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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1643857)

  • 21. A distribution-free procedure for the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.
    Hauschke D; Steinijans VW; Diletti E
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S37-43. PubMed ID: 1601530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Reference Datasets for Studies in a Replicate Design Intended for Average Bioequivalence with Expanding Limits.
    Schütz H; Labes D; Tomashevskiy M; la Parra MG; Shitova A; Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2020 Feb; 22(2):44. PubMed ID: 32034551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. An alternative derivation of the distribution of the individual bioequivalence metric.
    Bolton S; Sondhi M; DiLiberti C
    Drug Dev Ind Pharm; 2003 Apr; 29(4):469-74. PubMed ID: 12737539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Review of methods and criteria for the evaluation of bioequivalence studies.
    Pabst G; Jaeger H
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 1990; 38(1):5-10. PubMed ID: 2184041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Sample size determination for bioequivalence assessment by means of confidence intervals.
    Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S51-8. PubMed ID: 1601532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Use of the repeated cross-over designs in assessing bioequivalence.
    Liu JP
    Stat Med; 1995 May 15-30; 14(9-10):1067-78; discussion 1079-80. PubMed ID: 7569501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A distribution-free procedure for the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.
    Hauschke D; Steinijans VW; Diletti E
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1990 Feb; 28(2):72-8. PubMed ID: 2307548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Presentation of results from bioequivalence studies.
    Sauter R; Steinijans VW; Diletti E; Böhm A; Schulz HU
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992 Jul; 30(7):233-56. PubMed ID: 1506127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Bridging bioequivalence studies.
    Liu JP
    J Biopharm Stat; 2004 Nov; 14(4):857-67. PubMed ID: 15587968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. On the Incorrect Statistical Calculations of the Kinetica Software Package in Imbalanced Designs.
    Morales-Alcelay S; de la Torre de Alvarado JM; García-Arieta A
    AAPS J; 2015 Jul; 17(4):1033-4. PubMed ID: 25787313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Bioequivalence assessment: a pharmaceutical industry perspective.
    Godbillon J; Cardot JM; Lecaillon JB; Lefevre G; Sioufi A
    Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet; 1996; 21(2):153-8. PubMed ID: 8839689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The existence of sequence effect in cross-over bioequivalence trials.
    Zintzaras E
    Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet; 2000; 25(3-4):241-4. PubMed ID: 11420897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Fieller's confidence intervals for the ratio of two means in the assessment of average bioequivalence from crossover data.
    Vuorinen J; Tuominen J
    Stat Med; 1994 Dec 15-30; 13(23-24):2531-45. PubMed ID: 7701152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Optimal adaptive sequential designs for crossover bioequivalence studies.
    Xu J; Audet C; DiLiberti CE; Hauck WW; Montague TH; Parr AF; Potvin D; Schuirmann DJ
    Pharm Stat; 2016; 15(1):15-27. PubMed ID: 26538182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Non-traditional study designs to demonstrate average bioequivalence for highly variable drug products.
    Patterson SD; Zariffa NM; Montague TH; Howland K
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2001 Nov; 57(9):663-70. PubMed ID: 11791897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A small sample confidence interval approach to assess individual bioequivalence.
    Hyslop T; Hsuan F; Holder DJ
    Stat Med; 2000 Oct; 19(20):2885-97. PubMed ID: 11033583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The assessment of individual and population bioequivalence.
    Chinchilli VM
    J Biopharm Stat; 1996 Mar; 6(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 8838775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A three-step procedure for assessing bioequivalence in the general mixed model framework.
    Vuorinen J; Turunen J
    Stat Med; 1996 Dec; 15(24):2635-55. PubMed ID: 8981677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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