Deviations from scheduled sampling times [Study Performance]
Dear Chirag!
Most CROs allow for flexible deviations based on the sampling interval; 5% of the shorter of the two time intervals surrounding the sample are suggested.* Example:
For the last sample I would allow 5% of the last interval =
Tricky question. I would not send the subject home without taking a sample.
State in the protocol what you would do in such a case. For AUC∞ it shouldn’t be much of a problem. For AUC72 you might consider using an estimated
72 (given you have a reliable estimate of λz). With your current procedure you might end up comparing AUC70 to AUC74; a case of apples-and-oranges statistics.
If you are concerned about the regulatory acceptance of the data due to a large deviation, you may exclude the subject from the assessment of AUC, but still keep the data of Cmax (which is likely more variable and therefore more important).
❝ For collection of ambulatory samples we have in-house limits of ± 2 hrs from the scheduled time.
Most CROs allow for flexible deviations based on the sampling interval; 5% of the shorter of the two time intervals surrounding the sample are suggested.* Example:
scheduled interval shorter 5% h:mm
16 8
24 12 8 0.4 0:24
36 12 12 0.6 0:36
48 24 12 0.6 0:36
72 48 24 1.2 0:72
120 48 For the last sample I would allow 5% of the last interval =
0:72. ±5% doesn’t make sense, IMHO. A subject may arrive late (positive deviation), but it should be pointed out in the ICF that if somebody shows up early he/she has to await the scheduled time point (see also the quote in this post). Generally I’m in favour of the lin-up/log-down trapezoidal rule for the calculation of AUC because the linear trapezoidal rule gives a positive bias in the elimination phase.❝ The question is, how long the ambulatory sample can be collected beyond the allowed deviation of 2 hrs.
Tricky question. I would not send the subject home without taking a sample.
State in the protocol what you would do in such a case. For AUC∞ it shouldn’t be much of a problem. For AUC72 you might consider using an estimated
72 (given you have a reliable estimate of λz). With your current procedure you might end up comparing AUC70 to AUC74; a case of apples-and-oranges statistics.If you are concerned about the regulatory acceptance of the data due to a large deviation, you may exclude the subject from the assessment of AUC, but still keep the data of Cmax (which is likely more variable and therefore more important).
- G Pabst
Deviations in sampling times (Chapter 5.5)
in: W Cawello (ed), Parameters for Compartment-free Pharmacokinetics – Standardisation of Study Design, Data Analysis and Reporting
Shaker Verlag, Aachen 2003, pp 78–79
ISBN 3-8265-4767-5
—
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png)
Helmut Schütz
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png)
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна!
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png)
Helmut Schütz
![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png)
The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes
Complete thread:
- Ambulatory samples collection cakhatri 2012-09-08 06:31
- Deviations from scheduled sampling timesHelmut 2012-09-08 13:24
- Deviations from scheduled sampling times cakhatri 2012-09-11 06:20
- Deviations from scheduled sampling timesHelmut 2012-09-08 13:24
