Calculation of AUC0-72 [NCA / SHAM]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2009-01-26 16:24 (4568 d 05:02 ago) – Posting: # 3123
Views: 21,541

Dear D. Labes,

sorry for the late response – I was driven by discussions about the drafted European BE-Guideline. :-D

» I would like to discuss this a bit further.
» How do you act in a truncated setting if the last sample is missing? Or if some subject has conc. <LOQ due to faster kinetics?
»
» Omit this subject from the analysis?

I have heard of CROs omitting subjects if AUC72 was stated as the primary parameter and the sample at 72 h (or earlier) was ≤LOQ. In the strict sense I would consider this correct.
But: with the current trend of moving from seening BE as a surrogate of clinical safety/efficacy to a measure of pharmaceutical performance in vivo I would go with Kamal Midha’s Mantra and accept AUCs where the absorption is completed (Clast ≥2–4 times tmax). See Example 2 in this thread. If we truncate AUCs of subjects with Clast<72 (for any treatment) at the last time point where C>LOQ (for all treatments), it should be possible to get an unbiased estimate of the T/R-ratio.* Unfortunately this method is not available in commercial software (at least not in the current versions of WinNonlin, Kinetica, EquivTest/PK).

I wouldn’t start trying to get an estimate of C72.


Edit (years later)

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
21,594 posts in 4,515 threads, 1,532 registered users;
online 21 (0 registered, 21 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 22:27 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data.    Arthur Conan Doyle

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