Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum • But what is the real problem?

But what is the real problem? [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by ElMaestro – Denmark, 2018-06-07 15:53 (2927 d 19:09 ago) – Posting: # 18863
Views: 8,782

Hi Yura,

you do your study as best you can, making some assumoptions -good or bad- about GMR and CV.
At the end of the day you may show BE or not, and if you do, then it may be with a large or small margin. I guess forced BE just means the margin was large whatever that means quantitatively.
There is no real issue here. The discussions I have seen about BE consider forced BE as a hindsight phenomenon, like post-hoc power.

If you start fiddling with "forced BE" being convincingly planned before a trial then I would of course oppose it.

Remember: In principle, either the product is BE or it isn't. There just happens to be some uncertainty on the degree by which we can demonstrate it.

—
Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

Two-stage design and 'forced bioequivalence' Mikalai 2018-06-06 08:28
- Two-stage design and 'forced bioequivalence' ElMaestro 2018-06-06 10:53
  - Two-stage design and 'forced bioequivalence' Yura 2018-06-07 10:24
    - But what is the real problem?ElMaestro 2018-06-07 13:53
      - But what is the real problem? Yura 2018-06-07 14:59
        
        But what is the real problem? Mikalai 2018-06-07 15:47
        
        But what is the real problem? Helmut 2018-06-07 17:33
        
        But what is the real problem? Mikalai 2018-06-08 12:24
        
        U as a futility criterion Helmut 2018-06-08 14:00