These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11033576)

  • 21. Comparison of models for average bioequivalence in replicated crossover designs.
    Willavize SA; Morgenthien EA
    Pharm Stat; 2006; 5(3):201-11. PubMed ID: 17080753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products.
    Midha KK; Rawson MJ; Hubbard JW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2005 Oct; 43(10):485-98. PubMed ID: 16240706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Algorithms for evaluating reference scaled average bioequivalence: power, bias, and consumer risk.
    Tothfalusi L; Endrenyi L
    Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(27):4378-4390. PubMed ID: 28850696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The role of the upper sample size limit in two-stage bioequivalence designs.
    Karalis V
    Int J Pharm; 2013 Nov; 456(1):87-94. PubMed ID: 23954235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Subject-by-formulation interaction in determinations of individual bioequivalence: bias and prevalence.
    Endrenyi L; Tothfalusi L
    Pharm Res; 1999 Feb; 16(2):186-90. PubMed ID: 10100301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation by simulation of tests based on non-linear mixed-effects models in pharmacokinetic interaction and bioequivalence cross-over trials.
    Panhard X; Mentré F
    Stat Med; 2005 May; 24(10):1509-24. PubMed ID: 15761916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. New bioequivalence studies: individual bioequivalence and population bioequivalence.
    Nakai K; Fujita M; Ogata H
    Yakugaku Zasshi; 2000 Nov; 120(11):1201-8. PubMed ID: 11190205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. An individual bioequivalence approach to compare the intrasubject variability of two ciclosporin formulations, SangCya and Neoral.
    Canafax DM; Irish WD; Moran HB; Squiers E; Levy R; Pouletty P; First MR; Christians U
    Pharmacology; 1999 Aug; 59(2):78-88. PubMed ID: 10450062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A practical approach for evaluating population and individual bioequivalence.
    Gould AL
    Stat Med; 2000 Oct; 19(20):2721-40. PubMed ID: 11033571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of some properties of individual bioequivalence (IBE) from replicate-design studies.
    Tothfalusi L; Endrenyi L
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2001 Apr; 39(4):162-6. PubMed ID: 11332872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Case studies, practical issues and observations on population and individual bioequivalence.
    Zariffa NM; Patterson SD; Boyle D; Hyneck M
    Stat Med; 2000 Oct; 19(20):2811-20. PubMed ID: 11033577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Tests for individual and population bioequivalence based on generalized p-values.
    McNally RJ; Iyer H; Mathew T
    Stat Med; 2003 Jan; 22(1):31-53. PubMed ID: 12486750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Application of multilevel models in the evaluation of bioequivalence (II).].
    Liu QL; Shen ZZ; Li XS; Chen F; Yang M
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2010 Mar; 31(3):333-9. PubMed ID: 20510066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Extension to the use of tolerance intervals for the assessment of individual bioequivalence.
    Esinhart JD; Chinchilli VM
    J Biopharm Stat; 1994 Mar; 4(1):39-52. PubMed ID: 8019583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. On the statistical model of the two-stage designs in bioequivalence assessment.
    Karalis V; Macheras P
    J Pharm Pharmacol; 2014 Jan; 66(1):48-52. PubMed ID: 24175961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Mitigation of the convergence issues associated with semi-replicated bioequivalence data.
    Fuglsang A
    Pharm Stat; 2021 Nov; 20(6):1232-1234. PubMed ID: 34076368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. On TIER method for assessment of individual bioequivalence.
    Ju HL
    J Biopharm Stat; 1997 Mar; 7(1):63-85. PubMed ID: 9056589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Biometrical evaluation of bioequivalence trials using a bootstrap individual direct curve comparison method.
    Zintzaras E; Bouka P; Kowald A
    Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet; 2002; 27(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 11996322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Model-based analyses of bioequivalence crossover trials using the stochastic approximation expectation maximisation algorithm.
    Dubois A; Lavielle M; Gsteiger S; Pigeolet E; Mentré F
    Stat Med; 2011 Sep; 30(21):2582-600. PubMed ID: 21793036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Bioequivalence of methylphenidate immediate-release tablets using a replicated study design to characterize intrasubject variability.
    Meyer MC; Straughn AB; Jarvi EJ; Patrick KS; Pelsor FR; Williams RL; Patnaik R; Chen ML; Shah VP
    Pharm Res; 2000 Apr; 17(4):381-4. PubMed ID: 10870979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.