ライフサイエンスコーパス: futility

1 fied stopping rules (nonbinding stopping for futility).

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

3 approach to addressing clinical questions of futility.

4 We used early progression as an indicator of futility.

5 ard recommended termination of the trial for futility.

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

7 ucation to increase recognition of treatment futility.

8 The trial was terminated early for futility.

9 , and are hampered by varying definitions of futility.

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

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

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

13 terim analysis recommended early closure for futility.

14 The trial was stopped early because of futility.

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

16 Data Safety Monitoring Board for reasons of futility.

17 treatment before consideration of treatment futility.

18 , reaching the early stopping boundaries for futility.

19 trial was stopped in October 2010 because of futility.

20 The study was prematurely terminated for futility.

21 pendent data monitoring committee because of futility.

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

23 e trial was subsequently closed early due to futility.

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

25 The trial was terminated for futility.

26 for intensive care discontinuation owing to futility.

27 Accrual was stopped early for futility.

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

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

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

31 rocess to address questions of perioperative futility.

32 Enrollment was stopped early because of futility.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

40 5-year follow-up, the trial was stopped for futility after 49 patients were enrolled (median age, 39

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

57 Futility analysis determined that the probability of det

58 A futility analysis did not support continuing the study.

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

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

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

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

63 A Bayesian futility analysis utilizing the first 49 randomly assign

64 A futility analysis was performed when approximately half

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

66 Before the futility analysis, 90 participants were randomly assigne

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

78 53 talactoferrin and 152 placebo) because of futility and safety concerns identified by the Data Safe

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

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

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

82 Three interim analyses with futility assessments were planned.

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

84 The trial was stopped for futility at interim analysis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

96 cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries.

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

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

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

100 The futility boundary was crossed at the planned interim ana

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

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

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

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

105 s unblinded after crossing a prespecified OS futility boundary.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

121 Futility designs in Parkinson's disease are feasible in

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

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

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

125 deciding the most appropriate way to resolve futility disputes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

154 36 per group), additional stopping rules for futility lead to the saving of resources of up to 30% co

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

170 rely on institutional or multiinstitutional futility policies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

183 solution to futility disputes than previous futility statutes.

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

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

186 The futility stopping rules were an absolute increase in day

187 Futility studies are designed to test new treatments ove

188 The futility study design, an alternative approach focused o

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

197 Futility was modeled using multivariate regression analy

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

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

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

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