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 *

78 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9056595)

  • 41. Computer simulations for bioequivalence trials: selection of analyte in BCS drugs with first-pass metabolism and two metabolic pathways.
    Navarro-Fontestad C; Gonzalez-Alvarez I; Fernández-Teruel C; Garcia-Arieta A; Bermejo M; Casabó VG
    Eur J Pharm Sci; 2010 Dec; 41(5):716-28. PubMed ID: 20932901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. The impact of outlying subjects on decision of bioequivalence.
    Ki FY; Liu JP; Wang W; Chow SC
    J Biopharm Stat; 1995 Mar; 5(1):71-94. PubMed ID: 7613561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Assessment of selection bias in estimates of relative bioavailability and intrasubject variability from bioequivalence evaluations.
    Wang Y
    J Biopharm Stat; 2000 Aug; 10(3):407-24. PubMed ID: 10959920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Robust and bootstrap testing procedures for bioequivalence.
    Shen CF; Iglewicz B
    J Biopharm Stat; 1994 Mar; 4(1):65-90. PubMed ID: 8019585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Multiplicity adjustments in testing for bioequivalence.
    Hua SY; Xu S; D'Agostino RB
    Stat Med; 2015 Jan; 34(2):215-31. PubMed ID: 24980563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. A Novel Approach to Testing for Average Bioequivalence Based on Modeling the Within-Period Dependence Structure.
    Chandrasekhar R; Shi Y; Hutson AD; Wilding GE
    J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(6):1320-38. PubMed ID: 25671781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Efficient model-based bioequivalence testing.
    Möllenhoff K; Loingeville F; Bertrand J; Nguyen TT; Sharan S; Zhao L; Fang L; Sun G; Grosser S; Mentré F; Dette H
    Biostatistics; 2022 Jan; 23(1):314-327. PubMed ID: 32696053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. AUC and cmax are not sufficient to prove bioequivalence.
    Rescigno A; Powers JD
    Pharmacol Res; 1998 Feb; 37(2):93-5. PubMed ID: 9572062
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Bias of two one-sided tests procedures in assessment of bioequivalence.
    Liu JP; Weng CS
    Stat Med; 1995 Apr; 14(8):853-61. PubMed ID: 7644864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Determination of in vivo bioequivalence.
    Jackson AJ
    Pharm Res; 2002 Mar; 19(3):227-8. PubMed ID: 11934226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The formulation of the principle of superposition in the presence of non-compliance and its applications in multiple dose pharmacokinetics.
    Wang W; Ouyang SP
    J Pharmacokinet Biopharm; 1998 Aug; 26(4):457-69. PubMed ID: 10214562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. New Model-Based Bioequivalence Statistical Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Studies with Sparse Sampling.
    Loingeville F; Bertrand J; Nguyen TT; Sharan S; Feng K; Sun W; Han J; Grosser S; Zhao L; Fang L; Möllenhoff K; Dette H; Mentré F
    AAPS J; 2020 Oct; 22(6):141. PubMed ID: 33125589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Evaluation of the proposed FDA pilot dose-response methodology for topical corticosteroid bioequivalence testing.
    Singh GJ; Fleischer N; Lesko L; Williams R
    Pharm Res; 1998 Jan; 15(1):4-7. PubMed ID: 9487539
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Sample size determination for the two one-sided tests procedure in bioequivalence.
    Liu JP; Chow SC
    J Pharmacokinet Biopharm; 1992 Feb; 20(1):101-4. PubMed ID: 1588502
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Power of the two one-sided tests procedure in bioequivalence.
    Phillips KF
    J Pharmacokinet Biopharm; 1990 Apr; 18(2):137-44. PubMed ID: 2348380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Bioequivalence.
    Rescigno A
    Pharm Res; 1992 Jul; 9(7):925-8. PubMed ID: 1438007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. An improved intercept method for the assessment of absorption rate in bioequivalence studies.
    Macheras P; Symillides M; Reppas C
    Pharm Res; 1996 Nov; 13(11):1755-8. PubMed ID: 8956348
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Impact of variability on the choice of biosimilarity limits in assessing follow-on biologics.
    Zhang N; Yang J; Chow SC; Endrenyi L; Chi E
    Stat Med; 2013 Feb; 32(3):424-33. PubMed ID: 22933127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. A parametric approach to population bioequivalence.
    Hauck WW; Bois FY; Hyslop T; Gee L; Anderson S
    Stat Med; 1997 Feb; 16(4):441-54. PubMed ID: 9044531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. On a model-based approach to estimating efficacy in clinical trials.
    Albert JM; Demets DL
    Stat Med; 1994 Nov; 13(22):2323-35. PubMed ID: 7855466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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