Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum 00:34 CET

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log in |  Register |  Search

Elena777
Junior

Belarus,
2018-01-20 11:13
(edited by Elena777 on 2018-01-21 08:46)

Posting: # 18229
Views: 1,918
 

 Usage of function CVfromCI (package PowerTOST) [R for BE/BA]

Dear participants of forum, I am relatively new to R and RStudio. And I really need your advise to clear some questions up which are important for my self-education and professional skills.

1. A BE study of Sotalol HCl 160 mg tablets (Mylan) and Betapace 160 mg tablets (Berlex Laboratories) with standard 2x2 cross-over design was described in one of the applications on FDA (application number 75-725). They planned to enroll 24 subjects. But in fact that study was conducted with 23 subjects. I would like to calculate CV from CI using data of that study. What data should I write for arguments "n" and "design"? If I input such data:

CVfromCI(pe = 0.99, lower = 0.87, upper = 1.13, n = 23, design = "2x2", alpha = 0.05, robust=FALSE)

RStudio gives me a result but with the following note:

CVfromCI(pe = 0.99, lower = 0.87, upper = 1.13, n = 23, design = "2x2", alpha = 0.05, robust=FALSE)
Unbalanced 2x2 design. n(i)= 12/11 assumed.
[1] 0.2617363


Can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by means of using PowerTOST or should I correct my data?

2. While calculating CV from CI with data from another study I`ve got the following result:

CVfromCI(pe = 0.96, lower = 0.9075, upper = 1.0089, n = 24, design = "2x2", alpha = 0.05, robust=FALSE)
[1] 0.1071475
Warning message:
sigma based on pe & lower CL more than 10% different than sigma based on pe & upper CL. Check input.


My input is correct because numbers are taken from that application not from my head. Should I pay attention to this warning message and can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by PowerTOST?

3. While calculating CV from CI is it prefered to use CI for log-transformed parameters (for example LCmax) or for non-transformed parameters(Cmax)?


Big thanks in advance. :-)
Helmut
Hero
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2018-01-21 17:56

@ Elena777
Posting: # 18241
Views: 1,546
 

 Usage of function CVfromCI (package PowerTOST)

Dear Elena,

» 1. A BE study […] planned to enroll 24 subjects. But in fact that study was conducted with 23 subjects. […] If I input such data:
»
» CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=23, design="2x2", alpha=0.05, robust=FALSE)
»
» RStudio gives me a result but with the following note:
»
» CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=23, design="2x2", alpha=0.05, robust=FALSE)
» Unbalanced 2x2 design. n(i)= 12/11 assumed.
» [1] 0.2617363

»
» Can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by means of using PowerTOST or should I correct my data?

The function does not “know” how many subjects in each of the sequences were dosed. The function tries to keep a 2×2 study with an odd number of subjects as balanced as possible (here 12 subjects in one sequence and 11 in the other) and throws this message.
CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=23, design="2x2")
Unbalanced 2x2 design. n(i)= 12/11 assumed.
[1] 0.2617363

If you know the subjects per sequence and specify them in the argument n, you get the same result but without a message.
CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=c(12, 11), design="2x2")
[1] 0.2617363

But the study might have been even more unbalanced. Let’s try 14 subjects in one sequence and 9 in the other:
CVfromCI(pe=0.99, lower=0.87, upper=1.13, n=c(14, 9), design="2x2")
[1] 0.255524

Given that if you don’t know the subjects / sequence the code’s attempt to keep the sequences as balanced as possible gives you the highest (i.e., most conservative) estimate. For the background see this presentation (slides 25–29).

» 2. While calculating CV from CI with data from another study I`ve got the following result:
»
» CVfromCI(pe=0.96, lower=0.9075, upper=1.0089, n=24, design="2x2", alpha=0.05, robust=FALSE)
» [1] 0.1071475
» Warning message:
» sigma based on pe & lower CL more than 10% different than sigma based on pe & upper CL. Check input.

»
» My input is correct because numbers are taken from that application not from my head.

Please check it again. The PE is given by √lower × upper. In your case that’s sqrt(0.9075*1.0089) or 0.9568577. The function checks the input for plausibility. Hence, the message is correct since your 0.96 is different to 0.9568577.

» Should I pay attention to this warning message

Yes. Check the PE.

» and can I use this result for futher calculations of CVpooled by PowerTOST?

I would (after checking the data for correctness) suggest the ones with the highest numeric precision.

» 3. While calculating CV from CI is it prefered to use CI for log-transformed parameters (for example LCmax) or for non-transformed parameters(Cmax)?

The former. According to all guidelines the analysis for Cmax (and AUC as well) is done on log-transformed data.

Cheers,
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. ☼
Science Quotes
Elena777
Junior

Belarus,
2018-01-27 10:02

@ Helmut
Posting: # 18295
Views: 1,371
 

 Usage of function CVfromCI (package PowerTOST)

Dear Helmut, thanks, I really appreciate it.
Activity
 Thread view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
19,154 posts in 4,080 threads, 1,308 registered users;
online 9 (0 registered, 9 guests [including 7 identified bots]).

One can show the following: given any rule, however “fundamental”
or “necessary” for science, there are always circumstances
when it is advisable not only to ignore the rule,
but to adopt its opposite.    Paul Feyerabend

The BIOEQUIVALENCE / BIOAVAILABILITY FORUM is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5 RSS Feed