HeySPKimmelmanJ. Are outcome-adaptive allocation trials ethical?Clin Trials2015, 12: 102–106.
2.
HeiligCMWeijerbC. A critical history of individual and collective ethics in the lineage of Lellouch and Schwartz. Clin Trials2005; 2: 244–253.
3.
HeySPKimmelmanJ. The questionable use of unequal allocation in confirmatory trials. Neurology2014; 82: 77–79.
4.
HuFRosenbergerWF. The theory of response-adaptive randomization in clinical trials. New York: Wiley, 2006.
5.
BerryDA. Adaptive clinical trials: the promise and the caution. J Clin Oncol2011; 29: 606–609.
6.
RosenbergerWFLachinJ. Randomization in clinical trials. New York: Wiley, 2002.
7.
ThallPFFoxPWathenJK. Some caveats for outcome adaptive randomization in clinical trials. In: SverdlovO (ed.) Modern adaptive randomized clinical trials: statistical, operational, and regulatory aspects. Taylor & Francis, in press.
8.
MakiRGWathenJKPatelSR. Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and docetaxel compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas: results of Sarcoma Alliance for Research Through Collaboration Study 002. J Clin Oncol2007; 25: 2755–2763.
9.
ZhouXLiuSKimES. Bayesian adaptive design for targeted therapy development in lung cancer—a step toward personalized medicine. Clin Trials2008; 5: 181–193.
10.
BarkerADSigmanCCKelloffGJ. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther2009; 86: 97–100.
11.
KornELFreidlinB. Outcome-adaptive randomization: is it useful?J Clin Oncol2011; 29: 771–776.