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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8773956)

  • 1. Pharmacodynamic analysis of sparse data from concentration- and effect-controlled clinical trials guided by a pilot study. An investigation by simulations.
    Fullerton T; Forrest A; Levy G
    J Pharm Sci; 1996 Jun; 85(6):600-7. PubMed ID: 8773956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Population pharmacodynamics: strategies for concentration-and effect-controlled clinical trials.
    Ebling WF; Levy G
    Ann Pharmacother; 1996 Jan; 30(1):12-9. PubMed ID: 8773159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Feasibility of effect-controlled clinical trials of drugs with pharmacodynamic hysteresis using sparse data.
    Ebling WF; Matsumoto Y; Levy G
    Pharm Res; 1996 Dec; 13(12):1804-10. PubMed ID: 8987075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Concentration-controlled or effect-controlled trials: useful alternatives to conventional dose-controlled trials?
    Grahnén A; Karlsson MO
    Clin Pharmacokinet; 2001; 40(5):317-25. PubMed ID: 11432535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Design and analysis of in vitro antitumor pharmacodynamic studies.
    Kalns JE; Millenbaugh NJ; Wientjes MG; Au JL
    Cancer Res; 1995 Nov; 55(22):5315-22. PubMed ID: 7585594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A pharmacodynamic analysis method to determine the relative importance of drug concentration and treatment time on effect.
    Millenbaugh NJ; Wientjes MG; Au JL
    Cancer Chemother Pharmacol; 2000; 45(4):265-72. PubMed ID: 10755313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sample size/power calculations for population pharmacodynamic experiments involving repeated-count measurements.
    Ogungbenro K; Aarons L
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Sep; 20(5):1026-42. PubMed ID: 20721789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An evaluation of population D-optimal designs via pharmacokinetic simulations.
    Hooker AC; Foracchia M; Dodds MG; Vicini P
    Ann Biomed Eng; 2003 Jan; 31(1):98-111. PubMed ID: 12572660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The influence of sparse data sampling on population pharmacokinetics: a post hoc analysis of a pharmacokinetic study of morphine in healthy volunteers.
    Ariano RE; Duke PC; Sitar DS
    Clin Ther; 2012 Mar; 34(3):668-76. PubMed ID: 22381713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Using CTS and PK-PD models to predict the effect of uncertainty about population parameters on clinical trial power].
    Zhu L; Shi X; Liu Y
    Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2009 Feb; 26(1):42-6, 62. PubMed ID: 19334551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Pharmacodynamic parameter estimation: population size versus number of samples.
    Girgis S; Pai SM; Girgis IG; Batra VK
    AAPS J; 2005 Oct; 7(2):46. PubMed ID: 16353905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A placebo- and midazolam-controlled phase I single ascending-dose study evaluating the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of remimazolam (CNS 7056): Part II. Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling and simulation.
    Wiltshire HR; Kilpatrick GJ; Tilbrook GS; Borkett KM
    Anesth Analg; 2012 Aug; 115(2):284-96. PubMed ID: 22253270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The influence of underlying assumptions on evaluating the relative merits of concentration-controlled and dose-controlled trials.
    Lledó-García R; Hennig S; Karlsson MO
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2009 Jul; 86(1):70-6. PubMed ID: 19279565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative efficiencies of randomized concentration- and dose-controlled clinical trials.
    Endrenyi L; Zha J
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1994 Sep; 56(3):331-8. PubMed ID: 7924129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Concentration- or effect-controlled clinical trials with sparse data.
    Levy G; Ebling WF; Forrest A
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1994 Jul; 56(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 8033486
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. D-optimal designs for parameter estimation for indirect pharmacodynamic response models.
    Khinkis LA; Krzyzanski W; Jusko WJ; Greco WR
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2009 Dec; 36(6):523-39. PubMed ID: 19904585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Exploring clinical study design by computer simulation based on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling.
    Gieschke R; Reigner BG; Steimer JL
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1997 Oct; 35(10):469-74. PubMed ID: 9352398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Parameter estimation for sigmoid E
    Choe S; Lee D
    Transl Clin Pharmacol; 2017 Jun; 25(2):74-84. PubMed ID: 32133323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Value of information analysis optimizing future trial design from a pilot study on catheter securement devices.
    Tuffaha HW; Reynolds H; Gordon LG; Rickard CM; Scuffham PA
    Clin Trials; 2014 Dec; 11(6):648-56. PubMed ID: 25084784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Prediction of the outcome of a phase 3 clinical trial of an antischizophrenic agent (quetiapine fumarate) by simulation with a population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic model.
    Kimko HC; Reele SS; Holford NH; Peck CC
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2000 Nov; 68(5):568-77. PubMed ID: 11103759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.