Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1177/1740774510380953 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1177/1740774510380953 C5702272!5702272!20729254     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 227.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 261.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 261.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Clin+Trials 2010 ; 7 (6): 686-95 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=20729254|t=2010. Cancer registries: a novel alternative to long-term clinical trial follow-up based on results of a comparative study |pdf=|usr=}}{{20729254}} gab.com Text Cancer registries: a novel alternative to long-term clinical trial follow-up based on results of a comparative study JO: Clin Trials http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=20729254 #FOAvip Background: Data collection and review were identified as major contributors to the cost of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Purpose: We proposed and assessed a novel alternative for long-term clinical trial follow-up based on the data captured through an accredited Cancer Registry (CR) that is part of the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Methods: Patients from Mayo Clinic, Rochester, enrolled in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N934653 (COST) trial (98 patients) and the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0030 trial (55 patients) were included in the study. Demographic, treatment, and long-term outcome data were compared between the hospital-based CR and the RCTs? databases. Concordances were used to estimate the agreement between two databases. Kaplan?Meier curves were plotted to examine the consistency of time-to-event long-term outcomes of the CR and RCT databases. Results: High concordances (>95%) were observed for most demographic and treatment variables between the CR data and RCT data. The vital status concordances were 100% and 94.5% between the CR and COST and Z0030 databases, respectively. Three discrepant death dates were observed, one in the COST trial and two in the Z0030 trial. The concordances of disease-free status between the CR and RCT databases were 99.0% and 87.3%, and 15 discrepant disease recurrence cases were identified: 4 for COST and 11 for Z0030. Limitations: The analysis has been focused on patients from a single site, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, enrolled in two large RCT evaluating surgical treatments. The findings herein need to be confirmed in a broader setting, such as multi-center, multi-registry including nonsurgical trials. Conclusions: CR data were nearly identical to data from two randomized phase III trials in different disease types and conducted by two different cooperative groups. The NCDB Cancer Registries represent a feasible alternative for obtaining long-term follow-up data for large clinical trials. Twit Text FOAVip Cancer registries: a novel alternative to long-term clinical trial follow-up based on results of a comparative study ????Clin Trials http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=20729254 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=20729254 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|20729254}}</ref> Cancer registries: a novel alternative to long-term clinical trial follow-up based on results of a comparative study #MMPMID20729254 Shi Q; You YN; Nelson H; Allen MS; Winchester D; Stewart A; Young-Fadok T; Decker PA; Green EM; Holton SJ; Ballman KV Clin Trials 2010[Dec]; 7 (6): 686-95 PMID20729254show ga Background: Data collection and review were identified as major contributors to the cost of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Purpose: We proposed and assessed a novel alternative for long-term clinical trial follow-up based on the data captured through an accredited Cancer Registry (CR) that is part of the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Methods: Patients from Mayo Clinic, Rochester, enrolled in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N934653 (COST) trial (98 patients) and the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0030 trial (55 patients) were included in the study. Demographic, treatment, and long-term outcome data were compared between the hospital-based CR and the RCTs? databases. Concordances were used to estimate the agreement between two databases. Kaplan?Meier curves were plotted to examine the consistency of time-to-event long-term outcomes of the CR and RCT databases. Results: High concordances (>95%) were observed for most demographic and treatment variables between the CR data and RCT data. The vital status concordances were 100% and 94.5% between the CR and COST and Z0030 databases, respectively. Three discrepant death dates were observed, one in the COST trial and two in the Z0030 trial. The concordances of disease-free status between the CR and RCT databases were 99.0% and 87.3%, and 15 discrepant disease recurrence cases were identified: 4 for COST and 11 for Z0030. Limitations: The analysis has been focused on patients from a single site, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, enrolled in two large RCT evaluating surgical treatments. The findings herein need to be confirmed in a broader setting, such as multi-center, multi-registry including nonsurgical trials. Conclusions: CR data were nearly identical to data from two randomized phase III trials in different disease types and conducted by two different cooperative groups. The NCDB Cancer Registries represent a feasible alternative for obtaining long-term follow-up data for large clinical trials. äCancer registries: a novel alternative to long-term clinical trial fol(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing