Freedom to some degree [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by yjlee168 Homepage – Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 2009-04-21 16:03 (5850 d 23:11 ago) – Posting: # 3575
Views: 68,368

dear D. Labes,

❝ My questions remains:

❝ Do I do something wrong here? If yes, what?


I don't know why you used TYPE=UN in your SAS code. In the FDA 2001 Guidance (Appendix E, p.37), it says: "...In the Random statement, TYPE=FA0(2) could possibly be replaced by TYPE=CSH. This guidance recommends that TYPE=UN not be used, as it could result in an invalid (i.e., not nonnegative definite) estimated covariance matrix..."

❝ If not, what are the chances that regulators accept the bear / R handling of replicate studies?


As long as bear complies with the FDA Guidance (2001) and is statistically correct, it should be acceptable, I guess. :-)


Edit: Link corrected for FDA's new site. [Helmut]

All the best,
-- Yung-jin Lee
bear v2.9.2:- created by Hsin-ya Lee & Yung-jin Lee
Kaohsiung, Taiwan https://www.pkpd168.com/bear
Download link (updated) -> here

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
78 visitors (0 registered, 78 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:15 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the
hypothesis, then you’ve made a measurement. If the result is
contrary to the hypothesis, then you’ve made a discovery.    Enrico Fermi

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