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 *

83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9726700)

  • 1. Asymmetry of the mean-variability tradeoff raises questions about the model in investigations of individual bioequivalence.
    Endrenyi L; Hao Y
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1998 Aug; 36(8):450-7. PubMed ID: 9726700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A method for the evaluation of individual bioequivalence.
    Endrenyi L
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1994 Sep; 32(9):497-508. PubMed ID: 7820334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of some properties of individual bioequivalence (IBE) from replicate-design studies.
    Tothfalusi L; Endrenyi L
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2001 Apr; 39(4):162-6. PubMed ID: 11332872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mean difference vs. variability reduction: tradeoffs in aggregate measures for individual bioequivalence. FDA Individual Bioequivalence Working Group.
    Hauck WW; Chen ML; Hyslop T; Patnaik R; Schuirmann D; Williams R
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1996 Dec; 34(12):535-41. PubMed ID: 8996848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An area correction method to reduce intrasubject variability in bioequivalence studies.
    Abdallah HY
    J Pharm Pharm Sci; 1998; 1(2):60-5. PubMed ID: 10945919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Pharmacokinetic analysis of bioequivalence trials: implications for sex-related issues in clinical pharmacology and biopharmaceutics.
    Chen ML; Lee SC; Ng MJ; Schuirmann DJ; Lesko LJ; Williams RL
    Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2000 Nov; 68(5):510-21. PubMed ID: 11103754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A three-step procedure for assessing bioequivalence in the general mixed model framework.
    Vuorinen J; Turunen J
    Stat Med; 1996 Dec; 15(24):2635-55. PubMed ID: 8981677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of the reference scaled bioequivalence semi-replicate method with other approaches: focus on human exposure to drugs.
    Karalis V; Symillides M; Macheras P
    Eur J Pharm Sci; 2009 Aug; 38(1):55-63. PubMed ID: 19524039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Assessment of individual and population bioequivalence using the probability that bioavailabilities are similar.
    Schall R
    Biometrics; 1995 Jun; 51(2):615-26. PubMed ID: 7662849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Truncated AUC evaluates effectively the bioequivalence of drugs with long half-lives.
    Endrenyi L; Tothfalusi L
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 1997 Apr; 35(4):142-50. PubMed ID: 9112134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bioequivalence and intrasubject variability.
    Liu JP
    J Biopharm Stat; 1991; 1(2):205-19. PubMed ID: 1844697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessment of the bioequivalence of two formulations of clarithromycin extended-release 500-mg tablets under fasting and fed conditions: a single-dose, randomized, open-label, two-period, two-way crossover study in healthy Jordanian male volunteers.
    Alkhalidi BA; Tamimi JJ; Salem II; Ibrahim H; Sallam AA
    Clin Ther; 2008 Oct; 30(10):1831-43. PubMed ID: 19014838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Sample size determination for bioequivalence assessment by means of confidence intervals.
    Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1991 Jan; 29(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 2004861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparing generic and innovator drugs: a review of 12 years of bioequivalence data from the United States Food and Drug Administration.
    Davit BM; Nwakama PE; Buehler GJ; Conner DP; Haidar SH; Patel DT; Yang Y; Yu LX; Woodcock J
    Ann Pharmacother; 2009 Oct; 43(10):1583-97. PubMed ID: 19776300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Extension to the use of tolerance intervals for the assessment of individual bioequivalence.
    Esinhart JD; Chinchilli VM
    J Biopharm Stat; 1994 Mar; 4(1):39-52. PubMed ID: 8019583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Bayesian approach to bioequivalence for the 2 x 2 changeover design.
    Selwyn MR; Dempster AP; Hall NR
    Biometrics; 1981 Mar; 37(1):11-21. PubMed ID: 7018605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Sample size determination for bioequivalence assessment by means of confidence intervals.
    Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S51-8. PubMed ID: 1601532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Individual bioequivalence--a European perspective.
    Steinijans VW; Hauschke D
    J Biopharm Stat; 1997 Mar; 7(1):31-4. PubMed ID: 9056585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Estimating treatment means in a mixed-effect ANOVA model for bioequivalence studies.
    Hsuan FC
    Biometrics; 1993 Sep; 49(3):703-13. PubMed ID: 8241367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.