AUC vs. Cmax [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2015-09-17 23:53 (3115 d 07:32 ago) – Posting: # 15425
Views: 5,493

Hi Nisha,

❝ May I ask why it is not so commonly used?


The Potvin methods and their derivatives all suffer from one drawback: It is extremely difficult to argue they are usefulk when there is undcertainty about the point estimate. They are almost only useful if the uncertainty is just on the CV.
The reason is that a fixed GMR is used for quantification of the second stage; if you plug in the observed GMR then the methods just outright fail.

❝ What about a case in which AUC doesn't meet the BE criteria at stage I, but its power is >80% due to the low ISCV, while Cmax power is <80%? Could we still continue to stage II?


Yes, I would write in the protocol that you go by the highest CV or the CV observed for Cmax.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
110 visitors (0 registered, 110 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:26 CET (Europe/Vienna)

With four parameters I can fit an elephant,
and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.    John von Neumann

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