Fixed effects model with Group term [Two-Stage / GS Designs]
Dear mittyri,
Getting a little back to possible nightmare for BE studies assessed in Russia:
Why do you proceed to calculation of Point Estimate and Confidence Intervals using FDA Group Model 1 (those with Treatment*Group interaction) if it's not seems to be intended for anything more than assessment of statistical significance of this particular effect?
I've just gone through some historical studies (with groups) done at well-established CROs before EMA Q&A document regarding statistical model for TSDs became available. They assessed studies using FDA recommendations. Model 1 was used only to calculate significance of Treatment*Group interaction and nothing more! No MSE, PE and 90%CI print-outs for this model. After confirmation that effect is not significant, data was processed under FDA Group Model 2 with bioequivalence assessment.
Why not use the same strategy here? F and P seems to be equal between R and PHX, as well as between R and SAS PROC GLM.
![[image]](img/uploaded/image5.gif)
PS: FDA Group Model 1 produces weird results in regards to Point Estimate (if we get it directly from ANOVA table), potentially making a good trial useless. In one of examples PE traveled from 96% to 88% (sic!) for data where geometric means ratio was almost equal to LSMeans ratio.
Regards, VStus
Getting a little back to possible nightmare for BE studies assessed in Russia:
❝ It could be a nightmare for Russia, where the experts insist on the Group term in the model, but all other things should be like in EMA Guideline with all factors as fixed (does someone realize how many studies will be failed? The experts suggest not to pool the groups in this case like the FDA Guidance states!)
Why do you proceed to calculation of Point Estimate and Confidence Intervals using FDA Group Model 1 (those with Treatment*Group interaction) if it's not seems to be intended for anything more than assessment of statistical significance of this particular effect?
I've just gone through some historical studies (with groups) done at well-established CROs before EMA Q&A document regarding statistical model for TSDs became available. They assessed studies using FDA recommendations. Model 1 was used only to calculate significance of Treatment*Group interaction and nothing more! No MSE, PE and 90%CI print-outs for this model. After confirmation that effect is not significant, data was processed under FDA Group Model 2 with bioequivalence assessment.
Why not use the same strategy here? F and P seems to be equal between R and PHX, as well as between R and SAS PROC GLM.
![[image]](img/uploaded/image5.gif)
PS: FDA Group Model 1 produces weird results in regards to Point Estimate (if we get it directly from ANOVA table), potentially making a good trial useless. In one of examples PE traveled from 96% to 88% (sic!) for data where geometric means ratio was almost equal to LSMeans ratio.
Regards, VStus
Complete thread:
- Potvin C in the EU Helmut 2013-04-16 17:40
- Potvin C in the EU ElMaestro 2013-04-17 02:31
- Potvin C in the EU Helmut 2013-04-17 12:23
- 2 Groups model FDA d_labes 2013-04-17 13:10
- 2 Groups model FDA Helmut 2013-04-17 16:37
- Group effects obsolete? d_labes 2013-04-18 09:55
- Group effects FDA/EMA Helmut 2013-04-19 14:34
- Group effects FDA/EMA mittyri 2014-08-21 15:34
- Group effects FDA/EMA ElMaestro 2014-08-21 17:31
- Group effects EMA mittyri 2014-10-01 11:25
- Group effects EMA ElMaestro 2014-10-01 11:31
- Group effects EMA Helmut 2014-10-01 13:24
- Group effects EMA VStus 2016-10-06 22:06
- Group effects EMA ElMaestro 2016-10-07 12:45
- Group effects EMA mittyri 2016-10-07 15:06
- Fixed effects model with Group term mittyri 2016-10-09 13:27
- Fixed effects model: changing the F, p values mittyri 2016-10-10 18:33
- Fixed effects model: changing the F, p values ElMaestro 2016-10-10 20:10
- Fixed effects model: changing the F, p values Helmut 2016-10-11 00:17
- Holy War of type III d_labes 2016-10-11 13:17
- Significance of Group effect in Russia: why the type III is so 'important' mittyri 2016-10-11 15:07
- Fixed effects model: changing the F, p values zizou 2016-10-11 01:06
- FDA group model in R mittyri 2016-10-11 13:43
- FDA group model in R ElMaestro 2016-10-12 01:07
- FDA group model in R VStus 2016-10-17 15:32
- FDA group model in R ElMaestro 2016-10-17 18:58
- FDA group model in R VStus 2016-10-20 13:57
- FDA group model in R ElMaestro 2016-10-17 18:58
- FDA group model in R mittyri 2016-10-11 13:43
- Fixed effects model: changing the F, p values ElMaestro 2016-10-10 20:10
- Fixed effects model with Group termVStus 2016-10-20 13:54
- Fixed effects model: changing the F, p values mittyri 2016-10-10 18:33
- Fixed effects model with Group term mittyri 2016-10-09 13:27
- Group effects EMA mittyri 2016-10-07 15:06
- Group effects EMA ElMaestro 2016-10-07 12:45
- Group effects EMA VStus 2016-10-06 22:06
- Group effects FDA/EMA zizou 2016-12-31 02:54
- Group effects FDA/EMA Helmut 2017-06-03 14:57
- Group effects EMA mittyri 2014-10-01 11:25
- Group effects FDA/EMA ElMaestro 2014-08-21 17:31
- Group effects FDA/EMA mittyri 2014-08-21 15:34
- Group effects FDA/EMA Helmut 2013-04-19 14:34
- 2 Groups model FDA hiren379 2013-08-22 14:32
- Homework Helmut 2013-08-23 11:53
- Group effects obsolete? d_labes 2013-04-18 09:55
- 2 Groups model FDA Helmut 2013-04-17 16:37
- 2 Groups model FDA d_labes 2013-04-17 13:10
- Potvin C in the EU Helmut 2013-04-17 12:23
- Potvin C in the EU ElMaestro 2013-04-17 02:31