Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  2018-07-16 07:29 CEST (UTC+2h)

Potency correction - I still don't get it [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro - Denmark, 2018-06-23 10:14  - Posting: # 18950
Views: 555

Hi all,

section 4.1.8 of the EMA guideline opens up for potency calculation for BE evaluation.
I can see what it does. I still can't, after having read up on this for 8 years, see in which way that opportunity does anything good for the sake of the EU patient.

Can somebody give me a numerical example illustrating why potency correction is to the advantage of not only the Sponsor but also the patient??
90% CI is 77-108, but if assays differ, then we divide and multiply and do some gymnastics on the numbers, and hey presto we now have an approvable product. Nice for Sponsor (or at least the guy in the Armani suit). But is that really advantageous for the Patient? It may be if we seriously play around with the definition of average bioequivalence. Let me hear your thoughts, please: Under which assumptions in your opinion will a potency correction help regulators decide on relative rate and extent of absorption, and how does this (these) assumption(s) fit into your understanding of average BE?

Many thanks.

if (3) 4

Best regards,

"(...) targeted cancer therapies will benefit fewer than 2 percent of the cancer patients they’re aimed at. That reality is often lost on consumers, who are being fed a steady diet of winning anecdotes about miracle cures." New York Times (ed.), June 9, 2018.

Complete thread:

Back to the forum Activity
 Mix view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
18,527 posts in 3,938 threads, 1,190 registered users;
online 36 (0 registered, 36 guests [including 25 identified bots]).

Mankind has survived all catastrophes.
It will also survive modern medicine.    Gerhard Kocher

BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz