148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26648176)
1. Fundamentals of large-molecule protein therapeutic bioanalysis using ligand-binding assays.
Thway TM
Bioanalysis; 2016; 8(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 26648176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quality requirements for critical assay reagents used in bioanalysis of therapeutic proteins: what bioanalysts should know about their reagents.
Staack RF; Stracke JO; Stubenrauch K; Vogel R; Schleypen J; Papadimitriou A
Bioanalysis; 2011 Mar; 3(5):523-34. PubMed ID: 21388265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Protein-based matrix interferences in ligand-binding assays.
Gorovits B; McNally J; Fiorotti C; Leung S
Bioanalysis; 2014 Apr; 6(8):1131-40. PubMed ID: 24830897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of cell-based and non-cell-based assay platforms for the detection of clinically relevant anti-drug neutralizing antibodies for immunogenicity assessment of therapeutic proteins.
Hu J; Wala I; Han H; Nagatani J; Barger T; Civoli F; Kaliyaperumal A; Zhuang Y; Gupta S
J Immunol Methods; 2015 Apr; 419():1-8. PubMed ID: 25795420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. European Bioanalysis Forum recommendation on singlicate analysis for ligand binding assays: time for a new mindset.
Barfield M; Goodman J; Hood J; Timmerman P
Bioanalysis; 2020 Mar; 12(5):273-284. PubMed ID: 31975612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Are matrix effects the Achilles heel in the bioanalysis of biotherapeutics by ligand-binding assays?
Wang Q; Ma M
Bioanalysis; 2014 Apr; 6(8):1041-4. PubMed ID: 24830887
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Assay formats: Recommendation for best practices and harmonization from the global bioanalysis consortium harmonization team.
Dudal S; Baltrukonis D; Crisino R; Goyal MJ; Joyce A; Osterlund K; Smeraglia J; Taniguchi Y; Yang J
AAPS J; 2014 Mar; 16(2):194-205. PubMed ID: 24343771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of four distinct detection platforms using multiple ligand binding assay formats.
Soderstrom CI; Spriggs FP; Song W; Burrell S
J Immunol Methods; 2011 Aug; 371(1-2):106-13. PubMed ID: 21749873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Critical reagent generation, characterization, handling and storage workflows: impact on ligand binding assays.
Oquendo E; Savoie J; Swenson JM; Grimaldi C
Bioanalysis; 2021 May; 13(10):847-860. PubMed ID: 33890503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surface plasmon resonance as a tool for ligand-binding assay reagent characterization in bioanalysis of biotherapeutics.
Duo J; Bruno J; Kozhich A; David-Brown D; Luo L; Kwok S; Santockyte R; Haulenbeek J; Liu R; Hamuro L; Peterson JE; Piccoli S; DeSilva B; Pillutla R; Zhang YJ
Bioanalysis; 2018 Apr; 10(8):559-576. PubMed ID: 29701071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of competitive ligand-binding assay and bioassay formats for the measurement of neutralizing antibodies to protein therapeutics.
Finco D; Baltrukonis D; Clements-Egan A; Delaria K; Gunn GR; Lowe J; Maia M; Wong T
J Pharm Biomed Anal; 2011 Jan; 54(2):351-8. PubMed ID: 20863644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Addressing the challenges of biomarker calibration standards in ligand-binding assays: a European Bioanalysis Forum perspective.
Kunz U; Goodman J; Loevgren U; Piironen T; Elsby K; Robinson P; Pihl S; Versteilen A; Companjen A; Fjording MS; Timmerman P
Bioanalysis; 2017 Oct; 9(19):1493-1508. PubMed ID: 29056059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The impact of ligand binding based assays critical reagent characterization and storage.
Haulenbeek J; Beaver CJ
Bioanalysis; 2021 May; 13(10):797-805. PubMed ID: 34002637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Ligand-binding assays: risk of using a platform supported by a single vendor.
Yohrling J
Bioanalysis; 2009 Jun; 1(3):629-36. PubMed ID: 21083158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Sponsor relationships, analyte stability in ligand-binding assays and critical reagent management: a bioanalytical CRO perspective.
Lefor Bradford J
Bioanalysis; 2015; 7(11):1337-46. PubMed ID: 26110706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of assay formats for drug-tolerant immunogenicity testing.
Butterfield AM; Chain JS; Ackermann BL; Konrad RJ
Bioanalysis; 2010 Dec; 2(12):1961-9. PubMed ID: 21110740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Adventures in critical reagent lot changes in ligand-binding assays: redevelopment, bridging and additional processing requirements.
Rauwerdink A; Benson M; Jayne A; Babu S; St Charles J; Smith A
Bioanalysis; 2021 May; 13(10):771-777. PubMed ID: 33884890
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Application of multi-factorial design of experiments to successfully optimize immunoassays for robust measurements of therapeutic proteins.
Ray CA; Patel V; Shih J; Macaraeg C; Wu Y; Thway T; Ma M; Lee JW; Desilva B
J Pharm Biomed Anal; 2009 Feb; 49(2):311-8. PubMed ID: 19150188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Challenges in selectivity, specificity and quantitation range of ligand-binding assays: case studies using a microfluidics platform.
Yang TY; Uhlinger DJ; Ayers SA; O'Hara DM; Joyce AP
Bioanalysis; 2014 Apr; 6(8):1049-57. PubMed ID: 24830889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Critical ligand binding reagent preparation/selection: when specificity depends on reagents.
Rup B; O'Hara D
AAPS J; 2007 May; 9(2):E148-55. PubMed ID: 17614357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
