References [NCA / SHAM]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2007-11-28 18:58 (6771 d 21:30 ago) – Posting: # 1342
Views: 31,633

Dear all!

❝ Hopefully I will post a little collection the next days.


As promised…

IMHO everybody dealing with NCA and BE-statistics should get the pioneering paper by Sauter et al. (1992)!

Sauter R, Steinijans VW, Diletti E, Böhm E, Schulz H-U. Presentation of results from bioequivalence studies. Int J Clin Pharm Ther Toxicol. 1992; 30(Suppl1): S7–S30.


Method #1 considered a better metric than Method #5 according to simulations:

Tozer TN, Bois FY. Metrics of Absorption; Simulation Approach. In: Blume HH, Midha KK (Eds.), Bio-International 2 - Bioavailability, Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic Studies. Stuttgart: medpharm; 1995. p. 51–60.


A nice comparison of Methods #4 and #5 in Chapter 3.7 (Non-Compartmental Analysis); lin-up/log-down trapezoidal recommended variant of Method #1:

Gabrielsson J, Weiner D. Pharmacokinetic an Pharmacodynamic Data Analysis: Concepts and Applications. Stockholm: Swedish Pharmaceutical Press; 3rd ed. 2000. p. 141–153.


For a dicussion of different methods see also:

Pabst G. Area under the concentration-time curve. In: Cawello W (Ed.), Parameters for Compartment-Free Pharmacokinetics. Aachen: Shaker-Verlag; 2003. p. 65–80.

Method #4 is given in (F5.9), and Method #5 as an alternative in (F5.9a).

Chapter 6 (Presentation of bioequivalence studies) from a recent book:

Hauschke D, Steinijans V, Pigeot I. Bioequivalence Studies in Drug Development. Chichester: John Wiley; 2007. p. 123–155.


Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
101 visitors (0 registered, 101 guests [including 28 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:28 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To propose that poor design can be corrected by subtle analysis techniques
is contrary to good scientific thinking.    Stuart J. Pocock

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