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 *

67 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2779176)

  • 21. [Comparative studies of drug detection using recent immunologic methods].
    Käferstein H; Sticht G
    Beitr Gerichtl Med; 1990; 48():51-6. PubMed ID: 2241837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Interactions among enzyme, antibody, drug, and time in enzyme immunoassays for drugs of abuse.
    Osterloh J; Butrimovitz GP
    Clin Chem; 1982 Feb; 28(2):327-32. PubMed ID: 7035006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. On-site drug testing.
    Drummer OH
    Bull Narc; 2005; 57(1-2):205-11. PubMed ID: 21338022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Urine drug screening results from volunteers in phase I clinical pharmacology studies: are we being misled?
    Ramey KL; Kovacs SJ; Martin DE; Jorkasky DK
    J Clin Pharmacol; 1998 May; 38(5):413-6. PubMed ID: 9602952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Utility of ELISA screening for the monitoring of abstinence from illegal and legal drugs in hair and urine.
    Agius R; Nadulski T
    Drug Test Anal; 2014 Jun; 6 Suppl 1():101-9. PubMed ID: 24817055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Analytical methodology.
    Hawks RL
    NIDA Res Monogr; 1986; 73():30-42. PubMed ID: 3127720
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Precision and comparability of Abuscreen OnLine assays for drugs of abuse screening in urine on Hitachi 917 with other immunochemical tests and with GC/MS.
    Boettcher M; Haenseler E; Hoke C; Nichols J; Raab D; Domke I
    Clin Lab; 2000; 46(1-2):49-52. PubMed ID: 10745981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Performance evaluation of on-site oral fluid drug screening devices in normal police procedure in Germany.
    Musshoff F; Hokamp EG; Bott U; Madea B
    Forensic Sci Int; 2014 May; 238():120-4. PubMed ID: 24699311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Use of the Randox Evidence Investigator immunoassay system for near-body drug screening during post-mortem examination in 261 forensic cases.
    McLaughlin P; Maskell PD; Pounder D; Osselton D
    Forensic Sci Int; 2019 Jan; 294():211-215. PubMed ID: 30544085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Urine screening for drugs by EMIT.
    Fletcher SM
    J Forensic Sci Soc; 1981 Oct; 21(4):327-32. PubMed ID: 7031175
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. UPLC-Orbitrap
    Jagerdeo E; Schaff JE
    Methods Mol Biol; 2018; 1810():75-87. PubMed ID: 29974419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Direct automated EMIT d.a.u. analysis of N,N-dimethylformamide-modified serum, plasma, and postmortem blood for amphetamines, barbiturates, methadone, methaqualone, phencyclidine, and propoxyphene.
    Klinger RA; Blum LM; Rieders F
    J Anal Toxicol; 1990; 14(5):288-91. PubMed ID: 2263063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Occurrence of ethanol and other drugs in blood and urine specimens from female victims of alleged sexual assault.
    Jones AW; Kugelberg FC; Holmgren A; Ahlner J
    Forensic Sci Int; 2008 Oct; 181(1-3):40-6. PubMed ID: 18922656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluation of KIMS immunoassays on a cobas c 501 analyzer for drugs of abuse and ethyl glucuronide testing in urine for forensic abstinence control.
    Neukamm MA; Bahrami A; Auwärter V; Mehne FMP; Höss E
    Drug Test Anal; 2017 Aug; 9(8):1217-1223. PubMed ID: 28024169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evaluation of the Dade Behring Syva EMIT 2000 tacrolimus assay on the Bayer Advia 1650.
    Stephen DW; Rooke P; Clark S; Coutts M; Crowe L; Docherty D
    Ann Clin Biochem; 2003 Nov; 40(Pt 6):697-700. PubMed ID: 14629812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. False-negative results in the immunoassay analysis of drugs of abuse: can adulterants be detected by sample check test?
    Matriciani B; Huppertz B; Keller R; Weiskirchen R
    Ann Clin Biochem; 2018 May; 55(3):348-354. PubMed ID: 28728424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Utilization of a detection level of 25ng/mL for cannabinoids in urine using a CEDIA THCPLUS immunoassay: application of this cut-off to urines of school children.
    Madhavaram H; Couch RA
    Forensic Sci Int; 2010 May; 198(1-3):28-30. PubMed ID: 20219301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Semiquantitation of cannabinoid immunoassays? A reexamination of the EMIT 20-ng/mL assay.
    Haver VM; Romson JL; Sadrzadeh SM
    J Anal Toxicol; 1991; 15(2):98-100. PubMed ID: 1646909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Drug screening and confirmation by GC-MS: comparison of EMIT II and Online KIMS against 10 drugs between US and England laboratories.
    Lu NT; Taylor BG
    Forensic Sci Int; 2006 Mar; 157(2-3):106-16. PubMed ID: 15899564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Evaluation of six commercial amphetamine and methamphetamine immunoassays for cross-reactivity to phenylpropanolamine and ephedrine in urine.
    D'Nicuola J; Jones R; Levine B; Smith ML
    J Anal Toxicol; 1992; 16(4):211-3. PubMed ID: 1501473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.