What ’bout science? [NCA / SHAM]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2016-02-16 13:12 (1637 d 09:13 ago) – Posting: # 15995
Views: 3,764

Hi Jay,

» As mentioned in the EU GL, half of dosage interval may be considered. So if the label states once a day then AUC0-12 and AUC12-last may be considered.

Thank you for repeating what I already have written above.

Do you have an own opinion? I don’t see any pharmacokinetic justification for a cut-off of τ/2 but I’m always eager to learn something new. I can only speculate that the idea of the almighty oracle was to catch with the partial AUCs 50% of the AUC0–τ but that doesn’t work:
kabs/kel  AUC0–τ/2/AUC0–τ  AUCτ/2–τ/AUC0–τ
  2.0         44.4%          55.6%
  1.0         38.0%          62.0%  ⇐ flip-flop
  0.5         34.3%          65.7%

Reminds me on an innovator (!) company which had the splendid idea to develop a new formulation of an antibiotic (doubled strength) in order to “double the time above the MIC”. When I talked about first-order processes and exponential functions and that therefore, this concept could never work they didn’t believe me at first. When I presented some plots they trashed the project. Lack of basic PK knowledge is abundant.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
20,996 posts in 4,377 threads, 1,460 registered users;
online 19 (0 registered, 19 guests [including 11 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 23:25 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

[Those] who have an excessive faith in their theories or in their
ideas are not only poorly disposed to make discoveries, but they
also make very poor observations.    Claude Bernard

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