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.
469 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27372551)
1. Regulatory Considerations of Bioequivalence Studies for Oral Solid Dosage Forms in Japan. Kuribayashi R; Takishita T; Mikami K J Pharm Sci; 2016 Aug; 105(8):2270-7. PubMed ID: 27372551 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bioequivalence Evaluations of Generic Dry Powder Inhaler Drug Products: Similarities and Differences Between Japan, USA, and the European Union. Kuribayashi R; Yamaguchi T; Sako H; Takishita T; Takagi K Clin Pharmacokinet; 2017 Mar; 56(3):225-233. PubMed ID: 27461251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Modernization and Strengthening of Bioequivalence Guidelines in Japan. Kuribayashi R; Yamaguchi T; Takagi K Clin Pharmacokinet; 2021 Feb; 60(2):145-151. PubMed ID: 33247363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. International guidelines for bioequivalence of systemically available orally administered generic drug products: a survey of similarities and differences. Davit B; Braddy AC; Conner DP; Yu LX AAPS J; 2013 Oct; 15(4):974-90. PubMed ID: 23821352 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Dissolution Profiles of Generic Products in Dissolution Media Defined by Japanese Guidelines for Bioequivalence Studies. Kajiwara E; Kamizato H; Shikano M Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2021 Sep; 55(5):1096-1100. PubMed ID: 34097289 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Current Regulation for Bioequivalence Evaluations of Generic Ophthalmic Dosage Forms in Japan. Myoenzono A; Kuribayashi R; Yamaguchi T; Ogawa T; Takagi K Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet; 2020 Dec; 45(6):697-702. PubMed ID: 32930951 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Trends in the quality evaluation of generic products and bioequivalence guidelines]. Yomota C Kokuritsu Iyakuhin Shokuhin Eisei Kenkyusho Hokoku; 2012; (130):1-12. PubMed ID: 23243982 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. International Guidelines for Bioequivalence of Locally Acting Orally Inhaled Drug Products: Similarities and Differences. Lu D; Lee SL; Lionberger RA; Choi S; Adams W; Caramenico HN; Chowdhury BA; Conner DP; Katial R; Limb S; Peters JR; Yu L; Seymour S; Li BV AAPS J; 2015 May; 17(3):546-57. PubMed ID: 25758352 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Classification of torasemide based on the Biopharmaceutics Classification System and evaluation of the FDA biowaiver provision for generic products of CLASS I drugs. Khan MZ; Rausl D; Radosević S; Filić D; Danilovski A; Dumić M; Knezević Z J Pharm Pharmacol; 2006 Nov; 58(11):1475-82. PubMed ID: 17132210 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Aspects of Oral Modified-Release Drug Products. Wang R; Conner DP; Li BV AAPS J; 2017 Mar; 19(2):360-366. PubMed ID: 28004346 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of Generic Drug Reviews for Marketing Authorization between Japan and Canada. Kuribayashi R; Appleton S Drugs R D; 2017 Sep; 17(3):371-379. PubMed ID: 28577294 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Bioequivalence study designs for generic solid oral anticancer drug products: scientific and regulatory considerations. Kaur P; Chaurasia CS; Davit BM; Conner DP J Clin Pharmacol; 2013 Dec; 53(12):1252-60. PubMed ID: 23996908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparing generic and innovator drugs: a review of 12 years of bioequivalence data from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Davit BM; Nwakama PE; Buehler GJ; Conner DP; Haidar SH; Patel DT; Yang Y; Yu LX; Woodcock J Ann Pharmacother; 2009 Oct; 43(10):1583-97. PubMed ID: 19776300 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of Dissolution Similarity Assessment Methods for Products with Large Variations: f Yoshida H; Shibata H; Izutsu KI; Goda Y Biol Pharm Bull; 2017; 40(5):722-725. PubMed ID: 28458360 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Investigation on the need of multiple dose bioequivalence studies for prolonged-release generic products. García-Arieta A; Morales-Alcelay S; Herranz M; de la Torre-Alvarado JM; Blázquez-Pérez A; Suárez-Gea ML; Alvarez C Int J Pharm; 2012 Feb; 423(2):321-5. PubMed ID: 22120644 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. United States Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of generic drug products. Meyer MC J Clin Psychiatry; 2001; 62 Suppl 5():4-9; discussion 23-4. PubMed ID: 11305846 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Japanese guidance on bioavailability and bioequivalence. Aoyagi N Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet; 2000; 25(1):28-31. PubMed ID: 11032086 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Overview of the European Medicines Agency's Development of Product-Specific Bioequivalence Guidelines. Sullivan JO; Blake K; Berntgen M; Salmonson T; Welink J; Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2018 Sep; 104(3):539-545. PubMed ID: 29319156 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Variability and impact on design of bioequivalence studies. Van Peer A Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol; 2010 Mar; 106(3):146-53. PubMed ID: 20041877 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Current regulatory approaches of bioequivalence testing. Karalis V; Macheras P Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol; 2012 Aug; 8(8):929-42. PubMed ID: 22681436 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]