Calculation of AUC0-72 [NCA / SHAM]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2009-01-26 18:20 (6347 d 04:19 ago) – Posting: # 3126
Views: 40,985

Dear D. Labes,

❝ I am with you if the values in the last part of the concentration time course are <LOQ. But I think it's different with missing values (vial broken or so) especially in case of long half life drugs.


If a value is missing – or even came up as <LOQ in repeated analyses – and is included within values which are clearly (!) above LOQ I routinely substitute such a value by a (log)interpolated estimate. I have such a procedure since decades (oh, I’m getting old) in my protocols, and never got any problems.

❝ Because time points are spread occasionally with 24h in the last part, there may be a considerable portion of AUC missing.


This wouldn’t bother me as long as Clast ≥2–4 times tmax.

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

❝

❝ Is this sentence then furthermore your opinion?


Yes.
—
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;
114 visitors (0 registered, 114 guests [including 22 identified bots]).
Forum time: 23:40 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