A Nightmare on Elm Street [Study Per­for­mance]

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2013-09-13 17:26 (4315 d 02:30 ago) – Posting: # 11491
Views: 10,087

❝ So in the protocol they simply copypasted from the guidance “AUC0-4, AUC4-t, AUC0-∞, and Cmax, where AUC0-4 is the area under the plasma-concentration vs. time curve from 0 to 4 hours, AUC4-t is area under the curve from 4 hours to the last measurable time point” without stating the algo? Brilliant. Which software are they using?


Exactly... Software wise I think they use both WinNonlin and SAS. I think they can do the interpolation by doing a protocol amendment? I have seen this before and FDA accepted it (not for partial AUC but for other things).
A lot of companies do this because they don't know whether their Kel elimination coding in SAS is "safe" so they need something that is officially validated.

❝ ❝ They have the following:

❝ ❝ 3.5 hr with a time deviation of 45 mins; Reason - Restick

❝ ❝ 4 hr with a time deviation of 15 mins; Reason - Restick


❝ Splendid. As you posted before I thought I have seen everything – but this?!


YES! I told you I haven't seen EVERYTHING :-(

❝ The latter (OK, the second one at 4:15). Set the first one to “missing”, “not reportable“, or “oops”.


Why the latter and not the first? If they have both samples and the numbers are different? I think they should take the average?

Thanks
John

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,428 posts in 4,929 threads, 1,684 registered users;
95 visitors (0 registered, 95 guests [including 20 identified bots]).
Forum time: 19:56 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

No matter what side of the argument you are on,
you always find people on your side
that you wish were on the other.    Thomas Berger

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5