EllenbergSSFlemingTRDeMetsDL. Data monitoring committees in clinical trials: a practical perspective. Chichester; Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2002, p. xiii, 191 pp.
2.
MarquisD. Leaving therapy to chance. Hastings Cent Rep1983; 13: 40–47.
3.
LipskyAMLewisRJ. Response-adaptive decision-theoretic trial design: operating characteristics and ethics. Stat Med2013; 32: 3752–3765.
4.
KarrisonTGHuoDZChappellR. A group sequential, response-adaptive design for randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials2003; 24: 506–522.
5.
PalmerCRRosenbergerWF. Ethics and practice: alternative designs for phase III randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials1999; 20: 172–186.
6.
RosenbergerWFLachinJM. The use of response-adaptive designs in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials1993; 14: 471–484.
7.
HeySKimmelmanJ. Are outcome-adaptive allocation trials ethical?Clin Trials, 2015, 12: 102–106.
8.
EmanuelEJWendlerDGradyC. What makes clinical research ethical?JAMA2000; 283: 2701–2711.
9.
GreenSJFlemingTRO’FallonJR. Policies for study monitoring and interim reporting of results. J Clin Oncol1987; 5: 1477–1484.
10.
MillerFGJoffeS. Equipoise and the dilemma of randomized clinical trials. New Engl J Med2011; 364: 476–480.