Approved Pilot and Failed Pivotal Study [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by Lucas – Brazil, 2014-03-17 18:51 (4130 d 10:41 ago) – Posting: # 12639
Views: 18,203

Hi!

❝ Apparently the point estimates have changed quite a bit! Could you compare Reference-pilot and Reference-pivotal to get a feeling for these products?


Yes, they've changed a lot, but not only the point estimate, the geometric means aswell. In the drug B studies the Cmax geo mean for the reference treatment changed 45% from the pilot to the pivotal. For drug B the major difference was for the Cmax of the test treatment, which changed 23%.
So when I compare RxR for drug A I get a positive result, but for drug B this does not happen, since they have a ratio of 145% for Cmax. It is noteworthy that for drug A a different batch of the reference was used in the pivotal study, but Cmax was very similar and for drug B with the same batch we got very different values for the plasma concentrations.

❝ Replicate designs employed?


Standard 2x2 Xover actually.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,428 posts in 4,929 threads, 1,687 registered users;
67 visitors (0 registered, 67 guests [including 13 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:32 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority
is not using his intelligence;
he is just using his memory.    Leonardo da Vinci

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