SR formulations - no MD study? [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2007-01-23 19:32 (7077 d 12:31 ago) – Posting: # 484
Views: 16,584

Dear hirenpharm!

❝ I did not get me right by misfortune.

❝ I meant to say that the AUC(0-last) failing and AUC(0-24)passing.


Hhm, that's bad luck...
One possible reason: your last sampling points are close to LOQ, combined with a relatively long sampling interval (e.g., 16, 24, 36 h). In such a case it happens quite often that in the same subject t(last) will be 24 h for one formulation, and 36 h for the other. Such a difference mainly influences the intra-subject variability--which I would expect to be higher for AUC(last) than for AUC(24). The point estimate should not be influenced as much (differences will mean out).
Unfortunatelly you have to follow your statistical protocol; regulators do not like any kind of 'data dredging' / 'cherry picking'. :cherry picking:

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;
222 visitors (0 registered, 222 guests [including 21 identified bots]).
Forum time: 09:04 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
But, in practice, there is.    Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut

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