Potvin B, C, or D? [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2011-10-28 00:52 (4986 d 16:06 ago) – Posting: # 7557
Views: 18,897

Dear D. Labes!

❝ ❝ Why don't we discuss method C in stead where the authors make a clear discussion between alpha1 and alpha2; it is for many practical purposes performing just like method B anyway, at least under the conditions tested by Potvin :-D.


❝ I can not see the 'clear discussion' for alpha1 and alpha2 in the Potvin et al. paper.


Me not either. I’ve heard that regulators read this forum; so if they have no access to the paper here’s a snippet from its Section 5 (Discussion and Recommendations)

The goal of our group was to validate at least one method for two-stage designs that could be used for BE studies. Methods B and C meet our criteria of not more than minimal inflation of type I error rate. We recommend that regulatory agencies accept either. It is our understanding that the FDA has accepted studies with designs like those considered here.
For sponsors, there is a small power advantage to Method C over Method B, so we consider Method C as the method of choice. Another advantage of Method C is that it was designed so that if the study were found to have adequate power at the first stage, the α for that study would be the same as if it were designed to be single-stage study.


❝ For the acceptance of Potvin C see this post.


Terrible.
BTW, FDA recommends Method C (for T/R 0.95) and Method D (for T/R 0.90)… That’s not surprising with Donald Schuirmann as a co-author.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,673 registered users;
46 visitors (0 registered, 46 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:58 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