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 *

86 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1601534)

  • 21. Alternative confidence intervals for the assessment of bioequivalence in four-period cross-over designs.
    Quiroz J; Ting N; Wei GC; Burdick RK
    Stat Med; 2002 Jul; 21(13):1825-47. PubMed ID: 12111892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Pharmacokinetic analysis of bioequivalence trials: implications for sex-related issues in clinical pharmacology and biopharmaceutics.
    Chen ML; Lee SC; Ng MJ; Schuirmann DJ; Lesko LJ; Williams RL
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2000 Nov; 68(5):510-21. PubMed ID: 11103754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Asthma management: the challenge of equivalence.
    Steinijans VW; Neuhäuser M; Hummel T; Leichtl S; Rathgeb F; Keller A
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1998 Mar; 36(3):117-25. PubMed ID: 9562226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Choice of characteristics and their bioequivalence ranges for the comparison of absorption rates of immediate-release drug formulations.
    Schall R; Luus HG; Steinijans VW; Hauschke D
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1994 Jul; 32(7):323-8. PubMed ID: 7952792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Role of food interaction pharmacokinetic studies in drug development. Food interaction studies of theophylline and nifedipine retard and buspirone tablets].
    Drabant S; Klebovich I; Gachályi B; Renczes G; Farsang C
    Acta Pharm Hung; 1998 Sep; 68(5):294-306. PubMed ID: 9805816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Bioequivalence and pharmacokinetics of two zidovudine formulations in healthy Brazilian volunteers: an open-label, randomized, single-dose, two-way crossover study.
    Dos Reis Serra CH; Mori Koono EE; Kano EK; Schramm SG; Armando YP; Porta V
    Clin Ther; 2008 May; 30(5):902-8. PubMed ID: 18555936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Sample size considerations for establishing clinical bioequivalence of allergen formulations.
    Rabin RL; Slater JE; Lachenbruch P; Pastor RW
    Arb Paul Ehrlich Inst Bundesamt Sera Impfstoffe Frankf A M; 2003; (94):24-33. PubMed ID: 15119019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Bioanalytic examination and pharmacokinetics of captopril. Bioequivalence studies of different captopril-containing Tensiomin preparations].
    Klebovich I; Benköné MS
    Acta Pharm Hung; 1997 Jul; 67(4):123-35. PubMed ID: 9289940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Lack of bioequivalence of two oxytetracycline formulations in the rabbit.
    Chong W; Kim YJ; Kim SD; Han SK; Ryu PD
    J Vet Sci; 2002 Mar; 3(1):25-30. PubMed ID: 14614269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Simulation study of the relationship between variation in bioavailability and clinical equivalence using a direct link model.
    Matsumoto Y; Shimizu M; Ogata H
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2005 Jan; 43(1):57-62. PubMed ID: 15704616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A new PK equivalence test for a bridging study.
    Novick SJ; Zhang X; Yang H
    J Biopharm Stat; 2016; 26(5):992-1002. PubMed ID: 26882145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Determining equivalence and the impact of sample size in anti-infective studies: a point to consider.
    Bristol DR
    J Biopharm Stat; 1996 Jul; 6(3):319-26. PubMed ID: 8854235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Bioequivalence: switchability and scaling.
    Midha KK; Rawson MJ; Hubbard JW
    Eur J Pharm Sci; 1998 Apr; 6(2):87-91. PubMed ID: 9795020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Controversy. II: Bioequivalence as an indicator of therapeutic equivalence: modeling the theoretic influence of bioinequivalence on single-dose drug effect.
    Olson SC; Eldon MA; Toothaker RD; Ferry JJ; Colburn WA
    J Clin Pharmacol; 1987; 27(5):342-5. PubMed ID: 3693579
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Application of the modified chi-square ratio statistic in a stepwise procedure for cascade impactor equivalence testing.
    Weber B; Lee SL; Delvadia R; Lionberger R; Li BV; Tsong Y; Hochhaus G
    AAPS J; 2015 Mar; 17(2):370-9. PubMed ID: 25515206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Past, Present, and Future of Bioequivalence: Improving Assessment and Extrapolation of Therapeutic Equivalence for Oral Drug Products.
    Cristofoletti R; Rowland M; Lesko LJ; Blume H; Rostami-Hodjegan A; Dressman JB
    J Pharm Sci; 2018 Oct; 107(10):2519-2530. PubMed ID: 29935299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Sample size calculations for risk equivalence testing in pharmacoepidemiology.
    Tubert-Bitter P; Manfredi R; Lellouch J; Bégaud B
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2000 Dec; 53(12):1268-74. PubMed ID: 11146274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. What is the true risk of a pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction?
    Fuhr U
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2007 Oct; 63(10):897-9. PubMed ID: 17684737
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Regulatory and study conditions for the determination of bioequivalence of highly variable drugs.
    Endrenyi L; Tothfalusi L
    J Pharm Pharm Sci; 2009; 12(1):138-49. PubMed ID: 19470298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.