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 *

439 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28624777)

  • 1. A Novel Lack-of-Fit Assessment as a System Suitability Test for Potency Assays.
    Li R; Cai W; Zocher M
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2017; 71(5):368-378. PubMed ID: 28624777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Application of the four-parameter logistic model to bioassay: comparison with slope ratio and parallel line models.
    Vølund A
    Biometrics; 1978 Sep; 34(3):357-65. PubMed ID: 719119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Testing for parallelism in the heteroscedastic four-parameter logistic model.
    Sidik K; Jonkman JN
    J Biopharm Stat; 2016; 26(2):250-68. PubMed ID: 25629201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Measuring parallelism, linearity, and relative potency in bioassay and immunoassay data.
    Gottschalk PG; Dunn JR
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(3):437-63. PubMed ID: 15920890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Novel Method for Qualification of a Potency Assay through Partial Computer Simulation.
    Novick S; Sondag P; Schofield T; Miller K
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2018; 72(3):249-263. PubMed ID: 29444993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Bioassay case study applying the maximin D-optimal design algorithm to the four-parameter logistic model.
    Coffey T
    Pharm Stat; 2015; 14(5):427-32. PubMed ID: 26235135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A model-free approach to estimation of relative potency in dose-response curve analysis.
    Guardabasso V; Rodbard D; Munson PJ
    Am J Physiol; 1987 Mar; 252(3 Pt 1):E357-64. PubMed ID: 3826362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Equivalence testing for parallelism in the four-parameter logistic model.
    Jonkman JN; Sidik K
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Sep; 19(5):818-37. PubMed ID: 20183446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Note on the autocorrelation coefficient as a test statistic for assessment of the goodness-of-fit of biokinetic models to multiple bioassay data sets.
    Gregoratto D; Marsh JW
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Dec; 157(3):442-5. PubMed ID: 23813614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The autocorrelation coefficient as a tool for assessing goodness of fit between bioassay predictions and measurement data.
    Puncher M; Birchall A; Marsh JW
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2007; 127(1-4):370-3. PubMed ID: 17553862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Parallelism in practice: approaches to parallelism in bioassays.
    Fleetwood K; Bursa F; Yellowlees A
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2015; 69(2):248-63. PubMed ID: 25868991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A curve similarity approach to parallelism testing in bioassay.
    Faya P; Rauk AP; Griffiths KL; Parekh B
    J Biopharm Stat; 2020 Jul; 30(4):721-733. PubMed ID: 32163316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Percent residual accuracy for quantifying goodness-of-fit of linear calibration curves.
    Logue BA; Manandhar E
    Talanta; 2018 Nov; 189():527-533. PubMed ID: 30086955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Introduction to the Use of Linear and Nonlinear Regression Analysis in Quantitative Biological Assays.
    Jarantow SW; Pisors ED; Chiu ML
    Curr Protoc; 2023 Jun; 3(6):e801. PubMed ID: 37358238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A new bioassay for the immunocytokine L19-IL2 for simultaneous analysis of both functional moieties.
    Winter J; Barbin K; Bacci C; Bunte T
    J Pharm Biomed Anal; 2011 Jan; 54(1):81-6. PubMed ID: 20828971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A personal computer-based system for parallel line analysis of bioassay data.
    Iznaga N; Núñez G; Solozabal J; Morales A; Artaza E; Rubio R; Cardenas E
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 1995 Jul; 47(2):167-75. PubMed ID: 7587163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. How Well Does Your Phylogenetic Model Fit Your Data?
    A Shepherd D; Klaere S
    Syst Biol; 2019 Jan; 68(1):157-167. PubMed ID: 30329125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of a statistical outlier in potency bioassays.
    Sondag P; Zeng L; Yu B; Rousseau R; Boulanger B; Yang H; Novick S
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Nov; 17(6):701-709. PubMed ID: 30112804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Development of Generic Equivalence Margins for Early-Stage Implementation of Equivalence Testing for Potency Assays.
    Pflanzner T; Duan Y; Bui UN; Zhang L; Hartman SE; Kron M
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2021; 75(2):173-187. PubMed ID: 32999078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.