167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28620937)
1. Testing for bioequivalence of highly variable drugs from TR-RT crossover designs with heterogeneous residual variances.
Kang Q; Vahl CI
Pharm Stat; 2017 Sep; 16(5):361-377. PubMed ID: 28620937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Consumer's risk in the EMA and FDA regulatory approaches for bioequivalence in highly variable drugs.
Muñoz J; Alcaide D; Ocaña J
Stat Med; 2016 May; 35(12):1933-43. PubMed ID: 26707698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. On statistical power for average bioequivalence testing under replicated crossover designs.
Wan H; Chow SC
J Biopharm Stat; 2002 Aug; 12(3):295-309. PubMed ID: 12448572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessing individual bioequivalence with high-order cross-over designs: a unified procedure.
Hsuan FC; Reeve R
Stat Med; 2003 Sep; 22(18):2847-60. PubMed ID: 12953284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Two-stage designs versus European scaled average designs in bioequivalence studies for highly variable drugs: Which to choose?
Molins E; Cobo E; Ocaña J
Stat Med; 2017 Dec; 36(30):4777-4788. PubMed ID: 28853164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Individual bioequivalence revisited.
Chen ML; Lesko LJ
Clin Pharmacokinet; 2001; 40(10):701-6. PubMed ID: 11707058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Non-traditional study designs to demonstrate average bioequivalence for highly variable drug products.
Patterson SD; Zariffa NM; Montague TH; Howland K
Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2001 Nov; 57(9):663-70. PubMed ID: 11791897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. PhRMA perspective on population and individual bioequivalence.
Barrett JS; Batra V; Chow A; Cook J; Gould AL; Heller AH; Lo MW; Patterson SD; Smith BP; Stritar JA; Vega JM; Zariffa N
J Clin Pharmacol; 2000 Jun; 40(6):561-70. PubMed ID: 10868305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sample size determination for individual bioequivalence inference.
Chiang C; Hsiao CF; Liu JP
PLoS One; 2014; 9(10):e109746. PubMed ID: 25310592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Subject-by-formulation interaction in bioequivalence: conceptual and statistical issues. FDA Population/Individual Bioequivalence Working Group. Food and Drug Administration.
Hauck WW; Hyslop T; Chen ML; Patnaik R; Williams RL
Pharm Res; 2000 Apr; 17(4):375-80. PubMed ID: 10870978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Some statistical considerations on the FDA draft guidance for individual bioequivalence.
Hsuan FC
Stat Med; 2000 Oct; 19(20):2879-84. PubMed ID: 11033582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An Exact Procedure for the Evaluation of Reference-Scaled Average Bioequivalence.
Tothfalusi L; Endrenyi L
AAPS J; 2016 Mar; 18(2):476-89. PubMed ID: 26831249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of models for average bioequivalence in replicated crossover designs.
Willavize SA; Morgenthien EA
Pharm Stat; 2006; 5(3):201-11. PubMed ID: 17080753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. On the leveling-off properties of the new bioequivalence limits for highly variable drugs of the EMA guideline.
Karalis V; Symillides M; Macheras P
Eur J Pharm Sci; 2011 Nov; 44(4):497-505. PubMed ID: 21945487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Population and individual bioequivalence: lessons from real data and simulation studies.
Zariffa NM; Patterson SD
J Clin Pharmacol; 2001 Aug; 41(8):811-22. PubMed ID: 11504268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Model-Based Approach for Designing an Efficient Bioequivalence Study for Highly Variable Drugs.
Song E; Lee W; Kim BH
Pharmaceuticals (Basel); 2021 Oct; 14(11):. PubMed ID: 34832883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Estimating product bioequivalence for highly variable veterinary drugs.
Claxton R; Cook J; Endrenyi L; Lucas A; Martinez MN; Sutton SC
J Vet Pharmacol Ther; 2012 Apr; 35 Suppl 1():11-6. PubMed ID: 22413787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
