim analysis a

201 dvanced cardiopulmonary resuscitation beyond futility for organ preservation, moment to approach fami

202 ed equivalent liver iron content, indicating futility for the composite primary end point.

203 se events in the negative pressure group and futility for the primary outcome.

204 biliary tumors) as independent predictors of futility from multivariate analysis.

205 The concept of futility has often been invoked to justify abstention fr

206 In this capacity, futility has played an important part in the development

207 nal right ventricular failure predisposed to futility (hazard ratio, 8.48 [95% CI, 1.85-38.91]; P=0.0

208 d recommended early closure of the trial for futility (ie, no significant difference would be shown).

209 ed interim monitoring plan was to report for futility if the HR was > 1.18 when 334 IDFS events were

210 Enrollment was stopped for futility if the probability fell to below 10% for every

211 daries were to accept the null hypothesis of futility if the test statistic z < 0.39 (P >/= .348) and

212 clonus and poor outcome, due to neurological futility in 293 of 330 (89%), at 5 days (3-8 d) after re

213 The trial was halted early for futility in April, 2011, after a planned interim analysi

214 This engenders feelings of frustration and futility in both patients and the dermatologists who car

215 Although attempts have been made to define futility in medicine, all proposed definitions are inade

216 disease progression, ultimately resulting in futility in most patients.

217 The trial was stopped for safety and futility in November 2013 after 364 of the planned 726 i

218 oring Board after an interim analysis showed futility in reaching the primary end point for simvastat

219 6) when a planned interim analysis suggested futility in reaching the primary end point, and the stud

220 Because testing for futility in this noninferiority trial corresponds to tes

221 However, a narrow definition of futility in this situation is the key, since the concept

222 ical factors distinguishing feasibility from futility, in order to increase population efficiency and

223 chieved about the definition of futility; 3) futility is a value-laden determination, the usurpation

224 will ultimately dictate all such decisions, futility is an unnecessary concept.

225 We argue that a form of socialised care futility is communicated between staff and is used to ra

226 ition of futility is used; 4) the concept of futility is not practically useful because empirical tre

227 o the following major criticisms: 1) Medical futility is simply an attempt to increase the power of t

228 lue-free or strict physiologic definition of futility is used; 4) the concept of futility is not prac

229 Understanding the justification for a futility judgement may be relevant to deciding the most

230 view will summarize recent literature around futility judgements in intensive care emphasising ethica

231 aining and knowledge, lack of time, sense of futility, lack of reimbursement, competing demands durin

232 36 per group), additional stopping rules for futility lead to the saving of resources of up to 30% co

233 ut, this circuit exhibits hyposensitivity to futility, leading to long-term increased perseverance.

234 Continuous Bayesian futility monitoring was used.

235 has been shown that, despite almost certain futility, most ICU costs are incurred in the last week o

236 pt 12, 2012, the trial was stopped early for futility (n=841).

237 nical trials hopefully ending the Kafkaesque futility of cancer vaccines.

238 nclusiveness remains in the determination of futility of care after major stroke.

239 events were observed to test superiority or futility of concurrent temozolomide.

240 rdance with a prespecified stopping rule for futility of finding one drug to be superior or inferior,

241 The apparent futility of M6P causing destruction of its LLO product w

242 a should inform the ethical debate as to the futility of performing CLKT in high-acuity recipients.

243 Our research demonstrates the futility of scrutinizing the relative importance of high

244 In the head and neck, the futility of skull radiography is again reemphasized as a

245 , the study was stopped because of potential futility of sunitinib plus FOLFIRI.

246 liver transplantation (LT) or the potential futility of their care.

247 itant AS-CA has worse outcomes or results in futility of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR

248 y algorithm, secondary therapy, and defining futility of treatment.

249 We elucidate the epistemological futility of using concepts such as unconscious thinking

250 interim analysis, enrollment was halted for futility on January 10, 2023.

251 , we terminated the trial 4 months early for futility on the basis of their recommendation.

252 On March 13, 2013, the study was stopped for futility on the recommendation of the data and safety mo

253 ort was closed at the first stage because of futility: Only one of 16 patients exhibited both OR and

254 ctrum, without undue concern about treatment futility or excessive reoperation.

255 utcome have been discontinued for reasons of futility or increased mortality.

256 al with interim analyses for early stopping (futility or success) or population enrichment, which was

257 oints [0.48] per month in the placebo group; futility p=0.032; efficacy p=0.76).

258 rely on institutional or multiinstitutional futility policies.

259 Although the concept of futility promises simplicity, it cannot stand alone as a

260 e outcomes and predictors of renal allograft futility (RAF-patient death or need for renal replacemen

261 of the data and safety monitoring board for futility reasons after inclusion of 188 patients, 97 in

262 s stopped at the second interim analysis for futility regarding RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; P = .99

263 g illness, resolving conflict around medical futility, responding to a request for physician-assisted

264 Using all 4 factors, the futility risk model had a good discriminatory ability (c

265 failure-free survival were identified and a futility risk model was created.

266 The model predicted futility risk of 5%, 10%, 20%, and 50% for patients with

267 using multivariate regression analysis and a futility risk score formula was computed on the basis of

268 Socialised care futility risks good quality care, therefore systematic s

269 nued therapy despite the protocol-stipulated futility rule achieved SVR; one additional patient with

270 D was 50% (3/6), with 3 patients meeting the futility rule at treatment week 12.

271 A futility rule for GVHD-free survival at day 56 was met a

272 The study met futility rules for survival after enrolling 146 of 259 p

273 d on 394 patients appeared to have suggested futility, so the study was closed to accrual.

274 solution to futility disputes than previous futility statutes.

275 second interim analysis met the prespecified futility stopping criteria in the intention-to-treat pop

276 ate of the trials remain low, and therefore, futility stopping rules to terminate ineffective treatme

277 The futility stopping rules were an absolute increase in day

278 Futility studies are designed to test new treatments ove

279 The futility study design, an alternative approach focused o

280 priate outcome measure for a neuroprotection futility study in Parkinson's disease (sensitive to trac

281 design incorporating a dose selection and a futility test avoided the need for a much larger convent

282 Stage 2 (futility test, 75 patients per group) compared the dose

283 tient benefit-centered definition of medical futility that included both quantitative and qualitative

284 878 planned before reaching the prespecified futility threshold.

285 Only 3 eyes met criteria for failure or futility through 2 years.

286 Although some physicians use the concept of futility to unilaterally withhold or withdraw life suppo

287 lied with certainty to any given patient; 5) futility undermines our pluralistic society and threaten

288 Given these results, futility was declared for CP-316,311 and the trial was t

289 After a second interim analysis, futility was declared for patients who were ER/PgR-, so

290 first interim analysis because criterion for futility was met (p=0.78).

291 Futility was modeled using multivariate regression analy

292 opped when the prospective stopping rule for futility was reached.

293 wo-stage design, incorporating a stop:go for futility, was employed.

294 ollment, the study was closed because of the futility; we did not observe sufficient events to evalua

295 At the third interim analysis, criteria for futility were met and the trial was stopped early.

296 ing board recommended stopping the study for futility when 894 (median age, 63 years; 286 [32%] women

297 s stopped at the fourth interim analysis for futility with a sample size of 479 patients.

298 k of heart failure, mortality, and treatment futility with aortic valve replacement.

299 The trial was stopped early because of futility with respect to the primary end point and safet

300 ndomization before the trial was stopped for futility with respect to the primary outcome.