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 *

137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24526610)

  • 1. Sequential bioequivalence approaches for parallel designs.
    Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2014 May; 16(3):373-8. PubMed ID: 24526610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A sequential bioequivalence design with a potential ethical advantage.
    Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2014 Jul; 16(4):843-6. PubMed ID: 24871343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Controlling the type I error rate in two-stage sequential adaptive designs when testing for average bioequivalence.
    Maurer W; Jones B; Chen Y
    Stat Med; 2018 May; 37(10):1587-1607. PubMed ID: 29462835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Sequential bioequivalence trial designs with increased power and controlled type I error rates.
    Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2013 Jul; 15(3):659-61. PubMed ID: 23543603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A Three-Treatment Two-Stage Design for Selection of a Candidate Formulation and Subsequent Demonstration of Bioequivalence.
    Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2020 Aug; 22(5):109. PubMed ID: 32803519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Controlling type 1 error rate for sequential, bioequivalence studies with crossover designs.
    Rasmussen HE; Ma R; Wang JJ
    Pharm Stat; 2019 Jan; 18(1):96-105. PubMed ID: 30370634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Two-stage designs for cross-over bioequivalence trials.
    Kieser M; Rauch G
    Stat Med; 2015 Jul; 34(16):2403-16. PubMed ID: 25809815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pilot and Repeat Trials as Development Tools Associated with Demonstration of Bioequivalence.
    Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2015 May; 17(3):678-83. PubMed ID: 25732246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of group sequential and fixed sample size designs for bioequivalence trials with highly variable drugs.
    Knahl SIE; Lang B; Fleischer F; Kieser M
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2018 May; 74(5):549-559. PubMed ID: 29362819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Blinded sample size re-estimation in crossover bioequivalence trials.
    Golkowski D; Friede T; Kieser M
    Pharm Stat; 2014; 13(3):157-62. PubMed ID: 24715672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Random-effects linear modeling and sample size tables for two special crossover designs of average bioequivalence studies: the four-period, two-sequence, two-formulation and six-period, three-sequence, three-formulation designs.
    Diaz FJ; Berg MJ; Krebill R; Welty T; Gidal BE; Alloway R; Privitera M
    Clin Pharmacokinet; 2013 Dec; 52(12):1033-43. PubMed ID: 24085600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Sequential design approaches for bioequivalence studies with crossover designs.
    Potvin D; DiLiberti CE; Hauck WW; Parr AF; Schuirmann DJ; Smith RA
    Pharm Stat; 2008; 7(4):245-62. PubMed ID: 17710740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bioequivalence studies: biometrical concepts of alternative designs and pooled analysis.
    Zintzaras E; Bouka P
    Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet; 1999; 24(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 10716060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Additional results for 'Sequential design approaches for bioequivalence studies with crossover designs'.
    Montague TH; Potvin D; Diliberti CE; Hauck WW; Parr AF; Schuirmann DJ
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 21308974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Two-stage designs in bioequivalence trials.
    Schütz H
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2015 Mar; 71(3):271-81. PubMed ID: 25604509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An iterative method to protect the type I error rate in bioequivalence studies under two-stage adaptive 2×2 crossover designs.
    Molins E; Labes D; Schütz H; Cobo E; Ocaña J
    Biom J; 2021 Jan; 63(1):122-133. PubMed ID: 33000873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Statistical methodology for highly variable compounds: A novel design approach for the ofatumumab Phase 2 bioequivalence study.
    Jones B; Li B; Bagger M; Goodyear A; Ludwig I
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Nov; 21(6):1357-1365. PubMed ID: 35604539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Futility rules in bioequivalence trials with sequential designs.
    Fuglsang A
    AAPS J; 2014 Jan; 16(1):79-82. PubMed ID: 24218038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.