PAR not yet [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by The Outlaw Torn – Europe, 2011-10-25 10:57 (4989 d 06:08 ago) – Posting: # 7541
Views: 15,441

Hi Helmut,

Sorry for the delay (CPhI stuff) and thanks for the info.

We are involved in a project in which the CRO has proposed this study approach. My feedback was basically the same or similar (would I be ostracized if I said "essentially similar"?) to yours—as long as the consumer risk is preserved, I don't see why it wouldn't be okay to stop without penalty after the first stage if the BE study is successful (Potvin method C).

I'll make sure the CRO provides adequate justification in the protocol. Thanks for the feedback. If I get feedback from the authorities on this approach later on, I'll pass it on.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,673 registered users;
60 visitors (0 registered, 60 guests [including 12 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:06 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Medical researches can be divided into two sorts:
those who think that meta is better and those
who believe that pooling is fooling.    Stephen Senn

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