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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9523315)

  • 1. Why rate of absorption inferences in single dose bioequivalence studies are often inappropriate.
    Basson RP; Ghosh A; Cerimele BJ; DeSante KA; Howey DC
    Pharm Res; 1998 Feb; 15(2):276-9. PubMed ID: 9523315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Tmax: an unconfounded metric for rate of absorption in single dose bioequivalence studies.
    Basson RP; Cerimele BJ; DeSante KA; Howey DC
    Pharm Res; 1996 Feb; 13(2):324-8. PubMed ID: 8932457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of different indirect measures of rate of drug absorption in comparative pharmacokinetic studies.
    Lacey LF; Keene ON; Duquesnoy C; Bye A
    J Pharm Sci; 1994 Feb; 83(2):212-5. PubMed ID: 8169791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Choice of characteristics and their bioequivalence ranges for the comparison of absorption rates of immediate-release drug formulations.
    Schall R; Luus HG; Steinijans VW; Hauschke D
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1994 Jul; 32(7):323-8. PubMed ID: 7952792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Partial-area method in bioequivalence assessment: naproxen.
    Niazi SK; Alam SM; Ahmad SI
    Biopharm Drug Dispos; 1997 Mar; 18(2):103-16. PubMed ID: 9099447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Finding T
    Han YR; Lee PI; Pang KS
    Drug Metab Dispos; 2018 Nov; 46(11):1796-1804. PubMed ID: 30135243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Differential pharmacokinetics of diclofenac potassium for oral solution vs immediate-release tablets from a randomized trial: effect of fed and fasting conditions.
    Chen C; Bujanover S; Kareht S; Rapoport AM
    Headache; 2015 Feb; 55(2):265-75. PubMed ID: 25546369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cmax/AUC is a clearer measure than Cmax for absorption rates in investigations of bioequivalence.
    Endrenyi L; Fritsch S; Yan W
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1991 Oct; 29(10):394-9. PubMed ID: 1748540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Absorption rate vs. exposure: which is more useful for bioequivalence testing?
    Tozer TN; Bois FY; Hauck WW; Chen ML; Williams RL
    Pharm Res; 1996 Mar; 13(3):453-6. PubMed ID: 8692741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of bioequivalence of highly variable drugs using clinical trial simulations. II: Comparison of single and multiple-dose trials using AUC and Cmax.
    el-Tahtawy AA; Tozer TN; Harrison F; Lesko L; Williams R
    Pharm Res; 1998 Jan; 15(1):98-104. PubMed ID: 9487554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Criteria to assess in vivo performance of sustained release products: application to diltiazem formulations.
    Bialer M; Sussan S; Abu Salach O; Danenberg HD; Ben-David J; Gibor Y; Laor A
    J Pharm Sci; 1995 Oct; 84(10):1160-3. PubMed ID: 8801328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of absorption rates in bioequivalence studies of immediate release drug formulations.
    Schall R; Luus HG
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992 May; 30(5):153-9. PubMed ID: 1592542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Bioequivalence: performance of several measures of extent of absorption.
    Bois FY; Tozer TN; Hauck WW; Chen ML; Patnaik R; Williams RL
    Pharm Res; 1994 May; 11(5):715-22. PubMed ID: 8058642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Sensitivity of indirect metrics for assessing "rate" in bioequivalence studies--moving the "goalposts" or changing the "game".
    Rostami-Hodjegan A; Jackson PR; Tucker GT
    J Pharm Sci; 1994 Nov; 83(11):1554-7. PubMed ID: 7891273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Limits of 80%-125% for AUC and 70%-143% for Cmax. What is the impact on bioequivalence studies?
    Hauck WW; Parekh A; Lesko LJ; Chen ML; Williams RL
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2001 Aug; 39(8):350-5. PubMed ID: 11515710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products.
    Midha KK; Rawson MJ; Hubbard JW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2005 Oct; 43(10):485-98. PubMed ID: 16240706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sensitivity of empirical metrics of rate of absorption in bioequivalence studies.
    Ring A; Tothfalusi L; Endrenyi L; Weiss M
    Pharm Res; 2000 May; 17(5):583-8. PubMed ID: 10888310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of truncated areas in the assessment of bioequivalence of immediate release formulations of drugs with long half-lives and of Cmax with different dissolution rates.
    Sathe P; Venitz J; Lesko L
    Pharm Res; 1999 Jun; 16(6):939-43. PubMed ID: 10397617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Esomeprazole MUPS 40 mg tablets and esomeprazole MUPS 40 mg tablets encapsulated in hard gelatine are bioequivalent.
    Talpes S; Knoerzer D; Huber R; Pfaffenberger B
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2005 Jan; 43(1):51-6. PubMed ID: 15704615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Criteria to assess in vivo performance and bioequivalence of generic controlled-release formulations of carbamazepine.
    Bialer M; Yacobi A; Moros D; Levitt B; Houle JM; Munsaka MS
    Epilepsia; 1998 May; 39(5):513-9. PubMed ID: 9596204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.