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 *

208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18663758)

  • 21. Combining proof-of-concept with dose-finding: utilization of adaptive designs in migraine clinical trials.
    Sagkriotis A; Scholpp J
    Cephalalgia; 2008 Aug; 28(8):805-12. PubMed ID: 18513264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. High dose selection in general toxicity studies for drug development: A pharmaceutical industry perspective.
    Buckley LA; Dorato MA
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Aug; 54(3):301-7. PubMed ID: 19477212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of the reference scaled bioequivalence semi-replicate method with other approaches: focus on human exposure to drugs.
    Karalis V; Symillides M; Macheras P
    Eur J Pharm Sci; 2009 Aug; 38(1):55-63. PubMed ID: 19524039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Optimal adaptive design in clinical drug development: a simulation example.
    Maloney A; Karlsson MO; Simonsson US
    J Clin Pharmacol; 2007 Oct; 47(10):1231-43. PubMed ID: 17906158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Escalation, group and A + B designs for dose-finding trials.
    Ivanova A
    Stat Med; 2006 Nov; 25(21):3668-78. PubMed ID: 16381057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Approaches to Japanese dose evaluation in global drug development: factors that generate different dosages between Japan and the United States.
    Nakashima K; Narukawa M; Takeuchi M
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2011 Dec; 90(6):836-43. PubMed ID: 22048222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Extreme value modelling of laboratory safety data from clinical studies.
    Southworth H; Heffernan JE
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(5):361-6. PubMed ID: 22684727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Selection of the first-time dose in humans: comparison of different approaches based on interspecies scaling of clearance.
    Mahmood I; Green MD; Fisher JE
    J Clin Pharmacol; 2003 Jul; 43(7):692-7. PubMed ID: 12861964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Closure procedures for monotone bi-factorial dose-response designs.
    Hellmich M; Lehmacher W
    Biometrics; 2005 Mar; 61(1):269-76. PubMed ID: 15737103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Computer simulations of bioequivalence trials: selection of design and analyte in BCS drugs with first-pass hepatic metabolism: linear kinetics (I).
    Fernández-Teruel C; Nalda Molina R; González-Alvarez I; Navarro-Fontestad C; García-Arieta A; Casabó VG; Bermejo M
    Eur J Pharm Sci; 2009 Jan; 36(1):137-46. PubMed ID: 19028574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials.
    Bretz F; Koenig F; Brannath W; Glimm E; Posch M
    Stat Med; 2009 Apr; 28(8):1181-217. PubMed ID: 19206095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Partition testing in dose-response studies with multiple endpoints.
    Liu Y; Hsu J; Ruberg S
    Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(3):181-92. PubMed ID: 17654696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Practical considerations for optimal designs in clinical dose finding studies.
    Bretz F; Dette H; Pinheiro JC
    Stat Med; 2010 Mar; 29(7-8):731-42. PubMed ID: 20213708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Design of phase II ALS clinical trials.
    Schoenfeld DA; Cudkowicz M
    Amyotroph Lateral Scler; 2008; 9(1):16-23. PubMed ID: 18273715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Adaptive designs for dose-finding in non-cancer phase II trials: influence of early unexpected outcomes.
    Resche-Rigon M; Zohar S; Chevret S
    Clin Trials; 2008; 5(6):595-606. PubMed ID: 19029208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. American College of Clinical Pharmacology position statement on the use of microdosing in the drug development process.
    Bertino JS; Greenberg HE; Reed MD;
    J Clin Pharmacol; 2007 Apr; 47(4):418-22. PubMed ID: 17389550
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A European pharmaceutical company initiative challenging the regulatory requirement for acute toxicity studies in pharmaceutical drug development.
    Robinson S; Delongeas JL; Donald E; Dreher D; Festag M; Kervyn S; Lampo A; Nahas K; Nogues V; Ockert D; Quinn K; Old S; Pickersgill N; Somers K; Stark C; Stei P; Waterson L; Chapman K
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Apr; 50(3):345-52. PubMed ID: 18295384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Commentary on ACCP position statement on the use of microdosing in the drug development process.
    Rowland M
    J Clin Pharmacol; 2007 Dec; 47(12):1595-6; author reply 1597-8. PubMed ID: 18048576
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Dose finding with the sequential parallel comparison design.
    Wang JJ; Ivanova A
    J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(5):1091-101. PubMed ID: 24919070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Commentary on 'Designs for dose-escalation trials with quantitative responses'.
    O'Quigley J
    Stat Med; 2009 Dec; 28(30):3745-50; discussion 3759-60. PubMed ID: 19967752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.