Snafued! WTF! &%$@! [Study Per­for­mance]

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2013-09-10 18:11 (4669 d 23:45 ago) – Posting: # 11469
Views: 12,305

Hi Ohlbe & Helmut,

Not a joke. The reply from the project manager:
Subject 143 – the 3.5 hour sample should not have been collected due to the delay in resticks of 41 minutes. Unfortunately, both were collected, shipped. I have reached out to PK group for input regarding this.

Restick = Difficulty in drawing blood. WTF for 41 mins. How many holes did they poke? I don't know. The subject should've been dropped out since it is inhuman to poke so many holes (it hurts!).

P.S. Helmut,
From our previous discussion, you wrote:

❝ BTW, if you ask Phoenix/WinNonlin for partial AUCs (and sampling wasn’t performed exactly at the cut-off time point) an interpolation between two adjacent time points (before/after) is used; linear if C2 ≥ C1 and log/linear if C2 < C1. Makes sense, IMHO.


I don't think you can make interpolation to obtain the concentration at the desire time right (example: interpolate 4 hr concentration from 3.5 hr and 4.25 hr concentration)? I thought you have to use the time point as is?

Thanks
John

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
128 visitors (0 registered, 128 guests [including 23 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:56 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Scientists often have a naïve faith that
if only they could discover enough facts about a problem,
these facts would somehow arrange themselves
in a compelling and true solution.    Theodosius Dobzhansky

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