Evaluation according to design [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2012-01-10 19:22 (5270 d 03:24 ago) – Posting: # 7894
Views: 4,535

Dear Luv!

❝ We did a full replicate BE study for EU submission a few days back with 40 volunteers. %ISCV observed for reference product was […] 28% […], thus we have to comply with normal 80-125% CI limit criteria, …


Yes. Bad luck.

❝ … considering the study as a two way study.


What? You had four periods and two sequences (RTRT|TRTR).

❝ Now which is the right way Statistically, Practically and Regulatory approach wise.


I strongly oppose Chiku's opinion. Evaluate the study according to its design (SAS, Phoenix/WinNonlin, and R could do the job). No way to mean responses of T and R. How would you code the (pseudo-)periods? Example from EMA’s Q&A document, data set I (I removed all incomplete data); 69 subjects, 276 observations, EMA’s Method A (all effects fixed):

                                        PE     CL (lo – hi)   df  CVintra
Full model                            115.46  106.49 125.19  203  42.37%
Stacked and recoded to RT|TR          115.46  106.51 125.17  205  42.26%
Means of RR and TT, recoded to RT|TR  113.50  103.07 124.98   67  34.90%


Note two more degrees of freedom if the observations are stacked and recoded (two periods instead of four). The PE is not affected but the CI is anticonservative. Taking the means is IMHO not acceptable at all.

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
23,654 posts in 4,992 threads, 1,571 registered users;
118 visitors (0 registered, 118 guests [including 14 identified bots]).
Forum time: 23:47 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The idea is to try and give all the information to help others
to judge the value of your contribution;
not just the information that leads to judgment
in one particular direction or another.    Richard Feynman

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