Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum • PK simulation

PK simulation [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by d_labes – Berlin, Germany, 2012-03-30 17:38 (5190 d 23:14 ago) – Posting: # 8356
Views: 15,807

Dear Helmut,

❝ Is this correct? I think that I screwed up the analytical error. Original text:

Analytical assay errors were generated from log-normal distributions with no bias, a CV of 10%, plus a constant term equal to the product of the assay CV and the limit of quantification, LQ.

❝ Shouldn’t I rather use a normal distribution instead (AErr1 <- rnorm(n=1, mean=0, sd=abs(C[j]*AErr)))? …

I'm not quite sure If I really understand what you attempt here.

But your implementation of the analytical error via log-normal distribution seems correct for me.

What I absolutely don't understand is the "... constant term ...". What is it good for :confused:

. This is only a shift in the concentration levels constant over the whole curve and also for all simulated profiles the same, if I understand. But nothing like a random term as errors usually are deemed for.

BTW: Why do you think you have screwed up something? Because the scatter in the simulated data is too smooth compared to real data :smoke:

—
Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

PK simulation Helmut 2012-03-29 18:52
- PK simulationd_labes 2012-03-30 15:38
  - PK simulation Helmut 2012-03-30 15:56
    - PK simulation - log-normal d_labes 2012-03-31 14:40
  - Why all this fuzz? Helmut 2012-03-30 18:46
- PK simulation jag009 2012-03-30 20:34
- PK simulation jag009 2012-04-04 17:03
  - R function rlnorm() d_labes 2012-04-05 09:15
  - Lognormal vs. truncated normal Helmut 2012-04-05 14:27
    - Lognormal vs. truncated normal jag009 2012-04-05 17:52