Long t½ drugs [NCA / SHAM]

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2012-12-05 17:04 (4131 d 18:39 ago) – Posting: # 9674
Views: 5,283

(edited by jag009 on 2012-12-05 17:24)

Hi all,

Would appreciate all your comments with the following scenario... I recently ran a FDA BE study involving an IR product with a long and variable t1/2. The literature value is around 25 hrs with an upper range of 60 hr. I ran a small pilot study (n=6) and the results showed that 96 hours sampling was more than adequate to capture 90% of the PK profile (Helmut will scream at me for using n=6 :-P).

My pivotal study finished with 44 subjects. The study population showed a mean t1/2 of 25 hrs (Range 12-67 hrs) for each treatment. I went ahead with PK blood sampling for 96 hrs (timept before 96 hr was 72 hr). Based on 96 hour sampling, the mean(AUCt/AUCinf) ratio was about 92% for each treatment. Individual data showed 3 subjects to have AUCt/AUCinf ratio of 60% with a t1/2 of greater than 60 hours.

Maybe this is a silly question... Do you think that I might get question from the agency about the 3 subjects? Since the mean t1/2 from each treatment arm was 25 hrs with an upper range of 67 hrs, I can re-evaluate the data as a truncated design (if being asked) and compute AUC0-72.

The result as is for both AUC and AUCi are dead since the 90% CIs were well within 80-125% (Ratio~100%, intra CV~10%). Washout was adequate(3 wks) with no carryovers. I don't have an issue with computing AUC0-72(pass anyway) but I was just curious if I would even get a question from FDA regarding the 3 subjects.

Thanks
John

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
81 visitors (0 registered, 81 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 11:43 CET (Europe/Vienna)

With four parameters I can fit an elephant,
and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.    John von Neumann

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